Edit: This question attracted way more interest than I hoped for! I will need some time to go through the comments in the next days, thanks for your efforts everyone. One thing I could grasp from the answers already - it seems to be complicated. There is no one fits all answer.

Under capitalism, it seems companies always need to grow bigger. Why can’t they just say, okay, we have 100 employees and produce a nice product for a specific market and that’s fine?

Or is this only a US megacorp thing where they need to grow to satisfy their shareholders?

Let’s ignore that most of the times the small companies get bought by the large ones.

  • gary@piefed.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    3 days ago

    I hate it. It even bleeds over into performance reviews. Like you’ll never get a perfect score no matter how hard you work because you always have to be improving on something. It’s supposed to be the sure fire sign of “success” but all it does is create impossible goals and bring everyone down.

    • vga@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      I think the focus on growth is not the problem. The problem is leadership thinking that the individual has a significant role in how much they can create growth. The environment is much more significant.