Xilinx cuts 250 jobs.

On Jun 5, 12:09 pm, Frank Buss <f...@frank-buss.de> wrote:
> rickman wrote:
> > There are just some posts that are better left without responses.  I
> > think Frank's was one of those.
>
> I don't see what was wrong with my post, I just explained why big companies
> needs new people all the time. And Peter's comment is right: a company
> can't stop hire people, because if someone like Peter would leave the
> company, someone from accounting can't replace him.
>
> --
> Frank Buss, f...@frank-buss.dehttp://www.frank-buss.de,http://www.it4-systems.de

I don't think there was anything "wrong" with your post.  I just don't
think that Peter's response was at all helpful to Xilinx and I don't
know that it "needed" a response at all.  You stated an observation.
Xilinx has its reasons for what it did.  Since none of us know what
those reasons were, including Peter most likely, there is no point in
trying to justify or condemn Xilinx for not meeting our
expectations.

I would rather condemn Xilinx for its marketing decisions if
anything.  They certainly don't meet my expectations there...  ;^)

But to your argument, I don't agree.  It is very often that a company
will simply put out a hiring freeze rather than a layoff, partly
because it is much cheaper!  Layoffs mean an immediate reduction in
paychecks, but at the expense of several weeks of severance pay and
potentially higher unemployment insurance rates.  A hiring freeze
costs next to nothing and does allow for filling positions that are
the exception.  Let's face it, this is not the government, they will
do what makes the most sense to them including violating their own
rules if needed.

Although you can't replace Peter with someone from accounting (at
least we can assume that) I am sure that Xilinx has any number of good
engineers who *can* take over his duties.  Yes, I expect there will be
some loss of productivity in the company overall, but that is the
goal, to reduce productivity (as little as possible) to bring expenses
in line with expected revenue.

If I had to guess, I would say that the layoffs were not in reaction
to a bad quarter, but because of the darkening clouds on the horizon
of coming quarters.  A company can always ride out a single quarter or
even a single year.  It is the long term perspective that causes
layoffs.

Perhaps Xilinx senses a change of sea state... a new paradigm
coming?

Rick

So Jim wasn't too far off then.

On Jun 5, 11:34 am, austin <aus...@xilinx.com> wrote:
> OK,
>
> What about the press release did you not get?
>
> We reorganized from a business unit structure, to a functional unit
> structure.
>
> We recognized the need to be more efficient, and serve our customers better.
>
> Get it?

...snip...

> Austin


Obviously tact with customers was not one of the criteria used to
decide who to layoff.  ;^)

BTW, this idea of business unit vs. functional unit, that is exactly
the sort of Brownian motion stuff I mentioned in my other post.
Management has to do something.  So they rearrange the furniture.
Then if a new customer walks in the door and buys something they can
say it is working.  I find management is a lot more effective if they
focus on the realities of running a business rather than the
superficial aspects.

Expenditures is one of those realities.  Cutting payroll is a good
short term solution to the need to reduce expenditures.  But it has to
be combined with other changes that produce long term improvements...
changes other than decor.

Rick

rickman wrote:
>
> Obviously tact with customers was not one of the criteria used to
> decide who to layoff.  ;^)
<snip>

"I'm being completely disrespectful - possibly even hurtful - but it's
okay because I'm winking."
Please let us know when a tragedy strikes close to your own heart. ;-)

<snip>
> BTW, this idea of business unit vs. functional unit, that is exactly
> the sort of Brownian motion stuff I mentioned in my other post.
> Management has to do something.  So they rearrange the furniture.
> Then if a new customer walks in the door and buys something they can
> say it is working.  I find management is a lot more effective if they
> focus on the realities of running a business rather than the
> superficial aspects.
<snip>

I agree that this kind of realignment is superfluous.  Businesses tend
to vasciallate between functional orientation and product orientation,
reorganizing to the other side of the fence every several years.
Bizarre behavior in this engineer's eyes but it's the way things often
go.

<snip>
> Expenditures is one of those realities.  Cutting payroll is a good
> short term solution to the need to reduce expenditures.  But it has to
> be combined with other changes that produce long term improvements...
> changes other than decor.
>
> Rick

I agree that mass job cuts do little more for the business than to
affect the stock price in the near term.  The human cost is large.  If
any one company's layoffs are better than the "brownian motion" you
suggest, then the long term benefits might be felt, but at a large
human cost.  The business cycle has regular boom and bust periods but
tends to come out better over each cycle.  It's just sad that it comes
at such a cost.

- John_H

On Thu, 5 Jun 2008 00:45:57 +0100, "Symon" <symon_brewer@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>http://www.edn.com/article/CA6566989.html
>
>

My condolences to the folks who've been laid off, of course, but also
to the folks left behind.  I've worked at two companies that had
first-time layoffs while I was there, and the effect was pretty
wrenching to the collective psyche.  Here's hoping that this is the
last time the good people of Xilinx have to go through this.

Bob Perlman
Cambrian Design Works
http://www.cambriandesign.com