it clearly needs to be repeated that layoffs are a leadership failure, full stop.
Zach Leatherman 3030 replies 195195 likes3737 reposts33 quotes Original on BlueskyOriginal on MastodonAlso posted to Mastodon.
30 replies
I wholeheartedly agree, but I have doubts if this logic applies to the recent Tailwind implosion.
say more?
Doesn't seem like "management" could have done a better job other than generally solving the whole OSS funding problem
Or a less balanced yet still valuable take here:
I’m not balanced? 😂
You are a perfectly balanced person.
Your take on this on the other hand - was a little on the spicy side 😅
Ok. I think I said what I wanted to say in my first post
That's a useful clarification. Thanks. Food for thought
I think I agree with you. The whole mess *SUCKS*; I absolutely feel for everyone involved, and hope all the folks impacted are alright. But...this is not simply an "oss funding issue". Building a company around services and support for a company owned OSS product is an entirely different problem.
I still don't understand in what way you mean that the Tailwind leadership failed in this case. Are you suggesting you know that they should have known to do something differently? In that case what?
"management" could have done less evangelising of AI tools to his many followers though...
Admittedly I don't use Twitter basically ever but I've definitely seen him mentioning AI tools.I can't help but feel slightly mixed on it.
Obviously still funding OSS is harder than it should be.
I'm on the fence about AI enthusiasts getting eaten alive by the basilisk.
When that happens, I don't experience the schadenfreude at all.
Yeah to be clear I don't either, but I also don't feel as much sympathy.
My point is - I kinda do feel sympathy. It's a fellow human hurting from the hand of an intelligence I have little in common with (regardless of whether we consider the AI or the billionaire the perpetrator of said hurting)
@zachleat is this a subtoot/relatoot to something I missed or just you being philosophical (and absolutely right in my opinion, may I add)?
@nice2meatu tailwind, presumably? @zachleat
@zachleat and yet, layoffs are conducive to increased comp packages for leadership — make it make sense
What's this in reference to? I fully agree btw. My recent organization (McGill University) had 100+ layoffs and yet no upper management changes or resignations. And more cuts to come. Total shambles.
Tailwind laid off 75% of their staff claiming that people are using LLMs to do what the products they sell do
Cloudflare layoffs 😞
oh, I should look at the dates. but the repost was in reference to CF 😅
@zachleat yes, thank you! it really bothers me that one guy gets to control the narrative and blames it on some external factor.
they had ~3 years to react, it surely didn't come as a surprise.
@mayank I don’t have their ARR numbers but I do believe it’s in the millions (still)
What if the layoffs are a strategic choice? A way of reducing costs in response to external forces? I don’t think it’s right to say all layoffs are a leadership failure.
in your mind, what is the venn diagram of “strategic choice” and “leadership failure?”
While most probably are, I’m suggesting that not all layoffs are leadership failures. I suspect M&A would provide good examples of when layoffs are an inevitable, strategic outcome.
@zachleat when a billion dollar enterprise barricades your store entrance and gives a scrambled version of your product away for free, what could you do about it?
I’m asking because I might be next in line, luckily I’ll only have to fire myself.
Not always true, e.g. when you are extracting a finite good. BP would have done better if it had carried on extracting oil until uneconomical, than trying to pivot to green tech. Also true that automation is a good reason for reducing workforce.