Live data from Hacker News

Why Good People Leave Large Tech Companies

thinkgrowth.org

241–250 of 265 posts

Re: Why Good People Leave Large Tech Companies

#241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could look at all postings over the last month, from many different online sources and in 2 - 3 of the top tech cities. You could probably do it just by looking in a single city.

I wasn't doubting that there are hundreds of companies who would be potentially interested in hiring someone with my skills. I was puzzled that I would be interested in working for so many different places. I now realize that some people seem to simply not care where they work, at least at the apply-for-job stage. That was the piece that I was missing.

I'm sure they care to some degree. It's not like you don't get better idea of the culture by having an onsite...

Re: Why Good People Leave Large Tech Companies

#242
post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, no: share price.

Not many at the ordinary-worker level have a meaningful equity participation or bonuses. 10% of your salary at most at most companies if an impossible set of conditions are met, or laid off when the company needs to save some money, versus executives who will pocket millions whatever happens.

Most big tech companies give a substantial portion of compensation (up to 50%) in the form of RSUs, even for "ordinary" engineers.

Re: Why Good People Leave Large Tech Companies

#243
post #90
post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the company is still succeeding, then it doesn't seem to be an unreasonable move. The company doesn't operate for the benefit of employees commutes. If they can still attract and retain talent and have a more practical work space, then great.

Any company/CEO who wastes 45 x 2 minutes of my life on a commute is bound to get a quit notice.

Then they'll get people who live closer. Like I said, their business isn't built to give employees short commutes. Certainly retention is in their interests, but it's a means to an end. Moving their office is also a means to an end.

Re: Why Good People Leave Large Tech Companies

#244
post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe it's different in SF but out on the east coast I've seen people be passed for the wrong version of jQuery on the resume, or literally "not enough eye contact". Applying to jobs out here is kind of a crap shoot where you shotgun out to a ton till you get past enough bullshit to be given in person interviews where you can actually demonstrate your skills

> I've seen people be passed for the wrong version of jQuery on the resume Well, those people dodged a bullet, then...

If you're putting jQuery on your resume, you might have bigger problems than versioning.

Re: Why Good People Leave Large Tech Companies

#245
post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If anyone wants to be part of the decision making process, they really should strive to get in that room. And when they get there, they will appreciate the absence of noise from people who think their voices automatically matter. If a company doesn't have a way to gather important feedback from its workers, then that is a failure. But that does not equate to everyone needing to be in that room. When I started out, my…

Everything is replaceable, even and especially the large tech company. The constant reminder sure kills productivity though. People are more productive when they think companies actually give a shit about the hard work they put into the company.

Yes. And this is where it gets sociopathic. Large companies will hire "good" managers to make people feel they make a difference, that they are being heard, and that the company gives a shit. But of course, this is business as usual. Worker satisfaction is just a number on a spreadsheet that execs in a room move up and down with pirks, with corporate philosophy, with company events, and with dangling carrots.

This isn't to say it isn't important. It is, and that is why they will spend time and money on it. But if, say, the cash is low, these are things that go, and rightfully so if it's to stay in business.

And the kicker is, the guys that run the show, the guys that start businesses and come to work with a mission, the guys everyone seems to want to be -- they don't need anything. They're already as motivated as can be, take on all the responsibility, and even sign the checks to pay everyone AND pay for the things they believe they will make them happy.

And this truly is the paradox. There is nothing cushy about an executive job, especially at a tech company. And I'd say never at a startup. It's cut throat as fuck. If you can't deliver, you're out. You should be out. Everyone is watching you, and everyone will complain. But you have no one to complain to. Having someone to complain to, having excuses, these are all pirks.

But if you can deliver, then you have professional freedom and high reward, at least in a capitalist economy. Then you get to make life cushy for yourself if that is what you desire.

Re: Why Good People Leave Large Tech Companies

#246
post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's fascinating how in the recruitment process, hiring managers who expect potential hires to act logically and methodically all but demand the recruit to suspend his or her logic and mental methods when considering their personal financial interests. The dichotomy would be humorous if it weren't so sad.

Yes! Entering the job market I was offered x amount of stock. I had no way to know what this was worth and essentially asked my manager who said "you should feel good about this amount". He was honest and fair but the fact is that most places are trying to hire bright people and they offer x amount of stock without providing how much stock is out there. Here's a # that we know is meaningless to you, do you accept? Wh…

Any company which won't clearly explain the last share price for you stock and your strike price is trying to pull a fast one. Without that information, it's worth $0.

Re: Why Good People Leave Large Tech Companies

#247
post #46

This attitude of "you really have to want to work here or you ought to leave" justifies a lot of insanity. I've heard it from companies who make potential employees jump through ridiculous hoops to even get a chance at a job. Here's reality for people who suffer from this delusion: most people don't give a fuck and are just looking for a job. They're applying to dozens or hundreds of jobs (yes, even in software), and…

People are applying to dozens or hundreds of jobs at once? How is that possible? I'm generally only considering 1 new employer at a time, and the most I've ever done concurrently was applying to two companies in CA at the same time. How could there even be dozens of companies that you'd want to work for at any given time?

Are you kidding? Most people don't care where they work. And why should they? Most places are the same, especially--but not exclusively--for lower paying jobs. Is there a big difference between working at McDonald's or Burger King? Hell, there isn't a big difference working at various tech companies. Most people just don't want to starve and be homeless. You can apply to one employer at a time. And if they don't respond? How long are you going to wait for them to respond? Till your money runs out and you can't buy food or pay rent? Beyond that, while you're sleeping on a park bench with all your worldly possessions? I mean, surely, if you don't need to eat or have a roof over your head, then you have the luxury of applying to one or two companies at a time. The rest of us don't have that luxury. And really, all it requires is emailing your resume or filling out online forms. It's not that hard to apply to multiple places at once.

Re: Why Good People Leave Large Tech Companies

#248
post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe it's different in SF but out on the east coast I've seen people be passed for the wrong version of jQuery on the resume, or literally "not enough eye contact". Applying to jobs out here is kind of a crap shoot where you shotgun out to a ton till you get past enough bullshit to be given in person interviews where you can actually demonstrate your skills

> I've seen people be passed for the wrong version of jQuery on the resume Well, those people dodged a bullet, then...

I agree, but since its difficult to know that ahead of time, you end up applying to multiple companies

Re: Why Good People Leave Large Tech Companies

#249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my professional experience, every time higher ups made a decision without input from worker bees, the project failed, delayed, or cancelled. I personally love it when higher-ups make a decision without consulting me. Because then I have zero skin in the game. I don't work ridiculous hours. When I am involved in decision making, then I make sure project succeeds. Sometimes that means working late hours, taking pro-…

There's a difference between having A Decider and having your decider make all the important decisions. Yes, there needs to be a captain of the ship, and when she tells you to do something, you fucking do it because that's what captain means and you can kvetch about it when you're back on land. But if the captain is making all of the important decisions, something has gone terribly wrong and your boat will not functi…

I agree with you, but I'm not arguing for a single "Decider", but rather a small group of what the comment I replied to referred to as "higher-ups" being responsible for making decisions in their areas of responsibility. I think this works in your ship analogy as well, but I don't know enough about sailing to say what those people are called - mates? In any case, you get the drift :-)

Re: Why Good People Leave Large Tech Companies

#250
post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You like people telling you what to do and having no control over those decisions? Personally I absolutely loathe such environments, especially when the decisions are made haphazardly without proper rationale, which they often are (executives are human too). At the end of the day, the "subordinates" are the ones actually doing the far majority of the work, and they far outnumber the managers. I don't see why the work…

That would be the idea behind a technical lead no? Having a voice for the tehcnical team. Everyone should have a voice but not everyone needs to literally be at the table. Seeing companies go from small to larger and seeing how the flat structure begins to show caveats as a team grows, I agree everyone should have a voice, but ultimately a decision needs to be made and a big group of people are never going to agree o…

Of course a decision ultimately has to be made, and I'm not claiming that every decision must garner unanimous agreement from everyone. That's impossible. I'm just advocating for more democracy and inclusion. Although it might be a hit to the ego of a lead higher up in the foodchain, ultimately I think it improves decision-making and increases employee engagement.
Post reply on HN