
Netflix's Culture Document (2009) - bcardarella
http://www.slideshare.net/reed2001/culture-2009
======
up_and_up
Its always interesting to read these broad visionary executive statements in
contrast to the 'boots on the ground' nitty gritty such as the reviews of
Netflix on Glassdoor:

<http://www.glassdoor.com/Reviews/Netflix-Reviews-E11891.htm>

Incongruences are notable.

~~~
psadri
I tend to agree. This document sounds really great but does not match up with
the reality, at least based on the few samples that I am aware of.

Big companies constantly try to portray themselves as the enlightened place to
work in order to attract great people.

~~~
TazeTSchnitzel
This is ironic, considering at the start of the presentation they pointed out
this exact point.

------
timdellinger
They updated this in 2011, by the way:

<http://www.slideshare.net/reed2001/culture-1798664>

------
jtbigwoo
We talked about this back in 2009:
<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=740524>

~~~
bcardarella
Yeah the document is a few years old, but it is relevant considering this
recent TC article: [http://techcrunch.com/2013/01/31/read-what-facebooks-
sandber...](http://techcrunch.com/2013/01/31/read-what-facebooks-sandberg-
calls-maybe-the-most-important-document-ever-to-come-out-of-the-valley/)

------
socalnate1
I'm very curious how (or if at all) this thinking has been applied to
Netflix's hourly employees. Basic customer service, distribution center folks,
etc who have more structured jobs to do. The distinction is briefly touched on
at the beginning, but I'd love to hear more.

~~~
tibbon
I too am very interested in this. Netflix and Amazon both seem to be amazing
companies to work for - if you're in the right class/caste/level of
employment. If you're a developer or similar working for corporate, it sounds
great. If you're working in the factory-like fulfillment warehouses, it sounds
less great. There are few stories I've heard of the companies applying equal
policies to both. I've heard of even fewer stories of people moving between
the two classes of employees- or of the companies creating opportunities for
them to do so.

But moreso, instead of demonizing the companies for any practices on their
hourly employees- I'm curious to know if its possible to apply these forward-
thinking policies to 'unskilled labor' or hourly workers from an
organizational perspective. Or are these types of policies only workable for
certain types of jobs? Have there been any large (and recent) experiments done
with applying this type of management to hourly employees?

~~~
Evbn
Hourly fulfillment employees do work at marginal cost (linear relationship
between revenue and labor) that doesn't have the multiplier effect that
corporate office work has. Thus there is a hard ceiling on sustainable wage
level. For a lawyer it is high. For packaging $5 books it is not.

------
tvladeck
I read this, and I had a ridiculous number of "Aha!" moments. A few for me:

-Context vs. control: In any place where your expecting creative contribution, it makes literally zero sense to define the contribution by the input. You hire people for their output, not their input.

-Vacation tracking: If you're not tracking how many hours the employees _do_ work, you're already not tracking how many they _don't_ work -- by definition.

-Generous severance: This way your managers don't feel bad firing people that aren't a good fit.

------
yalogin
One thing that stands out here is the work-life balance for employees will not
be there and Netflix does not think they should care about it. Given that they
measure the effectiveness of the employee, one can always be more effective if
he/she works longer hours every single day. Same goes with the no vacation
tracking policy. That only means there are no vacation. You are getting paid
so deal with it :)

Of course startups in the valley are in general not big on work-life balance
anyway.

------
cpdean
I really like slide #7, in how it discusses that most "corporate values" are
just these ambiguous ethereal ideals that don't necessarily mean anything.

> "[Enron's values] were chiseled in marble in the main lobby, but had little
> to do with the real values of the organization."

I wish other major employers would see this and realize how self-parodying
they can be.

~~~
Klinky
>I wish other major employers would see this and realize how self-parodying
they can be.

It would be nice if Netflix itself actually realized this.

------
dockd
I've always wondered how these slides applied to their CEO as their stock went
from 300 to 66 and, in particular, the comparison to sports teams--although
per their slides it's not a perfect comparison.

So when would it ever be time to trade the CEO?

Is every employee given a year or two to turn things around?

------
dude_abides
Most points in this document are great, except for the argument about high
salary in lieu of high bonuses and great benefits.

High bonuses have worked well for Wall St traders, as well as for exec-level
employees in all industries. And great benefits clearly work well, as proven
by Google.

~~~
Pkeod
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6XAPnuFjJc>

High enough salary + great benefits to the point where needs are met are
ideal. "Rockstars" may be able to negotiate with companies who want to hire
those kinds of people, but if you are hiring only the best people and not the
best people for your company then your culture will suffer. I like the way
Valve does things. No rockstar culture like WallSt or Hollywood has. Everyone
gets even footing and credit. You can earn more if your peers agree that you
deserve it - people there are not chasing rewards - they are doing what they
love well and being rewarded for it. It seems to work very well for them and
other co-op like companies.

------
bcardarella
This document is a fantastic read, highly recommend everybody to check it out

------
rajesht
If you need 129 slides to explain your culture, there is definitely something
wrong with it.

------
pbreit
It's interesting that while Netflix is quite successful overall it has made
some hugely bad decisions (silverlight, qwikster, house of cards release). You
wonder if Netflix culture is a contributor.

~~~
philwebster
I'm going to echo the other commenters here and ask why House of Cards was a
hugely bad decision. It's funny because just today I reactivated my Netflix
account so I could watch the show.

There is a problem here though. Because I'm sure I'll devour the season in
less than a month, I'll be tempted to cancel my account (until Arrested
Development is released). If they had spaced the release out like a normal TV
show, they could get about 3 months of subscription fees from me.

~~~
scottm01
As to the problem... Let's assume that they're not going to make major policy
decisions based on just this one show and instead that it's a ramp up of what
started with Lillehammer. We'll see them putting out content more and more
frequently.

As they put out more and more 'original' content, it becomes more likely that
even if there is a month you're not interested in something new you'll stick
around for the next new thing. I've been a subscriber (and cable cord-cutter)
for years and even without the original content it's been worth the small fee.

I don't think we'll know for awhile whether the strategy is successful, but I
certainly think it's more promising then qwikster (:

~~~
scrabble
They've said already that they plan on putting out at least 5 new Netflix
original series a year.

