8 ms·

Google Finds That Perks Can't Keep Some Employees From Leaving

45 points by nickb 18y ago

markbao 18y ago
Perks are great - but always remember that there will always be people getting paid $200,000 a year that choose a chance making it big with a startup over a steady salary.
- Andys 18y ago
  And the more you pay them, the quicker they'll be able to self-bootstrap.
  - xirium 18y ago
    They've been paid obscenely well in stock options. Even if the Google stock price falls to its initial US$85 per share, at least 2200 Googlers are going to get US$10 million or more in vested stock options this summer ( http://www.news.com/Life-after-Google%2C-with-millions/2100-1030_3-6226900.html http://www.news.com/Life-after-Google%2C-with-millions/2100-... ).
  - pjhyett 18y ago
    Precisely.
LPTS 18y ago
It must be a fine line to walk between finding hyper-intelligent people, meeting their intense need for self actualization, and mostly employing them in the soul numbing work of selling ads.
- gojomo 18y ago
  This criticism -- that genius is being wasted on "soul numbing" ad work -- strikes me as an inaccurate cheap shot. First, because most of the brain power at Google isn't devoted to the ad systems, but to the services that attract an audience. Don't you think their most "hyper-intelligent people" are engaged in the constant and noble battle to continue improving search, for an ever-changing internet and against the efforts of many unscrupulous manipulators? Second, because even creating better ad systems is a valuable and intellectually challenging activity. Directly, because matching people to info about things they may want is crucial to our economy, and online systems can do it better than ever before. Indirectly, because ad revenues make so much of the rest of the internet possible. Ad work is no more "soul numbing" than any other commercial work to "make something people want".
  - LPTS 18y ago
    I agree it's a bit of a cheap shot. I don't think it's inaccurate. There is no doubt the ad system is valuable. There is no doubt that creating the advertising systems google uses would be an intellectual challenge. But people don't want to see ads. This work is mostly the work of deciding how to best trick people into being distracted by text they don't want to see in the first place. The better the ad people do their jobs, the worse off most people are for it. This is the basis for the work being soul numbing. Conversely, on what basis would working on google's ads be the kind of soul affirming work you look back happily on as you cough up blood while you're dying 50 years from now? Then the googlers can look at all the stuff someone like Ludwig Mies or Steve Reich or Jonathan Ive comes out with. I am sure that google has a huge amount of talent that would be capable of creating at this level (the peak of human potential), and they don't produce much at this level.
    - mrtron 18y ago
      I think that we will see excessive commercialization as something evil in 50+ years, along with the whole institution of corporations. So, going on this train of thought, how can you be a slave to any corporation where the huge number of employees are making very few very rich and die happy? On my death bed I will not look back and say 'I am really glad I worked for X and sacrificed time from my friends and family to make the company extra money.' I just want to be proud of my accomplishments and know I worked hard and played hard. Whether or not I got by with ad revenue probably won't factor into it too much for me.
      - gojomo 18y ago
        If you live in a highly-developed country, 'the whole institution of corporations', legal fiction/invention that it is, is probably responsible for most of your modern comforts. The institution of corporations is certainly responsible for the startup opportunities cherished by this community. On your death bed, you might wish somebody had worked harder at their company to cure whatever's killing you.
        18y ago
- nkohari 18y ago
  Hey, isn't selling ads what Web 2.0 is all about? :)
mattmaroon 18y ago
Everyone keeps referring to their lunches as "haute cuisine". Maybe I missed something the couple times I ate there, but I don't think it's fair to refer to a buffet as that. I guess relative to the normal corporate vending machines it's pretty awesome, but it's far from a Michelin 3 Star joint.
- dcurtis 18y ago
  Are you kidding? How many buffets have you been to with real, decently awesome sushi? Filet Mignon? It's a several leaps above Hometown Buffet in so many ways...
  - menloparkbum 18y ago
    It's kind of like the whole foods buffet.
  - mattmaroon 18y ago
    A few, though none outside of a casino. Still, even those are not really haute cuisine.
- enonko 18y ago
  There's only one three star joint on the west coast and while it's not far from Mountain View, it's definitely not Google's cafeteria. :)
  - mattmaroon 18y ago
    French Laundry?
    - enonko 18y ago
      Yes. I've been to 6 three-star places over the last few years, but FL takes the cake.
jmzachary 18y ago
Maybe it's just me, but I don't know if I could get serious work done at that Zurich office. I think it would feel more like working at FAO Schwartz.
wallflower 18y ago
Outside the bubble of SV/Google, some of us accept free coffee (that we have to make ourselves) in the morning as a perk
- neilc 18y ago
  I wouldn't call that "outside the bubble of SV/Google"; I would say that is "inside the bubble of working a crappy job". There are many companies outside SV/Google that offer far more perks than free coffee in the morning (and there are even SV companies like Intel that don't offer even that).
  - ambition 18y ago
    Lack of perks, by itself, does not a crappy job make. It may be indicative of other crappiness, but not certainly not definitive.
    - neilc 18y ago
      Certainly true.
tdavis 18y ago
It must just be me, but if I had a job at Google I wouldn't leave it to go work at a place like Facebook. All they have going for them is mass adoption which doesn't mean much without a worthwhile monetization strategy which they've yet to find. Work for a high-flying tech company with more perks than anybody, 20% of my time to work on whatever I want and a proven method for generating massive income or jump ship to work at the "hottest thing" of the moment where they need to take millions of funding each year just to keep the lights on and expansion moving along... seems a pretty easy decision to me. Have we really gotten to the point where working at Google is considered "soul numbing work?" Some people would be wise to gain some perspective.
- menloparkbum 18y ago
  Hardly anyone gets to do the 20% time. Google has done a good job keeping its engineering hiring relatively top notch, but it has not done the same with its management hiring process. Thus there is a good chance your manager will be a complete psycho.
  - bluelu 18y ago
    A friend also told me taht he had no time working on his 20% project, because he was so busy doing the other stuff. And I suspect the bonus depends on the regular work, and not on your pet project ;-). Hell, not even the inventor of python can work on python full time. (only 50%). I expected at least him to work 50% on it, as it's so widely used inside google. The same for people working on php.
- aston 18y ago
  The perks at Facebook are basically the same as those at Google, but with a lot more freedom for your work (in the form of a lot less supervision). Plus brand new options that aren't nearly underwater.
- nkohari 18y ago
  The only reason I'd leave Google for Facebook is for the options -- if Facebook can wait to implode until after it finds a successful exit at their ridiculous valuation.
KirinDave 18y ago
Also, Google's engineering and hiring and payment policies are frustratingly biased towards C++ developers. I know several top-notch web developers who have turned down google offers because they'd be making less than other companies would pay them, and many of those startups offer options as well. When you find a top-notch web developer, telling them they're not worth as much as a C++ developer (of any ability) is just crazy. They're a rare and hotly contested breed in the valley.
- menloparkbum 18y ago
  It is much easier to find a top notch web developer than it is to find someone top notch who is good at C++. This is the case anywhere in Silicon Valley where C++ programmers who actually know what they are doing are needed. VMWare, for instance, pays like $160,000 starting salary to C++ wizards.
  - KirinDave 18y ago
    > It is much easier to find a top notch web developer than it is to find someone top notch who is good at C++. I disagree with this. Top notch people in web development are extremely rare. You can find a lot of mediocre people, or motivated people, but finding people both motivated and talented is hard. It's also unfortunate that Google limits itself to C++, but that's a whole different story.
    - blogimus 18y ago
      I agree that it is harder to find top notch people than mediocre, that just seems natural, following the talent bell curve(most in the middle level of ability, some very poor, some excel) but how does Google limits itself to C++? I read a lot of noise on Google using Python: http://www.python.org/about/quotes/ http://www.python.org/about/quotes/ (and this is just a starting point of the info on Google using Python)
      - menloparkbum 18y ago
        Google doesn't limit itself to C++, they just happen to need C++ programmers at the moment.
ambition 18y ago
I think of job satisfaction as a function with weighted attributes. There's a "perks at work" attribute, a money attribute, an attribute for how much you like your team, how many weekly hours the work culture demands of you, how much you like your boss, whether the work is meaningful and related to your life goals, the opportunities to advance in the company and to grow as a person, whether you can live in a location you like, etc. etc. Google's problem relative to this article is that for many people, the "perks at work" weighting isn't that high. So no matter how good Google's perks are, other factors can dominate. I think there might be a bit of an effect where people don't appreciate what they don't have to pay for, too.
- skmurphy 18y ago
  The title positions Google as a nice resort no one should want to leave. But for most engineers (who would have pursued a different career if they were purely money motivated) salary and perks are "hygiene factors", which can dissatisfy if they are inadequate but can't really satisfy. See Hertzberg's "Two Factor" theory of job satisfaction http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two_factor_theory http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two_factor_theory
- LogicHoleFlaw 18y ago
  I wonder how Google compares to SAS in job satisfaction? SAS is famously high in employee perks and retention, and is extremely family-friendly.
Mystalic 18y ago
Facebook's perks are better. I've seen both. Still dreaming about that damn candy and drink station.
- aston 18y ago
  That candy and soda count as a perk indicates the demographic Facebook is trying to woo to work there.
- fallentimes 18y ago
  The main difference is Google's options are actually worth something.
- Tichy 18y ago
  I wouldn't trust a company that tries to poison me.

45 points by nickb 18y ago

Perks are great - but always remember that there will always be people getting paid $200,000 a year that choose a chance making it big with a startup over a steady salary.

Andys 18y ago
And the more you pay them, the quicker they'll be able to self-bootstrap.
- xirium 18y ago
  They've been paid obscenely well in stock options. Even if the Google stock price falls to its initial US$85 per share, at least 2200 Googlers are going to get US$10 million or more in vested stock options this summer ( http://www.news.com/Life-after-Google%2C-with-millions/2100-1030_3-6226900.html http://www.news.com/Life-after-Google%2C-with-millions/2100-... ).
- pjhyett 18y ago
  Precisely.

LPTS 18y ago

It must be a fine line to walk between finding hyper-intelligent people, meeting their intense need for self actualization, and mostly employing them in the soul numbing work of selling ads.

gojomo 18y ago
This criticism -- that genius is being wasted on "soul numbing" ad work -- strikes me as an inaccurate cheap shot. First, because most of the brain power at Google isn't devoted to the ad systems, but to the services that attract an audience. Don't you think their most "hyper-intelligent people" are engaged in the constant and noble battle to continue improving search, for an ever-changing internet and against the efforts of many unscrupulous manipulators? Second, because even creating better ad systems is a valuable and intellectually challenging activity. Directly, because matching people to info about things they may want is crucial to our economy, and online systems can do it better than ever before. Indirectly, because ad revenues make so much of the rest of the internet possible. Ad work is no more "soul numbing" than any other commercial work to "make something people want".
- LPTS 18y ago
  I agree it's a bit of a cheap shot. I don't think it's inaccurate. There is no doubt the ad system is valuable. There is no doubt that creating the advertising systems google uses would be an intellectual challenge. But people don't want to see ads. This work is mostly the work of deciding how to best trick people into being distracted by text they don't want to see in the first place. The better the ad people do their jobs, the worse off most people are for it. This is the basis for the work being soul numbing. Conversely, on what basis would working on google's ads be the kind of soul affirming work you look back happily on as you cough up blood while you're dying 50 years from now? Then the googlers can look at all the stuff someone like Ludwig Mies or Steve Reich or Jonathan Ive comes out with. I am sure that google has a huge amount of talent that would be capable of creating at this level (the peak of human potential), and they don't produce much at this level.
  - mrtron 18y ago
    I think that we will see excessive commercialization as something evil in 50+ years, along with the whole institution of corporations. So, going on this train of thought, how can you be a slave to any corporation where the huge number of employees are making very few very rich and die happy? On my death bed I will not look back and say 'I am really glad I worked for X and sacrificed time from my friends and family to make the company extra money.' I just want to be proud of my accomplishments and know I worked hard and played hard. Whether or not I got by with ad revenue probably won't factor into it too much for me.
    - gojomo 18y ago
      If you live in a highly-developed country, 'the whole institution of corporations', legal fiction/invention that it is, is probably responsible for most of your modern comforts. The institution of corporations is certainly responsible for the startup opportunities cherished by this community. On your death bed, you might wish somebody had worked harder at their company to cure whatever's killing you.
      - 18y ago
nkohari 18y ago
Hey, isn't selling ads what Web 2.0 is all about? :)

mattmaroon 18y ago

Everyone keeps referring to their lunches as "haute cuisine". Maybe I missed something the couple times I ate there, but I don't think it's fair to refer to a buffet as that. I guess relative to the normal corporate vending machines it's pretty awesome, but it's far from a Michelin 3 Star joint.

dcurtis 18y ago
Are you kidding? How many buffets have you been to with real, decently awesome sushi? Filet Mignon? It's a several leaps above Hometown Buffet in so many ways...
- menloparkbum 18y ago
  It's kind of like the whole foods buffet.
- mattmaroon 18y ago
  A few, though none outside of a casino. Still, even those are not really haute cuisine.
enonko 18y ago
There's only one three star joint on the west coast and while it's not far from Mountain View, it's definitely not Google's cafeteria. :)
- mattmaroon 18y ago
  French Laundry?
  - enonko 18y ago
    Yes. I've been to 6 three-star places over the last few years, but FL takes the cake.

jmzachary 18y ago

Maybe it's just me, but I don't know if I could get serious work done at that Zurich office. I think it would feel more like working at FAO Schwartz.

wallflower 18y ago

Outside the bubble of SV/Google, some of us accept free coffee (that we have to make ourselves) in the morning as a perk

neilc 18y ago
I wouldn't call that "outside the bubble of SV/Google"; I would say that is "inside the bubble of working a crappy job". There are many companies outside SV/Google that offer far more perks than free coffee in the morning (and there are even SV companies like Intel that don't offer even that).
- ambition 18y ago
  Lack of perks, by itself, does not a crappy job make. It may be indicative of other crappiness, but not certainly not definitive.
  - neilc 18y ago
    Certainly true.

tdavis 18y ago

It must just be me, but if I had a job at Google I wouldn't leave it to go work at a place like Facebook. All they have going for them is mass adoption which doesn't mean much without a worthwhile monetization strategy which they've yet to find. Work for a high-flying tech company with more perks than anybody, 20% of my time to work on whatever I want and a proven method for generating massive income or jump ship to work at the "hottest thing" of the moment where they need to take millions of funding each year just to keep the lights on and expansion moving along... seems a pretty easy decision to me. Have we really gotten to the point where working at Google is considered "soul numbing work?" Some people would be wise to gain some perspective.

menloparkbum 18y ago
Hardly anyone gets to do the 20% time. Google has done a good job keeping its engineering hiring relatively top notch, but it has not done the same with its management hiring process. Thus there is a good chance your manager will be a complete psycho.
- bluelu 18y ago
  A friend also told me taht he had no time working on his 20% project, because he was so busy doing the other stuff. And I suspect the bonus depends on the regular work, and not on your pet project ;-). Hell, not even the inventor of python can work on python full time. (only 50%). I expected at least him to work 50% on it, as it's so widely used inside google. The same for people working on php.
aston 18y ago
The perks at Facebook are basically the same as those at Google, but with a lot more freedom for your work (in the form of a lot less supervision). Plus brand new options that aren't nearly underwater.
nkohari 18y ago
The only reason I'd leave Google for Facebook is for the options -- if Facebook can wait to implode until after it finds a successful exit at their ridiculous valuation.

KirinDave 18y ago

Also, Google's engineering and hiring and payment policies are frustratingly biased towards C++ developers. I know several top-notch web developers who have turned down google offers because they'd be making less than other companies would pay them, and many of those startups offer options as well. When you find a top-notch web developer, telling them they're not worth as much as a C++ developer (of any ability) is just crazy. They're a rare and hotly contested breed in the valley.

menloparkbum 18y ago
It is much easier to find a top notch web developer than it is to find someone top notch who is good at C++. This is the case anywhere in Silicon Valley where C++ programmers who actually know what they are doing are needed. VMWare, for instance, pays like $160,000 starting salary to C++ wizards.
- KirinDave 18y ago
  > It is much easier to find a top notch web developer than it is to find someone top notch who is good at C++. I disagree with this. Top notch people in web development are extremely rare. You can find a lot of mediocre people, or motivated people, but finding people both motivated and talented is hard. It's also unfortunate that Google limits itself to C++, but that's a whole different story.
  - blogimus 18y ago
    I agree that it is harder to find top notch people than mediocre, that just seems natural, following the talent bell curve(most in the middle level of ability, some very poor, some excel) but how does Google limits itself to C++? I read a lot of noise on Google using Python: http://www.python.org/about/quotes/ http://www.python.org/about/quotes/ (and this is just a starting point of the info on Google using Python)
    - menloparkbum 18y ago
      Google doesn't limit itself to C++, they just happen to need C++ programmers at the moment.

ambition 18y ago

I think of job satisfaction as a function with weighted attributes. There's a "perks at work" attribute, a money attribute, an attribute for how much you like your team, how many weekly hours the work culture demands of you, how much you like your boss, whether the work is meaningful and related to your life goals, the opportunities to advance in the company and to grow as a person, whether you can live in a location you like, etc. etc. Google's problem relative to this article is that for many people, the "perks at work" weighting isn't that high. So no matter how good Google's perks are, other factors can dominate. I think there might be a bit of an effect where people don't appreciate what they don't have to pay for, too.

skmurphy 18y ago
The title positions Google as a nice resort no one should want to leave. But for most engineers (who would have pursued a different career if they were purely money motivated) salary and perks are "hygiene factors", which can dissatisfy if they are inadequate but can't really satisfy. See Hertzberg's "Two Factor" theory of job satisfaction http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two_factor_theory http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two_factor_theory
LogicHoleFlaw 18y ago
I wonder how Google compares to SAS in job satisfaction? SAS is famously high in employee perks and retention, and is extremely family-friendly.

Mystalic 18y ago

Facebook's perks are better. I've seen both. Still dreaming about that damn candy and drink station.

aston 18y ago
That candy and soda count as a perk indicates the demographic Facebook is trying to woo to work there.
fallentimes 18y ago
The main difference is Google's options are actually worth something.
Tichy 18y ago
I wouldn't trust a company that tries to poison me.