返回列表
🧠 阿头学 · 💬 讨论题

ClickUp 用裁员押注 AI 原生组织,但“100x 组织”更像激进管理宣言而非已被证明的定律

这篇文章最有价值的判断是“AI 正在重写组织瓶颈而不只是提升个人效率”,但作者把这一点直接推演成裁员 22% 与“100x 组织”必然正确,论证明显过度,且带强烈 PR 包装。
打开原文 ↗

2026-05-22 原文链接 ↗
阅读简报
双语对照
完整翻译
原文
讨论归档

核心观点

  • 裁员被定义为“制造扰动”而非成本削减。 作者声称此次缩减22%人员是业务强劲时主动发起的系统重建,节省资金将回流给留下的核心人才;但“未来不是更少的人”与当下裁掉近两成员工的行动存在明显叙事矛盾,成本重构仍是更可信的底层动机。
  • AI 不会全员提效,反而会让平庸者成为系统瓶颈。 普通工程师借助AI导致代码提交量暴涨500%,却不会对客户结果产生同等增益,反而制造巨大的评审瓶颈拖慢顶尖工程师;真正的杠杆在于让10x工程师进化为指挥Agent的100x工程师,而非推动无限制的token消耗。
  • 高杠杆岗位坍缩为“统筹-评审”双节点。 未来工程、产品、设计的工作流将被拆解为“向AI下达精准指令”与“以判断力审核输出”两个环节;产品管理与设计职能合并,用户研究和反复迭代的跨部门沟通瓶颈被AI填平。
  • 薪酬体系走向极端两极化,并制造关键人物风险。 ClickUp推出百万美元现金年薪档试图绑定能创造100倍影响力的超级节点,但高度依赖极少数掌握核心上下文且“几乎不可能被替代”的人才,会使组织面临极高的单点故障脆弱性。
  • “人味”是AI泛滥时代唯一不该被优化的好瓶颈。 前线人员与客户一对一交流的时间必须被刻意保留,AI的价值在于吃掉会议前后的行政杂事,而非替代人际连接;这与全面自动化的主流叙事形成鲜明反差。

跟我们的关联

  • 对 ATou 意味着什么、下一步怎么用: 不要再将AI视为“让所有人效率提升10%”的平权工具,下一步必须建立个人工作流的“统筹-评审”双节点,把自己的时间严格限定在定义任务和判断AI输出质量上,凡是可以被AI执行的环节都应主动外包给Agent,否则会成为新组织形态下的被优化对象。
  • 对 Uota 意味着什么、下一步怎么用: 产品、设计与用户研究的边界正在被AI抹平,下一步需要培养从UX直觉到产品逻辑的全栈闭环能力,在沙盒环境中用AI快速验证假设和原型,但坚决守住进入生产环境前的质量闸门,避免因“代码通货膨胀”而浪费顶尖协作者的时间。
  • 对 🌍通用/管理者意味着什么、下一步怎么用: 组织管理的重心正从“提升均值”转向“放大极值”,下一步应立刻审计团队流程——引入AI是在替代真正的瓶颈,还是在增加需要人类统筹与评审的输入量?如果是后者,说明工作流需要破坏性重构而非简单叠加AI工具。

讨论引子

1. 如果AI生成的代码往往包含隐蔽的逻辑漏洞与幻觉,顶尖工程师审查Agent代码的认知负荷可能高于审查人类代码,那么“审查Agent代码比审查人写代码快得多”这一核心假设是否反而低估了软件工程的复杂性? 2. 当组织将赌注押在极少数掌握核心上下文的“100x人才”身上时,一旦这些拿着百万年薪的超级节点离职,高度耦合的AI自动化系统是否会因关键人物风险而面临崩溃? 3. 在“产品-设计合并”和“PM不写生产代码”的新分工下,那些不具备顶尖统筹判断力、也不在前线接触客户的中间层执行者,其职业出路是否只有被优化或被迫转型为“系统管理者”这一条窄路?

今天,我们将员工人数缩减了 22%。与此同时,公司的业务状态比以往任何时候都更强。所以,我觉得有必要直接说明我看到了什么,以及原因是什么。

第一,这个决定是我做出的,由我负责。我之所以这么做,是因为以最高生产力水平运作的方式正在改变,而如果 ClickUp 想赢得未来,就必须随之改变。

第二,这不是为了削减成本。这次调整带来的大部分节省,都会直接回流到留下来的人身上。我们将推出百万美元年薪档。如果你借助 AI 创造了远超常规的影响力,你的薪酬将不再受传统薪酬带限制。

最重要的是,我对受影响的同事怀有最深的感激。我们是在业务强劲的情况下做这件事,正是为了能够妥善照顾大家。每一位受影响的人都会获得一份方案,既是对他们贡献的尊重,也能帮助他们顺利过渡。

在我看来,只有两个选择。要么等着这件事在市场中慢慢发生,要么坦诚面对我所看到的变化,主动采取行动。

THE 100X ORGANIZATION 最主要的变化,是我们正在围绕我所说的 100x 组织进行重组。目标是实现 100 倍产出。要以最高水平完成建设,如今所需要的岗位,本质上已经和一年前不同了。

对现有系统做渐进式改良,无法带我们到达那里。我们需要新的系统。这意味着必须制造足够大的扰动,用重建取代在已经坏掉的东西上继续修补。

一种常见说法是,AI 会让每个人都更高效。事实并非如此。今天的许多工作流,如果不改变,反而会在 AI 系统中制造瓶颈。

这些岗位会演变。但如果等它自然发生,就意味着现在就会落后。

100x 组织其实高度依赖人,依赖程度比今天高得多,几乎无法相比。只有那些已经接受并采用新工作方式的 10x 人才,才能让这一切成为可能。

THE BUILDERS, AGENT MANAGERS, AND FRONT-LINERS

— THE BUILDERS: 10X ENGINEERS 我认为,大多数公司都还没有真正理解 AI 在工程领域到底带来了什么变化。常见叙事是,AI 会让所有工程师都更高效。单独看某个人,也许是这样。但从组织层面看,现实恰恰完全不是这么回事。

这是 ClickUp 最近验证出来的结果。那些真正优秀的工程师,也就是能够统筹、架构和评审的人,正在变成 100x 工程师。他们不再亲自写代码,而是在指挥会写代码的 agent。真正重要的能力,是判断力。

AI 会让最优秀的工程师效率暴涨,而其他人使用 AI,反而会拖慢这些工程师。 想一想就明白了。瓶颈在于两件事,第一是统筹,也就是告诉 AI 该做什么,第二是评审,也就是检查 AI 做了什么。其他一切都被跨过去了,不再重要。 所以,你希望由谁来统筹和评审代码?

你又希望公司里最好的工程师,把时间花在哪里?

如果你最好的工程师把时间花在审查别人的代码上,这本身就是一种低效的瓶颈。与审查人写的代码相比,他们审查自己 agent 写出来的代码会快得多。

新世界的关键,是让你的 10x 工程师进化成 100x。

错误的策略,是推动每个工程师都去无限制地使用 token。采用这种做法的公司,会为 pull request 增长 500% 而欢呼。但客户获得的结果,并不会随着代码产量一起增长。

我把这叫作 AI 编程的大清算。每家公司很快都会面对这个问题,如果现在还没遇到的话。

更多代码,只会成为最优秀工程师的另一个瓶颈,最终也会成为公司影响力的瓶颈。

— THE BUILDERS: 10X PRODUCT MANAGERS 产品管理和设计岗位正在合并。

那些真正关注客户的设计师,会越来越像产品经理。

而那些对 UX 有直觉的产品经理,也会越来越像设计师。

用户研究这个瓶颈已经消失了。现在只需要提一句 agent,我们就能立刻启动研究并分析结果。

产品和设计之间反复迭代的瓶颈也消失了。产品建设者会自己完成迭代,同时借助 agent 和技能,确保结果与质量和战略保持一致。

还有一个今天听上去会有争议的观点。我认为,让 PM 去交付生产代码,是错误策略,因为这只会再引入一个瓶颈,浪费最优秀工程师的时间。

说清楚一点,PM 应该会写代码,但应该是在试验场里写,用来迭代、验证和界定范围。这些代码不应该进入生产环境。

除了管理系统、统筹 AI、评审输出之外,其他事情都会变成瓶颈。 这也是为什么,除了这些岗位之外,另外几个关键角色是系统管理者,他们负责减少瓶颈;以及一个你无法替代的瓶颈,那就是与客户见面的时间。

— THE SYSTEM MANAGERS 有点讽刺的是,那些用 AI 自动化自己工作的人,反而永远都会有工作。他们会成为 AI 系统的拥有者,也就是 agent 管理者。ClickUp 里已经有很多这样的人。

我们所依赖的底层系统,必须做对,这一点至关重要。我觉得,大多数公司如果以为可以在现有系统上继续迭代,然后在这个新世界里竞争,那就是在自欺欺人。

你必须制造足够大的扰动,让旧系统被彻底淘汰。如果 AI native 这个词还有定义,那它就是这个意思。

— THE FRONT-LINERS 在一个会被 AI 沟通淹没的世界里,对客户来说,最重要的会是人的触感。

这是一个不该被替代的瓶颈,即使有一天 agent 的质量已经高到足以参加视频会议。

和客户一对一交流的时间,不应该被自动化。应该被自动化的,是围绕会议的各种系统。这样一来,前线人员几乎 100% 的时间都能花在客户身上。

REWARDING 100X IMPACT 当公司能够用更少的人做更多的事,多出来的钱会流向哪里? 至少在我们这里,这种新运营模式带来的很大一部分节省,会直接回流给那些促成这一切的人。

创造生产力的人,必须得到与之相匹配的回报。这样双方的激励才是一致的。更何况,在一个顶尖人才能创造 100 倍影响力的世界里,你根本承受不起失去他们的代价。

你的目标,应该是把这些员工留住几十年。他们所掌握的背景信息,以及他们高效统筹和评审的能力,几乎不可能被替代。

今天的薪酬带应该被彻底丢掉。我们将推出每年 100 万美元现金年薪档,而且公司里几乎每个人都有机会达到这个水平,只要他们通过创建或管理 AI 系统,真正做出了 100 倍影响力。

THE FUTURE 几乎每一家公司都会做出类似的改变。那些主动去做的公司,会定义接下来会发生什么。

未来不是更少的人,而是不同的工作、新的岗位,以及给那些拥抱变化的人更好的回报。我们已经看到全新的岗位开始出现,比如一年前还根本不存在的 Agent Managers。

ClickUp 正在为领导这场转变做准备,不只是对内,也包括对客户。我从未像现在这样笃定,我们正朝着正确的方向前进。

Today we reduced headcount by 22%. The business is the strongest it's ever been. So I think it's important to be direct about what I'm seeing and why.

今天,我们将员工人数缩减了 22%。与此同时,公司的业务状态比以往任何时候都更强。所以,我觉得有必要直接说明我看到了什么,以及原因是什么。

First, I made this decision and I own it. I did it because the way to operate at the highest level of productivity is changing, and to win the future, ClickUp needs to change with it.

第一,这个决定是我做出的,由我负责。我之所以这么做,是因为以最高生产力水平运作的方式正在改变,而如果 ClickUp 想赢得未来,就必须随之改变。

Second, this wasn't about cutting costs. Most savings from this change will flow directly back into the people who stay. We'll be introducing million-dollar salary bands. If you create outsized impact using AI, you'll be paid outside of traditional bands.

第二,这不是为了削减成本。这次调整带来的大部分节省,都会直接回流到留下来的人身上。我们将推出百万美元年薪档。如果你借助 AI 创造了远超常规的影响力,你的薪酬将不再受传统薪酬带限制。

Most importantly, I have the deepest gratitude for those affected. We're doing this from a position of strength specifically so we can take care of people properly. Everyone affected receives a package aimed at honoring their contributions and easing the transition.

最重要的是,我对受影响的同事怀有最深的感激。我们是在业务强劲的情况下做这件事,正是为了能够妥善照顾大家。每一位受影响的人都会获得一份方案,既是对他们贡献的尊重,也能帮助他们顺利过渡。

I only see two options: wait for this to play out gradually in the market or be honest about what I'm seeing and act proactively.

在我看来,只有两个选择。要么等着这件事在市场中慢慢发生,要么坦诚面对我所看到的变化,主动采取行动。

THE 100X ORGANIZATION The primary change is that we're restructuring around what I call 100x org. The goal is 100x output. The roles required to build at the highest level are fundamentally different than they were a year ago.

THE 100X ORGANIZATION 最主要的变化,是我们正在围绕我所说的 100x 组织进行重组。目标是实现 100 倍产出。要以最高水平完成建设,如今所需要的岗位,本质上已经和一年前不同了。

Incremental improvements to existing systems won't get us there. We need new ones. That means creating enough disruption to rebuild rather than iterate on what's already broken.

对现有系统做渐进式改良,无法带我们到达那里。我们需要新的系统。这意味着必须制造足够大的扰动,用重建取代在已经坏掉的东西上继续修补。

The common narrative is that AI makes everyone more productive. It doesn't. Many of the workflows of today, if left unchanged, create bottlenecks in AI systems.

一种常见说法是,AI 会让每个人都更高效。事实并非如此。今天的许多工作流,如果不改变,反而会在 AI 系统中制造瓶颈。

These roles will evolve. But waiting for that to happen naturally means falling behind now.

这些岗位会演变。但如果等它自然发生,就意味着现在就会落后。

The 100x org is actually heavily dependent on people - infinitely more than today. This is only possible with 10x people that have embraced and adopted new ways of working.

100x 组织其实高度依赖人,依赖程度比今天高得多,几乎无法相比。只有那些已经接受并采用新工作方式的 10x 人才,才能让这一切成为可能。

THE BUILDERS, AGENT MANAGERS, AND FRONT-LINERS

THE BUILDERS, AGENT MANAGERS, AND FRONT-LINERS

— THE BUILDERS: 10X ENGINEERS I don't think most companies have internalized what's actually happening with AI in engineering. The common narrative is that AI makes all engineers more productive. That may be true in isolation, but at an organization level - that is the farthest thing from reality.

— THE BUILDERS: 10X ENGINEERS 我认为,大多数公司都还没有真正理解 AI 在工程领域到底带来了什么变化。常见叙事是,AI 会让所有工程师都更高效。单独看某个人,也许是这样。但从组织层面看,现实恰恰完全不是这么回事。

Here's what we've validated recently at ClickUp: the great engineers, the ones who can orchestrate, architect, and review, are becoming 100x engineers. They're not writing code. They're directing agents that write code. The skill is judgment.

这是 ClickUp 最近验证出来的结果。那些真正优秀的工程师,也就是能够统筹、架构和评审的人,正在变成 100x 工程师。他们不再亲自写代码,而是在指挥会写代码的 agent。真正重要的能力,是判断力。

AI makes the best engineers wildly more productive, and everyone else using AI slows these engineers down. Think about it - the bottlenecks are (1) orchestration - telling AI what to do, and (2) reviewing - what AI did. Everything is leapfrogged and no longer needed. So who do you want orchestrating and reviewing code?

AI 会让最优秀的工程师效率暴涨,而其他人使用 AI,反而会拖慢这些工程师。 想一想就明白了。瓶颈在于两件事,第一是统筹,也就是告诉 AI 该做什么,第二是评审,也就是检查 AI 做了什么。其他一切都被跨过去了,不再重要。 所以,你希望由谁来统筹和评审代码?

And how do you want your best engineers to spend their time?

你又希望公司里最好的工程师,把时间花在哪里?

If your best engineers are spending time reviewing other people's code, then this is inherently an inefficient bottleneck. These engineers can review their agent's code much faster than reviewing human code.

如果你最好的工程师把时间花在审查别人的代码上,这本身就是一种低效的瓶颈。与审查人写的代码相比,他们审查自己 agent 写出来的代码会快得多。

The new world is about enabling your 10x engineers to become 100x.

新世界的关键,是让你的 10x 工程师进化成 100x。

The wrong strategy is to push every engineer to use infinite tokens. Companies doing this are celebrating 500% more pull requests. But customer outcomes don't match the volume of code being generated.

错误的策略,是推动每个工程师都去无限制地使用 token。采用这种做法的公司,会为 pull request 增长 500% 而欢呼。但客户获得的结果,并不会随着代码产量一起增长。

I call this the great reckoning of AI coding, and every company will face this soon if not already.

我把这叫作 AI 编程的大清算。每家公司很快都会面对这个问题,如果现在还没遇到的话。

More code is just another bottleneck to the best engineers, and ultimately to your company's impact as well.

更多代码,只会成为最优秀工程师的另一个瓶颈,最终也会成为公司影响力的瓶颈。

— THE BUILDERS: 10X PRODUCT MANAGERS Product management and design roles are merging.

— THE BUILDERS: 10X PRODUCT MANAGERS 产品管理和设计岗位正在合并。

Designers that have customer focus, become more like product managers.

那些真正关注客户的设计师,会越来越像产品经理。

And product managers that have intuition for UX become more like designers.

而那些对 UX 有直觉的产品经理,也会越来越像设计师。

The bottleneck of user research is gone. It takes us just one mention of an agent to kickoff research and analyze results.

用户研究这个瓶颈已经消失了。现在只需要提一句 agent,我们就能立刻启动研究并分析结果。

The bottleneck of product <> design iteration is also gone. The product builder iterates on their own, along with agents and skills that ensure alignment with quality and strategy.

产品和设计之间反复迭代的瓶颈也消失了。产品建设者会自己完成迭代,同时借助 agent 和技能,确保结果与质量和战略保持一致。

Also controversial today - I believe that the wrong strategy is to have your PMs shipping code - that just introduces another bottleneck that the best engineers will waste their time on.

还有一个今天听上去会有争议的观点。我认为,让 PM 去交付生产代码,是错误策略,因为这只会再引入一个瓶颈,浪费最优秀工程师的时间。

To be clear, PMs should be coding but they should do this in a playground to iterate, validate, and scope. That code should not go to production.

说清楚一点,PM 应该会写代码,但应该是在试验场里写,用来迭代、验证和界定范围。这些代码不应该进入生产环境。

Everything outside of managing systems, orchestrating AI, and reviewing output becomes a bottleneck. That's why the other roles that are critical along with these are the systems managers (to reduce bottlenecks) along with a bottleneck you can't replace - customer meeting time.

除了管理系统、统筹 AI、评审输出之外,其他事情都会变成瓶颈。 这也是为什么,除了这些岗位之外,另外几个关键角色是系统管理者,他们负责减少瓶颈;以及一个你无法替代的瓶颈,那就是与客户见面的时间。

— THE SYSTEM MANAGERS Ironically, the people that automate their jobs with AI will always have a job. They become owners of the AI systems - agent managers. We have many examples of these people at ClickUp.

— THE SYSTEM MANAGERS 有点讽刺的是,那些用 AI 自动化自己工作的人,反而永远都会有工作。他们会成为 AI 系统的拥有者,也就是 agent 管理者。ClickUp 里已经有很多这样的人。

The underlying systems in which we operate are absolutely critical to get right. I think most companies are delusional to think they can iterate on existing systems and compete in this new world.

我们所依赖的底层系统,必须做对,这一点至关重要。我觉得,大多数公司如果以为可以在现有系统上继续迭代,然后在这个新世界里竞争,那就是在自欺欺人。

You must create enough disruption so that old systems are deprecated entirely. If there's any definition for 'AI native' that's what it is.

你必须制造足够大的扰动,让旧系统被彻底淘汰。如果 AI native 这个词还有定义,那它就是这个意思。

— THE FRONT-LINERS In a world that will become saturated with AI communication, the human touch will matter more than anything to customers.

— THE FRONT-LINERS 在一个会被 AI 沟通淹没的世界里,对客户来说,最重要的会是人的触感。

This is a bottleneck that you shouldn't replace - even when agents are high enough quality to do video meetings.

这是一个不该被替代的瓶颈,即使有一天 agent 的质量已经高到足以参加视频会议。

One-on-one meeting time with customers is something that shouldn't be automated. The systems around the meetings should be - so that front-liners spend nearly 100% of their time with customers.

和客户一对一交流的时间,不应该被自动化。应该被自动化的,是围绕会议的各种系统。这样一来,前线人员几乎 100% 的时间都能花在客户身上。

REWARDING 100X IMPACT In a world where companies are able to do so much more with less, where does that excess money go? In our case, much of the savings in this new operating model will flow directly back to those that enabled it.

REWARDING 100X IMPACT 当公司能够用更少的人做更多的事,多出来的钱会流向哪里? 至少在我们这里,这种新运营模式带来的很大一部分节省,会直接回流给那些促成这一切的人。

We must reward people that create productivity accordingly. This aligns incentives on both sides. Plus, in a world where your best people create 100x impact, you can't afford to lose them.

创造生产力的人,必须得到与之相匹配的回报。这样双方的激励才是一致的。更何况,在一个顶尖人才能创造 100 倍影响力的世界里,你根本承受不起失去他们的代价。

You should aim to retain these employees for decades. The context they have and their ability to efficiently orchestrate and review will be nearly impossible to replace.

你的目标,应该是把这些员工留住几十年。他们所掌握的背景信息,以及他们高效统筹和评审的能力,几乎不可能被替代。

Compensation bands of today should be thrown out the door. We're introducing $1 million cash/year salary bands with a path available to nearly everyone in the company if they produce 100x impact by creating or managing AI systems.

今天的薪酬带应该被彻底丢掉。我们将推出每年 100 万美元现金年薪档,而且公司里几乎每个人都有机会达到这个水平,只要他们通过创建或管理 AI 系统,真正做出了 100 倍影响力。

THE FUTURE Nearly every company will make changes like these. The ones that do it proactively will define what comes next.

THE FUTURE 几乎每一家公司都会做出类似的改变。那些主动去做的公司,会定义接下来会发生什么。

The future is not fewer people. It's different work, new roles, and better rewards for those who embrace it. We're already seeing entirely new roles emerge, like Agent Managers, that didn't exist a year ago.

未来不是更少的人,而是不同的工作、新的岗位,以及给那些拥抱变化的人更好的回报。我们已经看到全新的岗位开始出现,比如一年前还根本不存在的 Agent Managers。

ClickUp is positioning to lead this shift, not just internally, but for our customers too. I've never been more certain about where we're headed.

ClickUp 正在为领导这场转变做准备,不只是对内,也包括对客户。我从未像现在这样笃定,我们正朝着正确的方向前进。

Today we reduced headcount by 22%. The business is the strongest it's ever been. So I think it's important to be direct about what I'm seeing and why.

First, I made this decision and I own it. I did it because the way to operate at the highest level of productivity is changing, and to win the future, ClickUp needs to change with it.

Second, this wasn't about cutting costs. Most savings from this change will flow directly back into the people who stay. We'll be introducing million-dollar salary bands. If you create outsized impact using AI, you'll be paid outside of traditional bands.

Most importantly, I have the deepest gratitude for those affected. We're doing this from a position of strength specifically so we can take care of people properly. Everyone affected receives a package aimed at honoring their contributions and easing the transition.

I only see two options: wait for this to play out gradually in the market or be honest about what I'm seeing and act proactively.

THE 100X ORGANIZATION The primary change is that we're restructuring around what I call 100x org. The goal is 100x output. The roles required to build at the highest level are fundamentally different than they were a year ago.

Incremental improvements to existing systems won't get us there. We need new ones. That means creating enough disruption to rebuild rather than iterate on what's already broken.

The common narrative is that AI makes everyone more productive. It doesn't. Many of the workflows of today, if left unchanged, create bottlenecks in AI systems.

These roles will evolve. But waiting for that to happen naturally means falling behind now.

The 100x org is actually heavily dependent on people - infinitely more than today. This is only possible with 10x people that have embraced and adopted new ways of working.

THE BUILDERS, AGENT MANAGERS, AND FRONT-LINERS

— THE BUILDERS: 10X ENGINEERS I don't think most companies have internalized what's actually happening with AI in engineering. The common narrative is that AI makes all engineers more productive. That may be true in isolation, but at an organization level - that is the farthest thing from reality.

Here's what we've validated recently at ClickUp: the great engineers, the ones who can orchestrate, architect, and review, are becoming 100x engineers. They're not writing code. They're directing agents that write code. The skill is judgment.

AI makes the best engineers wildly more productive, and everyone else using AI slows these engineers down. Think about it - the bottlenecks are (1) orchestration - telling AI what to do, and (2) reviewing - what AI did. Everything is leapfrogged and no longer needed. So who do you want orchestrating and reviewing code?

And how do you want your best engineers to spend their time?

If your best engineers are spending time reviewing other people's code, then this is inherently an inefficient bottleneck. These engineers can review their agent's code much faster than reviewing human code.

The new world is about enabling your 10x engineers to become 100x.

The wrong strategy is to push every engineer to use infinite tokens. Companies doing this are celebrating 500% more pull requests. But customer outcomes don't match the volume of code being generated.

I call this the great reckoning of AI coding, and every company will face this soon if not already.

More code is just another bottleneck to the best engineers, and ultimately to your company's impact as well.

— THE BUILDERS: 10X PRODUCT MANAGERS Product management and design roles are merging.

Designers that have customer focus, become more like product managers.

And product managers that have intuition for UX become more like designers.

The bottleneck of user research is gone. It takes us just one mention of an agent to kickoff research and analyze results.

The bottleneck of product <> design iteration is also gone. The product builder iterates on their own, along with agents and skills that ensure alignment with quality and strategy.

Also controversial today - I believe that the wrong strategy is to have your PMs shipping code - that just introduces another bottleneck that the best engineers will waste their time on.

To be clear, PMs should be coding but they should do this in a playground to iterate, validate, and scope. That code should not go to production.

Everything outside of managing systems, orchestrating AI, and reviewing output becomes a bottleneck. That's why the other roles that are critical along with these are the systems managers (to reduce bottlenecks) along with a bottleneck you can't replace - customer meeting time.

— THE SYSTEM MANAGERS Ironically, the people that automate their jobs with AI will always have a job. They become owners of the AI systems - agent managers. We have many examples of these people at ClickUp.

The underlying systems in which we operate are absolutely critical to get right. I think most companies are delusional to think they can iterate on existing systems and compete in this new world.

You must create enough disruption so that old systems are deprecated entirely. If there's any definition for 'AI native' that's what it is.

— THE FRONT-LINERS In a world that will become saturated with AI communication, the human touch will matter more than anything to customers.

This is a bottleneck that you shouldn't replace - even when agents are high enough quality to do video meetings.

One-on-one meeting time with customers is something that shouldn't be automated. The systems around the meetings should be - so that front-liners spend nearly 100% of their time with customers.

REWARDING 100X IMPACT In a world where companies are able to do so much more with less, where does that excess money go? In our case, much of the savings in this new operating model will flow directly back to those that enabled it.

We must reward people that create productivity accordingly. This aligns incentives on both sides. Plus, in a world where your best people create 100x impact, you can't afford to lose them.

You should aim to retain these employees for decades. The context they have and their ability to efficiently orchestrate and review will be nearly impossible to replace.

Compensation bands of today should be thrown out the door. We're introducing $1 million cash/year salary bands with a path available to nearly everyone in the company if they produce 100x impact by creating or managing AI systems.

THE FUTURE Nearly every company will make changes like these. The ones that do it proactively will define what comes next.

The future is not fewer people. It's different work, new roles, and better rewards for those who embrace it. We're already seeing entirely new roles emerge, like Agent Managers, that didn't exist a year ago.

ClickUp is positioning to lead this shift, not just internally, but for our customers too. I've never been more certain about where we're headed.

📋 讨论归档

讨论进行中…