3 ms·

> That has been my entire career. Never seen it go differently. In my "big tech company", there's a thorough (and I think overall fair) evaluation process, and

> That has been my entire career. Never seen it go differently. In my "big tech company", there's a thorough (and I think overall fair) evaluation process, and a very high performer can earn a significant amount of money, e.g. 10x the salary of a junior. People are also strongly incentized to deliver through bonuses and stock refresher. I'm not denying that what you describe exists in some (most?) companies, but there are tons of companies out there, and it's also up to employees to do their homework and find places that suits their values and ambitions. They do exist!

scarface_74 3y ago
A junior at BigTech averages around $170K. Are you really saying a high performer can make $1.7 million in compensation a year? I’m sure there are a very few that do.
- saagarjha 3y ago
  Sure, but there are very few high performers.
- yodsanklai 3y ago
  Look at Google [1] and Meta [2], this seems to be in the ballpark. There are people with such high salaries, but they are very few and more than just high-performers. [1] https://www.levels.fyi/companies/google/salaries/software-engineer https://www.levels.fyi/companies/google/salaries/software-en... [2] https://www.levels.fyi/companies/facebook/salaries/software-engineer https://www.levels.fyi/companies/facebook/salaries/software-...
bornfreddy 3y ago
Ok, seriously curious - how does this evaluation process look like, at least in broad strokes? I haven't yet seen one that would make incentives aligned, but you got my hopes up. :)
asveikau 3y ago
My experience with those big companies and those tough but allegedly fair review processes is that management has no idea who is actually doing the work, and disproportionately compensates people they like on a personal level, unfairly. The bias reenforces itself when the "top performers" are preferentially assigned prestigious work that can look good on the next review. You can tell who the stupidest people in the organization are by the faith they have in the fairness and appropriateness of the review system.

scarface_74 3y ago

A junior at BigTech averages around $170K. Are you really saying a high performer can make $1.7 million in compensation a year? I’m sure there are a very few that do.

saagarjha 3y ago
Sure, but there are very few high performers.
yodsanklai 3y ago
Look at Google [1] and Meta [2], this seems to be in the ballpark. There are people with such high salaries, but they are very few and more than just high-performers. [1] https://www.levels.fyi/companies/google/salaries/software-engineer https://www.levels.fyi/companies/google/salaries/software-en... [2] https://www.levels.fyi/companies/facebook/salaries/software-engineer https://www.levels.fyi/companies/facebook/salaries/software-...

bornfreddy 3y ago

Ok, seriously curious - how does this evaluation process look like, at least in broad strokes? I haven't yet seen one that would make incentives aligned, but you got my hopes up. :)

asveikau 3y ago

My experience with those big companies and those tough but allegedly fair review processes is that management has no idea who is actually doing the work, and disproportionately compensates people they like on a personal level, unfairly. The bias reenforces itself when the "top performers" are preferentially assigned prestigious work that can look good on the next review. You can tell who the stupidest people in the organization are by the faith they have in the fairness and appropriateness of the review system.