Most of their top engineers would quit and go to work for another company that values their time. Quality of service would fall because top people have left. They would have a lot more difficult time to find any engineers to work for them.
Maybe. But I doubt it.
First because people don’t quit that fast and second because I think something else might happen that is worth the risk of loosing a few “top” quitters.
I think top people will realize there is an opportunity here, and after seeing how effective it can be for a team to work toward a common goal, will request other such tasks be added to the list.
Eventually, people at that company can choose where to use their “20% service job” time.
But, then again, don’t worry, it’s all theoretical anyway, it’s obviously not up to me.
In which case, if it was up to me, and it is not, obviously, I’d open a short discussion about goals, and if we couldn’t find a common ground, would write down “culture fit” and wish you better happiness somewhere else.
Why should engineer choose this culture compared to other cultures where he can just build things and provide value at what they are best at?
Knowing other engineers most would avoid such activities where they can't use their skills valuably like a plague.
Also you would lose goal/results oriented people. The ones who are best at reaching those goals are the ones who can not stand doing anything that does not align woth those goals.
I’m not building a video platform. It’s already there. I’m just, totally hypocritically, fixing the company that operates it.
Are you saying there is no more work left to do?
What about improving algorithms that can moderate those PTSD causing media themselves so it would not be a problem in the first place.
Are you claiming that YouTube does not have a need for engineers at all because the product is already available for public?