3 ms·

The problem is that (hypothetical) you as a line level manager don’t control comp and raises. Even in BigTech your manager doesn’t control your promotion and

The problem is that (hypothetical) you as a line level manager don’t control comp and raises. Even in BigTech your manager doesn’t control your promotion and everyone knows it’s better to “boomerang” because you will get paid less being promoted to an L5 (mid) from an L4 than someone hired as an L5.

eloisant 8mo ago
Then you shouldn't say "A junior developer just isn’t worth the investment" but "my company decided not to invest in people". That might not be YOUR choice, it's still a choice being made at the company you work for.
- raw_anon_1111 8mo ago
  You’re mencing words for no reason. Companies don’t care about “people”. They care about allocating capital where they see the highest return. Investing in a junior developer who will do negative work instead of a mid level developer who will do positive work once they learn the business and processes is a better investment. You’re niavely making a moral argument as if anything about corporate America is moral. Can you make an argument based on numbers? Every single argument I make to leadership has to have a business case
  - eloisant 8mo ago
    It's not a moral argument, it's about having a short term vision or a long term vision. Most US companies typically just have a short term vision, but that's not the case of all companies. Japanese companies for example usually care more about long term. This is why US car makers like GM fire workers when business goes down, then need to rehire and potentially re-train workers. Toyota on the other hand doesn't fire workers, instead use their time for training when the business goes down. Guess which company is struggling and which one is the world leader? So to get back to your leadership: if they only care about the next quarter, then sure no number will convince them. The company might be dead in a few years but they don't care.

eloisant 8mo ago

Then you shouldn't say "A junior developer just isn’t worth the investment" but "my company decided not to invest in people". That might not be YOUR choice, it's still a choice being made at the company you work for.

raw_anon_1111 8mo ago
You’re mencing words for no reason. Companies don’t care about “people”. They care about allocating capital where they see the highest return. Investing in a junior developer who will do negative work instead of a mid level developer who will do positive work once they learn the business and processes is a better investment. You’re niavely making a moral argument as if anything about corporate America is moral. Can you make an argument based on numbers? Every single argument I make to leadership has to have a business case
- eloisant 8mo ago
  It's not a moral argument, it's about having a short term vision or a long term vision. Most US companies typically just have a short term vision, but that's not the case of all companies. Japanese companies for example usually care more about long term. This is why US car makers like GM fire workers when business goes down, then need to rehire and potentially re-train workers. Toyota on the other hand doesn't fire workers, instead use their time for training when the business goes down. Guess which company is struggling and which one is the world leader? So to get back to your leadership: if they only care about the next quarter, then sure no number will convince them. The company might be dead in a few years but they don't care.