Sounds like a story and less a recounting of reality. From the article (and likely buried in it): “In fact, the voluntary leave rate is only 3%, far lower than the industry standard of 18%. (The involuntary rate of departure is 8%, only 2 percentage points higher than the average for this category.)”
So what’s the problem? Looks like 97% of the people there at any given time are at least satisfied. And probably more than just satisfied, given that being at Netflix probably makes you a target for premier opportunities elsewhere.
I thought the public berating was a Chinese thing; i.e. berating the student in front of the class. Had a manager do that; put up a list of peoples names and hours, and berating them for not putting in enough hours.
This piece sounds so sensationalized. Haven’t worked there, but from reading their culture document and talking with a couple employees, it’s a very high performance company that values high performers. I’m sure it’s possible to identify a handful of examples over the years and use them to attempt to paint the company as a monster.
These stories may be true. But they are out of context. And I would say it's pretty biased when most of them are previous (fired) employees. You can run interviews on any company on such samples and it won't be any better.
Is it a good place for good performers? Are they regularly promoted and given a raise? Is there enough internal transparency that politics does not get in the way? How do they make sure that a manager does not misuse this policy to grind an axe with an employee whom he doesn't like?
North star and blast radius are common industry phrases. I have never heard of an personal blast radius though - always used with respect to code or system design changes. The sunshining stuff crosses over from performance focused to a bit cultish for sure though. Basically, a more extreme version of Amazon's culture. Would rather work there than a place with a bunch of mediocre, untalented coworkers though.