1) When someone is unhappy and you ask for questions, they will often ask the question they think you will find most uncomfortable to answer. They don't have much power but they can make you squirm.
2) If someone is still drinking the google juice and believes executives have their interests at heart, they may well believe enough in the "culture of transparency" that if they're worried about layoffs they ask about it at an all-hands.
3) They might suspect you're full of it and that your response to this question will be a litmus test
It's not only about the one being fired. It's also about the ones not affected knowing it was the last round for a while so they can focus on their work, not on fear of losing it.
Being transparent can create trust. Trust is important for motivation. Motivation is important for "knowledge workers"
To turn it around: Why should one work hard if there is a high chance of some global sweep soon, where they might randomly pick me without any reasoning.
>Why should one work hard if there is a high chance of some global sweep soon, where they might randomly pick me without any reasoning.
This seems like taking huge logical leaps. If a friend expressed mine expressed it I would recommend them talking to a therapist about their self sabotaging thinking and perhaps depression.
If there is a layoff and I am at risk, I would rather have hard work to show. If Im not laid off, I would rather have hard work to capitalize on the aftermath. If I am laid off, I would rather have good reputation with my network .
What I said is true even if you believe it is random (which I don't).
Good work output is the smart choice if I will be retained OR if I will be fired. crapping out ignores the fact that the chance of being fired is low, even if it is random (google isnt going to go full twitter, if there even is a layoff). Being the guy who's work goes to shit when a layoff is announced sticks with you if you stay. If your boss is firing based on their subjective impressions OR quantitative ones, it actively hurts your chances.
There are big cognitive distortions at play here at each progressive leap: Randomness exists > Randomness is predominant > Nothing I do matters> It is a good idea to give up.
This is how I think when I am clinically depressed. It is self defeating and self fulfilling.
I do wonder how much of this is self-fulfilling atrophy. You're tired and sick, so you stay in bed. Then you get weak, making you more tired. Hopefully she can turn things around, regardless of underlying causes.
It sounds like for cases like hers, trying and pushing yourself to exercise only makes you weaker, not stronger. If you're curious, her channel has a number of videos about this.
The difference in this case between a "founder" and a "manager" is more about understanding the nuts and bolts of the business and being able to lean on that understanding in ways that require you to cut through the org chart.
Is it surprising that leaders who don't understand a business and aren't willing to engage across the full depth/breadth of the business are less effective than those that try to treat everything as an abstract cashflow machine?