6 ms·

I worked at Google from 2005 to 2013, seeing it grow from 4,000 to 50,000 employees during this time. In 2005, it was a wonderful, prestigious place to work wi

I worked at Google from 2005 to 2013, seeing it grow from 4,000 to 50,000 employees during this time. In 2005, it was a wonderful, prestigious place to work with many great people and a startup vibe, the place was vibrant. By 2013, Larry and Sergey were put out to pasture, and the company took on a much more bureaucratic, compartmentalized feel. I was working hard, most of my work was fighting bureaucracy and optimizing what I did for the horrific perf process, and going through constant re-orgs so that I had no consistent manager, and no chance of promotion (this is a big deal at Google). Joining in 2005 was the best thing I've done for my career, and leaving in 2013 was again the best thing I've done for my career. I value the time there, but the Google that I remember no longer exists.

gerash 5y ago
The perf process sounds good on paper. It's just like peer reviews in the academia they said. However its outcome in practice can't be any worse. To this day, people "cook up" a project that doesn't need to exist and won't share the credit or their territory with anyone (or else the committee will doubt their ownership) and abandon the project less than six months after their promotion and switch to a new team.
- Leszek 5y ago
  So... it's like academia.
vishnugupta 5y ago
This is eerily similar to my experience at Amazon including how I feel when I look back. Even the years are same :-). I somehow feel joining and leaving Amazon when I did (2005-2012) was the best thing to have happened. What makes it more special was the stellar team that I got to be a part of with whom I’m still in touch with. It’s like being part of a secret club. The only thing we used to discuss among colleagues most of the time was solving some hairy interesting engineering problem. That changed as years wore on, it became more gossip and internal politics and who got promoted how and when etc.
- ido 5y ago
  The funny thing (to me) is that 4000 people already seems unwieldy to me - I run a company of 5 and can imagine managing maybe 20-30 people, 100 at a stretch but I have no idea how to run a company with anywhere close to 4000 employees (nor what would so many people work on).
BurningFrog 5y ago
I was there 2006-2009. Each year a new level of management appeared above me, and things got ever more "political" and perf centric. Just as people are different at age 10, 20 and 40, companies are different in different stages and sizes. Know what you want and look for it. I realized I want to be at small companies, and have not worked at a company larger than 25 people since.
- brundolf 5y ago
  I've found the sweet spot to be around 50-200. I've always worked at smaller companies, and the 10-person company I worked at was the only terrible experience of the bunch. It sounds weird to say, but... I'm really glad to have an HR department again. I'm sure it varies widely. I just feel like a tiny company leaves too much room for unhealthy and unprofessional dynamics, even though I'm sure it can be perfectly fine in other cases. Just depends on the people.
  - Andrex 5y ago
    Mirrors my experience. 50-200 is a sweet spot of possibly knowing just about everyone in the company while also having many perks of BigCo, and the sub-10 person startup folded the week I joined.
  - BurningFrog 5y ago
    At my craziest startup, the charismatic CEO would occasionally yell "under 50 employees, no one has any rights!". It was a joke, but was it really? Part of the small startup life is that most job don't last. Both because startups die young, but also because they can be crazy. My first dying startup was a disaster. I adapted my expectations, and now I see them as unplanned vacations. I quit the crazy company above on my 1 year vesting day.
MertsA 5y ago
Q: What's the fastest way to go from L4->L5 at Google? A: Get a job at Facebook at E4, get promoted to E5, and get hired back at Google L5. https://youtu.be/8DYje57V_BY https://youtu.be/8DYje57V_BY
- UncleMeat 5y ago
  Google is somewhat famous for downleveling so I'm really not sure that this is actually true.
  - abdabab 5y ago
    They can’t downlevel someone from Facebook that easily. They have to match the compensation at least and Facebook pays pretty well at L5 level.

gerash 5y ago

The perf process sounds good on paper. It's just like peer reviews in the academia they said. However its outcome in practice can't be any worse. To this day, people "cook up" a project that doesn't need to exist and won't share the credit or their territory with anyone (or else the committee will doubt their ownership) and abandon the project less than six months after their promotion and switch to a new team.

Leszek 5y ago
So... it's like academia.

vishnugupta 5y ago

This is eerily similar to my experience at Amazon including how I feel when I look back. Even the years are same :-). I somehow feel joining and leaving Amazon when I did (2005-2012) was the best thing to have happened. What makes it more special was the stellar team that I got to be a part of with whom I’m still in touch with. It’s like being part of a secret club. The only thing we used to discuss among colleagues most of the time was solving some hairy interesting engineering problem. That changed as years wore on, it became more gossip and internal politics and who got promoted how and when etc.

ido 5y ago
The funny thing (to me) is that 4000 people already seems unwieldy to me - I run a company of 5 and can imagine managing maybe 20-30 people, 100 at a stretch but I have no idea how to run a company with anywhere close to 4000 employees (nor what would so many people work on).

BurningFrog 5y ago

I was there 2006-2009. Each year a new level of management appeared above me, and things got ever more "political" and perf centric. Just as people are different at age 10, 20 and 40, companies are different in different stages and sizes. Know what you want and look for it. I realized I want to be at small companies, and have not worked at a company larger than 25 people since.

brundolf 5y ago
I've found the sweet spot to be around 50-200. I've always worked at smaller companies, and the 10-person company I worked at was the only terrible experience of the bunch. It sounds weird to say, but... I'm really glad to have an HR department again. I'm sure it varies widely. I just feel like a tiny company leaves too much room for unhealthy and unprofessional dynamics, even though I'm sure it can be perfectly fine in other cases. Just depends on the people.
- Andrex 5y ago
  Mirrors my experience. 50-200 is a sweet spot of possibly knowing just about everyone in the company while also having many perks of BigCo, and the sub-10 person startup folded the week I joined.
- BurningFrog 5y ago
  At my craziest startup, the charismatic CEO would occasionally yell "under 50 employees, no one has any rights!". It was a joke, but was it really? Part of the small startup life is that most job don't last. Both because startups die young, but also because they can be crazy. My first dying startup was a disaster. I adapted my expectations, and now I see them as unplanned vacations. I quit the crazy company above on my 1 year vesting day.

MertsA 5y ago

Q: What's the fastest way to go from L4->L5 at Google? A: Get a job at Facebook at E4, get promoted to E5, and get hired back at Google L5. https://youtu.be/8DYje57V_BY https://youtu.be/8DYje57V_BY

UncleMeat 5y ago
Google is somewhat famous for downleveling so I'm really not sure that this is actually true.
- abdabab 5y ago
  They can’t downlevel someone from Facebook that easily. They have to match the compensation at least and Facebook pays pretty well at L5 level.