A Rest of World article exposes dysfunction within Samsung’s semiconductor division, where engineers describe a “militaristic” culture and hierarchical management that stresses meeting precise yield and cost targets. Managers—often promoted more for administrative skill than technical expertise—push unrealistic goals, driving workers to falsify yield and defect data. Employees routinely face intense pressure to manipulate results to appear compliant, with performance metrics rewarding speed over safety. Despite these issues, Samsung defends its practices, citing fairness and transparency. This internal culture, dubbed the “Samsung way,” may be undermining innovation and chip quality in a division critical to competing in the global AI chip market.
A Rest of World report highlights deep-rooted cultural challenges within Samsung’s semiconductor division. Engineers describe a “militaristic, hierarchical” environment where managers—often chosen for bureaucratic skill—prioritize meeting aggressive yield and cost targets over technical integrity . Annual performance reviews rely heavily on precise metrics, pressuring teams to exaggerate production numbers, underreport defects, and conceal mistakes.
The reliance on rigid quantitative goals leaves little space for long-term innovation. Managers typically lack technical expertise, focusing instead on short-term deliverables, which leads to dysfunctional automation and dubious engineering shortcuts. One engineer recounted being told to “massage our data,” reflecting an internal expectation to manipulate results rather than confront underlying issues.
In this system, employees encounter a stark choice: comply with data distortion or risk poor performance reviews. The normalized practice of obfuscation has earned the nickname the “Samsung way,” where problems are hidden instead of solved.
Samsung maintains that it upholds fairness, transparency, and engagement. However, experts argue that such a results-over-process approach could suppress creativity, compromise chip reliability, and hinder competitiveness—especially as Samsung vies with rivals like SK Hynix and TSMC in advanced AI memory (HBM) technology.
To reverse course, Samsung must align its performance systems with long-term engineering goals. This involves empowering technically skilled managers, embedding quality-first practices, and enabling engineers to report issues without fear of reprisal. Strengthening internal audits, supporting iterative development, and fostering a feedback-driven culture can rebuild engineering excellence.
As global demand for AI chips grows, Samsung’s ability to compete will depend not only on capital investment but also on cultivating a supportive, technically rigorous environment—one that encourages candour and craftsmanship over conformity. Only by addressing these cultural barriers can Samsung restore its edge in semiconductor innovation.
Read the original article published in Rest of World.
