Andy Jassy’s point was that Amazon’s leadership principles are not a checklist that produces an automatic answer. They can pull leaders toward different priorities, and leaders have to decide how to balance them. His example was Amazon’s aspiration to be “Earth’s Best Employer”: that goal does not mean the company will accept every proposed workplace change.
Jassy made the comments in 2021, shortly after becoming Amazon CEO, during an employee discussion recorded with Alicia Boler Davis and later published publicly. The remarks offer a window into Amazon’s stated management philosophy—not independent proof of how the company treats workers or resolves every conflict.
What Jassy said about tension
Amazon added two Leadership Principles on July 1, 2021, expanding its framework from 14 principles to 16. Later that month, Jassy discussed the additions in a conversation with Alicia Boler Davis, then senior vice president of Global Customer Fulfillment. Amazon described the public version as a discussion that had originally been recorded internally. Amazon’s interview summary and GeekWire’s July 29, 2021 report provide the context.
Jassy called tension among the principles natural and useful. His example was the new employer principle: employees could frame almost any proposed change as something Amazon should make if it aimed to be the world’s best employer. But, he said, the company cannot make every possible change. Leaders must decide which changes matter most to building a strong workplace and a place where people can build long-term careers.
#1 Best Overall
That distinction matters: “strive” describes an aspiration, not a claim that Amazon has already earned the title or a promise that every employee request will be granted.
What the two 2021 principles say
Amazon’s July 1 announcement introduced two principles. The company’s 2021 Leadership Principles reference document gives their formal wording and descriptions.
Rank #2
- The Five Dysfunctions of a Team
- English
- hardcover
- First Edition
- gelatine plate paper
“Strive to be Earth’s Best Employer”
This principle sets an ambition for a safer, more productive, higher-performing, more diverse and more just workplace. It also emphasizes empathy, employee development, empowerment and employees’ long-term personal success. It is broader than a benefits promise: it describes the kind of workplace and employee experience Amazon says leaders should work toward.
“Success and Scale Bring Broad Responsibility”
This principle asks leaders to consider the effects Amazon has on customers, employees, partners, communities, the planet and future generations. Its scope goes beyond a company’s direct transactions; it calls attention to secondary consequences and to leaving things better than they were found. Amazon later identified this principle as a foundation for its approach to responsible AI, an example of how the company applies the idea beyond the 2021 announcement. Amazon’s responsible AI overview
How the principles can pull in different directions
Amazon says its principles guide everyday actions and decisions. Its current Leadership Principles page includes customer obsession, ownership, frugality, bias for action, insist on the highest standards, disagree and commit, and deliver results alongside the two 2021 additions. The following conflicts are implications of that published framework, not a list Jassy specifically recited in the interview.
| Competing priorities | Where the tension can arise |
|---|---|
| Customer obsession and employee welfare | Low prices, fast delivery and reliability may place demands on staffing, schedules, productivity targets and workplace design. The goals are not inherently incompatible, but choices about operations can affect workers as well as customers. |
| Frugality and employer investment | Efficient spending may pull against spending on safety, training, compensation, benefits or management capacity. The judgment is whether the outlay is a cost to minimize or an investment in durable performance. |
| Bias for action and deliberation | Speed may help customers and innovation, while decisions involving safety, workers, communities, privacy or the environment may call for consultation and risk assessment. |
| High standards and sustainable work | High standards can improve quality and accountability, but unrealistic targets or poorly designed measures can create pressure and unsustainable workloads. |
| Deliver results and long-term responsibility | Immediate results may be easier to measure than investments whose benefits accrue over time, including investments in people, communities or environmental effects. |
These are competing pressures, not proof that any one principle must be abandoned. The framework does not supply a universal formula for deciding when speed should yield to deliberation, or when a long-term benefit justifies a near-term cost.
Tension is not the same as contradiction
A tension exists when two legitimate goals require balancing. A contradiction arises when, in a specific situation, instructions cannot both be followed. Hypocrisy or implementation failure is different again: it is a gap between what an organization says it values and what it does.
Jassy presented tension as an intentional feature of the principles. That can be useful: a rigid rulebook would struggle to account for the different people, time horizons and consequences involved in real decisions. But broad principles also leave room for inconsistent interpretation. A manager could invoke the principle that supports a preferred choice and neglect the one that complicates it.
Do these 3 things before closing this tab:
1Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minute2Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problems3Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitchesBest Value
- DEVELOPING LEADERS WITHIN YOU 2.0 BRAND NEW PAPERBACK
Amazon’s principles therefore do not, by themselves, establish that workplace conditions meet the employer aspiration or that leaders consistently weigh the wider effects of decisions. They set out the company’s stated expectations; evaluating implementation requires evidence about outcomes.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.How to judge whether the principles shape decisions
For employees, investors and other readers, the useful question is not simply whether Amazon has adopted the language, but whether decisions and outcomes reflect it. A practical review would ask:
- Who benefits from the decision, and who bears its costs—customers, employees, partners, communities or future users?
- Does the decision prioritize immediate results or longer-term effects, and why?
- Which outcomes are measured, such as safety, quality, retention, workload, cost or environmental impact?
- Who has authority to make the trade-off, and who is accountable for its consequences?
- Can affected employees raise concerns or challenge a decision without retaliation?
- Are adverse effects disclosed and the decision revisited when evidence changes?
For the employer principle, relevant evidence could include injury and safety data, compensation and benefits, retention, promotion and internal mobility, training access, employee survey results, grievance and retaliation processes, and workload and scheduling. Conditions may differ across warehouse, delivery, corporate and contract work, so a single company-wide statement cannot establish the experience of every group.
For broad responsibility, the same accountability question applies: which indirect effects were considered, who assessed them, and what changed as a result? Without outcome evidence, the principles remain a description of what Amazon says leaders should consider—not independent verification that the company has achieved those aims.
Quick wins for a faster PC:
Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsFix Now →Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →What the remarks do—and do not—establish
Jassy’s 2021 comments explain why Amazon regards tension among its principles as useful: leaders face competing responsibilities and cannot meet every request or optimize every goal at once. They do not show that Amazon’s trade-offs are always sound, that the new principles produced measurable workplace changes, or that the company has attained its “Best Employer” ambition. The test is whether leaders use the principles to make decisions that are explainable, accountable and responsive to their consequences.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
