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

81–90 of 326 posts

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

#81

Post by binary132 »

throwway120385 wrote: post #69
zuppy wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it's more like short term gain vs long term gain. experienced engineers can design an architecture that will allow you to scale cheaper and faster in the future, at the high initial cost. it will be cheaper to maintain, better for security. depends at what point your business is at the moment of hiring and what you plan to do with the product. do you need volume or quality (both variants are right)?

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 money to solve business problems, including these problems of scale

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

#82

Post by jcalvinowens »

indoordin0saur wrote: post #43
tomatohs wrote: post #17

It's not 2010 anymore. Most startups can't even attract "the best engineers" much less hire them. This is the late game, why would an engineer work for a fraction of a percent of equity and a below market salary when they can take a job at FANG? You've got to be offering something really, really valuable like remote work, an interesting problem, and/or a new experience. Otherwise the math doesn't math.

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.

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.

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

#83

Post by William_BB »

jackdawed wrote: post #33

I interviewed with an early stage pre-seed startup with a very young team, like 25-27. I was interviewed by someone way more junior than me. According to the recruiter, in 3 months, I've made it the furthest and he told me this startup was churning through top tier candidates left and right. After my interview, I immediately knew why. The team was so junior they didn't know how to evaluate senior talent. They didn't…

This is so interesting to hear. From what I've seen, probably half of recent yc startups have founders below 30. I wonder how senior talent views being interviewed by people who are essentially junior/mid developers.

I'm in my 20s with good credentials and have quite a few friends in the startup world. I would never feel comfortable interviewing someone with 10+ years of industry experience.

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

#84

Post by agent327 »

ilc wrote: post #16

Why do we go to work? - Sense of value and worth to society? Go volunteer. - Wanting to help make someone else's dreams come true? Probably not. - They pay us! Ummmnnn. I may or may not be a top engineer. But, in large part for most people the big reason is: They get paid.

You could also ask the question for "why do founders even bother with startups", and you'll get the exact same answer. It seems selfish that they then expect their employees to work for them, not for money, but rather for love and exposure.

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

#85

Post by rachofsunshine »

axpy906 wrote: post #12

Seems like the author is a bit frustrated from unrealistic expectations. Hits home as we’ve not filled a role for over six months.

I've been in recruiting for seven years! If I weren't frustrated with clients sometimes, there'd be something deeply wrong with me :)

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

#86

Post by OhMeadhbh »

Lyngbakr wrote: post #61
andy99 wrote: post #25

> Would you rather spend four months in stasis waiting This is a false dichotomy. Hiring slowly doesn't mean doing nothing. It's really more like "do you (CTO) want to slow down on building and become a manager now?" Waiting and finding someone who doesn't need managing can be way less distracting than going for someone imperfect because you've convinced yourself you need to hire now.

The author's point, though, is that folks tend to wait four months and then hire "someone imperfect", which they could've done now.

If you find you're shooting yourself in the foot, do not reload.

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

#87

Post by jeron »

reminds me of the obnoxious Ramp ad about how they only hire the best engineers with a very low hire rate

I wonder if they considered that they simply hired people who are just really good at interviewing, and not necessarily actually the best engineers?

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

#88

Post by klas_segeljakt »

It brings Steve Jobs' quote to mind: "It doesn't make sense to hire smart people and then tell them what to do. We hire smart people so they can tell us what to do"

Companies who generically look for "the best engineers" think their problems will be solved if they can just hire someone smart and tell them what to do. They say they want "the best engineers" but then their job descriptions and interview processes scream "we want someone who will execute our vision exactly as we've defined it."

The best engineers will tell you why your architecture is wrong, why your code sucks, why your timeline is unrealistic, and why your product decisions make no technical sense. If you're not ready for that level of pushback, you don't actually want the best engineers.

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

#89

Post by TrackerFF »

onesandofgrain wrote: post #8

Companies that say they only want the "the best engineers" or "we only hire A-students" and "top of the cake-engineers" I've usually found to be a breeding-ground for a somewhat toxic work-environment.

Where I'm from, and this might be universal, those types of firms are either finance or consulting shops.

The actual work practically never warrants the type of people they want to hire, but they pay well enough and they can leverage their prestige. Part of the schpiel is that they can boast to their clients that they hire the best of the best, and thus billing $1000 for a fresh grad is worth it.

There's a lot of focus on signaling. Of course Jane or Joe with a graduate degree in theoretical physics from MIT is going to be able to sift through data and compile spreadsheets and nice powerpoint slides...but it's going to be complete overkill.

Post reply on HN