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

How Google keeps employees by treating them like kids (2006)

aaronsw.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 171 posts

Re: How Google keeps employees by treating them like kids (2006)

#121

Post by absconditus »

shmerl wrote: post #46
raldi wrote: post #17

A month earlier, Aaron wrote about his experiences working in a more traditional kind of office: http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/officespace > Gray walls, gray desks, gray noise. The first day I showed up here, I simply couldn’t take it. By lunch time I had literally locked myself in a bathroom stall and started crying. So I'm not sure what kind of office would have ever met his approval.

This one doesn't look gray: http://www.businessinsider.com/inside-mozillas-amazing-offic...

The building appears to be better than average, but the workspaces look pretty horrible.

Re: How Google keeps employees by treating them like kids (2006)

#122

Post by jaredmcateer »

6cxs2hd6 wrote: post #99
com2kid wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder how many of those people ever had their own office. If you don't know any better, what you have may seem pretty good. Both have their advantages and disadvantages. For some types of problem solving, a closed space to think for an extended period of time is really useful.

> I wonder how many of those people ever had their own office. If you don't know any better, what you have may seem pretty good. Coach never felt cramped until I was back there after the first time flying business class. Spoiled for life. If there is some second transition to travel satori -- where mountains are mountains and coach is no longer cramped -- I haven't attained it yet. For people writing code, there need…

I used to have my own office and closing the door just meant people would knock on my door instead of popping their head in. Headphones and setting myself to busy on IM has always been the best way of indicating to someone I was busy.

Re: How Google keeps employees by treating them like kids (2006)

#123

Post by ksk »

ksk wrote: post #82
amaks wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apparently you haven't worked for Microsoft. Google is engineer's heaven compared to MS.

>Google is engineer's heaven compared to MS. How so? I'd be crushed at the thought of using my skills to get people to click on ads, or coming up with new ways to mine their data.

On second thoughts, I realize this is bit of a generalization but then again, I was replying to a generalization :P

Re: How Google keeps employees by treating them like kids (2006)

#124

Post by cromwellian »

treenyc wrote: post #112
cromwellian wrote: post #64

I'm 42. Most of the people I work with are in the 30s and 40s and have children. The stereotype of Google hiring nothing but Stanford grads has been over for a while. As much as I like Aaron, here he is guilty of excessive generalization. Even in 2006 the claims don't match reality. I lived through the first dot.com boom in CA, where companies were falling hand over fist to offer perks, many of them financially unsus…

thanks. I also know people who work at Google who are hired straight of college just like described in the article. Can you or anyone provide us with 1. actual % of people in different age group working at google. 2. Please let me know what department you are working in. That might provide some insights. Occasional Perks is great. However, if the company rely on that to retain its' employees than something rotten. Go…

Even if I had the hard data, I doubt I would be at liberty to disclose them. I work on both infrastructure and on consumer facing apps stuff (like gmail). My role working on the GWT compiler means I interact with dozens of other product teams, so I have a pretty good idea of the average age of people I have to sit in meetings with.

Google used to be a youngish company with a low median average age, I'd say that started to change even as far back as 2005. The demographics of the company are greying.

I don't really stay at Google because of the food or other benefits, I stay because of the people, culture, and products. If it ever becomes a shitty place to work on those grounds, then a startup will start to look much better. Many Googlers have in fact encountered shitty politics within their particular area and left the company eventually.

That is, the idea that Google is not an interesting place to work, but a shitty workplace that needs to "bribe" people to stay because it's so rotten is so far from reality is hilarious. I think Google could drop a lot of the perks tomorrow, and there's be some disgruntled #firstworldproblems people whining, but they'd ultimately stay. As I mentioned and was quoted in this TechCrunch article (http://techcrunch.com/2012/02/25/sugar-water/) a lot of the problems that startups "solve" in the Valley are utterly trivial, and if you really want to work on stuff like flying stratospheric balloons, or grand mega-AIs, or whatever Jeff Dean is cooking up next, there aren't many places outside of academia you can flee to.

The perks by and large serve to keep employees happy and undistracted. Happy employees equals happy culture equals higher propensity to work together collaboratively instead of being shit balls to your co-workers because you don't have good healthcare, or must commute outside the office to get crappy subway sandwiches every day.

If you don't think Google is doing anything exciting, or creating value for humanities, than pray-tell, what company in this area that doesn't have great perks, is doing better in those categories?

Re: How Google keeps employees by treating them like kids (2006)

#125

Post by yetanotherphd »

Claims that other people are "infantile" are almost always just a pissing contest. It's an easy way to put someone down since being infantile is hard to define, and making that claim already sets you up as the more mature person in the conversion.

And the idea that having stuff done for you is equivalent to being treated like a kid says more about the psychological issues of the author than reality. Our entire economy is based around exchanging services for money. Google takes it to a (slightly) higher level, although the only perk that people use in real life is the food.

Re: How Google keeps employees by treating them like kids (2006)

#127

Post by ryandrake »

derwiki wrote: post #11
pcvarmint wrote: post #5

I thought it looked creepy, like an adult daycare center. I was approached twice and interviewed twice by Google but I don't think I'd fit that culture. No offices -- just open spaces. A meritocracy where you are evaluated by your peers generally, rather than by a boss or customer for your merits in a particular job. Where you don't even know what you will be working on until you're hired, as if that gives you a choi…

I'm surprised at how polarizing no offices vs open offices is. My first job at IBM, I had an office with two co-workers. They were great, but on days they were out it was sooo isolating. When I quit and took a job at a start up in SF with an open office plan, I loved it immediately. I could look across the room and see if the systems guy was there or getting coffee, instead of pinging into the Sametime void. So, I'm…

I've worked in cubicles and in an open office most of my life. I'm now working for a company with offices with doors, and I have to say, offices are pretty much the worst.

In an open office (and to a lesser extent, places with open cubicles), you can have constant interaction with other people. You can scan the room quickly to see who's busy, who's concentrating, who looks available for a quick chat, etc. You can hear all the technical conversations going on and are able to jump in at any point if needed. Someone's sketching something out on a whiteboard, anyone can just glance it over if they're curious or feel they can contribute.

With offices, I've found people tend to hide behind their doors. E-mail/IM can be ignored. You have to force yourself to get out and have face to face interactions. If you want to understand how things are going, what the current challenges are, or have any kind of technical discussion that requires more than a few people, you need to schedule a meeting, pry everyone out of their offices and haul them into a conference room. You can't feel the general "pulse" of the place like you can with an open plan.

The only thing worse than closed-door offices is telecommuting, where all of the above is true plus there's not (generally) even the option of getting someone face-to-face at all. Quite honestly, I don't think I would accept a job offer at a place if you told me that a significant number of people telecommuted.

Different strokes for different folks, but I find open offices suit my work style and need for human interaction much better than offices.

Re: How Google keeps employees by treating them like kids (2006)

#128

Post by niketdesai »

I transferred to the Motorola division so I kind of have both perspectives while being at Google.

In some regard, a lot of Googlers don't even know how good they have it. What Google manages to do pretty well is pick the right people for 'the company' and then acclimatize them extremely fast to everything: process, tools, lifestyle and sometimes koolaid.

In doing so are we infants? Perhaps. But fundamentally this is no different than what all children go through (acclimatization to their environment).

I'm not sure working for some crummy company, or a startup means one life is better than the other - they are different. And if you're lucky enough to be able to choose that then that is awesome.

Re: How Google keeps employees by treating them like kids (2006)

#129

Post by dekhn »

git-pull wrote: post #70
sliverstorm wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have to think his head was wired differently than most of us.

Prodigies tend to receive a lot of encouragement and enabling. Ying and yang, Too much nurturing can be toxic.

What makes you think Aaron was a prodigy? Please cite specific facts or details; be careful because the press makes claims about his achievements which aren't completely accurate. He seemed intelligent perhaps a bit more than the typical person, but profoundly unwise in many ways (if you want to achieve a goal, do so in a way that achieves the goal, rather than the spectacularly inefficient, risky, and ultimately unproductive things he worked on).

Re: How Google keeps employees by treating them like kids (2006)

#130

Post by auvrw »

> Even the suburban desert of Mountain View is better.

haha, i think mountain view is actually quite a quaint little town compared to sun-beat santa clara, which really isn't so bad either. (aaah, i miss the weather, i do.)

but heck, the late aaron swartz lamenting an HR tact that pervades so many of the companies, software and otherwise, hiring math & science "types?" holiday stylesheet or no, it's a depressing read.

Post reply on HN