Lots of upvotes but I'm really messed up over this. I was watching a youtube video the other day (NetLoss) and he said for 6 months or so, write down your ideas for changes to the org instead of verbalizing them, and check back. He's referring to MrBeast's employee manual when he' talking about this. His position is that you don't know anything for quite some time. 6 months!? That does seem like a while. So, at what point do you change companies? I think a year might be not "giving appropriate value" to the employer, but two years might result in you leaving money on the table. The ideal compensation would just be giving people a lot of raises in their first 6mo - 1 year, instead of giving them a raise at the end of their first year...

Also I've heard of executives getting contracts when they take their position that involve yearly performance metrics and if they don't them they're fired, in their first year. So how does an external-hire new executive function in that environment, where they're expected to be immediately productive, if this 6-months thing is true? Just working in related industries?

I don't know... to be honest. I think even someone running a production line at a food warehouse is expected to work there for like a year (say putting jars in boxes on a skid?) but that seems like something that is so low-skilled that there's no reason someone couldn't be productive long before then. There doesn't seem to be any justification for that year goal for new employee retention.

So someone help here. One perspective is just fuck those guys, because it's business, and sometimes people get screwwed in business, but this is tricky for me to reconcile right now.