I don't think a general discussion on this topic can really be had. In my experience of working for shitty enterprise software, good and bad consulting firms (

I don't think a general discussion on this topic can really be had. In my experience of working for shitty enterprise software, good and bad consulting firms (and seeing how their non-tech clients work), and silicon valley startups. The company financials, work culture, job market are all vastly different, impacting all the trade-offs of different hiring method. i.e. some firms simply cannot afford top-of-the-market pay for senior engineers they want to hire, so they hire more junior ones and train them, who eventually leave after they're trained, but people don't immediately jump to next ship paying a little more, so you end up getting good work out of them for a period of time while underpaying them. Some companies compete on non-momentary means. Some pay top of the market rate, but only hire seniors. Some pay top of the market rate, and hire from all levels; some of the juniors rise up through promotions, and some didn't get recognition despite growing, so they leave for other companies. Some companies simply don't care about engineering quality, or does not have the ability/DNA to differentiate between good and bad work. Also in silicon valley, networking and mentoring good engineers is much more professionally rewarding than in smaller markets.