Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

It depends how you define almost no one. I agree almost no one is worth that much...but that was my point. There are people with hourlies in the hundreds of thousands. I wouldn't call tens of thousands particularly high.

And no...that just isn't correct. It does vary by industry. Very generally, capital-intensive businesses have smaller productivity differences...but even then it is probably far less than you think (in some of those industries, experience curves are per employee). But, given the subject of the post, then yes...productivity can vary that much.

What is perhaps confusing you, and many companies get this wrong, is that they treat every employee like a superstar when (by definition) they can't be. It is far more profitable to hire five below-average people and teach them to be average than hire one superstar.

My point wasn't really about what companies should or should not do but how they should look at those decisions. Wages really don't matter. I will pay someone $1m tomorrow if they can generate $5m in sales. Simple.

But companies should think carefully before they go down this route. It mostly isn't worth it because most companies aren't very good at hiring and will lose the employee if they can't continuously provide a high productivity environment. Some places can retain staff but, again, there is an 95/5 rule about workplaces just as there is employees.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: