@MartinGTobias If it is possible to talk again, I suggest not having a 2-way conversation about the past situation. 1-way from the CEO is the right way to move forward, and not give them pressure. But usually, they would repeat this situation. So keeping away from them is the best option.
I was sent this chart and found the implication, if true, important.
Many people derided the reduction in force that happened at Twitter/X and the firing of 80% of the company. But it turned out that the company wasn’t only no worse for wear, but are seeing record usage since streamlining their workforce and OpEx.
Well if the chart below is true, it is a path that many other companies will have to take.
If you’re a public company, I don’t see how you can defend yourself from activists as AI tools proliferate. You have two choices:
1) double your work product and quantity of code shipped and product value as you keep headcount steady.
OR
2) reduce your R&D/OpEx by 50% and have half the team + AI tools do the work that the entire team used to do before.
FWIW, I don’t see how companies can empower their employees with tools and claim they have doubled their productivity unless revenue also doubles.
So the latter (#2) seems like the most obvious path that shareholders will push for. In no small part because of the SBC- based dilution they would also save if this happened.