I don't know what's more disturbing:
1. That seeing employees playing ping pong and sitting at a bar would mean anything at all to a highly-sought after and ostensibly experienced candidate.
2. That CEOs apparently believe these things can convince the most desirable candidates to join their companies.
I've worked at companies that looked "hip" by having ping pong tables and playstations/xboxs. In practice almost nobody used them as it would look like they're slacking rather than working. It was nothing but a sham, trying to make these places look less like what they actually are.
It's nuts. Get people elsewhere. Thousands of engineers across the country (or planet) would jump at the chance to work remotely for half an SV salary.
I remember that we didn't even plug the phones in.
these people were being paid £55k (a lot) each, to basically look pretty.
seems like a massive waste of man hours to me- but, I suppose I'm a sysadmin not a sales/CEO
I've worked and interviewed at plenty of companies that put on the best front. Just like that ping-pong thing and similar equivalents. But as soon as I started working at these places, I realized that it's not like that and I've learned to ignore it over the years.
The "lively" culture is most likely a product of the upswing that justified the hiring. Meaning that a week later, everyone will be just as shut off as at any other company.
while I'm working on exciting challenges, of course
As an SVP as SFDC he would have had a much larger base salary, and probably damn good options. His Twitter stock grant is probably worth a lot more, but it was also riskier.
Now $150k + $250k RSUs (probably on a 5+ yr schedule) for a new PhD is a lot. I assume they were working on something that Google figured could save them an order of magnitude more than that a year. (Of course the debate is, couldn't a similarly motivated, if not fiscally so, existing staff developer make the same savings? Probably yes.)
If you can also manage people.
If you can also manage projects.
If you can also see the broader picture and how your company fits into it.
If you know how to delegate.
If you know how to hire and retain the right kind of talent.
If you can resolve conflicts effectively.
If you can communicate well with both engineers and customers.
Depending on your org structure you may also need to make the correct choices regarding infrastructure and technical direction as you go consistently and over a long period of time.
I've known a lot of engineers in my career. Most of them were not suitable to become a VP of engineering - including those with many years of experience.
The ability to engineer is often the smallest subset of what a VP of engineering does. It's a starting point.
Second, the VPE must have a larger focus - seeing what's good for the entire company, not just what's good for engineering, and certainly more than what's good for the current projects. Often a straight up engineer will be (quite properly) focused mainly on whatever their current project is, and may not even have the business knowledge to fully grok how it fits in the big picture.
Lastly, the VPE needs exceptional management and leadership skills. A tech lead will have this too, but it must be much stronger at the veep level.
>> "An engineer with enough experience can do the job of a VP of engineering"
I think that's the qualification - experience.
Not true.
http://techcrunch.com/2010/11/11/google-offers-staff-enginee...
https://medium.com/about-work/6aedba30ecfe
(Hint: 10x what? what is the thing being measured, and how?)
They hired him this year.
It looks like they hired him without the "senior" title last year. I was basing my assumption on the article's statement that he made $10M "last year".
From the article: "He drew a salary of $145,513 and a bonus of $100,000."
Personally, I don't think it's worth taking equity seriously unless (a) it's public stock, which has a published value, or (b) you know the cap table. If you don't get to see the cap table and term sheets, that employee equity is pretty meaningless-- not worth taking a pay cut or working typical startup hours.
He may be an engineer but he got the $10 Mil for being "The senior vice president of engineering"
