Too much dead weight, the overhead is ridiculous. IF the right ones can be identified and cut, NetAPP would be much more efficient cutting 30-50%.
4 replies (most recent on top)
@1hvx+19pf8ZCn: 100% sure that you are a troll and never worked in a top 5 company. Lol.
The guy who replied is definitely an old school boy without any idea about big guys like FAANG, and little guys like snowflakes, pure, ...
Have fun with NetApp meetings ! lol
I agree to the opinion on this reply.
This thinking is hilarious. You are either new to industry or you have no perception beyond what you can see. When I was young (early 20s) I assumed that if I didn't know what someone was doing they must be dead weight. It was an incredibly naïve point of view. As I progressed in my career and got older I began working more outside my field and learned that there is a lot of work that happens that never touches mine and isn't always visible. This helped me understand that you should never assume someone is dead weight. YOU just don't know their value prop to the company. I am not saying that companies don't have dead weight. Every company does. But assuming NetApp, which has been cutting for years and has now cut into the bone, has a 50% dead weight workforce shows you are either ignorant or uneducated.