3 ms·
Obviously this depends on the company, but after 15 years at multiple FAANG, I'm leaning towards no. It might have been true at 2010-era Microsoft but the pain
by Arainach 3y ago
Obviously this depends on the company, but after 15 years at multiple FAANG, I'm leaning towards no. It might have been true at 2010-era Microsoft but the painful transition where they fired all the SDETs got rid of most of the people who "made it through" and after that I never felt this to be the case.
Google, for instance, has a slow tedious hiring process with a lot of false negatives, but in my experience those who made it through were absolutely qualified and great to work with. There certainly wasn't 30% to cull. In my opinion there wasn't even enough people to fill the percentage quota that need to be given ratings lower than satisfactory - before the layoffs. After them, the fact that they're still enforcing these quotas on teams is absurd cruelty that kills morale.
- scarface_74 3y agoI mean looking at Googles abysmal track record compared to its peers when it comes to creating and sustaining new products and product categories over the last two decades is not exactly an argument for their hiring process.
- Arainach 3y agoThe decision to sustain products is at the executive level, not the ground level.
- scarface_74 3y agoIt’s also part of the promotion culture where no one shows “impact” by sustaining an existing project.
- Arainach 3y agoSure, but is hiring people smart enough to identify and follow incentives a flaw in hiring or ground level employee capability or a management flaw?