31–40 of 136 posts
Just skimmed through it, but it seems extremely similar to what is done at other big tech companies.
Have they all reached the same conclusion independently or are they just copying each other's homework?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think it's true. It's in the company's interest that people are evaluated fairly, especially if they are going to give big bonus or agressively fire low performers (like some of these tech companies do). Don't know about Dropbox in particular, but I know other tech companies who take evaluation very seriously. The manager doesn't have the final word and there's a calibration committee that ranks employee base…
So you're defending the standard company evaluation metrics in theory, yet in your closing paragraph you state from your own personal experience that the outcome aligns with the above commentor's statement (which you disagree with).
My experience is that it can be hard to define criteria that align with company's goal (make shareholder happy).
It could be that I’m getting old, became a parent and working remotely from the middle of nowhere, but do I need to get to the next level? I really wouldn’t mind keeping my current salary, adjust it for inflation and I’m good. I don’t care about my title, I don’t want to manage people, I don’t want to work harder than I need to. I just want to pay off my mortgage, have some leftover money for vacations, have time for…
That’s because “impact” is generally code for making other people rich. If you’re in a small enough company for your impact to matter, chances are your stock options are still chips, which you might never get to cash in. If the company is post IPO then chances are your impact will never move the needle materially for yourself. Income is really the only thing that matters. When you do the same job and aren’t getting i…
I love this and am going to reuse it!
In all of "career frameworks" I've seen, people who actually build things are labelled as "juniors" and "middles" while those who navigate office politics and ass-kissing are "seniors" and above.
Do you think that's a bad thing? writing code != building things. In my org, seniors spend a lot less time building things: writing components, etc. They do spend a lot of time navigating office politics. But they are engineering specific office politics: how does system A interact with system B? What are the architectural implications? Ownership of long term data and technical and business strategies? The "art" of n…
In all of "career frameworks" I've seen, people who actually build things are labelled as "juniors" and "middles" while those who navigate office politics and ass-kissing are "seniors" and above.
In all of "career frameworks" I've seen, people who actually build things are labelled as "juniors" and "middles" while those who navigate office politics and ass-kissing are "seniors" and above.
Do you think that's a bad thing? writing code != building things. In my org, seniors spend a lot less time building things: writing components, etc. They do spend a lot of time navigating office politics. But they are engineering specific office politics: how does system A interact with system B? What are the architectural implications? Ownership of long term data and technical and business strategies? The "art" of n…
In all of "career frameworks" I've seen, people who actually build things are labelled as "juniors" and "middles" while those who navigate office politics and ass-kissing are "seniors" and above.
In all of "career frameworks" I've seen, people who actually build things are labelled as "juniors" and "middles" while those who navigate office politics and ass-kissing are "seniors" and above.
But beyond that there's way more to building than writing code or laying bricks. These aren't the career defining challenges you think they are. Solving problems is, and most problems in any non-trivial activity are not solved with code or more precise brick placement.
So while you should be able to code and lay bricks enough to be comfortable in any conversation in the team, you'll get away with not being the best at that if you have skills useful for the bigger picture.
When someone conceived the whole thing and considered all the implications properly from the start, when they "politicked" their way into smoothing the path for the builder to walk and build on, when they "ass-kissed" to get the resources they need, then they're certainly a few steps ahead of any junior or middle even before writing a line of code.
It could be that I’m getting old, became a parent and working remotely from the middle of nowhere, but do I need to get to the next level? I really wouldn’t mind keeping my current salary, adjust it for inflation and I’m good. I don’t care about my title, I don’t want to manage people, I don’t want to work harder than I need to. I just want to pay off my mortgage, have some leftover money for vacations, have time for…
If I found a job at a higher level that I thought I'd really enjoy and that I'd be good at, I'll be interested, but otherwise I'm content.