5 ms·
I think the part that is transparent is that you're not going to build your career and retire at Netflix, you know it's a stint. It may be arbitrary and caprici
by Programmatic 10y ago
I think the part that is transparent is that you're not going to build your career and retire at Netflix, you know it's a stint. It may be arbitrary and capricious otherwise, but you know that in advance and can decide if it's worth it. I would not mind being in such an environment for a stint, myself.
- mindcrime 10y agoI think the part that is transparent is that you're not going to build your career and retire at Netflix, you know it's a stint. But anybody who has been paying attention has known that any job is "just a stint" since at least the 90's, if not the 80's. A big part of the Re-engineering[1] push of the 90's involved reducing costs, at least in part by reducing head-count. And before that, you had the 80's LBO[2] craze, which resulted in dramatic layoffs at many companies. As a Gen-X'er who grew up in the 80's, I have never expected to have a life-long career at a single company, and I can't imagine many - if any - of my peers imagining that either. In this regard, there's nothing unique at Netflix. All jobs are essentially "temp" jobs in this day and age. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_process_reengineering https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_process_reengineering [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leveraged_buyout https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leveraged_buyout
- Programmatic 10y agoThere are varying levels of job security, and the loyalty part in technology especially just means that you have to voluntarily leave to another company to get treated better. I'd rather work somewhere that had little to no job security but where everyone was on the ball. Otherwise, the detritus starts to pile up when they aren't mobile within the market.