5 ms·

> Secondly, I sincerely doubt we'd make an offer to a candidate that assumes their skills are all at the top of the range. "Fives" are extraordinarily rare, mos

> Secondly, I sincerely doubt we'd make an offer to a candidate that assumes their skills are all at the top of the range. "Fives" are extraordinarily rare, most employees have no fives, and the ones that do have one five. I don't understand the rationality behind this. Why have (nearly) impossible to reach ratings? I mean, by this logic, the most talented people will only ever be a 4, yes? So make 4 the limit. You just came off of saying you'd never make an offer to an 80K candidate who thinks they're worth 100K[0]. Yet, you're telling your very best that they'll never be _the_ very best because basically nobody is a "five". [0] It's what you were basically responding to. Edit: for clarification.

jc4p 10y ago
I also work at Stack Overflow. I don't think anyone can be _the_ very best and I think that's not a reasonable or attainable goal. We value T shaped developers, and our salary matrix values both spreading breadth (e.g. as a mobile dev if I up my skills in sysadmin or data science) or depth (which is a bit harder to do if you're already experienced) which fits into that nicely.
- JustSomeNobody 10y ago
  I don't know how to _not_ come off sounding argumentative here, so don't take this harshly, but: > I don't think anyone can be _the_ very best and I think that's not a reasonable or attainable goal. ... kinda proves my point of not needing a "five" rating.
  - sciurus 10y ago
    But then 4 is the best, and you can't be the best, so now you only need 3, but then 3 is the best...
  - ebcode 10y ago
    The problem w/ ranking people (in general) is that it embodies this idea of "the best". At SO, it appears this ranking system is internalized by the employees who are consistently ranked below "the best" (5). So why bother trying to be "the best", when it's made to seem so impossible by the ranking system? Ranking is demoralizing.
  - mahyarm 10y ago
    But if someone happens to be the best and being the best is valuable then why not reward them?
sklivvz1971 10y ago
> So make 4 the limit You are confusing 2 things. The salary is (effectively) determined by the average skill rating of a person. The single skills can and do go up to AAA+++, and this raises the average and thus the salary. While having an average of 5 is very difficult, having a super high maximum is actually meaningful. Some people are special in some area and we recognize that. EDIT: clarified terms (see https://stackoverflow.com/company/salary/skills/web-developer https://stackoverflow.com/company/salary/skills/web-develope... for the formulas)

jc4p 10y ago

I also work at Stack Overflow. I don't think anyone can be _the_ very best and I think that's not a reasonable or attainable goal. We value T shaped developers, and our salary matrix values both spreading breadth (e.g. as a mobile dev if I up my skills in sysadmin or data science) or depth (which is a bit harder to do if you're already experienced) which fits into that nicely.

JustSomeNobody 10y ago
I don't know how to _not_ come off sounding argumentative here, so don't take this harshly, but: > I don't think anyone can be _the_ very best and I think that's not a reasonable or attainable goal. ... kinda proves my point of not needing a "five" rating.
- sciurus 10y ago
  But then 4 is the best, and you can't be the best, so now you only need 3, but then 3 is the best...
- ebcode 10y ago
  The problem w/ ranking people (in general) is that it embodies this idea of "the best". At SO, it appears this ranking system is internalized by the employees who are consistently ranked below "the best" (5). So why bother trying to be "the best", when it's made to seem so impossible by the ranking system? Ranking is demoralizing.
- mahyarm 10y ago
  But if someone happens to be the best and being the best is valuable then why not reward them?

sklivvz1971 10y ago

> So make 4 the limit You are confusing 2 things. The salary is (effectively) determined by the average skill rating of a person. The single skills can and do go up to AAA+++, and this raises the average and thus the salary. While having an average of 5 is very difficult, having a super high maximum is actually meaningful. Some people are special in some area and we recognize that. EDIT: clarified terms (see https://stackoverflow.com/company/salary/skills/web-developer https://stackoverflow.com/company/salary/skills/web-develope... for the formulas)