Connect with us

Published

on

Amazon is instructing corporate staffers to spend five days a week in the office, CEO Andy Jassy wrote in a memo on Monday.

The decision marks a significant shift from Amazon’s earlier return-to-work stance, which required corporate workers to be in the office at least three days a week. Now, the company is giving employees until Jan. 2 to start adhering to the new policy.

Amazon also plans to simplify its corporate structure by having fewer managers in order to “remove layers and flatten organizations,” Jassy said. The company rapidly grew its headcount over the course of the pandemic before Jassy took the helm and instituted widespread cost cuts across Amazon, including the largest layoffs in its 27 years as a public company.

Jassy wrote in a lengthy missive to staffers that Amazon is making the changes in order to strengthen its corporate culture and ensure that it remains nimble. He underscored the point by saying the company created a “bureaucracy mailbox,” or dedicated email alias, to root out any unnecessary processes or excessive rules within the company.

“We want to operate like the world’s largest startup,” Jassy wrote. “That means having a passion for constantly inventing for customers, strong urgency (for most big opportunities, it’s a race!), high ownership, fast decision-making, scrappiness and frugality, deeply-connected collaboration (you need to be joined at the hip with your teammates when inventing and solving hard problems), and a shared commitment to each other.”

Hey team. I wanted to send a note on a couple changes we’re making to further strengthen our culture and teams.

First, for perspective, I feel good about the progress we’re making together. Stores, AWS, and Advertising continue to grow on very large bases, Prime Video continues to expand, and new investment areas like GenAI, Kuiper, Healthcare, and several others are evolving nicely. And at the same time we’re growing and inventing, we’re also continuing to make progress on our cost structure and operating margins, which isn’t easy to do. Overall, I like the direction in which we’re heading and appreciate the hard work and ingenuity of our teams globally.

When I think about my time at Amazon, I never imagined I’d be at the company for 27 years. My plan (which my wife and I agreed to on a bar napkin in 1997) was to be here a few years and move back to NYC. Part of why I’ve stayed has been the unprecedented growth (we had $15M of annual revenue the year before I joined—this year should be well north of $600B), the perpetual hunger to invent, the obsession with making customers’ lives easier and better every day, and the associated opportunities these priorities present. But, the biggest reason I’m still here is our culture. Being so customer focused is an inspiring part of it, but it’s also the people we work with, the way we collaborate and invent when we’re at our best, our long-term perspective, the ownership I’ve always felt at every level I’ve worked (I started as a Level 5), the speed with which we make decisions and move, and the lack of bureaucracy and politics.

Our culture is unique, and has been one of the most critical parts of our success in our first 29 years. But, keeping your culture strong is not a birthright. You have to work at it all the time. When you consider the breadth of our businesses, their associated growth rates, the innovation required across each of them, and the number of people we’ve hired the last 6-8 years to pursue these endeavors, it’s pretty unusual—and will stretch even the strongest of cultures. Strengthening our culture remains a top priority for the s-team and me. And, I think about it all the time.

We want to operate like the world’s largest startup. That means having a passion for constantly inventing for customers, strong urgency (for most big opportunities, it’s a race!), high ownership, fast decision-making, scrappiness and frugality, deeply-connected collaboration (you need to be joined at the hip with your teammates when inventing and solving hard problems), and a shared commitment to each other.

Two areas that the s-team and I have been thinking about the last several months are: 1/ do we have the right org structure to drive the level of ownership and speed we desire? 2/ are we set up to invent, collaborate, and be connected enough to each other (and our culture) to deliver the absolute best for customers and the business that we can? We think we can be better on both.

On the first topic, we’ve always sought to hire very smart, high judgment, inventive, delivery-focused, and missionary teammates. And, we have always wanted the people doing the actual detailed work to have high ownership. As we have grown our teams as quickly and substantially as we have the last many years, we have understandably added a lot of managers. In that process, we have also added more layers than we had before. It’s created artifacts that we’d like to change (e.g., pre-meetings for the pre-meetings for the decision meetings, a longer line of managers feeling like they need to review a topic before it moves forward, owners of initiatives feeling less like they should make recommendations because the decision will be made elsewhere, etc.). Most decisions we make are two-way doors, and as such, we want more of our teammates feeling like they can move fast without unnecessary processes, meetings, mechanisms, and layers that create overhead and waste valuable time.

So, we’re asking each s-team organization to increase the ratio of individual contributors to managers by at least 15% by the end of Q1 2025. Having fewer managers will remove layers and flatten organizations more than they are today. If we do this work well, it will increase our teammates’ ability to move fast, clarify and invigorate their sense of ownership, drive decision-making closer to the front lines where it most impacts customers (and the business), decrease bureaucracy, and strengthen our organizations’ ability to make customers’ lives better and easier every day. We will do this thoughtfully, and our PxT team will work closely with our leaders to evolve our organizations to accomplish these goals over the next few months.

[By the way, I’ve created a “Bureaucracy Mailbox” for any examples any of you see where we might have bureaucracy or unnecessary process that’s crept in and we can root out…to be clear, companies need process to run effectively, and process does not equal bureaucracy, but unnecessary and excessive process or rules should be called out and extinguished. I will read these emails and action them accordingly.]

To address the second issue of being better set up to invent, collaborate, and be connected enough to each other and our culture to deliver the absolute best for customers and the business, we’ve decided that we’re going to return to being in the office the way we were before the onset of COVID. When we look back over the last five years, we continue to believe that the advantages of being together in the office are significant. I’ve previously explained these benefits (February 2023 post), but in summary, we’ve observed that it’s easier for our teammates to learn, model, practice, and strengthen our culture; collaborating, brainstorming, and inventing are simpler and more effective; teaching and learning from one another are more seamless; and, teams tend to be better connected to one another. If anything, the last 15 months we’ve been back in the office at least three days a week has strengthened our conviction about the benefits.

Before the pandemic, not everybody was in the office five days a week, every week. If you or your child were sick, if you had some sort of house emergency, if you were on the road seeing customers or partners, if you needed a day or two to finish coding in a more isolated environment, people worked remotely. This was understood, and will be moving forward as well. But, before the pandemic, it was not a given that folks could work remotely two days a week, and that will also be true moving forward—our expectation is that people will be in the office outside of extenuating circumstances (like the ones mentioned above) or if you already have a Remote Work Exception approved through your s-team leader.

We are also going to bring back assigned desk arrangements in locations that were previously organized that way, including the U.S. headquarters locations (Puget Sound and Arlington). For locations that had agile desk arrangements before the pandemic, including much of Europe, we will continue to operate that way.

We understand that some of our teammates may have set up their personal lives in such a way that returning to the office consistently five days per week will require some adjustments. To help ensure a smooth transition, we’re going to make this new expectation active on January 2, 2025. Global Real Estate and Facilities (GREF) is working on a plan to accommodate desk arrangements mentioned above and will communicate the details as they are finalized.

I want to thank our leaders and support teams in advance for the work they will do to improve their org structures over the coming months. With a company of our size and complexity, the work won’t be trivial and it will test our collective ability to invent and simplify when it comes to how we organize and go after the meaningful opportunities we have across all of our businesses.

Having the right culture at Amazon is something I don’t take for granted. I continue to believe that we are all here because we want to make a difference in customers’ lives, invent on their behalf, and move quickly to solve their problems. I’m optimistic that these changes will better help us accomplish these goals while strengthening our culture and the effectiveness of our teams.

Thanks, Andy

This is breaking news. Please refresh for updates.

Continue Reading

Technology

Inside one of the first all-female hacker houses in San Francisco

Published

on

By

Inside one of the first all-female hacker houses in San Francisco

For Molly Cantillon, living in a hacker house wasn’t just a dream, but a necessity.

“I had lived in a few hacker houses before and wanted to replicate that energy,” said Cantillon, 20, co-founder of HackHer House and founder of the startup NOX. “A place where really energetic, hardcore people came together to solve problems. But every house I lived in was mostly male. It was obvious to me that I wanted to do the inverse and build an all-female hacker house that created the same dynamic but with women.”

Cantillon, who has lived in several hacker houses over the years, saw a need for a space dedicated exclusively to women. That’s why she co-founded HackHer House, the first all-female hacker house in the San Francisco Bay Area.

“A hacker house is a shared living space where builders and innovators come together to work on their own projects while collaborating with others,” said Jennifer Li, General Partner at Andreessen Horowitz and sponsor of the HackHer House. “It’s a community that thrives on creativity and resource sharing, making it a cost-effective solution for those in high-rent areas like Silicon Valley, where talented founders and engineers can easily connect and support each other.”

Founded by Cantillon, Zoya Garg, Anna Monaco and Anne Brandes, this house was designed to empower women in a tech world traditionally dominated by men. 

“We’re trying to break stereotypes here,” said Garg, 21, a rising senior at Stanford University. “This house isn’t just about living together; it’s about creating a community where women can thrive in tech.”

Located in North Beach, HackHer House was home this summer to seven women, all of whom share the goal of launching successful ventures in tech. 

Venture capital played a key role in making HackHer House possible. With financial backing, the house offered subsidized rent, allowing the women to focus on their projects instead of struggling with the Bay Area’s notoriously high living costs.

“New grad students face daunting living expenses, with campus costs reaching the high hundreds to over a thousand dollars a month,” said Li. “In the Bay Area, finding a comfortable room typically starts at $2,000, and while prices may have eased slightly, they remain significantly higher than the rest of the U.S. This reality forces many, including founders, to share rooms or crash on friends’ couches just to make ends meet.” 

Hacker houses aren’t new to the Bay Area or cities like New York and London. These live-in incubators serve as homes and workspaces, offering a collaborative environment where tech founders and innovators can share ideas and resources. In a city renowned for tech advancements, hacker houses are viewed as critical for driving the next wave of innovation. By providing affordable housing and a vibrant community, these spaces enable entrepreneurs to thrive in an otherwise cutthroat and expensive market.

Watch this video to see how Hacker House is shaping the future of women in tech.

Continue Reading

Technology

Elon Musk’s X will be allowed back online in Brazil after paying one more fine

Published

on

By

Elon Musk's X will be allowed back online in Brazil after paying one more fine

The Federal Supreme Court (STF) in Brazil suspends Elon Musk’s social network after it fails to comply with orders from Minister Alexandre de Moraes to block accounts of those being investigated by the Brazilian justice system. 

Cris Faga | Nurphoto | Getty Images

X has to pay one last fine before the social network owned by Elon Musk is allowed back online in Brazil, according to a decision out Friday from the country’s top justice, Alexandre de Moraes.

The platform was suspended nationwide at the end of August, a decision upheld by a panel of judges on Sept. 2. Earlier this month, X filed paperwork informing Brazil’s supreme court that it is now in compliance with orders, which it previously defied.

As Brazil’s G1 Globo reported, X must now pay a new fine of 10 million reals (about $2 million) for two additional days of non-compliance with the court’s orders. X’s legal representative in Brazil, Rachel de Oliveira, is also required to pay a fine of 300,000 reals.

The case dates back to April, when de Moraes, the minister of Brazil’s supreme court, known as Supremo Tribunal Federal (STF), initiated a probe into Musk and X over alleged obstruction of justice.

Musk had vowed to defy the court’s orders to take down certain accounts in Brazil. He called the court’s actions “censorship,” and railed online against de Moraes, describing the judge as a “criminal” and encouraging the U.S. to end foreign aid to Brazil.

In mid-August, Musk closed down X offices in Brazil. That left his company without a legal representative in the country, a federal requirement for all tech platforms to do business there.

By Aug. 28, de Moraes’ court threatened a ban and fines if X didn’t appoint a legal representative within 24 hours, and if it didn’t comply with takedown requests for accounts the court said had engaged in plots to dox or harm federal agents, among other things.

Earlier this month, the STF froze the business assets of Musk companies, including both X and satellite internet business Starlink, operating in Brazil. The STF said in court filings that it viewed Starlink parent SpaceX and X as companies that worked together as related parties.

Musk wrote in a post on X at that time that, “Unless the Brazilian government returns the illegally seized property of and SpaceX, we will seek reciprocal seizure of government assets too.”

On August 29, 2024, in Brazil, the Minister of the Supreme Court, STF Minister Alexandre de Moraes, orders the blocking of the accounts of another company, Starlink, of Elon Musk, to guarantee the payment of fines imposed by the STF due to the lack of representatives of X in Brazil. 

Ton Molina | Nurphoto | Getty Images

As head of the STF, de Moraes has long supported federal regulations to rein in hate speech and misinformation online. His views have garnered pushback from tech companies and far-right officials in the country, along with former President Jair Bolsonaro and his supporters.

Bolsonaro is under investigation, suspected of orchestrating a coup in Brazil after losing the 2022 presidential election to current President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva.

While Musk has called for retribution against de Moraes and Lula, he has worked with and praised Bolsonaro for years. The former president of Brazil authorized SpaceX to deliver satellite internet services commercially in Brazil in 2022.

Musk bills himself as a free speech defender, but his track record suggests otherwise. Under his management, X removed content critical of ruling parties in Turkey and India at the government’s insistence. X agreed to more than 80% of government take-down requests in 2023 over a comparable period the prior year, according to analysis by the tech news site Rest of World.

X faces increased competition in Brazil from social apps like Meta-owned Threads, and Bluesky, which have attracted users during its suspension.

Starlink also faces competition in Brazil from eSpace, a French-American firm that gained permission this year from the National Telecommunications Agency (Anatel) to deliver satellite internet services in the country.

Lukas Darien, an attorney and law professor at Brazil’s Facex University Center, told CNBC that the STF’s enforcement actions against X are likely to change the way large technology companies will view the court.

“There is no change to the law here,” Darien wrote in a message. “But specifically, big tech companies are now aware that the laws will be applied regardless of the size of a business and the magnitude of its reach in the country.”

Musk and representatives for X didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment on Friday.

Late Thursday, X Global Government Affairs posted the following statement:

“X is committed to protecting free speech within the boundaries of the law and we recognize and respect the sovereignty of the countries in which we operate. We believe that the people of Brazil having access to X is essential for a thriving democracy, and we will continue to defend freedom of expression and due process of law through legal processes.”

WATCH: X is a financial ‘disaster’

Elon Musk's X is a financial 'disaster,' co-authors of new book 'Character Limit' say

Continue Reading

Technology

OpenAI sees roughly $5 billion loss this year on $3.7 billion in revenue

Published

on

By

OpenAI sees roughly  billion loss this year on .7 billion in revenue

Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI, at the Hope Global Forums annual meeting in Atlanta on Dec. 11, 2023.

Dustin Chambers | Bloomberg | Getty Images

OpenAI, the creator of ChatGPT, expects about $5 billion in losses on $3.7 billion in revenue this year, CNBC has confirmed.

The company generated $300 million in revenue last month, up 1,700% since the beginning of last year, and expects to bring in $11.6 billion in sales next year, according to a person close to OpenAI who asked not to be named because the numbers are confidential.

The New York Times was first to report on OpenAI’s financials earlier on Friday after viewing company documents. CNBC hasn’t seen the financials.

OpenAI, which is backed by Microsoft, is currently pursuing a funding round that would value the company at more than $150 billion, people familiar with the matter have told CNBC. Thrive Capital is leading the round and plans to invest $1 billion, with Tiger Global planning to join as well.

OpenAI CFO Sarah Friar told investors in an email Thursday that the funding round is oversubscribed and will close by next week. Her note followed a number of key departures, most notably technology chief Mira Murati, who announced the previous day that she was leaving OpenAI after six and a half years.

Also this week, news surfaced that OpenAI’s board is considering plans to restructure the firm to a for-profit business. The company will retain its nonprofit segment as a separate entity, a person familiar with the matter told CNBC. The structure would be more straightforward for investors and make it easier for OpenAI employees to realize liquidity, the source said.

OpenAI’s services have exploded in popularity since the company launched ChatGPT in late 2022. The company sells subscriptions to various tools and licenses its GPT family of large language models, which are powering much of the generative AI boom. Running those models requires a massive investment in Nvidia’s graphics processing units.

The Times, citing an analysis by a financial professional who reviewed OpenAI’s documents, reported that the roughly $5 billion in loses this year are tied to costs for running its services as well as employee salaries and office rent. The costs don’t include equity-based compensation, “among several large expenses not fully explained in the documents,” the paper said.

WATCH: OpenAI has a lot of challengers, says Madrona’s Matt McIlwain

OpenAI has a lot of challengers, says Madrona's Matt McIlwain

Continue Reading

Trending