The headline implies that only the current quarters matter. There's too much of that myopia IMO.
If Microsoft's top management thinks there should be fewer people in middle management, that may be good or bad, I don't know, I won't pretend to have an opinion on that. But I do have an opinion on focusing on the current few quarters, as the headline does (and to a lesser degree the article): bad.
Are layoffs being used instead of firing due to regulations?
Like it seems much better for morale to ratchet up a stricter performance bar and have forced exits at review time, rather than having these bulk layoffs. I can’t make it make sense absent regulations distorting the natural game theoretic dynamics.
The headline implies that only the current quarters matter. There's too much of that myopia IMO.
If Microsoft's top management thinks there should be fewer people in middle management, that may be good or bad, I don't know, I won't pretend to have an opinion on that. But I do have an opinion on focusing on the current few quarters, as the headline does (and to a lesser degree the article): bad.
Are layoffs being used instead of firing due to regulations?
Like it seems much better for morale to ratchet up a stricter performance bar and have forced exits at review time, rather than having these bulk layoffs. I can’t make it make sense absent regulations distorting the natural game theoretic dynamics.