4 ms·

Current SWE interviews seem extraordinarily effective. They've produced corporations that dominate our lives, with systems that have unimaginable capabilities.

Current SWE interviews seem extraordinarily effective. They've produced corporations that dominate our lives, with systems that have unimaginable capabilities. Their profits currently dwarf other companies such that the S&P500 is basically a tech company index. More companies will adopt hiring practices like these as the applicants become more competitive. SpaceX has grueling all-day multiround tech-like interviews like this, whereas Boeing just does 1 hour with 2 managers. The effect on employee quality is clear.

rsynnott 6y ago
There's a phenomenon where an entity which is successful for reason X is unaware that it's hurting itself for reason Y, and may even attribute its success to reason Y. Which is all very well until X shrinks or Y grows. The point is that you can't assume that just because something is doing well, everything it's doing is perfect. In fact, success is likely to hide all sorts of bad practices, because the bad practices just don't hurt enough to offset the success coming from another source. I kind of suspect that this is why declining tech companies often crash and burn so dramatically; they tend to have a lot of myths that they believe about themselves, and when the one thing keeping them going declines, they can't address all the things that are pulling them down, because they don't really believe in them in the first place.
woeirua 6y ago
I'm about 99% certain that the actual cause for the disparity between the two is that Boeing is a publicly traded company while SpaceX is a privately held firm, which completely eliminates the need for management to focus on short-term profitability. When you look at stupid practices inside of a company, and cultural erosion, you can almost always trace it back to decisions that management is making to maximize profit. I'd go so far as to say, this is the ONLY reason why smaller companies are able to outmaneuver larger ones.

rsynnott 6y ago

There's a phenomenon where an entity which is successful for reason X is unaware that it's hurting itself for reason Y, and may even attribute its success to reason Y. Which is all very well until X shrinks or Y grows. The point is that you can't assume that just because something is doing well, everything it's doing is perfect. In fact, success is likely to hide all sorts of bad practices, because the bad practices just don't hurt enough to offset the success coming from another source. I kind of suspect that this is why declining tech companies often crash and burn so dramatically; they tend to have a lot of myths that they believe about themselves, and when the one thing keeping them going declines, they can't address all the things that are pulling them down, because they don't really believe in them in the first place.

woeirua 6y ago

I'm about 99% certain that the actual cause for the disparity between the two is that Boeing is a publicly traded company while SpaceX is a privately held firm, which completely eliminates the need for management to focus on short-term profitability. When you look at stupid practices inside of a company, and cultural erosion, you can almost always trace it back to decisions that management is making to maximize profit. I'd go so far as to say, this is the ONLY reason why smaller companies are able to outmaneuver larger ones.