Live data from Hacker News

The Google incentive mismatch: Problems with promotion-oriented cultures

warp.dev

191–200 of 613 posts

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

#191

Seriously, why do people care about being promoted beyond senior/staff? Even at a smaller company you're making 200k/year, you probably have a good handle on your job, why not just coast? There's a big discontinuity in comp if you can make it to the director level, but being a manager or senior staff seems like a ton of work for no benefit. I work like 20 hours a week at my job, I almost quit because it's extremely b…

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…

> 4. Bigger title -> more control in picking interesting problems to work on. People trust you to say "this should be a priority"

This is probably one of the most dominant non-financial factor for engineers. Because if you want to make a visible, critical design decisions for billion-user products you usually want to be at least L6~L7, the level where you're now an owner of a non-trivial product/system spanning across teams.

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

#192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, given "getting hit by a bus" is a probabilistic event that is independent of my working hours, I would rather make 2x for half as many years, all other things being equal. I'd also rather make 3x for a third as many years, and so on, if it were possible. Given time value of money and compounding interest, it's always better to front load your working time and make Nx for 1/N as much calendar time worked. And for…

I think it's insane to, for example, work at an office early in your 20s, to put a couple grand in your 401(k). Those 1-2 years, if spent exploring, could mean finding a happier and more thoughtful way to progress through the latter 70% of your life.

I think this points out a difference in viewing everything in life as an efficiency problem focused on retirement age and overall wealth. Makes sense for a forum of engineers to see it this way I suppose.

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

#193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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!

I think someone already built it… and called it Jira.

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

#194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Erm that’s not true at all.

Okay, Googler, how about some data to back up that assertion? Let's have a googley-argument where we're respectful in showing that we're smarter than the person we're putting down. Here's my data. Google values consensus - fact. This "wisdom of the crowds" philosophy was core to founding google - Larry & Sergey's brilliant insight that the collective votes of hyperlinks was a stronger signal than things like H1 tags…

> But consensus means, in a literal sense, that everybody needs to agree on the right thing to do.

I want to push back on this. I think there is absolutely such a thing as “rough consensus” where everyone gets to air their concerns, but the group still makes a decision where not everyone gets their way. Rough consensus processes are much harder to do over a mailing list because there’s no sense of what “the room” wants - since all the air gets taken up by the people who have the most time & are the most argumentative. It’s much easier to achieve rough consensus in person - especially amongst groups who have good working relationships with each other.

In many ways this is a product failure of mailing lists and the like. I’d love more answers in this space to allow us to make better collective decisions, remotely.

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

#195
post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think Apple has done a fantastic job of incremental improvements on their products rather than chasing the next cool thing. Can you name a company that has actually been doing this better? For instance, they often resist new technologies like high refresh rate or OLED screens, 5G, etc., until they feel the technology is developed sufficiently and won’t impact battery life. There are other brands that compete by mak…

I haven't worked at apple, but I suspect that this is the result of only having Some companies like to spam new products, others like to perfect what they have.

I'm not sure if you're saying it's a bad thing that they have <20 core products? I've always considered that a strength and a remarkable show of discipline, especially when they're willing to kill perfectly good products in order to create imperfectly great ones.

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

#196

Seriously, why do people care about being promoted beyond senior/staff? Even at a smaller company you're making 200k/year, you probably have a good handle on your job, why not just coast? There's a big discontinuity in comp if you can make it to the director level, but being a manager or senior staff seems like a ton of work for no benefit. I work like 20 hours a week at my job, I almost quit because it's extremely b…

To be clear, your question is why do people want to grow? Or why do they want to make more money? Or why do they want more status/power/recognition?

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

#197
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…

So what happens when you promote someone for maintaining the same system for years? When do you stop promoting them? There's a person on my team who is happy to maintain what he works on. He has worked on fundamentally the same project for over a decade. He's a senior level engineer, and as far as I know doesn't have aspirations beyond that, which is perfectly fine. Assuming he keeps doing that work, and no more, doe…

At some companies, this is broadly what "SRE" vs "SWE" is meant to capture. But the issue is that roles aren't very fluid, plenty of times SWE ends up transitioning to a role more resembling an SRE after building a system and reorienting towards maintaining it.

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

#198
post #74
post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> couldn’t get it updated for about 3-4 weeks

That doesn't sound like a large issue (but the details can completely change it). Maybe it was the right decision.

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

#199
post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Yeah from what I've heard you ideally want to hit 70-80% of your OKRs, and people game it to make sure they fail at one or two so they don't get accused of being "too easy".

I've never seen or even heard of anyone throwing their OKRs to avoid the appearance that they were too easy. In fact, you rarely hear about another team's grading of OKRs at all. Plenty of teams inside Google also set OKRs expecting/hoping to hit 1.0 so it wouldn't be at all surprising to see lots of 1's/near 1's on teams.

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

#200
post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems pretty sexist to associate solving hard problems with masculinity. Women at Google also work on hard problems.

Should have just said toxic humanistic traits

Should just have said toxic traits. Leave out the unnecessary elaboration because it contributes nothing and can detract from the point.
Post reply on HN