Well, either the information is worth that much or more (to someone), in which case the true value of the option Wave is offering is ~0, or it’s not, in which case the package deal is worth some non-zero amount that might still be significantly less than the headline value of the unencumbered financial benefits.
By successfully executing these agreements, Wave and their terminated employees managed to capture some value for themselves, at the cost of imposing negative externalities on parties not directly involved (Oli, other prospective Wave employees, would-be startup employees more generally).
And I’m saying (a) we should probably assign some blame to all parties involved in creating this externality and (b) Oli himself might be in a position to do something unilaterally to disincentivize others from creating or benefiting from it in the future.
Even a limited monetary offer might be a way to add force / credibility / publicity to the approach that Ben and Oli appear to already be taking, of making it well-known that they consider making these kinds of offers to be harmful and norm-violating. So it seemed worth throwing out there as a suggestion, even if it unrealistic or unworkable at scale.
Well, either the information is worth that much or more (to someone), in which case the true value of the option Wave is offering is ~0, or it’s not, in which case the package deal is worth some non-zero amount that might still be significantly less than the headline value of the unencumbered financial benefits.
What do you think the altruistic value in 2017 (ex-ante) was of negotiating releasing one laid off Wave employee from a non-disparagement+non-disclosure? (When the alternative is that they stay quiet about their time at Wave, not say selectively positive things.)
Pretty low! I know nothing about the specifics, but I personally would probably not have predicted that the information gained from such a release would be worth much to anyone. One reason is that I predict (retrodict?) that if there were a lot of value in this information, at least one of the laid-off employees would have declined the severance agreement or negotiated for better terms.
Also, in my model, a lot of the value isn’t exactly altruistic. In a lot of possible worlds, most of the value would accrue in the form of a better working life for well-off people who in principle have the resources and selfish interest to pay for such benefits, even if there’s no mechanism for them to actually do so. The counterfactual EA who learns that e.g. Lincoln Quirk is a terrible boss (but everything else about Wave is otherwise as it appears), instead goes off to work in some equally high-paying and high-impact role, but is personally happier during their working hours.
Well, either the information is worth that much or more (to someone), in which case the true value of the option Wave is offering is ~0, or it’s not, in which case the package deal is worth some non-zero amount that might still be significantly less than the headline value of the unencumbered financial benefits.
By successfully executing these agreements, Wave and their terminated employees managed to capture some value for themselves, at the cost of imposing negative externalities on parties not directly involved (Oli, other prospective Wave employees, would-be startup employees more generally).
And I’m saying (a) we should probably assign some blame to all parties involved in creating this externality and (b) Oli himself might be in a position to do something unilaterally to disincentivize others from creating or benefiting from it in the future.
Even a limited monetary offer might be a way to add force / credibility / publicity to the approach that Ben and Oli appear to already be taking, of making it well-known that they consider making these kinds of offers to be harmful and norm-violating. So it seemed worth throwing out there as a suggestion, even if it unrealistic or unworkable at scale.
What do you think the altruistic value in 2017 (ex-ante) was of negotiating releasing one laid off Wave employee from a non-disparagement+non-disclosure? (When the alternative is that they stay quiet about their time at Wave, not say selectively positive things.)
Pretty low! I know nothing about the specifics, but I personally would probably not have predicted that the information gained from such a release would be worth much to anyone. One reason is that I predict (retrodict?) that if there were a lot of value in this information, at least one of the laid-off employees would have declined the severance agreement or negotiated for better terms.
Also, in my model, a lot of the value isn’t exactly altruistic. In a lot of possible worlds, most of the value would accrue in the form of a better working life for well-off people who in principle have the resources and selfish interest to pay for such benefits, even if there’s no mechanism for them to actually do so. The counterfactual EA who learns that e.g. Lincoln Quirk is a terrible boss (but everything else about Wave is otherwise as it appears), instead goes off to work in some equally high-paying and high-impact role, but is personally happier during their working hours.