its pretty simple, there is obviously a very ingrained faith in the standard organizational structure w/ management, staff. its so obvious that is how things should be (its "fundamental"), that its difficult to consider that belief is possibly also a matter of faith, even if that standard structure was itself emergent in some respects.

its possible the commenter i was responding to was referring more to the "rah rah" aspect of zappos as a whole, rather than religious zeal re: this new organizational concept. those are different things in my mind, also both are exhibited by the directive "to all employees: read this book and indicate you have done so".

anyway it isnt a comment on whether or not the zappos idea itself is useful and/or just another fad coated with new terminology (i have no idea). just that when you can identify someone else as engaging in religious zealotry, its fun to consider what that zealotry is being compared to, which probably turns out to be something like "everybody knows its supposed to be this way", aka. some sorta implicit religion.

> they're not really a tech company

By your definition, what is a tech company?

I consider that recent. Long enough to know you hate the commute.

Henderson is a suburb of Vegas. You wouldn't have to move unless you wanted to walk to work.

In the grand scheme of things, 3 months pay is not that significant (a large enough performance bonus can already match that, or a joining bonus for that matter). Now compare that against the chances that you will enjoy your new same-pay job less, or you'll have to move far away, or delay career advancement while you learn the ropes at the new job. There are plenty of potential advantages from changing jobs too, depending on the job, so it actually might make a lot of sense to switch. The point here is that 3 months of salary tips the balance only slightly.

Of course, those who have reservations about working where they are, should take the severance package, but that's the point.

Also, I am a bit surprised that we are discussing 3 months of pay as a magnanimous, almost foolish, concession from management, whereas in many places around the world that kind of compensation is law mandated when you lay-off people without reason.

3 months is less than 1% of lifetime earnings. Not worth throwingaway your plans (whatever your plans may be)

3 months pay is nothing compared to years at a great company with great culture and great people. The work itself might be the same company to company, but the people and the environment depend a lot on internal culture that's not particularly easy to find before taking a job elsewhere. One spends at least 8 hours a day working with others, not just writing rote code. There's very much a human aspect to employment, not simply economic self-interest.

> I imagine most developers could find a job with similar pay in a month or maybe one and a half

Geographic area heavily influences this. Last time, I spent 8 weeks with almost no nibbles (and then suddenly had two companies fighting for me on the 9th week).

I've got mouths to feed. And when you interview for your new job, you are going to be asked why you took the buyout. "LOL 3 months salary" isn't a good answer.

Not everyone likes the ping-pong ball model of modern employment. A stable job, where I show up five days a week, the company takes care of me, and I get to form stable working relationships with my coworkers, is valuable to me and many others.