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

91–100 of 326 posts

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

#91

Post by nathell »

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…

Yep. Existence of "the best engineers" would imply existence of The One True Metric by which you can judge the person in all context; but that's at best an oversimplification.

The actual metrics (not necessarily easily quantifiable) are the desired traits you put in your job description; they don't correlate perfectly.

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

#92

Post by rachofsunshine »

mitchitized wrote: post #41

Although I agree with the overall sentiment of the article, the reality in 2025 is that it is a totally dead market and we are still trying to figure out WTH is going on. Some companies are holding their breaths due to political instability, others are in sectors that are already getting decimated (likely from the same instability above), yet others have reached a point where they (and "they" appear to be in a majori…

The market is definitely not dead. It started warming up last summer and has continued to do so throughout 2025.

But the market is two-tiered in a way it hasn't been before, particularly w.r.t. remote hiring. Almost all engineers want remote jobs and a small number of employers offer them, so the remote job hunt still puts employers in the driver's seat. But (good, senior) engineers hold the cards right now for in-office roles.

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

#93

Post by cmrdporcupine »

adw wrote: post #63
cmrdporcupine wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's always been the case that FAANG or whatever are not always the "best" home for the "best" engineers. Many do not/did not feel comfortable there, especially as they became more and more corporate and slow. But unfortunately the answer now is that "best engineers" can't work there either because the layoff / employment-squeeze is in full swing. You're right that the equity packages offered by startups to engineers…

In my experience startups have as much bullshit as FAANG companies, it’s just different bullshit.

Absolutely, I agree. A few years ago I walked away from 10 years at Google hoping to rekindle some excitement in exchange for losing out on money. I hated the way things ran at Google and only lasted there so long because of the money.

So far I've mostly found different (often worse) kinds of dysfunction and not really much better velocity.

There are broader dysfunctions in our industry.

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

#94

Post by OhMeadhbh »

guestbest wrote: post #28

The best people have the best options which may be leaving the company only a few weeks to months when their ‘dream offer’ comes in. In addition most work doesn’t need the ‘best people’ but consistent and dedicated people. I think this was even in a Dale Carnegie course. I’d have to look it up. My point is ‘qualified’ people with good values are mostly want companies need.

Just to complicate things, "best people" also means "best fit for an organization's culture." I know several HIGH FUNCTIONING engineers from Amazon who went on to startups and failed miserably. But then again, I know several HIGH FUNCTIONING engineers from Amazon who founded startups and did pretty well. But my point still holds... just 'cause you're doing well in one organization doesn't mean you'll do well in a different organization.

One of the best games programmers I know went to [[very large video game company]], but didn't do well. They then went to [[different very large video game company]] and knocked it out of the park.

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

#95

Post by rachofsunshine »

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.

And, more to the point, that they'd hire a _better_ imperfect candidate by taking those four months doing tough interviews with lots of imperfect candidates (rather than hiring one in desperation later).

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

#96

Post by jerf »

zuppy wrote: post #50
fitzn wrote: post #13

> The best engineers make more than your entire payroll. They have opinions on tech debt and timelines. They have remote jobs, if they want them. They don’t go “oh, well, this is your third company, so I guess I’ll defer to you on all product decisions”. They care about comp, a trait you consider disqualifying. They can care about work-life balance, because they’re not desperate enough to feel the need not to. And ho…

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)?

You know, three years ago I would have said that I can give you a pretty good architecture fairly quickly but if you just want banged-out code I'll be beaten by someone who just plows forward for at least a couple of months... but after some vibe coding I've done I think I could do both at the same time now fairly well. Vibe code very quickly that I also know I can make scale fairly well with not much more effort.

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

#98

Post by jmull »

Another aspect of this that bothers me is starting off the employer/employee relationship with a bald-faced lie.

I'm not a stickler for rigorous honesty in what is essentially marketing materials -- sure, present your strengths, not your weaknesses; fine, be aspirational. But to start right off with something you know isn't anywhere close to the truth sets a pretty bad direction.

Probably the best case is that people -- some of whom will become your employees -- realize it's BS and learn not to take what you say at face value in the future.

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

#100

Post by rachofsunshine »

phendrenad2 wrote: post #15

I appreciate where the author is coming from, but I think when people say they want the best engineers they sometimes mean the top 25% or something. They don't always have a delusional belief that the top 1% are just sitting around waiting for their amazing company to come along.

There's a bit of doublethink involved.

On the one hand (and as I mentioned in the post), yes, most employers are not as dumb as I'm making them sound. In principle they know they need to comprpmise - but in practice, they often balk at doing so because they haven't clearly articulated what they will compromise on.

Post reply on HN