News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Why Google Employees Quit by russell on Sunday January 18, 2009 @01:18PM (#439497)
I remember reading about a tech company 20 years or so ago (cant remember the name or industry) that attributed their success to splitting divisions in two when the head count exceeded 600. 600 was the maximum size where everyone knew everybody's name.

My experience is that 100 is a very good size to join. It's small enough that an individual can have an impact, that everyone knows who you are, that stock options mean something, and that you get paid every month.

Re:Why Google Employees Quit by juliend2 on Sunday January 18, 2009 @01:28PM (#439502)
Is it Gore-Tex maybe? I've read something like this in "The Tipping Point" by Malcolm Gladwell.

This is a must-read.

Re:Why Google Employees Quit by fallentimes on Sunday January 18, 2009 @01:38PM (#439511)
Not surprisingly, they're on this list every year:

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/bestcompanies/2008/sn...

No formal titles, egos are strongly discouraged and business units are divided when headcount goes over 100.

Re:Why Google Employees Quit by felipe on Sunday January 18, 2009 @06:53PM (#439817)
I think you are talking about BSO-Origin. I worked there for 4 years, and they called divisions "cells" for that reason. I think it worked wonderfully for IT services, and I wonder why other companies didn't adopt that model as well.

BSO-Origin also had something called "Environmental Accounting", where the environmental impact of each project was estimated, and a certain amount was re-invested in environmental projects.

The founder (Eckart Wintzen) was a true visionnaire, and unfortunately he passed away recently. Here is a great article about him, back from the 90s:

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/4.11/es_wintzen_pr.html