How can a company such as Twitter survive even after such a huge percentage of its workforce has been fired?
In: 1
[removed]
[removed]
Twitter seems to be doing better than ever, I’m thinking this is a classic “too many cooks in the kitchen” scenario. In economics, you have diminishing marginal utility as you hire more people. What this means, is that 5 people aren’t doing 5x the work of 1 person, they’re more doing 4x or 3x the work. As more people are added, there are more useless meetings and people getting in the way. It can get to the point where adding employees is actually *detrimental* and decreases the product put out. Think about office cliques, people talking at the water fountain, etc. The more people you add (without the work to support it), the more these inefficiencies show up. These inefficiencies make the people actually doing work more inefficient too. Think about the distractions bored coworkers can be. Having too many people on a project can be a disaster. I’m an engineer too. I’ve seen this first hand. Oftentimes, less is more. Keep in mind, there’s a clear motivation for you to do the least amount of work possible, while not getting fired. That maximizes happiness. With more bloat, that’s even harder to find.
– I have a business economics minor
Twitter seems to be doing better than ever, I’m thinking this is a classic “too many cooks in the kitchen” scenario. In economics, you have diminishing marginal utility as you hire more people. What this means, is that 5 people aren’t doing 5x the work of 1 person, they’re more doing 4x or 3x the work. As more people are added, there are more useless meetings and people getting in the way. It can get to the point where adding employees is actually *detrimental* and decreases the product put out. Think about office cliques, people talking at the water fountain, etc. The more people you add (without the work to support it), the more these inefficiencies show up. These inefficiencies make the people actually doing work more inefficient too. Think about the distractions bored coworkers can be. Having too many people on a project can be a disaster. I’m an engineer too. I’ve seen this first hand. Oftentimes, less is more. Keep in mind, there’s a clear motivation for you to do the least amount of work possible, while not getting fired. That maximizes happiness. With more bloat, that’s even harder to find.
– I have a business economics minor
[removed]
[removed]
Twitter seems to be doing better than ever, I’m thinking this is a classic “too many cooks in the kitchen” scenario. In economics, you have diminishing marginal utility as you hire more people. What this means, is that 5 people aren’t doing 5x the work of 1 person, they’re more doing 4x or 3x the work. As more people are added, there are more useless meetings and people getting in the way. It can get to the point where adding employees is actually *detrimental* and decreases the product put out. Think about office cliques, people talking at the water fountain, etc. The more people you add (without the work to support it), the more these inefficiencies show up. These inefficiencies make the people actually doing work more inefficient too. Think about the distractions bored coworkers can be. Having too many people on a project can be a disaster. I’m an engineer too. I’ve seen this first hand. Oftentimes, less is more. Keep in mind, there’s a clear motivation for you to do the least amount of work possible, while not getting fired. That maximizes happiness. With more bloat, that’s even harder to find.
– I have a business economics minor
[removed]
Look at all the apks and websites that exist that were created by a single person. Most at least started that way.
Most people working for a multi million dollar software/website aren’t the actual programmers. They’re payroll,HR, managers, advertisers, designers, idea people, influencers, and such.
You want a heavily used program to simply stay up and running, all you need is a few people and some servers.
To add more to the comments already shared, Twitter is breaking with every new feature. The site is constantly going down. Because the various SOPs put in place are ignored, and teams responsible for certain things no longer exist.
To use a ELI5 example:
Imagine you had a team of experts to build a house. One expert handles the electrical wiring. One expert handles the structure. One expert handles the plumbing. Etc.
Well you decide to fire everyone except the interior designer. Well, they been with the team for decades, and knows what a house “looks like”. Well, they’re wiring power and are definitely not familiar with the details of grounding properly. But power is flowing so maybe it’s right. They set up the plumbing and toilets are flushing so maybe it’s right. And you know, why did the structural engineer always do a specific pattern? Well they aren’t here to explain so let’s do it my way. Roof holds up but leans a bit.
Anyways, here’s your house! It’s functioning. Power exists. Toilets flush. Walls are kinda holding up.
So officially, things are working from the outside view.
But we know the truth. This house is a death trap. We see the faults. We don’t want things to fail. But every time someone points out a flaw, a stupid rich baby calls them a jackass.
So most of us has given up and now are enjoying the popcorn.
Latest Answers