4 ms·

Ok. amazon has a high attrition rate because of it's culture. Making the pay higher won't necessarily fix that. Does ANYONE in amazon see culture changes occur

Ok. amazon has a high attrition rate because of it's culture. Making the pay higher won't necessarily fix that. Does ANYONE in amazon see culture changes occurring at all? I'm willing to respond to the 5 recruiters contacting me BUT only if there is a huge drive to change culture as well.

DesiLurker 5y ago
plus that high pay looks just like a bait to me. you still have to survive brutal (& I mean Brutal) annual reviews for entire duration and also not get PIPed in the process. getting piped for a bullshit reason really sucks, I have never been but have closely seen it happen. to answer the original question, nope, I have not seen any evidence of culture change, source: a close friend joined & left in a year.
- deltaonefour 5y ago
  Well, this uptick I've seen only in the last couple months so I'm wondering is there a culture change or impetus for culture change that occurred within the last month or couple months or so? I think it's unlikely and that you're probably most likely right, but I want to fish out some comments from people in amazon who know what's going on.
belval 5y ago
Disclaimer: I work at AWS. I see comments about the culture a lot and I feel the need to chime in and say that it's not actually bad? At least in my team, the work life balance is fine, my manager is great and the projects are interesting. Not saying that it's the same for every SDE, but some of the stories you read online make it seem like they shackle you to your desk and PIP you into submission.
- deltaonefour 5y ago
  What about during review season where someone on your team MUST get pipped? I know that there are teams that are doing well. But if one person or more on your team gets pipped every year something is wrong...
  - belval 5y ago
    I actually had a talk with my manager about that, as I was curious about how it actually worked (yes you can ask your manager it's not illegal). There IS an expectation of managers being able to identify the bottom performers in their team, but for the PIP part it's up to the manager. They absolutely can push back and say that no-one in their team deserves to get PIP'ed. They would have to write a reason (i.e. "No one on my team is performing low enough that I'd prefer re-hiring") but that's pretty much it. Anecdotes on the Internet make it seem like we are all scared at review time to see who is going to get PIP'ed, but that's just not how it is...
    - deltaonefour 5y ago
      I think your viewing it from a microcosm and that the rest of the internet actually probably has a more accurate view given that you had to ask your manager about this. What I'm hearing from others is this... there are good teams at amazon... amazon is huge but the overall culture is not what you describe. I guess I'm looking for a more overall picture rather then someone viewing it from the perspective of a good team. >They absolutely can push back and say that no-one in their team deserves to get PIP'ed You realize that a pip is not normal? Even one person getting PIP'ed on a team is is an event and abnormal. The fact that a manager has to "push back" for not pip-ing somone raises a red flag for me.
      - belval 5y ago
        > At least in my team... > Not saying that it's the same for every SDE... I think my initial comment had enough disclaimer to make it clear that I don't think this is applicable to every team at Amazon. > You realize that a pip is not normal? Even one person getting PIP'ed on a team is is an event and abnormal. The fact that a manager has to "push back" for not pip-ing somone raises a red flag for me. Every company I worked at had some form of "performance improvement plan" that essentially meant "pick up the pace or we will have to discuss options". The idea that on a team of 20 people, during the span of a year, not a single employee (expected rate is ~5%) is underperforming is worthy of writing a justification. EDIT: Re-reading your comment I think I understand why you think this is so weird. > The fact that a manager has to "push back" for not pip-ing somone raises a red flag for me. You don't have to push-back not pip-ing a specific employee, but you will have to justify why no-one on your 20+ people team got PIP'ed during the year. Is that clearer?

DesiLurker 5y ago

plus that high pay looks just like a bait to me. you still have to survive brutal (& I mean Brutal) annual reviews for entire duration and also not get PIPed in the process. getting piped for a bullshit reason really sucks, I have never been but have closely seen it happen. to answer the original question, nope, I have not seen any evidence of culture change, source: a close friend joined & left in a year.

deltaonefour 5y ago
Well, this uptick I've seen only in the last couple months so I'm wondering is there a culture change or impetus for culture change that occurred within the last month or couple months or so? I think it's unlikely and that you're probably most likely right, but I want to fish out some comments from people in amazon who know what's going on.

belval 5y ago

Disclaimer: I work at AWS. I see comments about the culture a lot and I feel the need to chime in and say that it's not actually bad? At least in my team, the work life balance is fine, my manager is great and the projects are interesting. Not saying that it's the same for every SDE, but some of the stories you read online make it seem like they shackle you to your desk and PIP you into submission.

deltaonefour 5y ago
What about during review season where someone on your team MUST get pipped? I know that there are teams that are doing well. But if one person or more on your team gets pipped every year something is wrong...
- belval 5y ago
  I actually had a talk with my manager about that, as I was curious about how it actually worked (yes you can ask your manager it's not illegal). There IS an expectation of managers being able to identify the bottom performers in their team, but for the PIP part it's up to the manager. They absolutely can push back and say that no-one in their team deserves to get PIP'ed. They would have to write a reason (i.e. "No one on my team is performing low enough that I'd prefer re-hiring") but that's pretty much it. Anecdotes on the Internet make it seem like we are all scared at review time to see who is going to get PIP'ed, but that's just not how it is...
  - deltaonefour 5y ago
    I think your viewing it from a microcosm and that the rest of the internet actually probably has a more accurate view given that you had to ask your manager about this. What I'm hearing from others is this... there are good teams at amazon... amazon is huge but the overall culture is not what you describe. I guess I'm looking for a more overall picture rather then someone viewing it from the perspective of a good team. >They absolutely can push back and say that no-one in their team deserves to get PIP'ed You realize that a pip is not normal? Even one person getting PIP'ed on a team is is an event and abnormal. The fact that a manager has to "push back" for not pip-ing somone raises a red flag for me.
    - belval 5y ago
      > At least in my team... > Not saying that it's the same for every SDE... I think my initial comment had enough disclaimer to make it clear that I don't think this is applicable to every team at Amazon. > You realize that a pip is not normal? Even one person getting PIP'ed on a team is is an event and abnormal. The fact that a manager has to "push back" for not pip-ing somone raises a red flag for me. Every company I worked at had some form of "performance improvement plan" that essentially meant "pick up the pace or we will have to discuss options". The idea that on a team of 20 people, during the span of a year, not a single employee (expected rate is ~5%) is underperforming is worthy of writing a justification. EDIT: Re-reading your comment I think I understand why you think this is so weird. > The fact that a manager has to "push back" for not pip-ing somone raises a red flag for me. You don't have to push-back not pip-ing a specific employee, but you will have to justify why no-one on your 20+ people team got PIP'ed during the year. Is that clearer?