4 ms·

I don't believe this to be true for the most part, but if it is, then quit immediately and find a real job. The 'benefits' are generally not worth it for someo

by jariel 6y ago

I don't believe this to be true for the most part, but if it is, then quit immediately and find a real job. The 'benefits' are generally not worth it for someone to have to asses you everyone once and a while wherein you can get axed. You have to ask yourself some very serious questions as to why you're there in the first place. It's fair if you have to hire your boss or something like that, ie you're 23 hired as 'C-' something and now they need someone who actually knows what they are doing, but that's if it's within expectations, and they don't need to fire you. For founders with tons of equity, it's understandable if there's a shift in responsibility, but not getting axed unless there's an obvious issue. Unless you are saving babies or literally stopping the Nazis from taking over the world, you don't need to be 'patriotic' to your team. Just professionally loyal.

marcinzm 6y ago
Every job you get assessed periodically and can be fired if you're not performing up to par. In a growth startup, performing up to par as an executive means being able to scale to the next level if needed. You get a fancy title, a bunch of equity and the chance to jump a few management levels if you can keep up. The reason they wouldn't want to keep someone who got "demoted" around is because they too often will have an axe to grind and cause issues.
- jariel 6y ago
  This is really not the right description for a few reasons. 1) In normal circumstances, you get hired to do 'job A' it's not unheard of to get let go quickly if you can't do 'job A' but rare to get leg to after some time. Getting fired after a review because after 3 years, somehow you're not 'qualified' to do your job doesn't happen that often. Layoff, yes, but fired, no. 2)_It's not a helpful analogy because at a startup if you're 'VP or Head of A' - the job of managing 0 people, to managing 3 to 10 to a division is going to obviously change tremendously. So it's more like 'We hired you to do Job A, now it's Job B, you're not quite qualified so you're out'. If this is a scenario you think you could be in, you need to quit now, there's almost zero chance it's worth the time or effort to be there. A lot of the equity may be unvested. What has vested and not exercisable may not be within reach for the staffer to actually afford to buy. There may be wash-out rounds later that will dilute the leavers significantly while those who stay get issued more equity. It's understandable that a company wants to have more capable and senior people in roles as they scale, but that doesn't mean the individual has to go - they can 'hire their boss', they can do other strategic things. Technical people for example can go on to technical leadership roles instead of classical product or management. If a company also wants to put someone in the role of VP of whatever, knowing they're going to need someone considerably more senior in the future, and effectively will have to let go of said person ... and that mutual understanding is not there to begin with ... then it's also a problem in management. The only role for which there is essentially a tacit understanding from the start would be CEO as there are serious discussions and expectations there, for most other roles there is not. Finally, I would say that for more senior roles, jobs are not as easy coming as they are otherwise. Young people tend to not grasp how impactful changing roles and careers can be. If you're 23 and you have to go back to 'writing code' like you did 'just last year' - that's fine. Probably. But for most other people it's an existential calamity. It's a really, really big deal. While Valley people do understand the concept of 'getting let go' - even then, it's still not looked well upon. Systematically companies like to hire people that are in that role already and employed. Outside the Valley failure is not well recognized and they will not care about 'how much said person learned'. It could be a career ending/destroying situation. If you were hired for a senior role, but expect there's a decent chance you'll get let go as the company grows - you've been duped and you're at the wrong company. Move on.
  - marcinzm 6y ago
    If you're at a startup early enough to have an overly inflated title and can't tolerate the risk of getting fired (career, etc.) then you should not be at a startup, period. Startups are risky, they run out of funding, they lay people off, markets shift, competitors beat them, etc, etc. Getting fired for not scaling is probably the least likely way for you to lose your job.
  - fatnoah 6y ago
    >Finally, I would say that for more senior roles, jobs are not as easy coming as they are otherwise. I went through this when my company was acquired. I led an Engineering team of about 30 people. About 6 months after we were acquired, the company moved its own people in and I got moved into an IC role after about 4-5 years of being "no code". At that point, I realized I had no interest in a) being the mentor for my new boss who was not technical and very junior and b) writing code any more. 15 years of coding was enough for me, so I moved on.

by jariel 6y ago

marcinzm 6y ago

Every job you get assessed periodically and can be fired if you're not performing up to par. In a growth startup, performing up to par as an executive means being able to scale to the next level if needed. You get a fancy title, a bunch of equity and the chance to jump a few management levels if you can keep up. The reason they wouldn't want to keep someone who got "demoted" around is because they too often will have an axe to grind and cause issues.

jariel 6y ago
This is really not the right description for a few reasons. 1) In normal circumstances, you get hired to do 'job A' it's not unheard of to get let go quickly if you can't do 'job A' but rare to get leg to after some time. Getting fired after a review because after 3 years, somehow you're not 'qualified' to do your job doesn't happen that often. Layoff, yes, but fired, no. 2)_It's not a helpful analogy because at a startup if you're 'VP or Head of A' - the job of managing 0 people, to managing 3 to 10 to a division is going to obviously change tremendously. So it's more like 'We hired you to do Job A, now it's Job B, you're not quite qualified so you're out'. If this is a scenario you think you could be in, you need to quit now, there's almost zero chance it's worth the time or effort to be there. A lot of the equity may be unvested. What has vested and not exercisable may not be within reach for the staffer to actually afford to buy. There may be wash-out rounds later that will dilute the leavers significantly while those who stay get issued more equity. It's understandable that a company wants to have more capable and senior people in roles as they scale, but that doesn't mean the individual has to go - they can 'hire their boss', they can do other strategic things. Technical people for example can go on to technical leadership roles instead of classical product or management. If a company also wants to put someone in the role of VP of whatever, knowing they're going to need someone considerably more senior in the future, and effectively will have to let go of said person ... and that mutual understanding is not there to begin with ... then it's also a problem in management. The only role for which there is essentially a tacit understanding from the start would be CEO as there are serious discussions and expectations there, for most other roles there is not. Finally, I would say that for more senior roles, jobs are not as easy coming as they are otherwise. Young people tend to not grasp how impactful changing roles and careers can be. If you're 23 and you have to go back to 'writing code' like you did 'just last year' - that's fine. Probably. But for most other people it's an existential calamity. It's a really, really big deal. While Valley people do understand the concept of 'getting let go' - even then, it's still not looked well upon. Systematically companies like to hire people that are in that role already and employed. Outside the Valley failure is not well recognized and they will not care about 'how much said person learned'. It could be a career ending/destroying situation. If you were hired for a senior role, but expect there's a decent chance you'll get let go as the company grows - you've been duped and you're at the wrong company. Move on.
- marcinzm 6y ago
  If you're at a startup early enough to have an overly inflated title and can't tolerate the risk of getting fired (career, etc.) then you should not be at a startup, period. Startups are risky, they run out of funding, they lay people off, markets shift, competitors beat them, etc, etc. Getting fired for not scaling is probably the least likely way for you to lose your job.
- fatnoah 6y ago
  >Finally, I would say that for more senior roles, jobs are not as easy coming as they are otherwise. I went through this when my company was acquired. I led an Engineering team of about 30 people. About 6 months after we were acquired, the company moved its own people in and I got moved into an IC role after about 4-5 years of being "no code". At that point, I realized I had no interest in a) being the mentor for my new boss who was not technical and very junior and b) writing code any more. 15 years of coding was enough for me, so I moved on.