3 ms·
My take is very different from the Wired article: I think Option Impact is a great resource. Anytime an early stage founder asks me about salary/equity comps, I
by lpolovets 8y ago
My take is very different from the Wired article: I think Option Impact is a great resource. Anytime an early stage founder asks me about salary/equity comps, I tell them to check out OI.
If a hiring manager wants to use this data to gouge employees then that's a problem with their ethics, not OI. The place where OI is incredibly useful is for making fair offers, especially for roles you're unfamiliar with. Maybe your company has 6 engineers and you're about to hire your first PM. What should you offer them? A market salary would be $X. You are not trying to figure out X so that you can make a lowball offer; you're trying to figure out X so that you don't offer 1.5X (which hurts your capacity to make future hires) or 0.5X (which might come off as stupid or insulting to the candidate). OI tells you what X is.
Data transparency is a good thing. It helps people avoid dumb mistakes. To be honest, I think it would be great if employees could have access to this data, too.
- hitekker 8y agoIt would be great if OI could let employees see this data. It would also kill OI's business model: provide a semi-legal mechanism for hiring-collusion among the giants and their wannabes.
- sjg007 8y agoIt sounds like collusion. I guess the anonymized profiles helps mitigate that.
- dswalter 8y agoI think much of what people are objecting to is that, by virtue of its position as an _invite only_ paid service, it provides insight to only the employer party of a two-player game. It is apparently purpose-built to allow only the employers to arbitrage that extra insight into hiring patterns.