….this non-policy yields broader lessons about the modern workplace.
For instance, ever more companies are realising that autonomy isn’t the opposite of accountability ”“ it’s the pathway to it. “Rules and policies and regulations and stipulations are innovation killers. People do their best work when they’re unencumbered,” says Steve Swasey, Netflix’s vice-president for corporate communication. “If you’re spending a lot of time accounting for the time you’re spending, that’s time you’re not innovating.”
The same goes for expenses. Employees typically don’t need to get approval to spend money on entertainment, travel, or gifts. Instead, the guidance is simpler: act in Netflix’s best interest. It sounds delightfully adult. And it is – in every regard. People who don’t produce are shown the door. “Adequate performance,” the company says, “gets a generous severance package.”
The idea is that freedom and responsibility, long considered fundamentally incompatible, actually go together quite well.
As my office sinks ever deeper in bureaucratic mire, this sounds delightful.
“Adequate performance,” the company says, “gets a generous severance package.”
So…”adequate” isn’t actually adequate? That sounds like double speak. This sounds nice, but I bet it won’t be long before they end up with a bunch of burned out folks that were afraid to take a break because it might be seen as “adequate” performance to do so. Sabatical living is important for the long haul. The breaks were built into the work time frame because they make people more productive. Studies were done, etc. Efficiency experts were consulted, etc. The breaks in work aren’t done out of charity, but to increase the bottom line. Human nature is prone to keep working without taking those essential breaks, that is why God put it into the law, because it shows us that our fallen nature fails us in this area of life. People will work to the breaking point, and corporations will let them, and then discard them for fresh meat. Managers invariably run their race horses to death, and then look for the next race horse, with no consideration for the ethics of such activity.
Maybe Netflix is the exception. It would be nice to hear what all the “adequate” folks have to say about the work environment there.
I used to work for the national office of a rather small organization. It was an OK place to work until the exeuctive secretary, who ran the office for the board of directors, decided to implement a time clock in place of time sheets, plus user codes for long distance and copying, etc. To no one’s surprise but his own, when he began to treat his employees like children, they began to act like children. I was blessed to find other employment soon after.
I once worked for a company like that Elle. Our bathroom breaks were timed, and if you spent too much time logged out (that being defined as something like more than ten minutes total for the day, apart from your scheduled breaks) you were docked. I was lucky enough to be gone in a couple months. But until I was able to leave, yes, the place was like an elementary school classroom. The job itself was interesting and rewarding, but the workpalce was foul. And they wondered why they had close to 100% turnover every 24 months?
I think there is a happy medium between a micromanaging and and somewhat rigid work environment and one of near absolute autonomy. Both are extremes are flawed. I suspect that S&T in #2 is right. The unspoken pressure will be enormous. If you take time off and others don’t will it be noticed? If I ran a company I might give some broad latitude on the subject of downtime. But I would make two weeks off a year mandatory and I would lock the doors to the shop on Sundays.
I would also hire someone to proof-read everything I ever wrote for silly mistakes and typos.