7 ms·

Having worked at Big Co and then on my own company for years, this is exactly what I was thinking. You'll lose professional autonomy in exchange for a good sal

Having worked at Big Co and then on my own company for years, this is exactly what I was thinking. You'll lose professional autonomy in exchange for a good salary, job security, and resume bling. And you probably won't have to work as hard or as often (again, probably).

bentcorner 6y ago
Depends on where you go. I work at a BigCo and IMO if you see a "because that's the way it is" and you don't like it, you can change it if you can justify the change. Everything has tradeoffs and sometimes the cost to change something is higher than the benefits gained, but the people I work with are always willing to listen.
- awinder 6y ago
  Yeah, same experience. You can't change all of the things but you can change like 1 thing at a time that's really peeving you off, iff you have a good reason & can make a good argument & it's worth your time & effort.
  - ethbro 6y ago
    Change at startups means convincing 0-1 people. Change at a BigCo means convincing 5-10 people. Those require very different tactics and skillsets.
bobbytherobot 6y ago
"you probably won't have to work as hard" For me, it was a question of: do I put in 40% to get 90% completed, or do I put in 150% to get 99% completed?
- throwaway9191a 6y ago
  I'd like to echo this, along with the "relax" sentiment from other comments. I worked incredibly hard to open source a project at a faang. I was even given a customer obsession award for it. No promo.. and no promo level projects for the next year or so... and now this open source project is "too old" for promo consideration. I've learned to relax and give just enough to not be marked LE. I now have a lot of time to dedicate to other pursuits.
  - nnoitra 6y ago
    LE?
    - 0xEFF 6y ago
      Low Energy I think.
  - foogazi 6y ago
    How was business impact measured when deciding to open source the project?
    - throwaway9191a 6y ago
      Probably too late to respond, but just in case. We were measuring the number of similar support requests that came to the team. Our library would allow customers to resolve these problems on their own. We had a good estimate of reduced requests, but not a good estimate increased time to maintain the open source library.
- bryanmgreen 6y ago
  That is so accurate and succinct. I'd say 40% for 80-85% from my experience.
- chubot 6y ago
  Yeah, I think that's accurate and reflects the low level of polish in many newer Google products
hnanon486282 6y ago
In my career, I've had almost the opposite experience. At $bigco, it was possible to beg/borrow for 100k to solve some problem, or hack together some tooling to solve a problem the team was running into. Need some servers and licenses, and it's near year end, partner with a program manager who hasn't used all his budget, help solve their problems, and get things done. I ended up spending something like $250k before the VP was even aware of the side project, and when it got to the VP level, it was how do we spend more to fix the gaps and have proper resources so it's not some toy side project. It was that way anyways, up until $bigco decided to emulate the way it thought the FAANG companies worked, and the management their started trying to micro-manage everyone in a large culture shift. At mid-size growth company, getting things done was still available, but you sort of had to tiptoe around decisions or solutions Co-Founder/CTO or employee number 10 had a personal interest in or battle it out on particularly poor tech decisions. Most progress was made in areas that the team didn't have an interest or expertise in (IE security), but it was ultimately possible to make progress. And in startup life, probably the least autonomy of all. The engineering manual literally says you only should work on what you've been assigned, as doing anything else creates chaos. Implying, you don't want to be a chaos maker in the eyes of your employer do you? So it's more difficult than anywhere else I've worked to tiptoe around these emotional investments, have any level of autonomy, and move the product forward. Anyways, I think my overall message is, companies are far too varied to have any idea on what to expect from moving from startup to $bigco. There might be some general trends, but the environment varies so much, you're not guaranteed to see any general trends when making the switch. All that can really be said, is it will be different, and you may have to jump a few times to really see any of the generalizations apply to you. Note: Using throwaway account to avoid any blowback.
- Aperocky 6y ago
  > up until $bigco decided to emulate the way it thought the FAANG companies worked thought being the keyword here, As somebody who works for FAANG, we are allowed a lot of leeway to do what we think we need for the goal set.
- lunias 6y ago
  I agree with your overall message 100%. Big companies are like cities. There are "good" and "bad" areas and different people may draw that distinction differently. If you have mobility within the company it's not too difficult to move into what you consider a good area over time. As a consultant / contractor I didn't have that luxury and often got saddled with the teams that needed to change the most, but resisted every opportunity to do so. Had I been a full-time employee and participated in some politics I think I could have greatly improved my autonomy and satisfaction.
lunias 6y ago
Tip top real estate on the Dead Sea. ;) http://brucefwebster.com/2008/04/11/the-wetware-crisis-the-dead-sea-effect/ http://brucefwebster.com/2008/04/11/the-wetware-crisis-the-d...

bentcorner 6y ago

Depends on where you go. I work at a BigCo and IMO if you see a "because that's the way it is" and you don't like it, you can change it if you can justify the change. Everything has tradeoffs and sometimes the cost to change something is higher than the benefits gained, but the people I work with are always willing to listen.

awinder 6y ago
Yeah, same experience. You can't change all of the things but you can change like 1 thing at a time that's really peeving you off, iff you have a good reason & can make a good argument & it's worth your time & effort.
- ethbro 6y ago
  Change at startups means convincing 0-1 people. Change at a BigCo means convincing 5-10 people. Those require very different tactics and skillsets.

bobbytherobot 6y ago

"you probably won't have to work as hard" For me, it was a question of: do I put in 40% to get 90% completed, or do I put in 150% to get 99% completed?

throwaway9191a 6y ago
I'd like to echo this, along with the "relax" sentiment from other comments. I worked incredibly hard to open source a project at a faang. I was even given a customer obsession award for it. No promo.. and no promo level projects for the next year or so... and now this open source project is "too old" for promo consideration. I've learned to relax and give just enough to not be marked LE. I now have a lot of time to dedicate to other pursuits.
- nnoitra 6y ago
  LE?
  - 0xEFF 6y ago
    Low Energy I think.
- foogazi 6y ago
  How was business impact measured when deciding to open source the project?
  - throwaway9191a 6y ago
    Probably too late to respond, but just in case. We were measuring the number of similar support requests that came to the team. Our library would allow customers to resolve these problems on their own. We had a good estimate of reduced requests, but not a good estimate increased time to maintain the open source library.
bryanmgreen 6y ago
That is so accurate and succinct. I'd say 40% for 80-85% from my experience.
chubot 6y ago
Yeah, I think that's accurate and reflects the low level of polish in many newer Google products

hnanon486282 6y ago

In my career, I've had almost the opposite experience. At $bigco, it was possible to beg/borrow for 100k to solve some problem, or hack together some tooling to solve a problem the team was running into. Need some servers and licenses, and it's near year end, partner with a program manager who hasn't used all his budget, help solve their problems, and get things done. I ended up spending something like $250k before the VP was even aware of the side project, and when it got to the VP level, it was how do we spend more to fix the gaps and have proper resources so it's not some toy side project. It was that way anyways, up until $bigco decided to emulate the way it thought the FAANG companies worked, and the management their started trying to micro-manage everyone in a large culture shift. At mid-size growth company, getting things done was still available, but you sort of had to tiptoe around decisions or solutions Co-Founder/CTO or employee number 10 had a personal interest in or battle it out on particularly poor tech decisions. Most progress was made in areas that the team didn't have an interest or expertise in (IE security), but it was ultimately possible to make progress. And in startup life, probably the least autonomy of all. The engineering manual literally says you only should work on what you've been assigned, as doing anything else creates chaos. Implying, you don't want to be a chaos maker in the eyes of your employer do you? So it's more difficult than anywhere else I've worked to tiptoe around these emotional investments, have any level of autonomy, and move the product forward. Anyways, I think my overall message is, companies are far too varied to have any idea on what to expect from moving from startup to $bigco. There might be some general trends, but the environment varies so much, you're not guaranteed to see any general trends when making the switch. All that can really be said, is it will be different, and you may have to jump a few times to really see any of the generalizations apply to you. Note: Using throwaway account to avoid any blowback.

Aperocky 6y ago
> up until $bigco decided to emulate the way it thought the FAANG companies worked thought being the keyword here, As somebody who works for FAANG, we are allowed a lot of leeway to do what we think we need for the goal set.
lunias 6y ago
I agree with your overall message 100%. Big companies are like cities. There are "good" and "bad" areas and different people may draw that distinction differently. If you have mobility within the company it's not too difficult to move into what you consider a good area over time. As a consultant / contractor I didn't have that luxury and often got saddled with the teams that needed to change the most, but resisted every opportunity to do so. Had I been a full-time employee and participated in some politics I think I could have greatly improved my autonomy and satisfaction.

lunias 6y ago

Tip top real estate on the Dead Sea. ;) http://brucefwebster.com/2008/04/11/the-wetware-crisis-the-dead-sea-effect/ http://brucefwebster.com/2008/04/11/the-wetware-crisis-the-d...