Live data from Hacker News

The Google incentive mismatch: Problems with promotion-oriented cultures

warp.dev

71–80 of 613 posts

Re: The Google incentive mismatch: Problems with promotion-oriented cultures

#71
The first thing that comes to mind reading this is that 'corporate ladder' is the wrong visual concept. Corporate hierarchies are trees with root at the top. The problem is then comparable to the academic world, where each PI will have a series of PhD students who themselves want to become PIs, but the PI replacement rate is too low to accomodate this. Unless the global academic world is expanding, inevitably the majority of PhDs will not become PIs.

One general solution is to flatten the hierarchy, which ultimately would reduce the spread in compensation and rewards from the bottom layer to the top layer. This would make promotion somewhat less attractive particularly if it came with heavier administrative responsibilities (generally less fun and more hassle).

Re: The Google incentive mismatch: Problems with promotion-oriented cultures

#72
post #43

Former Googler here. This person has correctly identified that a key reason why google sucks is that people very often... > choose between doing what’s best for users or what’s best for their career But the root cause isn't that people want to get promoted. It's that Google promotes people for the wrong reasons. Put very simply, the problem is that Google promotes people for "solving hard problems" not for solving US…

Another example of this is their OKR system. If you meet all your quarterly goals at Google, that's not a success. In fact, you're frowned upon for not setting your goals high enough.

Their whole management process encourages people to chase after impossible goals, and literally discourages people from getting things done.

Re: The Google incentive mismatch: Problems with promotion-oriented cultures

#73

My experience has been that some companies pressure engineers to want to advance. If you come into a performance review and say "actually I'm happy where I am" it's seen as a lack of motivation and will count as a mark against you. I had a boss say to me "I always want to move to the next level and I expect the same of my reports". Whatever, I guess I'm a poor employee because I like my job.

I’ve openly stated that I want my retirement job to be an SWE3-ish role somewhere. High enough to have interesting, somewhat challenging work, but with negative desire to climb the ranks any further.

Re: The Google incentive mismatch: Problems with promotion-oriented cultures

#74
post #46

It gets worse than promo-driven development. Recently we had a chat with a lead from another team. Their product has a lot of similarities with ours so we sync up every now and then to bounce ideas off each other. They recently release a big change that we thought didn't provide much value, so we asked him about it. His candid answer was "you know how it works, we have a service running in production, so we need to m…

The problem is a bit more insidious than that As an engineer, you want to be working on cool new features too! Very few folks will be content sitting on their laurels just fixing the occasional bug or adding a touch more polish to a product that's already "done" If you setup a team to work that way, very soon you'll find that most of your engineers have left. Heck, the manager might get bored and leave too. "Okay, th…

Experienced something similar, but it was not an outage. Had several knowledgeable people leave the company, and they all happened to be experts in a particular service. Positions weren’t backfilled even though the people gave advance notice. About two months later we ended up getting out butts kicked when nobody knew the details of the service implementation and the service was expected to be updated to support some new features.. couldn’t get it updated for about 3-4 weeks because we couldn’t afford an outage.

Re: The Google incentive mismatch: Problems with promotion-oriented cultures

#75
serious question here - how does Apple deal with this problem ?

Apple also survives on big bang releases - the next iphone, macbook pro, etc etc. But also is famous for not abandoning old phones. iphone 6 was still receiving updates in Dec 2021.

so how does Apple manage this dichotomy ? or is the company level yearly release completely wipe out the need for individual "hard problem" solving ?

Re: The Google incentive mismatch: Problems with promotion-oriented cultures

#76
post #43

Former Googler here. This person has correctly identified that a key reason why google sucks is that people very often... > choose between doing what’s best for users or what’s best for their career But the root cause isn't that people want to get promoted. It's that Google promotes people for the wrong reasons. Put very simply, the problem is that Google promotes people for "solving hard problems" not for solving US…

Yup. I left a decade ago with this exact thought. There are people there who lift mountains to create real working systems, but you're actively discouraged from doing that if you want any sort of career there. And spending two weeks a year on performance reviews just serves as a constant reminder of those values.

It's easily visible from the outside too. The constant stream of one half-baked video chat solution or social network replacing the last one, without any sense of progress or continuity, why would a company do that? Easy, no one gets promoted for fixing anything, but creating the next broken thing? That's vision.

Re: The Google incentive mismatch: Problems with promotion-oriented cultures

#77
post #46

It gets worse than promo-driven development. Recently we had a chat with a lead from another team. Their product has a lot of similarities with ours so we sync up every now and then to bounce ideas off each other. They recently release a big change that we thought didn't provide much value, so we asked him about it. His candid answer was "you know how it works, we have a service running in production, so we need to m…

The problem is a bit more insidious than that As an engineer, you want to be working on cool new features too! Very few folks will be content sitting on their laurels just fixing the occasional bug or adding a touch more polish to a product that's already "done" If you setup a team to work that way, very soon you'll find that most of your engineers have left. Heck, the manager might get bored and leave too. "Okay, th…

Part of this is due to companies shooting themselves in the foot over and over, recruiting developers looking for challenges rather than grunt developers okay doing largely maintenance for a solid income. If they advocate themselves as providing the challenges for the former and filter out the latter, yes, obviously your employees are going to leave after they have to move that one div by 5 pixels for the umpteenth time and get no mental stimulation for months.

Re: The Google incentive mismatch: Problems with promotion-oriented cultures

#78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Off the top of my head: 1. More money means less time till I hit FU money and can choose work without any consideration of pay 2. 200k/yr is not as much as it seems if you're in the bay area and have kids 3. Bigger title -> more input on core design decisions. Hate some idea coming from the higher ups? You're in a position to do something about it. 4. Bigger title -> more control in picking interesting problems to wo…

Do you worry about being hit by a bus before you have FU money? Personally I'd rather work half time for twice as many years than try to race to retire. A lot of responses seem to be focused on high cost-of-living areas, which is kind of a chicken-and-egg problem. If you want to be a moderately checked out person, living in a smaller city and stretching your giant bay area salary is the way to go. If you want to be a…

I’d rather work twice as many hours per year for half as many years. It’s not that one choice is obviously dominant over the other across all people.

Re: The Google incentive mismatch: Problems with promotion-oriented cultures

#79
post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Were strict hierarchies really that bad? It seems that just about anything else devolves into an ontological mess of Byzantine proportions. At one stage in my career I was reporting to 4 different bosses in this weird interleaved hypercube topology. I spent most of my time giving status updates

I once had a similar situation and seriously contemplated building an application to manage my status updates so I could enter the raw data once and have all N people who needed to be updated sent the right information in the right way at the right time....

This is a great idea!

Re: The Google incentive mismatch: Problems with promotion-oriented cultures

#80
post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Off the top of my head: 1. More money means less time till I hit FU money and can choose work without any consideration of pay 2. 200k/yr is not as much as it seems if you're in the bay area and have kids 3. Bigger title -> more input on core design decisions. Hate some idea coming from the higher ups? You're in a position to do something about it. 4. Bigger title -> more control in picking interesting problems to wo…

In general I agree. It's just that I don't know if salaried job lead to FU money. The only person I had or will be able to say FU is to myself sitting alone in living room.

You'd be able to reach FIRE money as a SWE. Possibly FU money if you get to vp level at a FAANG and then work for 10 years.
Post reply on HN