4 ms·

> AppAmaGooBookSoft Interesting... I have always steered clear of such jobs because I felt I would be just a cog in the machine. It seems to me only a select f

by annnnd 9y ago

> AppAmaGooBookSoft Interesting... I have always steered clear of such jobs because I felt I would be just a cog in the machine. It seems to me only a select few in those organizations ever shine (and most of them achieved their status before joining AppAmaGooBookSoft). Am I mistaken?

patio11 9y ago
I know a variety of folks there, and their experiences range from "cog in machine" to "really couldn't imagine working anywhere else", and there are a lot of machines you can be cogs in that don't pay $300k (ask the former Japanese salaryman). The main reason I mention it is so that everyone knows to aim for a package (compensation, skills growth, interestingness of work, life happiness, whatever) which compares to a clearly achievable outcome which tens of thousands of people of similar skill levels get offered every year.
- vonmoltke 9y ago
  > which compares to a clearly achievable outcome which tens of thousands of people of similar skill levels get offered every year Are you asserting that those five turn over a majority of their mid-career engineers annually? That's the only way I see the tens of thousands number being accurate. As for "mere mortals", I think most of us realize these companies hire them. Hell, I've been interviewing for my company a lot recently and a number of the people from those companies have been underwhelming at best (some to the point of causing me to wonder how they got hired there and I didn't). The issue is that many of us have soured on the random bullshit in their processes and have decided to stop throwing ourselves at it. I think it is a disservice to the up-and-coming not to acknowledge that and for them to realize it is "realistic" in a similar way that hitting a number in roulette is.
  - patio11 9y ago
    That's the only way I see the tens of thousands number being accurate. What's your over/under for how many engineers AppAmaGooBookSoft will hire this year? Mine is 50k. I did a back of the envelope calculation for this last year but can't find it. 90% retention rates imply a 5 year survivorship of ~60%; feel free to take any of several thousand HNers out to coffee if you want to confirm what competent, worksmanlike execution means your 6th year pay package looks like.
    - vonmoltke 9y ago
      The five combined have a total headcount of roughly 660k, meaning they would need to be hiring annually roughly 7.5% of their total just in software engineers. At that level I don't buy it. Since the number is dominated by Amazon, who has a huge logistics contingent, I'm not sure specifically about engineers. I'd say roughly half of that total is engineers that have something to do with software (not necessarily software engineers). That bumps your number to over 15% of the total engineering headcount. I'll be conservative and say 25% of the engineers are not software (with most being in Apple and Amazon). Now we're looking at 50k being 19% of the total software engineers. You seem to be talking about hired at all levels, while I was talking about only senior hires. In that case, I am closer to you than I indicated. My (possibly wrong) impression is that the majority of hiring by these companies is new grads and juniors, since that is what their interview processes are heavily biased towards. I put the total number of senior hires at 10k - 15k. As for total hires overall, I'll buy either your total hires or your retention rate, but not both. These companies are not growing headcount fast enough to be doing that much hiring at that retention rate in software engineers alone.
      - JoachimSchipper 9y ago
        Median tenure at Google is about a year: http://www.slate.com/blogs/business_insider/2013/07/28/turnover_rates_by_company_how_amazon_google_and_others_stack_up.html http://www.slate.com/blogs/business_insider/2013/07/28/turno.... Amazon is famous for burning out some of its employees very quickly. Why do you think 7.5% is a reasonable number?
        vonmoltke 9y ago
        You seem to be agreeing with me, so I'm not sure if I understand you... I was addressing Patrick's numbers (50k software engineers per year and >90% retention rate). Your link provides evidence that the latter number is incorrect, which was part of my point in both posts. In fact, it demonstrates that Patrick's 5-year scenario is the exception rather than the rule.
njwi332 9y ago
As someone who has worked for the 'Ama' part of that portmanteau for the last 2 years, and before that 5 smaller companies. I would say it is a strange but not bad combination of being a cog + having autonomy. I feel like a cog in a very big machine, there are many other teams i interact with, but simultaneously I have more autonomy within my own business line than any other company I've worked in. I'm constantly asked to think of new ideas and ways we can improve our processes, architecture etc and have gotten to prioritise my own work on things that I thought were important. I'm not sure if I'd say I'm 'shining', but I'm earning more money than I dreamed possible while learning from a lot of smart people, which lines up with pat's experience.

by annnnd 9y ago

patio11 9y ago

I know a variety of folks there, and their experiences range from "cog in machine" to "really couldn't imagine working anywhere else", and there are a lot of machines you can be cogs in that don't pay $300k (ask the former Japanese salaryman). The main reason I mention it is so that everyone knows to aim for a package (compensation, skills growth, interestingness of work, life happiness, whatever) which compares to a clearly achievable outcome which tens of thousands of people of similar skill levels get offered every year.

vonmoltke 9y ago
> which compares to a clearly achievable outcome which tens of thousands of people of similar skill levels get offered every year Are you asserting that those five turn over a majority of their mid-career engineers annually? That's the only way I see the tens of thousands number being accurate. As for "mere mortals", I think most of us realize these companies hire them. Hell, I've been interviewing for my company a lot recently and a number of the people from those companies have been underwhelming at best (some to the point of causing me to wonder how they got hired there and I didn't). The issue is that many of us have soured on the random bullshit in their processes and have decided to stop throwing ourselves at it. I think it is a disservice to the up-and-coming not to acknowledge that and for them to realize it is "realistic" in a similar way that hitting a number in roulette is.
- patio11 9y ago
  That's the only way I see the tens of thousands number being accurate. What's your over/under for how many engineers AppAmaGooBookSoft will hire this year? Mine is 50k. I did a back of the envelope calculation for this last year but can't find it. 90% retention rates imply a 5 year survivorship of ~60%; feel free to take any of several thousand HNers out to coffee if you want to confirm what competent, worksmanlike execution means your 6th year pay package looks like.
  - vonmoltke 9y ago
    The five combined have a total headcount of roughly 660k, meaning they would need to be hiring annually roughly 7.5% of their total just in software engineers. At that level I don't buy it. Since the number is dominated by Amazon, who has a huge logistics contingent, I'm not sure specifically about engineers. I'd say roughly half of that total is engineers that have something to do with software (not necessarily software engineers). That bumps your number to over 15% of the total engineering headcount. I'll be conservative and say 25% of the engineers are not software (with most being in Apple and Amazon). Now we're looking at 50k being 19% of the total software engineers. You seem to be talking about hired at all levels, while I was talking about only senior hires. In that case, I am closer to you than I indicated. My (possibly wrong) impression is that the majority of hiring by these companies is new grads and juniors, since that is what their interview processes are heavily biased towards. I put the total number of senior hires at 10k - 15k. As for total hires overall, I'll buy either your total hires or your retention rate, but not both. These companies are not growing headcount fast enough to be doing that much hiring at that retention rate in software engineers alone.
    - JoachimSchipper 9y ago
      Median tenure at Google is about a year: http://www.slate.com/blogs/business_insider/2013/07/28/turnover_rates_by_company_how_amazon_google_and_others_stack_up.html http://www.slate.com/blogs/business_insider/2013/07/28/turno.... Amazon is famous for burning out some of its employees very quickly. Why do you think 7.5% is a reasonable number?
      - vonmoltke 9y ago
        You seem to be agreeing with me, so I'm not sure if I understand you... I was addressing Patrick's numbers (50k software engineers per year and >90% retention rate). Your link provides evidence that the latter number is incorrect, which was part of my point in both posts. In fact, it demonstrates that Patrick's 5-year scenario is the exception rather than the rule.

njwi332 9y ago

As someone who has worked for the 'Ama' part of that portmanteau for the last 2 years, and before that 5 smaller companies. I would say it is a strange but not bad combination of being a cog + having autonomy. I feel like a cog in a very big machine, there are many other teams i interact with, but simultaneously I have more autonomy within my own business line than any other company I've worked in. I'm constantly asked to think of new ideas and ways we can improve our processes, architecture etc and have gotten to prioritise my own work on things that I thought were important. I'm not sure if I'd say I'm 'shining', but I'm earning more money than I dreamed possible while learning from a lot of smart people, which lines up with pat's experience.