There are positive aspects to 'the Amazon Way'

The business world is divided over a scathing report in the New York Times about how Amazon, the global retail giant, manages its workforce. If you’re an entrepreneur, you’ll likely sympathise with Jeff Bezos, the charismatic founder of Amazon who is now one of the richest people on the planet (as well as owner of the Washington Post). If you’re at the managerial level your feelings might go either way, depending on your views on how balanced work and life should be. If you’re a mere employee, it’s natural to see Bezos as heartless and exploitative.

The Times with its report has drawn the ire of Amazon and Bezos’ admirers, and he has said in self-defence, in an open letter to staff, that what was claimed in the story “is not Amazon I know”. The Times in turn pointed out that its information came from interviews with dozens of current and former employees of the company, which this year surpassed Walmart as America’s biggest retailer.

Every organisation has its own “culture”. At Bezos’ firm they call it “the Amazon Way”. There, as elsewhere, they talk about a strong work ethic and commitment to the pledge that “the customer always comes first”. However, many employees, both past and present, complained to the Times about their bosses constantly pushing “human limits” to the breaking point and the ever-present danger that a family or personal health issue could jeopardise their career. They said colleagues weeping at their desks due to work pressure were (or are) a common sight at Amazon. Bezos no doubt felt compelled to respond to the article because his company was portrayed as inhumane. The truth of the claims remains out of the general reader’s grasp, but the controversy will linger among the headline news.

Meanwhile, not all that the Times reported about Amazon was negative. There are laudable aspects to labour management at Amazon that should not be overlooked. In fact, some of their practices should be encouraged in all workplaces. The first lies in apparent efforts to promote constructive criticism. The Times rather alarmingly said Amazon employees are encouraged to “tear one another’s idea apart”. But allowing open discussion of ideas and policies – if not poisoned by office politics – serves to overcome the problem of “polite silence” on the part of employees failing to stymie poor decisions on the part of management.

Employees should not be afraid to speak up and supervisors should give their opinions due consideration. No policy or plan is perfect, but constructive scrutiny can identify and correct some if not most of the flaws. Such an arrangement, however, requires complete open-mindedness at all management levels, right up to the top. 

Amazon also encourages and facilitates the hiring of properly qualified people. Newcomers’ abilities are soon challenged and, if they rise to the occasion, their ideas are just as quickly embraced. This is only possible in an effective meritocracy, with open-mindedness again the key to success, from top to bottom.

One of Amazon’s former employees is quoted as saying in the Times story that a common lament at work was “Amazon is a place where overachievers go in order to feel bad about themselves.” It sounds awful on first hearing, and yet surely that can be a good predicament too. Perhaps those who regard themselves as overachievers can actually be accomplishing more.

Labour management requires a blend of humanitarianism and tough measures to ensure efficiency. The New York Times article is certainly worrying if the negative facets are true. But, at the same time, we need to keep in mind that Amazon doubtless introduced its practices in good faith and that some of those policies have gone askew – not always through the fault of management. The bottom line at this and any other company, after all, should be fairness.