What is Digg?Sponsored by Threadless
This Game Sucks view!
threadless.com - Grab this epic gaming tee for only $12 during the Threadless Holiday Sale!
91 Comments
- mysql101, on 05/20/2009, -1/+89Weird. It turns out the algorithm to calculate who is about to quit strangely coincides with people who recently received a 20% paycut and were asked to move down into the basement because they needed space to store some boxes in their old cube.
- hutch619, on 05/19/2009, -1/+72So after Google discovers that "some found the company's human-resources programs too impersonal" they literally go and write a human-resources program to find out which of their employees might be thinking about quitting? Hey Google, when you get done with that can you start working on an algorithm that helps guys figure out when their girlfriends are about to dump them? It would be nice to know if I'm investing enough time emotionally in a relationship without actually having to talk to the person!
- astorygirl, on 05/19/2009, -4/+51Talk about Big Brother.
- LargeStack, on 05/20/2009, -0/+40I want my stapler.
- AndrewDB, on 05/20/2009, -2/+38Maybe using this data they should make the employees happier that want to quit so they won't want to quit.
- Friskus, on 05/20/2009, -1/+25Google, meet self-fulfilling prophecy.
- sprkoolguy, on 05/20/2009, -0/+21I think thats the idea
- Billions, on 05/20/2009, -0/+20Or, 'algorithm' is code for just reading the gmail accounts of their employees...
- borsaid, on 05/20/2009, -1/+17Well technically those people aren't employees. . you see. . .there's this glitch. . . aah, i digress
- inactive, on 05/20/2009, -1/+17How about connecting with your staff on a more human level?
- joe7845, on 05/20/2009, -3/+15Google is like The Borg.
- surfacewound, on 05/20/2009, -0/+12Too bad. Here's a can of RAID.
- gerry87, on 05/20/2009, -1/+12There's flip side to this, as well as making likely-to-quit employees stay, a company could also adjust work out the best way to make an employee quit without having to fire them and without the employee knowing they've been 'made' quit.
- cerejota, on 05/20/2009, -0/+10Yes. Its an age old term, plus it might bother you, but your work is a commodity that you sell in a market. When commodities are amassed, they are generally called capital. It might not sound right but there is not a more accurate way to say it.
- Wuss, on 05/20/2009, -0/+10Google knew you people would say these things.
- cerejota, on 05/20/2009, -0/+10Big Brother is calculating you.
- armo, on 05/20/2009, -1/+10a fat king person?
- inactive, on 05/20/2009, -1/+9You probably are.
- inactive, on 05/20/2009, -1/+9I guess they forgot to consider that some people may find this to be offensive or a further invasion of privacy and quit on principle.
- covertbadger, on 05/20/2009, -0/+8Same reason you'd leave any other company - boredom, disillusionment, crap management, better offer elsewhere, disgust with childish gimmicky benefits - take your pick, really.
- esc27, on 05/20/2009, -0/+8How long before Google employees start gaming this system?
- bayliss, on 05/20/2009, -2/+9I wonder whether the algorithm is checking the 'google web history' tied to each gmail account to determine if hasSearchedJobWebsite >= 5 times today.
- surfacewound, on 05/20/2009, -1/+8Looks like they've long forgotten to not be double plus ungood.
- mrmod, on 05/20/2009, -2/+8Are you kidding? It's embarrassing that companies are so far out of touch with their employees that it's a big deal to be able to figure who's going to quit.
That goodness all these management business school graduates are helping out as managers /s - Krissam, on 05/20/2009, -0/+6to quote numb3rs "Don't confuse the ability to predict with the ability to control"
- negativerad, on 05/20/2009, -0/+62012 Google calculates which humans need to exist.
- 007isbond1, on 05/20/2009, -1/+7you are bigger than calulative brother.
- Myztry, on 05/20/2009, -1/+6You can find that out via SMS - with a small print disclaimer declaring it to be a 'simulation', and subscribing you to a weekly fee... ***** I HATE THOSE ADS (in Australia)
- SteveMax, on 05/20/2009, -2/+6Yes, they are. Statistically at least, you can pretty much describe the collective behaviour of a group very well. With some more variables, it's possible to assign a probability of each behaviour to each individual, and so you find out who are more likely to do something (for example, quit). It's not a simple modelling, but not impossible.
- w1cked1, on 05/20/2009, -1/+5Too many managers, I bet the equation favors them as well.
- cerejota, on 05/20/2009, -1/+5You beat me to it! This is exactly what it will be used for. Just like google uses your browsing data to both give you more relevant information and to better target advertising, this algo will also be used to do this.
It will also be used to allow a situation to continue. In fact, welcome to the algo-slip, were you fire yourself. - malcolmlo, on 05/20/2009, -1/+5Google Employee: "Well you were right again but I get the last laugh: I quit."
- Canadian0207, on 05/20/2009, -0/+3did they use wolfram alpha?
- FreddieD, on 05/20/2009, -0/+3Honestly, this is probably the most direct method they can use right now... I get the impression that Google is a victim of their own success in a way. How many thousands do they currently employ worldwide? You can't keep a reputation for hiring the best of the best while at the same time have a huge bloated company. I am sure Microsoft went through this same thing 15 years ago or so.
- pw378, on 05/20/2009, -0/+3For every smoking hot chick you have ever seen, there are guys that said "not worth it" and dumped the her.
No matter how good something looks, there is always something else to look forward to. - inactive, on 05/21/2009, -0/+3I believe it is slightly different when you are prying into the private data of an individual to make such assessments. Individuals have some expectation of privacy. Publicly traded companies are required to release data that shows how they are performing financially so that investors can make decisions. They can fudge reports to make it appear they are performing better than they really are. They also get to decide what exactly is made public and what is considered confidential.
You have no such advantages when your employer pours through your personal data basically no holes are barred. You seem to be suggesting that a corporation has a greater right to privacy than an individual. I hope this is not what you meant.
Since many corporations routinely record all of your communications made from work telephones and computers its quite likely that Google spied into private email data to help make these assessments. If that ever comes to light there will be lawsuits a plenty. Google seems to be skating on thin ice in many places without even realizing it. - ViscidGobs, on 05/21/2009, -0/+2I knew that.
- jmehl, on 05/20/2009, -3/+5I think your perspective is based upon unfounded skepticism.
Sure, it would be questionable if small business owners were not able to detect that one of their 12 employees was disengaged. However, in a massive, global company like Google, with layers and layers of management, it's fantastic that they've developed such progressive tools in order to evaluate these kinds of data. Of course a large company is going to be out of touch with their employees. Thats just the nature of it, and this sums up the tenuous balance that any company with significant growth must manage. The option is traditionally to stay small and intimate or become large, clumsy and impersonal. Google is one of the most progressive in terms or accomodating their employees and creating an atmosphere where people do not just feel like an anonymous cog in an enormous corporation.
I hope they continue with their r&d in this area. Ultimately, their employees have a better shot of job satisfaction and positive affectivity because of these efforts. And subsequently, the increased productivity gained from those factors will help keep google moving forward and keep people employed. - Elranzer, on 05/21/2009, -0/+2You think Google cares if they're invading your privacy?
- serif69, on 05/20/2009, -0/+2Dear Mr. Schmidt:
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=i+quit
Love,
An Employee - jmehl, on 05/20/2009, -1/+3This is relevant to my interests. No...seriously. I'm in grad school and I'm studying Industrial/Organizational Psychology. This is quite relevant and I find it interesting.
- Taiyoryu, on 05/20/2009, -0/+2I know it's a joke, yet somehow, that idea might actually work.
- diggeratwork, on 05/20/2009, -1/+3Not everything in this word can be solved by algorithms and formulas. For everything else, you have Google.
- weeFred, on 05/20/2009, -1/+3So they're going to retain staff by firing the people who might want to leave? I think the idea is to find out who is statistically likely to leave and then try and improve life at google for them.
- Bloodwine, on 05/20/2009, -0/+2Underused employees are pretty common in the corporate world. I have several friends that work for various Fortune 500 corporations and their biggest complaint is boredom because they are given 2 days work of work and 2 weeks to do it in.
- robfrye, on 05/20/2009, -0/+2"Google says the algorithm already has identified employees who felt underused, a key complaint among those who contemplate leaving"
Why does everyone assume that a quantitative approach is bad? This sounds like a good thing! - vvvladut, on 05/20/2009, -0/+2They totally are. For instance, one of my friends at Google told me that you were going to write this comment, sometime about 3 hr 35 mins ago.
- Cglass, on 05/20/2009, -0/+2Good one bob, bob.
- levi88, on 05/20/2009, -1/+2I see what you did there.
- ViscidGobs, on 05/21/2009, -0/+1Discovery is a two-edged sword.
-
Show 51 - 92 of 92 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is