Why Jeff Bezos Doesn’t See The Amazon He Knows

Why Jeff Bezos Doesn’t See The Amazon He Knows

Who to believe about the real Amazon? Is it the New York Times? Or, Nick Ciubotariu, Head of Network Infrastructure? Or Jeff Bezos? The answer: it's quite possibly all of them.

 Amazon has undergone mind-boggling growth in the past seven years. In 2007, they had 17,000 employees. In 2014, that number was 154,100. In a company that large, there is going to be no singular experience of the company culture. The way that culture and the principles that serve as its foundation play out will vary -- some good, some bad, some ugly. And no single person can say his or her experience is the real one. They are all real.

So, here are some thoughts on why Jeff Bezos doesn't recognize the New York Time article's Amazon.

A data-driven culture filled with high achievers + continually raising the bar + a forced ranking system = some bad behavior. I believe every business should continually strive to improve performance, bring out the best in people, and push for better results. However, when you base a culture on continually raising the bar and a forced ranking system that mandates the removal of a certain percentage of low performers, it can create unintended consequences. Especially, when the people in the company are among the best and brightest and highly competitive by nature. Let's think about what this looks like. In an average workforce (and forced ranking system), you have about 10% -20% who are superstars and another 10% or so of low performers. In a company of 150,000+ that's about 15,000 low performers. And, remember these low performers see themselves among the best and brightest in they industry. Winning is often very important to people with that profile. A portion of that 70% in the middle know that they are not among the best performers and quite possible teeter on the edge of low performance, so to ensure that they do not end up in the percentage of low performers who are at risk, i.e., not winning, a few of them will, sometimes, behave badly. A few out of 15,000 could still be hundred or even thousands of people. They will sabotage other so-so performers. They will misrepresent their work and diminish the work of others. Even if it's hundreds or thousands of people, that behavior isn't as obvious with 150,000 people. It can hide more easily. It's most likely not the norm, but it doesn't mean it's not happening. 

Bad news often does not travel up. Plain fact is, most senior executives do not receive bad news, even in environments that pride themselves on robust debate and pushing people to be the best. As a matter of fact, it's more likely that bad news will be hidden in these type of environments because you don't want to show that your team is not performing well or that someone is behaving badly or that you or your team have made a mistake. You don't want that to be fodder for the debate. You don't want to be looked at poorly when performance ranking occurs. People will bring the great stuff to the attention of their managers, who bring it to their managers, who bring it to their managers, etc.. In the extreme, the hidden bad news can be so bad that it will eventually bring a company down. Think Arthur Andersen and Enron. 

Strong performers usually do the right things and are visible because of it. Nick Ciubotariu, sounds like a great manager. He may be one of the top 10- 20% I mentioned earlier. Great managers, who treat people well and get results, are often receive more visibility in companies. They are praised in ranking conversations. They are made Bar Raisers. They are the people senior executives see. Often, high performers and great managers hire other high performers and great managers so they may be less likely to see some of the bad behavior described in the New York Times article. 

About Edith Onderick-Harvey:

Edith Onderick-Harvey, president of NextBridge Consulting, is a highly sought after consultant and advisor for executives, teams and organizations undergoing high growth and significant change. Her passion is helping clients plan, design and implement leadership, team and organization strategies that allow them to execute strategy today and get ready for what’s next. Her clients include BiogenIdec, ImmunoGen, Akamai, RBS Citizens, Genzyme, Harvard Business School, MIT Sloan School of Management and many other Fortune 500 and growth companies.

She is the author of the Amazon bestseller Getting Real: Strategies for Leadership in Todays Innovation-Hungry, Time-Strapped, Multi-tasking World of Work. She has contributed to articles in Fast Company, The New York Times, Human Resource Executive, U.S. Business Review and CNN.com and other publications. She is a frequent speaker on leadership, talent and change. If you’re interested in booking her as a speaker or talking with her about how she could help you or your organization, please contact [email protected].


Zoltan Csimma

Board Member/ Executive Committee/Secretary of BSCP (Biomedical Science Careers Program). Board Member/ Compensation Committee of International Institute of New England. Life Science Cares Advisor. Exec. Advisor

9 年

Excellent points Edith! I really like what I'm hearing about GE's changes to their review system as well as Adobe. I know many feel if you don't measure performance you don't get it but the downsides of Reviews and forced rankings have been known for a long time. This is especially true if your really have a high performing employee base. We did without rankings in a Biotech with great results... the conversations about performance were still needed and dealing with non performers was a key ingredient. Stacking does creat mistrust and unreasonable fear/stress that in many cases destroys teamwork.

要查看或添加评论,请登录

社区洞察

其他会员也浏览了