541–550 of 596 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
These days I just immediately turn those down without a second thought. It's a joke of an interviewing system and your time is way too valuable for that. Happy to do coding questions, but not 8 hour long take-home projects. Those have screwed me too many times
Teleport has a comically large test. Think 20-40 hours.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But how do you evaluate value on a multi person and even multi team project? Is the tester or security person valued as much as the senior dev? Without them the devs work might do more harm than good, right? How do we put value on those intangibles?
I wanted to add to this. How do we evaluate value for managers? They can be making multiples of what the devs are yet they are overhead.
I used to think this way. Then I became a manager. (Now I'm an individual contributor/IC again.) Oh, how wrong I was.
Managers do coordination, which is far different than building, but typically more valuable. Why is it more valuable? Leverage.
If I as an IC do the wrong thing and it doesn't get to production, it typically wastes my time (and any time needed to fix the mess, if doing so is harder than `git reset`).
If a team of people do the wrong thing, then that's an entire team's time wasted. Managers exist to ensure that a team is pointed in the right direction. Figuring this out could include meetings (oh so many meetings) with other parts of the business or customers, discussing priorities and timelines and ensuring dependencies are understood and met.
You also need to foster intrateam communication so that Bob learns that Alice has already partway solved problem X, or Alice learns that Tracy has experience in technology Y. Sure, you could rely on ICs to do this, and good ones will, but I've seen communication short circuit big issues and save lots of development time.
Is the manager's effort overhead if, by their efforts (even partially, with the help of other team members), the team solves the correct problem, rather than the wrong problem correctly?
This explanation ignores the political aspect of management (protecting your team from budget cuts, layoffs and being pulled into extraneous meetings/other efforts). I've intentionally ignored this because it was minimal at most places I've been a manager, so I can't speak out of personal experience. But I've heard about other places where this was a large chunk of the value added by management.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
These days I just immediately turn those down without a second thought. It's a joke of an interviewing system and your time is way too valuable for that. Happy to do coding questions, but not 8 hour long take-home projects. Those have screwed me too many times
I have a different strategy, I will happily do one one or two take home exercises (and I'm willing to sink 8-16h into them) but I will tell the recruiter I'm not doing any additional coding on-site (personally I find this high-anxiety, and a crappy way to gauge skill). Happy to chat about all kinds of things, but if someone drops an involved coding question in an interview I'm done and I will walk out and not return…
With the greatest respect, the vibe I'm getting is "this person is prone to reacting in a volatile manner when things are not to their liking."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But how do you evaluate value on a multi person and even multi team project? Is the tester or security person valued as much as the senior dev? Without them the devs work might do more harm than good, right? How do we put value on those intangibles?
I wanted to add to this. How do we evaluate value for managers? They can be making multiples of what the devs are yet they are overhead.
For support roles, their value comes from the costs that they help prevent. A security expert is like insurance, where they provide value by ensuring the company's product has the minimum chance of being exploited as that could damage the business in multiple ways.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wanted to add to this. How do we evaluate value for managers? They can be making multiples of what the devs are yet they are overhead.
Evaluating value is usually not straightforward, unless the person was working alone it is always a subjective thing. If a junior is given a project alone, then they may provide zero value to the company if they can't complete it, but if they were paired with a senior, then together they should provide more value than the senior alone. Similarly, a manager's value is more indirect by providing a direction for the tea…
I guess I'm just skeptical and jaded based on my past experiences.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wanted to add to this. How do we evaluate value for managers? They can be making multiples of what the devs are yet they are overhead.
> They can be making multiples of what the devs are yet they are overhead. I used to think this way. Then I became a manager. (Now I'm an individual contributor/IC again.) Oh, how wrong I was. Managers do coordination, which is far different than building, but typically more valuable. Why is it more valuable? Leverage. If I as an IC do the wrong thing and it doesn't get to production, it typically wastes my time (and…
I don't envy the politics, but the coordination and meetings are easy. I'd rather be doing that, but you can't get there without moving up the ladder. I was a tech lead for a year and it was probably half coordination and meetings and the other half was troubleshooting and development. It was great... except they didn't promote me to that level.
Even if you think you’re well paid, now is the time to look around. I’ve had a lot of friends, mentees, and coworkers get huge bumps on total compensation even as relatively senior engineers and managers. Pay is jumping and companies aren’t doing a great job keeping that up for their people who have been around for a few years. As an employer, that should be the top worry, keep comp up, don’t lose your people because…
For those of you who have done this, how do you maximise your compensation? Tips appreciated.
My background: I'm somewhere around the 20 years of experience mark, a bit more than a quarter of that as a dev at a FAANG, a bit less than a quarter of that as a hiring manager / senior executive for startups (in one case, nearly quadrupling the number of devs in my org in a year; in another, managing a 4-5 dozen devs org).
The ideal situation is looking for a job while you have one that you are at least mostly-happy with. Or at least one where you can stay for at least another few months still -- in case you don't get the offers you want. And have a honest idea of how much you should or want to make. Ideal scenario is having close and honest friends that are peers (or even better: hiring managers) in your domain that you are comfortable talking money with.
Go through those companies in some order (most excited to least excited if you're in a hurry, least excited to most excited if you want to get the best offer possible) and interview at 1-2 at the same time, in order. Pass the interview at least up to the point where you're talking salary. In my experience, it's rarely upfront, which is an annoying waste of time if the candidate and company are on totally different planets regarding salary expectations, but having been a hiring manager, I get it [1].
Then get offers, or not. As hard as you can without pissing the company off (pissing off a hiring manager is harder than most people think, just be at least somewhat nice and reasonable about the whole thing) -- make sure to skip over HR and talk straight to the hiring manager, before and after the interview [2]. Preferably, ask to book the post-interview meeting during your pre-interview chat, so the hiring manager has extra peer pressure to actually show up "in person" (well, on the phone). Bonus points for reaching out to a senior director or (for a small enough company) a C-level executive on LinkedIn.
If you get all offers, you probably are asking less than you should. No offers, much more. 50/50? You're asking just the right amount. Not all refusals are salary-related, but for now, companies can't afford to be too choosy, so overall, market bias should be on your side. It's a time consuming process, but for a lot of people, frankly there's a 10-20% salary hike on the line every few years -- how much time is that worth to you? And don't feel bad for the "poor hiring managers" whose offers you do not accept in the end [3]. Keep in mind most of the advice on the internet is from recruiters and hiring managers that have a vested interested in candidates not shopping around (for a tangentially related topic, read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-Tech_Employee_Antitrust_L... and think about this topic, hard).
Finally, do this every year or two, even if you have no intention of leaving your current place. First, it'll leave a trail of companies (and hiring managers, that may go to a company you're a better fit for) knowing your name and wistfully thinking about the great candidate that got away. And second, it's a great thing to know exactly your worth on the market. I know folks who've doubled their income in less than five years this way.
To be fair, there's the (I believe very small) chance that your current employer will hear about your shenanigans -- and that could bite you in the ass in the (very) short term. Personally, I've never seen that, either as a candidate or hiring manager and for me personally, the risk is 100% worth it. Caveat lector.
[1] When I hired, I usually had 5-6 roles opened in my budget, and if your interview process proves to me you're a talented but more junior candidate than I hoped for, I might compromise but offer you below the bracket I was thinking about and raise the experience bar for the next hire. I usually have some kind of wiggle room of that nature, wiggle room which mostly disappears if I told you the expected salary bracket upfront.
[2] Admittedly, this is significantly easier at smaller company, where a formal HR is oftentimes just not there yet. You'll get significantly better feedback straight from the horse's mouth, including fun statements like "your salary expectation just doesn't fit in my budget"; though that either means you really asked for more than I can afford, or you did not convince me you're worth that much.
[3] First, they did a poor job convincing you to work for them and that's explicitly their job during the interview process, whether they know it or not. And second, if the company they hire for is any good, they usually only hire an absolute maximum of 30% of the candidates they interview (usually, much, much less: that FAANG I mentioned way earlier? more like 5%). If they can be choosy, why can't you be? Plus, I remember most of the candidates that I made offers to and said no to me. Not because I'm annoyed at them, but rather (until I left my hiring manager position) because I followed them on social media just in case they said something about their current job being a PITA or otherwise hint they might be looking. Telling a company no is a great way to leave a reputation of being better than they thought, and the good ones will not forget and keep the finger on the offer trigger. Keep in mind the good hiring managers also have a reputation they want to preserve, if they're even half thinking about their own career prospects...
I don't know who to believe. Compensation has indeed skyrocketed for remote positions, I can see as much from job ads. At the same time, I'm participating in hiring for a UK company (for remote or onsite positions that pay nowhere close to Bay Area rates), and we're fighting off people applying, to the point where we can be very picky. These people are very qualified, and still trying to get into positions where you…
P.S. we'll hire you! Send the candidates my way plz!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Amazon is absolutely a red flag on the resume. Many hiring managers (like myself) do not want to import the toxic, backstabbing, PIP culture from Amazon into our org. Also I’ve noticed the quality of Amazon engineers is lower, on average, compared to Google, ByteDance, FB, Stripe, etc. My advice is to work somewhere not-Amazon for a year or two. Then you’ll get more bites.
Is this true? Since joining Amazon 2 years ago the rate of recruiters hitting my inbox has increased around 3x and I regularly get contacts from Google, Facebook, and MS recruiters, plus recruiters from random small shops in the Bay Area. I suppose you are exaggerating.