Netflix Corporate Culture: Blogisode Two - The Keepers Test Managers Use

The next thing that struck me about this presentation was what I believe to be another “nice sounding” philosophy (don’t worry, not all of my blogisodes will be on nice sounding philosophies). I got to slide 28 and found the following:

The Keepers Test Managers Use:

“Which of my people, if they told me they were leaving in two months for a similar job at a peer company, would I fight hard to keep at Netflix?”

Then on slide 29 they say:

The other people should get a generous severance now, so we can open a slot to try to find a star for that role.

Once again, if it functions as it should (and I’m sure they will claim that they do) then great. But is it really happening that way? Are managers really choosing to keep the best performing employees even if they perform differently from themselves? Managers have a tendency to like/prefer those individuals who are most like themselves (as do co-workers with other co-workers). They do not tend to prefer (and would probably not “fight hard to keep”) the unsocial types that might get the work done but are different to be around or who don’t go to the company picnics or who don’t play the politics or who are quirky, different, or just don’t fit in.

On the very next slide, slide 30, they say:

HONESTY ALWAYS

To avoid surprises, you should periodically ask your manager: “If I told you I were leaving, how hard would you work to change my mind to stay at Netflix?”

REALLY? If I went and interviewed employees, how many would tell me they’ve actually done this? What about managers? How many managers would tell me that they’ve been asked this question and have told the employees “No?” Besides, if the managers were really living by the rule on slide 28, wouldn’t they have already eliminated everyone that they wouldn’t “fight” for, making slide 30 irrelevant? What if I interviewed people that were given generous severance packages…would they say they did this and their managers were honest with them? Did they see it coming? Would be interesting to know, wouldn’t it?

Ask yourself this, “is this the type of culture you’re looking for?” It might work for some, but to me it screams politics. It says to me; make sure your manager really likes you because no matter WHAT people say, research has proven time and time again that objectivity when it comes to subordinates is a rare thing to come by.

Netflix Corporate Culture: Blogisode One

A colleague of mine recently sent me this link and asked what I thought: Reference Guide on our Freedom & Responsibility Culture. The link is to a PowerPoint presentation put together by Netflix explaining their corporate culture. I had so many different reactions while I was reading it (this could be due to the fact that the .ppt had 128 slides)!! There are several points that this presentation makes that I agree with and that I like. However, after reading several comments on several different sites (including entire blogs) on the subject, I began to wonder: Am I the only one not drinking the Koolaid? I decided I had to write a blog on the topic.

As I started writing, I quickly realized that my blog would be 85 pages long (and nobody would ever read it), so I decided I would make my reaction to the Netflix Corporate Culture presentation into a blog miniseries, with multiple blogisodes (I love making up new words). I don’t know yet how many blogisodes there will be, so stay tuned! Here’s blogisode ONE.

It starts out by saying that they have real company values as opposed to nice sounding ones. They quote:

Like every company, we try to hire well, but unlike many companies, we practice “adequate performance gets a generous severance package”

Really? Can a large organization such as this one really practice this philosophy? Where is the room and attention to development or growth? Have they done research on the costs of turnover with or without a generous severance package? Are they saying that every person in the company gets the highest of marks on their performance reviews? I’d like to take a look at their performance reviews and see if they are really practicing this value.

If all of their performance reviews really ARE high, how do they identify the top performers? Who gets the promotion? Does this type of environment breed a culture of competition amongst “top” performers who typically already competitive by nature?

Also, what constitutes adequate performance?

Most companies have a hard time living by this philosophy when the word “average” is changed to “poor!” They won’t admit it, but just ask around and you are bound to find some employees that will tell you that it’s all about “who you know” or “who you are politically connected with” and not your performance that keeps you around (and usually getting you raises and promotions). This is definitely not a good thing and should be something that the organization tries to change. My point here though, is that they preface their statement by saying that their philosophy is a REAL one and everyone else’s is just “nice-sounding” when in fact, I believe that their philosophy is exactly that…nice sounding.