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

You don't want to hire "the best engineers"

otherbranch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 326 posts

Re: You don't want to hire "the best engineers"

#151

Post by datavirtue »

binary132 wrote: post #81
throwway120385 wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If your business is going to cease to exist in 4 months, who cares about scalability? Pay the interest when it comes due and when you can afford it. If someone is serious about building a company they will be okay with that.

unpopular opinion with engineers but unfortunately true startups are generally moreso a business endeavor than an engineering one, although the engineering must correctly support the business the engineering begins to take the driver’s seat as the tech debt and cost of scaling catch up to successful companies and begin to create excess drag but for many years, such companies can typically still afford to throw away m…

I'm in full tech debt black hole right now. Avoid this shit, if at all possible. The excess drag is real AF and is greatly threatening the business.

Re: You don't want to hire "the best engineers"

#152

Post by Cyclone_ »

Centigonal wrote: post #37

There is no such thing as "the best engineers." Some engineers are definitely better than others, but once you pass the bar of "really smart, great work ethic," the tech tree diverges pretty dramatically. Some engineers (like Notch) are amazing at quickly putting out vast quantities of mediocre code, prototyping ideas, maintaining a clear product vision, and bringing something into reality quickly. Other engineers (l…

Err I don't think that's exactly true to say there's no such thing as the best engineers. There's very few who would be capable of solving problems that someone like a Jeff Dean is able to do. Realistically though, not every company needs to solve problems of the difficulty that Google has.

Re: You don't want to hire "the best engineers"

#153

Post by SpicyLemonZest »

indoordin0saur wrote: post #108
jcalvinowens wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every single solitary person I've personally known who worked at a successful startup got screwed out of their equity somehow. Literally every single one.

Yup. The stories of old, where an engineer would grind for a decade then have a nice seven-figure payout to buy a home seem a remote memory. I'm not sure what happened because successful start-ups still exist and it seems like somebody is profiting off of acquisitions and IPOs.

It still happens all the time. It's just in an awkward in-between, where it's neither so uncommon that it's worth comment in news stories nor so common that most people in tech know someone who's gotten it. The Figma IPO surely minted dozens of millionaires, although I guess their lockup wouldn't be expired yet.

Re: You don't want to hire "the best engineers"

#154

Post by datavirtue »

gedy wrote: post #105
throwway120385 wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If your business is going to cease to exist in 4 months, who cares about scalability? Pay the interest when it comes due and when you can afford it. If someone is serious about building a company they will be okay with that.

Sure but then incentivize engineers to hack it out knowing they'll have to deal with the shit show if you become successful. Sorry but most "startup engineers" aren't , and it's basically bad for their careers to implement "the vision" in a throw-away manner.

Let's be real. Most first builds are done by very low talent Indian and Vietnamese developers with zero technical direction. Once the business grows, real engineers and architects are brought in to fight the horrendous, almost laughable, mess to pull the company back from certain failure...without getting any credit.

Re: You don't want to hire "the best engineers"

#156

Post by ospehlivano »

OhMeadhbh wrote: post #140
ospehlivano wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fair point about 4 months, I was thinking longer term there. But the original post was about finding the 'best' engineers, not necessarily senior ones. Either way, you can't know what's best for your situation until they're actually working.

"best" engineers vs "senior" engineers is a valid point. I think a lot of my comments on this thread are of the mode of "best engineer" should also be thought of as "best engineer for this environment / culture." I tend to stay away from people who say things like "top talent" and "10x engineer" and (worst yet) "Unicorn." You can't really make a judgement about an engineer without describing the environment they'll l…

Great point about environment fit. I've seen a wonderkid with amazing potential but no drive, and a solid engineer who maximized their potential through pure effort. Hard to say which was more valuable - depends on what the team needed.

Re: You don't want to hire "the best engineers"

#158

Post by eszed »

rachofsunshine wrote: post #79
indoordin0saur wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Engineers don't really care about equity anymore because they've been burned so many times. The big payouts from a successful company are not necessarily guaranteed the way they were pre-2015 or so. It has become too common for there to be behind-closed-doors dlilutions and investor-only exit opportunities. It has become very unwise to trust anything beyond real cash wired to your bank account.

Author of the OP here - to put some more empirical backing to this, virtually every single engineer in our candidate pool values illiquid equity at 20% or less of face value, and about one in three give it no weight at all. Totally off the topic of the thread, but it's why I do things differently with the people who work for me. I'm the sole owner of Otherbranch, but I pay out a percentage of profits over certain thr…

Love that compensation plan. I wish my (and every) company did that.

Re: You don't want to hire "the best engineers"

#159

Post by j45 »

glimshe wrote: post #116
Centigonal wrote: post #37

There is no such thing as "the best engineers." Some engineers are definitely better than others, but once you pass the bar of "really smart, great work ethic," the tech tree diverges pretty dramatically. Some engineers (like Notch) are amazing at quickly putting out vast quantities of mediocre code, prototyping ideas, maintaining a clear product vision, and bringing something into reality quickly. Other engineers (l…

Sometimes I'm just happy to avoid the worst engineers. They do exist. Bad work ethic, poor foundational skills, hard to work with. I feel that if I can weed them out, I've done 75% of my job as a hiring manager.

So true. Anyone who isn't wanting to be a self-directed learner misses the essence of working and growing with technology.

Re: You don't want to hire "the best engineers"

#160

Post by j45 »

giancarlostoro wrote: post #111
Centigonal wrote: post #37

There is no such thing as "the best engineers." Some engineers are definitely better than others, but once you pass the bar of "really smart, great work ethic," the tech tree diverges pretty dramatically. Some engineers (like Notch) are amazing at quickly putting out vast quantities of mediocre code, prototyping ideas, maintaining a clear product vision, and bringing something into reality quickly. Other engineers (l…

It's all about personality and attitude, anyone can learn to become a better engineer than they were yesterday. The issue is, do they have the resources to do so, are there incentives? Are you making sure they're fully equipped to give you their best? That includes everything from offering training to even benefits, overworked engineers will make mistakes sooner or later.

One can always train for knowledge and skills, attitude is much harder.
Post reply on HN