←back to thread

Google has eliminated 35% of managers overseeing small teams in past year

(www.cnbc.com)
574 points frays | 2 comments | 27 Aug 25 21:16 UTC | HN request time: 0.44s | source
Show context
mikestew ◴[27 Aug 25 21:52 UTC] No.45045782[source]▶
The 35% reduction refers to the number of managers who oversee fewer than three people, according to a person familiar with the matter.

If you oversee 0-2 people, in most cases that’s probably not an efficient ratio. How did Google get so many folks in that position in the first place? And I assume the other 65% take up the slack to fluff their teams? Or what? Leave the other 65% managing 0-2 people?

replies(16): >>45045800 #>>45045814 #>>45045815 #>>45045827 #>>45045863 #>>45046087 #>>45046207 #>>45046272 #>>45046285 #>>45046335 #>>45046408 #>>45046621 #>>45047565 #>>45047573 #>>45051289 #>>45052082 #
TheBigSalad ◴[27 Aug 25 21:54 UTC] No.45045800[source]▶
How is it not efficient?
replies(3): >>45045873 #>>45045880 #>>45046167 #
1. Etheryte ◴[27 Aug 25 22:01 UTC] No.45045880[source]▶
If managers oversee 0-2 people in a company, that means it's roughly just one person managing one person managing one etc.
replies(1): >>45050153 #
2. LudwigNagasena ◴[28 Aug 25 09:25 UTC] No.45050153[source]▶
Imagine you have a cohesive system that has 10 services, each service requires 1-3 people. The head of the system can assign 10 tech leads responsible for the overall quality of the services or they may have over 20 direct reports, most of whom have nothing of interest to report to the higher-up.