![Amazon was the biggest Internet-based retailer in the United States and had frequently been featured in Fortune magazine’s Elite List of the World’s Most Admired Companies, ranking second in 2014 and fourth in 2015.2 However, in 2015, controversy erupted on social media when an article in The New York Times portrayed Amazon as a company that was “conducting an experiment in how far it [could] push white-collar workers to get them to achieve its ever-expanding ambitions.”3 Many leading technology wizards, such as former Twitter chief executive officer (CEO) Dick Costolo, as well as venture capitalists Marc Andreessen and Keith Rabois, dismissed the criticism, arguing that such practices were part of what made “disruptive companies disruptive.”4 The New York Times article focused on the unconventional office culture promoted at Amazon. Particular attention was paid to the practice of encouraging employees to be ruthlessly critical of each other’s ideas in meetings and to surreptitiously send feedback to each other’s bosses.5 The article also mentioned the physical stress of Amazon’s workplace. Employees were expected to put in long hours and were reprimanded when they failed to respond to emails that arrived at midnight. This was the inevitable by- product of a policy that demanded that all employees work overtime, effectively forcing employees to work harder and faster until they quit, collapsed, or were terminated.6 As a result of its workplace policies, turnover at Amazon was high: most employees did not stay for more than a few months.7 Nonetheless, Amazon had climbed the ladder of achievements and accomplishments in an unrelenting, expeditious manner. It had surpassed Walmart as the most highly ranked retailer in terms of market valuation.8 The company was as continuously innovative as a new start-up.9 Amazon was on the verge of opening several new multi-floor offices in diverse locations, which would expand its operating capacity to approximately 50,000 employees.10 The question that arose at this critical juncture of its growth was whether Amazon would be able to attract and retain the engaged talent it required to fill these vacancies despite The New York Times exposé. Would Amazon’s demanding corporate culture continue to lead to innovation? Page 2 WORKPLACE CONUNDRUMS AT AMAZON Amazon had always maintained a strict emphasis on customer satisfaction. The business was built around this principle.11 Customers around the world were familiar with Amazon, but life inside the organization had been impenetrable until it was probed by The New York Times article. In a letter to shareholders, Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos wrote, “You can work long, hard, or smart, but at Amazon.com, you can’t choose two out of three.”12 In late 1999, when the Internet boom took a precipitous fall after years of exhilarating success, Amazon was burdened with debt and spiralling losses. Bezos needed to convince Wall Street that he was determined to cut costs. But what costs were left to cut? Unlike other competing firms in Silicon Valley, the company had never provided perks and benefits to its employees. The only “perk” Amazon had offered was free Aspirin, and this was taken away.13 Many considered the frequent temper tantrums of Bezos to be key to the survival and success of Amazon. Employees described Bezos’ outbursts as “nutters.”14 His favourite quips were, “Why are you ruining my life?” and, “If I hear that again, I am going to have](https://rblacademy.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/amazon-as-an-employer-SHRM-Case-Study-Solution-360x240.jpg)
Case Study Solution
Amazon as an Employer
AMAZON AS AN EMPLOYER SHRM Case Study Solution. Is Amazon’s employer brand as reported by The New York Times sustainable compassion and workplace policies of Amazon
AMAZON AS AN EMPLOYER SHRM Case Study Solution. Is Amazon’s employer brand as reported by The New York Times sustainable compassion and workplace policies of Amazon