Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Oxide’s compensation model: how is it going?

oxide.computer

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 241 posts

Re: Oxide’s compensation model: how is it going?

#161

Post by lolinder »

plorkyeran wrote: post #159
Aeolun wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find the whole variable comp for sales so bizarre. It’s like people trying to claim that the only way to get decent work out of programmers is by giving them comp on lines of code written. Why can’t a salesperson be properly motivated by just, you know, doing their job?

The thing that's unusual about sales is that it's the only metric that anyone's ever found that's (mostly) an exception to Goodhart's Law. Companies would love to pay a lot more people on commission if you could find a way to calculate commissions that gave the desired incentives.

It's not really that it's an exception to Goodharts Law, it's that Goodhart's Law only applies to measured proxies. If the goal of a company is first and foremost to make money, then sales is the only organization within the company that can be measured exactly according to the primary goal of the company rather than a proxy.

Goodhart's Law still applies to the extent that companies have other goals and sales's incentives totally screw those goals up. But they are very effective incentives at increasing money earned.

Re: Oxide’s compensation model: how is it going?

#162

Post by p_l »

atonse wrote: post #150
mastax wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also some of their customers are airgapped so if they’ll let you touch the machine that’ll make debugging a lot easier.

So this surprised me. If their customers are the kind that have airgapped servers, I’m surprised to see roles that all accept worldwide applicants.

You don't need to be in business of security clearances to require air-gapping.

Re: Oxide’s compensation model: how is it going?

#163

Post by [deleted] »

abxyz wrote: post #48

I like it a lot and their thoughtfulness about it but it's a little hollow when they're spending investor money. I'd like to see how this model evolves once they're off the vc teat: when there's a bottom line to answer to, does the dynamic shift? Everyone has an on-site chef when the money vc hose is on. Valve's flat structure was exciting because it wasn't 3 vc's in a coat larping as a business, it was an actual pro…

[deleted]

Re: Oxide’s compensation model: how is it going?

#164

Post by levi-turner »

abxyz wrote: post #48

I like it a lot and their thoughtfulness about it but it's a little hollow when they're spending investor money. I'd like to see how this model evolves once they're off the vc teat: when there's a bottom line to answer to, does the dynamic shift? Everyone has an on-site chef when the money vc hose is on. Valve's flat structure was exciting because it wasn't 3 vc's in a coat larping as a business, it was an actual pro…

> Support is typically low paid because it's a lot of effort for little reward, no matter how much you pay someone in support, there's only so much impact they can have on the bottom line.

As someone who was in Support and moved to the sales (engineering) side, I'll put it this way, if we had 3-4 of me in Support, my job would be 2-3-4x as easy.

Re: Oxide’s compensation model: how is it going?

#165

Post by rl3 »

sshine wrote: post #93
__jonas wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure what you're saying, are you implying Oxide is doing this?

They inevitably are, because anyone who has a service subscription is doing this. Because doing every single thing in-house is a different, more extreme value. I'd love to be a $207k/mo. lunch lady.

>I'd love to be a $207k/mo. lunch lady.

I mean, I'd settle for being a $207k/yr lunch lady. Perhaps I'm unduly devaluing myself..

Re: Oxide’s compensation model: how is it going?

#166

Post by anonfordays »

everial wrote: post #158
steveklabnik wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hm, well I am not sure about that either.

> The completion of a formal education is much more important than the institution From https://rfd.shared.oxide.computer/rfd/0003 -- which was top of mind since I started looking at the postings after reading the article. ;-)

That section is comedic gold. It reads like a character from Silicon Valley opining on hiring "only the finest." Poe's Law hilarity.

Re: Oxide’s compensation model: how is it going?

#167

Post by steveklabnik »

marcinzm wrote: post #155
steveklabnik wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> when there's a bottom line to answer to Having VC money doesn't mean that you can ignore finances. We are in a relatively capital-intensive business compared to a lot of the startups on HN. > Support is typically low paid because it's a lot of effort for little reward, Respectfully, I think this attitude is flat-out wrong. Because of this: > there's only so much impact they can have on the bottom line. Directly , s…

> We are in a relatively capital-intensive business compared to a lot of the startups on HN. Doesn't that just mean that employee compensation is an even smaller percentage of expenses versus other companies? So you can ignore that side of finances even more than other startups?

It means we need to make every dollar count, because we need a lot of them.

Re: Oxide’s compensation model: how is it going?

#168

Post by steveklabnik »

everial wrote: post #158
steveklabnik wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hm, well I am not sure about that either.

> The completion of a formal education is much more important than the institution From https://rfd.shared.oxide.computer/rfd/0003 -- which was top of mind since I started looking at the postings after reading the article. ;-)

It's not saying that doing so is a requirement, it's saying that, if you have a degree, the fact that you have one is more important than where it is from.

I dropped out of school, had terrible grades, and ended up going back and finishing, but still got like a 2.something GPA. The subject of school never came up. When I review applicants, I don't rate them poorly if they didn't get a degree.

Re: Oxide’s compensation model: how is it going?

#169

Post by steveklabnik »

neilv wrote: post #154
steveklabnik wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> SF Bay Area SWEs are famously compensation-focused, We don't hire only SF Bar Area SWEs. Only about a quarter of the company is in the Bay Area. > but you just can't find the analog of that among good salespeople? I'm not sure I've ever met an equivalent salesperson. Maybe that's a personal thing. Given the other responses in this thread, it seems to be fairly universal. > And you manage the imperfect alignment? No…

Thank you. Two followups, trying to learn from Oxide: 1. Did you go straight from founders and marketing/relations people doing sales, to hiring salespeople with a conventional compensation scheme? (Or were there some other things you tried in between?) 2. Given the opinionated and unconventional ideas that you have for engineering and product culture, and also given that traditional enterprise sales culture was powe…

1. I don't work on that side of things, but yeah, that's my understanding. We did discuss if we were going to try and do the flat scheme, but I believe we made the decision to be more traditional before we ended up putting up the job descriptions.

2. I can't answer that, as I don't work on that, but maybe someone else will read the thread and chime in. Sorry about that!

Re: Oxide’s compensation model: how is it going?

#170

Post by rubyn00bie »

Aeolun wrote: post #139
ralph84 wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I imagine they had to introduce variable comp for sales because they weren’t able to hire even a single good enterprise sales rep for a flat $200k. It’s not a culture thing, it’s just the market rate for the role. If they paid a flat $500k they’d stand a better chance of avoiding variable comp.

I find the whole variable comp for sales so bizarre. It’s like people trying to claim that the only way to get decent work out of programmers is by giving them comp on lines of code written. Why can’t a salesperson be properly motivated by just, you know, doing their job?

Really good sales people know the literal dollar value of their work. They often times have large networks, existing relationships, and know how to use them to make money. Every really good sales person I’ve ever known gives literally no shits about what anyone tells them because they’re closing. They know it’s their relationships more than anything pulling in the cash. When you’re closing deals for millions upon millions of dollars, if you aren’t getting paid enough there’s a competitor out there willing to do so to buy your relationships.

If engineers knew the literal dollar value they provided they, and could prove it, we’d likely be more motivated by money as well.

Addendum/Edit: I still think the best job ever is selling commercial aircraft. Close a deal on a fleet of 747s? You’d probably make a lot of CEOs blush with that pay day.

Post reply on HN