4 ms·

This aligns with Reed Hoffman's "tour of duty" philosophy: https://hbr.org/2013/06/tours-of-duty-the-new-employer-employee-compact https://hbr.org/2013/06/tour

This aligns with Reed Hoffman's "tour of duty" philosophy: https://hbr.org/2013/06/tours-of-duty-the-new-employer-employee-compact https://hbr.org/2013/06/tours-of-duty-the-new-employer-emplo... Basically, a manager and employee agree to work on a particular project for a set period of time. At the end of that period of time, the employee is offered the option of switching to a new kind of project or leaving. If an employee leaves between tour of duties, it is considered a respectable departure and they receive the full support of the company in terms of referrals and positive reference checks. I wish that more startups treated jobs as tours of duty. Your case highlights how having such an agreement with your employer could have been more mutually beneficial.

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
danso 11y ago
> I wish that more startups treated jobs as tours of duty. Is that even feasible for startups? I guess it depends on size and stage, but I imagine most startups don't have their mission and product to a solidified-enough stage where they can think in year-long phases...or to even have more than one major project in which a year-long engineering tour is possible.
- justonepost 11y ago
  No, it's definitely not feasible for a startup. Contracts are very common in a lot of jobs, but the friction they generate don't make sense in a startup. That's why you get all that startup equity, to deal with that risk.
  - bkeroack 11y ago
    "[A]ll that startup equity" for normal employees is typically sub 0.1%.
walshemj 11y ago
So your arguing for enforceable contracts that neither side can get out of easily? Ie sign for 7/12 or even a lifer at 20 years You do know that military's that use thease systems have some rather nice tax and benefit perks that civilians wont be able to match.
- philip1209 11y ago
  My understanding isn't that it is a legally-binding contract, but that you basically trade positive reference checks should an employee leave in exchange for predictability in when they leave.
  - walshemj 11y ago
    So they are basically offering nothing no one sensible ever gives anything more as a reference than "mr/ms x worked here from date to date" For fear of some manger having rush of blood to the head and leave a company open to a law suit. What's in it for the employee?

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

danso 11y ago

> I wish that more startups treated jobs as tours of duty. Is that even feasible for startups? I guess it depends on size and stage, but I imagine most startups don't have their mission and product to a solidified-enough stage where they can think in year-long phases...or to even have more than one major project in which a year-long engineering tour is possible.

justonepost 11y ago
No, it's definitely not feasible for a startup. Contracts are very common in a lot of jobs, but the friction they generate don't make sense in a startup. That's why you get all that startup equity, to deal with that risk.
- bkeroack 11y ago
  "[A]ll that startup equity" for normal employees is typically sub 0.1%.

walshemj 11y ago

So your arguing for enforceable contracts that neither side can get out of easily? Ie sign for 7/12 or even a lifer at 20 years You do know that military's that use thease systems have some rather nice tax and benefit perks that civilians wont be able to match.

philip1209 11y ago
My understanding isn't that it is a legally-binding contract, but that you basically trade positive reference checks should an employee leave in exchange for predictability in when they leave.
- walshemj 11y ago
  So they are basically offering nothing no one sensible ever gives anything more as a reference than "mr/ms x worked here from date to date" For fear of some manger having rush of blood to the head and leave a company open to a law suit. What's in it for the employee?