Great developers are raised, not hired • Hacker News Board

Re: Great developers are raised, not hired

#161

Post by brandall10 » Fri, Apr 12, 2019, 7:42 PM UTC

gorpomon wrote: post #36

msluyter wrote: post #20

I officially mentored someone at my previous company and helped him move from a support tech role into a software dev position. It was incredibly rewarding. But to play devil's advocate for a moment, isn't there something of a natural disincentive to level up one's employees in such a tight labor market? To follow the author's analogy, by mentoring someone, we're effectively "adding a fish" to the pond, and if someon…

IMO that devil's advocate argument is incorrect. There is no trap in working to increase an employee's skills. If you train someone at work and level them up-- they're not in class 8 hours a day not contributing. They are working on a project. All software mentorship is based around the idea of growing skills while meaningfully contributing to a project. Actually it's much harder to train someone without a project. I…

If you have a culture of leveling up people you consequentially level up your whole team... and no matter who leaves, that culture and standards you've set for the team remains.

Re: Great developers are raised, not hired

#162

Post by analyst74 » Fri, Apr 12, 2019, 7:46 PM UTC

I don't think a general discussion on this topic can really be had.

In my experience of working for shitty enterprise software, good and bad consulting firms (and seeing how their non-tech clients work), and silicon valley startups. The company financials, work culture, job market are all vastly different, impacting all the trade-offs of different hiring method.

i.e. some firms simply cannot afford top-of-the-market pay for senior engineers they want to hire, so they hire more junior ones and train them, who eventually leave after they're trained, but people don't immediately jump to next ship paying a little more, so you end up getting good work out of them for a period of time while underpaying them.

Some companies compete on non-momentary means.

Some pay top of the market rate, but only hire seniors.

Some pay top of the market rate, and hire from all levels; some of the juniors rise up through promotions, and some didn't get recognition despite growing, so they leave for other companies.

Some companies simply don't care about engineering quality, or does not have the ability/DNA to differentiate between good and bad work.

Also in silicon valley, networking and mentoring good engineers is much more professionally rewarding than in smaller markets.

Re: Great developers are raised, not hired

#163

Post by freyir » Fri, Apr 12, 2019, 7:46 PM UTC

neilv wrote: post #155

We're in a labor market in which CS students are focused on drilling for the FAANG-style whiteboard tests. And many will tell you their strategy is to go to Google for 2 years of experience and resume-building, and then leaving rather than grind away and play the promotion game there. And everyone has known for 20 years that you have to job-hop to grow your salary in this industry. And most employees would be naive t…

My last company would insist that they couldn’t give promotions or significant raises. Until you came in with an outside offer, then they’d roll out the red carpet and bend over backwards to keep you.

It breeds distrust, discontent, and disloyalty.

The best people don’t like this and leave. They company is left with people who can’t land outside offers. And the company ends up needing to pay market rate anyway to replace the good people who left.

Idiotic.

Re: Great developers are raised, not hired

#164

Post by rhizome » Fri, Apr 12, 2019, 7:49 PM UTC

wccrawford wrote: post #47

msluyter wrote: post #20

I officially mentored someone at my previous company and helped him move from a support tech role into a software dev position. It was incredibly rewarding. But to play devil's advocate for a moment, isn't there something of a natural disincentive to level up one's employees in such a tight labor market? To follow the author's analogy, by mentoring someone, we're effectively "adding a fish" to the pond, and if someon…

>To follow the author's analogy, by mentoring someone, we're effectively "adding a fish" to the pond, and if someone else "catches" the fish, that effort is largely wasted. Even more curious is that IT culture is basically that if you want to get paid what you're worth, you have to quit and go to another company. So these companies put all this effort into raising a better developer, and then refuse to pay them what…

And a couple weeks before I left, they put in a job ad for 7 developers

All "Senior X," right?

Re: Great developers are raised, not hired

#165

Post by crimsonalucard » Fri, Apr 12, 2019, 7:51 PM UTC

Great developers can be hired. For example, you raise the developer, I double his salary and hire him away from you. Not saying that I advocate this practice, but this is what happens in SV.

Re: Great developers are raised, not hired

#166

Post by freyir » Fri, Apr 12, 2019, 7:52 PM UTC

rb808 wrote: post #79

> Your mentees will support you and promote you for the rest of your life. The problem I've seen is that this is rarely true. We've had a big set of grads we've trained that quit for a 20% pay rise, or a project that they happen to like better. Many regretted it but it didnt stop the next guys from doing the same. I'm really burnt out over teaching green newbies again and again.

I feel for you, but then again, why do you keep hiring newbies? You get what you pay for.

Also, maybe the employee is worth the 20% pay bump after you’ve trained them? It sounds like you’re letting another company enjoy the fruits of your labor at a relatively cheap price.

Re: Great developers are raised, not hired

#167

Post by brandall10 » Fri, Apr 12, 2019, 7:53 PM UTC

vetinari wrote: post #131

chrisseaton wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why don't you match their pay rise? Or give them projects they're more keen to work on?

Usually, the teaching/mentoring is not free either. So you can a) hire someone who needs training and then train them, or you can b) hire someone who is productive since day 1. The people in a) cannot expect the same salary as b). Otherwise, there would be no point in incurring the costs of training them. Unfortunately, once you train them, someone can snatch them as people in b). You incur the loss, someone else ben…

This is simple - pay people by the value they bring to the company upon every annual compensation review.

Yes, it costs money to train people. Consequently they get paid less during that period. But once they can fly on their own, treat them as if you hired them like that.

Re: Great developers are raised, not hired

#168

Post by president » Fri, Apr 12, 2019, 7:54 PM UTC

msluyter wrote: post #20

I officially mentored someone at my previous company and helped him move from a support tech role into a software dev position. It was incredibly rewarding. But to play devil's advocate for a moment, isn't there something of a natural disincentive to level up one's employees in such a tight labor market? To follow the author's analogy, by mentoring someone, we're effectively "adding a fish" to the pond, and if someon…

3. Treat all workers as cogs in a machine that can be replaced at any moment if they are disobedient or fail to do their job right. After all, there are plenty of qualified people lined up to take their place anyway. Bonus points for incorporating foreign workers that can be locked into indentured servitude for many years. If you do it right, your fish can never leave the pond!

Re: Great developers are raised, not hired

#169

Post by freyir » Fri, Apr 12, 2019, 7:59 PM UTC

vetinari wrote: post #131

chrisseaton wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why don't you match their pay rise? Or give them projects they're more keen to work on?

Usually, the teaching/mentoring is not free either. So you can a) hire someone who needs training and then train them, or you can b) hire someone who is productive since day 1. The people in a) cannot expect the same salary as b). Otherwise, there would be no point in incurring the costs of training them. Unfortunately, once you train them, someone can snatch them as people in b). You incur the loss, someone else ben…

You think you’re entitled to a trained developer for the price of an inexperienced developer. That’s not going to happen. No wonder they leave.

Re: Great developers are raised, not hired

#170

Post by JoeAltmaier » Fri, Apr 12, 2019, 8:01 PM UTC

chrisseaton wrote: post #80

rb808 wrote: post #79

> Your mentees will support you and promote you for the rest of your life. The problem I've seen is that this is rarely true. We've had a big set of grads we've trained that quit for a 20% pay rise, or a project that they happen to like better. Many regretted it but it didnt stop the next guys from doing the same. I'm really burnt out over teaching green newbies again and again.

Why don't you match their pay rise? Or give them projects they're more keen to work on?

Sometimes their value to you is less than their value to someone else. You may need them, but the value they bring to the business has to pay off. That puts a hard limit on what you can pay for that skill.

It can suck to run a business - sometimes there's no good solution. I'd suggest more contracting for necessary-but-non-critical skills, but contracting's a jungle too.