The guy in the video provides a plausible answer, but it is anecdotal, and I don’t think it is right.
Let me tell you what I think.
Two reasons consistent to ALL of his companies (except Zip2 is not well-documented):
First: When 80% of Twitter staff is fired, and such events happen, the brilliant people understand this is the right move. The ones who want to take individual responsibility instead of falling towards the safety net of collectives (MBA/Big4 cultural virus that seeped into the business world in the last 50 years) love this. They understand that this means all of their lesser talented, less motivated colleagues would go in such a firing.
On the other hand, this scares the shit out of those who want to do things “together”! So they stay away.
This is a great filter!
Second: Because he is all-in!
See if the strategy I explained in the first reason is so simple. Can the CEO of Google fire 80% of its employees and suddenly expect it to get better like Twitter did? Hell no!
You know why?
Coz Elon puts in more work than anyone else first. This is leading from the front.
Without satisfying these two conditions, you cannot be the asshole who still attracts top folks!
I am increasingly convinced that individualism works so well in capitalistic environments that it beats every other system.
Maybe this deserves a corollary about why talented socialists end up as frustrated journalists. (PS: coz they can’t move the needle on anything)