undefined | Better HN

0 pointsIMTDb3y ago0 comments

> will likely only cause your A players (who are probably still very much in demand) to look elsewhere.

As other have said: is there such a high demand right now ? And if you know and feel that you are an "A" player; and so far you have seen "C" players getting laid off, you might actually feel that the average level of the people you interact with increases which makes you want to stay more.

0 comments

dx0343y ago

In most big companies I've worked at, I thought I could identify the people who made everyone slower and were a net negative to productivity. However, they never seemed to be the ones threatened to be fired. Often they were really good at playing corporate games so that it was really hard to justify firing them, while the ones fired were junior employees who had great potential but weren't as good at politics yet.

So while FB certainly intended to fire underperformers and increase average performance, I doubt they were able to identify the right people for that.

itsoktocry3y ago

>I thought I could identify the people who made everyone slower and were a net negative to productivity. However, they never seemed to be the ones threatened to be fired.

Or maybe you're not as good of a judge of these things as you think?

dx0343y ago

Could very well be. Especially in large companies, it's very hard to judge the importance of some roles and people. That's why there are always complains about how promotions work, no one has figured out how to value the work of an employee.

Don't know much about Meta's HR department, maybe they're really good at that. But in the end we're all humans and never unbiased when we make those decisions.

syntheticnature3y ago

Indeed. While one should always look to check on other biases in play, in my experience "F" players survive layoffs almost as often as "A" players, and it's those in the middle that get hit. (Sometimes this may be because the "F" players aren't getting paid as much, and are therefore cheap.)

Not to mention that the remaining "A" players may each be saddled with the work of ten laid-off "C" players because, as far as management is concerned, programmers are fungible. Why not have their 10x programmer take care of it?

hylaride3y ago

It's not white hot like it was 1-3 years ago, but if you're qualified and experienced, yes there very much is still demand from non-FAANG companies.

andsoitis3y ago

While that might be true:

a) the technical challenges at these large tech companies are probably way more interesting

b) compensation is very likely better

c) you are working with many many more peers who are super talented

dx0343y ago

Aren't technical challenges at smaller companies usually much more interesting? Pay is worse, but smaller companies usually offer much more freedom to implement your ideas and shape the company.

2 more replies

bumby3y ago

The technical challenges may be interesting, but are the strategic ones? I.e., do you think most people would choose to work on problems that optimize ad spend vs. something like, say, healthcare if all else was equal?

1 more reply

samrocksc3y ago

None of these are really factual points. Big Shops are place where you just get stuck being a YAML jockey and bantering in RFCs.

dangwhy3y ago

taking 50% paycut isn't easy.

hylaride3y ago

The way FAANG stocks have performed, you've already taken that if you work for one considering how much of their total comp tended to be RSUs (with the exception of apple).

1 more reply

troupe3y ago

Very good point. There is a big difference between random layoffs and laying off the bottom 20%.

Tempest19813y ago

Yeah, but you now have to pick up all the work they were doing.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

dx0343y ago

So while FB certainly intended to fire underperformers and increase average performance, I doubt they were able to identify the right people for that.

itsoktocry3y ago

>I thought I could identify the people who made everyone slower and were a net negative to productivity. However, they never seemed to be the ones threatened to be fired.

Or maybe you're not as good of a judge of these things as you think?

dx0343y ago

Don't know much about Meta's HR department, maybe they're really good at that. But in the end we're all humans and never unbiased when we make those decisions.

syntheticnature3y ago

hylaride3y ago

It's not white hot like it was 1-3 years ago, but if you're qualified and experienced, yes there very much is still demand from non-FAANG companies.

andsoitis3y ago

While that might be true:

a) the technical challenges at these large tech companies are probably way more interesting

b) compensation is very likely better

c) you are working with many many more peers who are super talented

dx0343y ago

Aren't technical challenges at smaller companies usually much more interesting? Pay is worse, but smaller companies usually offer much more freedom to implement your ideas and shape the company.

2 more replies

bumby3y ago

1 more reply

samrocksc3y ago

None of these are really factual points. Big Shops are place where you just get stuck being a YAML jockey and bantering in RFCs.

dangwhy3y ago

taking 50% paycut isn't easy.

hylaride3y ago

The way FAANG stocks have performed, you've already taken that if you work for one considering how much of their total comp tended to be RSUs (with the exception of apple).

1 more reply

troupe3y ago

Very good point. There is a big difference between random layoffs and laying off the bottom 20%.

Tempest19813y ago

Yeah, but you now have to pick up all the work they were doing.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse