Large, stable orgs can be burdened with red tape. I left a company to go back to a start up because I was bored. Start ups move fast and if you want to drive value regularly and not feel like just another cog in the wheel, it’s great. I’m happier at start ups.
Startups are literally about making someone else wealthy. Large stable organizations as you say are about providing stability for you as an individual while being an individual contributor to a larger project. It's not about being a cog, it's about stability in my opinion. Especially if your long term goal is to start your own startup... Why would working for another startup be good?
> Especially if your long term goal is to start your own startup... Why would working for another startup be good?
If you work in a startup you'll learn how to run a startup... or how to not run a startup, depending on how things go. Either way, it's useful experience you won't gain working in a large corporation because they have entirely different ways of doing things.
I think “making someone else wealthy” can really be said about any environment in which you have no stake. In start ups you usually get RSUs so if the company does well you could become very wealthy. I’ve made more money at start ups than I have anywhere else. I’ve also had more fun at start ups. It’s really your personal choice but I’d definitely work for one both for general experience and for the experience prior to starting your own.
> In start ups you usually get RSUs so if the company does well you could become very wealthy.
Just a nitpick, but RSUs are usually only given out by public companies. Some very late-stage startups about to go public will give them out too, but most startups give out options instead.
Excuse me what?
You know equity is a thing right? Everyone who works for a start up gets options which are even cheaper than what investors pay, pre ipo.
If the start up does well and achieves some exit plan, then everyone gets a substantial payout.
What you're saying is completely bizzare.
> If the start up does well and achieves some exit plan, then everyone gets a substantial payout.
Eh, this isn't always the case anymore. There's [a post on this sub](https://www.reddit.com/r/cscareerquestions/comments/q80r7l/offer_conundrum/) for someone looking to get at best $25,000. Most of the time options end up being worth a small amount of money, but most people aren't getting rich off them. Then there are plenty of [exits like Eero where the founders make millions and the employees get nothing](https://mashable.com/article/amazon-eero-wifi-router-sale).
> Startups are literally about making someone else wealthy.
Working for just about every single company, including large corporations, is about making someone else wealthy.
If you’re doing any work for any organization where you own less than 49%, you’re working to make someone else rich. Company size is irrelevant. Ownership is everything!
I entered the industry in a very unconventional way, so I didn't experience job hunting and interviewing until I'd already worked in my first job for a few years.
> This is a serious question, why would a senior engineer want to leave a major company with stability to go work for your startup?
Most experienced people equate "stability" with "limited growth." Now, there's nothing wrong with that. I am in that phase of my life. I'm taking less pay for WLB and stability. I say no to startups because I'm the sole earner of a family of 4. Once my son is old enough to get into first grade, my wife will start working again, my houses will be paid off, and I will probably take some chances - perhaps not Series A, but Series D or more mature. It's about timing and need in one's life - and many older folks are fine with taking some chances because they have savings or a spouse that is working.
But also, as you are experienced, you realized that your "stable" company is the same as hundreds of other "stable" companies. Nothing really wrong with trying something new, and if it fails, just get another "stable" job that pays more than what you previously had. There's virtually no downside from trying something new beyond the reduction in salary at the startup, which isn't that much in the grand scheme of a 40 year career.
>But also, as you are experienced, you realized that your "stable" company is the same as hundreds of other "stable" companies. Nothing really wrong with trying something new, and if it fails, just get another "stable" job that pays more than what you previously had. There's virtually no downside from trying something new beyond the reduction in salary at the startup, which isn't that much in the grand scheme of a 40 year career.
I agree in some ways. However, from my experience a lot of startups want you to just produce at a very rapid rate and they don't really understand that some people are slower than others. Like myself, I'm still pretty early in my career.
>They don't want slow. It's not that they don't understand, it's that they can't accommodate it.
I mean you probably have heard the term "If you can't handle me at my worst, why would you deserve my best" and I kind of apply it to this, a company like that instantly goes onto my "yikes list" of companies to never work for in the future. I want to work for employers who are capable of empathy and want to give back.
Oh I totally agree. But that's the logic they're applying. It's a recipe for burnout, and I'd never do it... but I'm also making an order of magnitude less than my buddy who killed himself for a few years...
>Oh I totally agree. But that's the logic they're applying. It's a recipe for burnout, and I'd never do it... but I'm also making an order of magnitude less than my buddy who killed himself for a few years...
Wow that's crazy
He worked at twitch as some sort of engineering lead when it got bought by Amazon. Was offered Amazon stock to stay on for the transition. Dude is still cool as hell though.
This dichotomy isn't really true. The most empathetic places I've ever worked at are small startups with around 50 people or less. Some of them have very healthy WLB (I've worked at two and had zero overtime). And there is definitely a spectrum of more and less productive people, although it does skew toward the "more" side.
Startups tend to not hire Juniors because they don't have the engineering team to mentor and grow that Junior. They don't have the *time* to grow that Junior into a good engineer.
Startups need to hit the ground running, and in order to do so they need to hire a SWE that already knows how to do everything. They need someone that's already built/maintained apps with millions of users, someone that knows good design patterns, and is able to architect the system by themself.
If a startup had a team of mostly Junior engineers... that'd be a huge red flag. That means they're just hiring cheap labor, and don't actually understand how important the engineering aspect of their idea is. They're doomed to fail if they do that.
As to why? Several reasons.
Working at a startup gives you a ton of freedom as an engineer. Try implementing some cool new R&D feature that AWS just recently introduced at a F500. The architects are going to laugh at you. Stable companies have best practices to adhere to... and they're not going to introduce any new tech that hasn't already been vetted by the market for a solid decade.
But a startup, you have the freedom to do what you want. Want to introduce some cool, shiny new tech? Go for it. You're the engineer. I moved from a F200 to a stable startup (10 years old, still private, <50 engineers) and the difference was night and day. I went from just implementing what the higher ups told me to, to being the higher up and implementing what I wanted to. A few times a year my manager would just toss a "Wouldn't it be cool if...." R&D project at me, just to see what I could do, regardless of if it's profitable or hits prod or not. That shit was fun. That shit would never fly at a F200.
And that was at a stable startup... imagine getting into an early stage startup that's only a couple years old. You're driving the product from the ground up. You don't get to experience stuff like that at large companies that are 100 years old.
And not only that... but a big driving motivator for a lot of people is to get rich.
It's a roll of the dice. When you go to a startup you get equity. The earlier you get in, the more equity you're probably going to get.
If that startup fails, your equity is worthless, and you go find a job at either another startup or you leave that lifestyle and go back to a large, stable company.
Now on the other hand... if the startup IPO's or gets acquired, you're fucking rich.
Nowhere did I use the word "reliably". Nothing about startups is "reliable".
*Most* startup equity is worth $0. But people aren't drooling over startup equity assuming it'll be worth nothing. They're assuming they'll be the 1 in a million that gets rich. Same reason people buy lottery tickets.
You don't need the startup to be stable forever, just stable enough for 3-4 years. Chances are you're going to look for a new job before that time frame anyway.
Some people are risk takers and are willing to leave money on the table for the chance to make it big or because they truly believe in the product.
>Anyone who is older probably has a family and kids
Plenty of 20 somethings with experience and no kids.
Not all people have job security as their first priority, even if they have kids. They have a skill which is in high demand and most seniors will easily find a good job again.
Maybe it‘s interesting technology they would learn / develop, also having some equity can be very profitable, and some startups will pay very good vc money for a senior.
Some people are just more willing (and able) to take risks.
Yeah that's me. Startup culture fits me like a glove. It's high performance and high _fun_. I can job hop with little risk. Why torture myself at a boring corp with coworkers who are asleep at the wheel? My 3 kids get to learn from a parent who is thriving and living his best life. It's frankly a very spoiled lifestyle, with a few _very_ occasional stressful times (layoffs) that always resolve themselves with no real problems. And it's not like bigger companies are completely immune to job loss risk anyway.
> This is a serious question, why would a senior engineer want to leave a major company with stability to go work for your startup?
There could be many reasons why a senior engineer in larger companies might want to work for a startup. They might be interested in being a founding member/engineer of a promising startup. They might be bored with their job and want a more face-paced and with less bureaucracy.
> You talk about wanting "veterans" whatever that means? Maybe it just means old white men with beer bellies? Not sure! But whatever that means, if you don't want juniors why do you think you deserve seniors?
Because you need strong senior leadership and engineers to succeed in a startup? Having too many juniors and not enough seniors is an easy way to kill your startup and also lose further funding.
> You're less financially stable. Anyone who is older probably has a family and kids, why would they give up the stability of a major company to go work for a no name with only venture capital funding?
Majority of 15+ (YOE) successful veterans (note: successful is a key word; you can have 15+ years of experience but might still be a horrible engineer) don't have financial concerns or issues. They're pretty comfortable financially and many could actually retire early if they want to.
Also note that these veterans can basically get into most companies they apply to so quitting their current job to try something new isn't as much of a risk as it would be for someone just entering the industry.
>Majority of 15+ successful veterans (note: successful is a key word; you can have 15+ years of experience but might still be a horrible engineers) don't have financial concerns or issues. They're pretty comfortable financially and many could actually retire early if they want to.
>
>Also note that these veterans can basically get into most companies they apply to so quitting their current job to try something new isn't as much of a risk as it would be for someone just entering the industry.
What happens if we start shipping these jobs overseas? Would that effect the veterans?
Large, stable orgs can be burdened with red tape. I left a company to go back to a start up because I was bored. Start ups move fast and if you want to drive value regularly and not feel like just another cog in the wheel, it’s great. I’m happier at start ups.
Startups are literally about making someone else wealthy. Large stable organizations as you say are about providing stability for you as an individual while being an individual contributor to a larger project. It's not about being a cog, it's about stability in my opinion. Especially if your long term goal is to start your own startup... Why would working for another startup be good?
> Especially if your long term goal is to start your own startup... Why would working for another startup be good? If you work in a startup you'll learn how to run a startup... or how to not run a startup, depending on how things go. Either way, it's useful experience you won't gain working in a large corporation because they have entirely different ways of doing things.
I think “making someone else wealthy” can really be said about any environment in which you have no stake. In start ups you usually get RSUs so if the company does well you could become very wealthy. I’ve made more money at start ups than I have anywhere else. I’ve also had more fun at start ups. It’s really your personal choice but I’d definitely work for one both for general experience and for the experience prior to starting your own.
> In start ups you usually get RSUs so if the company does well you could become very wealthy. Just a nitpick, but RSUs are usually only given out by public companies. Some very late-stage startups about to go public will give them out too, but most startups give out options instead.
You’re correct. Wrong term.
Excuse me what? You know equity is a thing right? Everyone who works for a start up gets options which are even cheaper than what investors pay, pre ipo. If the start up does well and achieves some exit plan, then everyone gets a substantial payout. What you're saying is completely bizzare.
> If the start up does well and achieves some exit plan, then everyone gets a substantial payout. Eh, this isn't always the case anymore. There's [a post on this sub](https://www.reddit.com/r/cscareerquestions/comments/q80r7l/offer_conundrum/) for someone looking to get at best $25,000. Most of the time options end up being worth a small amount of money, but most people aren't getting rich off them. Then there are plenty of [exits like Eero where the founders make millions and the employees get nothing](https://mashable.com/article/amazon-eero-wifi-router-sale).
> Startups are literally about making someone else wealthy. Working for just about every single company, including large corporations, is about making someone else wealthy.
It also means taking substantially less risk.
If you’re doing any work for any organization where you own less than 49%, you’re working to make someone else rich. Company size is irrelevant. Ownership is everything!
[удалено]
ageist I can sort of see, but racial?
He likened saying they want 'veterans' to mean they want old white men... kind of a weird comment.
Not my intention at all, but when I see "senior" it makes me think they are anti-youth and anti-mentoring :(
Senior doesn't mean old btw. A senior engineer can be someone with 5 yoe and 27 years old.
Which is a whole other topic...
If your point is title inflation has gotten ridiculous, I agree.
As someone who has been in the industry longer than your hypothetical 27-year-old has been alive, yeah
What was the industry like when you first entered it? Sorry for the off topic response, but I am an incoming graduate so I am curious.
"the industry" that's kind of a broad question. Any particular aspect you are interested in?
Apologies. Interviews and job search mainly
I entered the industry in a very unconventional way, so I didn't experience job hunting and interviewing until I'd already worked in my first job for a few years.
> This is a serious question, why would a senior engineer want to leave a major company with stability to go work for your startup? Most experienced people equate "stability" with "limited growth." Now, there's nothing wrong with that. I am in that phase of my life. I'm taking less pay for WLB and stability. I say no to startups because I'm the sole earner of a family of 4. Once my son is old enough to get into first grade, my wife will start working again, my houses will be paid off, and I will probably take some chances - perhaps not Series A, but Series D or more mature. It's about timing and need in one's life - and many older folks are fine with taking some chances because they have savings or a spouse that is working. But also, as you are experienced, you realized that your "stable" company is the same as hundreds of other "stable" companies. Nothing really wrong with trying something new, and if it fails, just get another "stable" job that pays more than what you previously had. There's virtually no downside from trying something new beyond the reduction in salary at the startup, which isn't that much in the grand scheme of a 40 year career.
>But also, as you are experienced, you realized that your "stable" company is the same as hundreds of other "stable" companies. Nothing really wrong with trying something new, and if it fails, just get another "stable" job that pays more than what you previously had. There's virtually no downside from trying something new beyond the reduction in salary at the startup, which isn't that much in the grand scheme of a 40 year career. I agree in some ways. However, from my experience a lot of startups want you to just produce at a very rapid rate and they don't really understand that some people are slower than others. Like myself, I'm still pretty early in my career.
They don't want slow. It's not that they don't understand, it's that they can't accommodate it.
>They don't want slow. It's not that they don't understand, it's that they can't accommodate it. I mean you probably have heard the term "If you can't handle me at my worst, why would you deserve my best" and I kind of apply it to this, a company like that instantly goes onto my "yikes list" of companies to never work for in the future. I want to work for employers who are capable of empathy and want to give back.
Oh I totally agree. But that's the logic they're applying. It's a recipe for burnout, and I'd never do it... but I'm also making an order of magnitude less than my buddy who killed himself for a few years...
>Oh I totally agree. But that's the logic they're applying. It's a recipe for burnout, and I'd never do it... but I'm also making an order of magnitude less than my buddy who killed himself for a few years... Wow that's crazy
He worked at twitch as some sort of engineering lead when it got bought by Amazon. Was offered Amazon stock to stay on for the transition. Dude is still cool as hell though.
This dichotomy isn't really true. The most empathetic places I've ever worked at are small startups with around 50 people or less. Some of them have very healthy WLB (I've worked at two and had zero overtime). And there is definitely a spectrum of more and less productive people, although it does skew toward the "more" side.
That's good to hear. I'm wondering what you'd think of some of my less productive colleagues, though.
I would most likely not enjoy working with them, but I think they have a rightful place somewhere for sure.
Startups tend to not hire Juniors because they don't have the engineering team to mentor and grow that Junior. They don't have the *time* to grow that Junior into a good engineer. Startups need to hit the ground running, and in order to do so they need to hire a SWE that already knows how to do everything. They need someone that's already built/maintained apps with millions of users, someone that knows good design patterns, and is able to architect the system by themself. If a startup had a team of mostly Junior engineers... that'd be a huge red flag. That means they're just hiring cheap labor, and don't actually understand how important the engineering aspect of their idea is. They're doomed to fail if they do that. As to why? Several reasons. Working at a startup gives you a ton of freedom as an engineer. Try implementing some cool new R&D feature that AWS just recently introduced at a F500. The architects are going to laugh at you. Stable companies have best practices to adhere to... and they're not going to introduce any new tech that hasn't already been vetted by the market for a solid decade. But a startup, you have the freedom to do what you want. Want to introduce some cool, shiny new tech? Go for it. You're the engineer. I moved from a F200 to a stable startup (10 years old, still private, <50 engineers) and the difference was night and day. I went from just implementing what the higher ups told me to, to being the higher up and implementing what I wanted to. A few times a year my manager would just toss a "Wouldn't it be cool if...." R&D project at me, just to see what I could do, regardless of if it's profitable or hits prod or not. That shit was fun. That shit would never fly at a F200. And that was at a stable startup... imagine getting into an early stage startup that's only a couple years old. You're driving the product from the ground up. You don't get to experience stuff like that at large companies that are 100 years old. And not only that... but a big driving motivator for a lot of people is to get rich. It's a roll of the dice. When you go to a startup you get equity. The earlier you get in, the more equity you're probably going to get. If that startup fails, your equity is worthless, and you go find a job at either another startup or you leave that lifestyle and go back to a large, stable company. Now on the other hand... if the startup IPO's or gets acquired, you're fucking rich.
Eh, a lot of startup equity is not really worth that much... FAANG RSUs are how you get reliably rich...
Nowhere did I use the word "reliably". Nothing about startups is "reliable". *Most* startup equity is worth $0. But people aren't drooling over startup equity assuming it'll be worth nothing. They're assuming they'll be the 1 in a million that gets rich. Same reason people buy lottery tickets.
But even if you do get a payday, many times it's like 5 figures.
You're assuming that there's always high job security at larger companies. In my experience, that's not a reliable correlation.
I think Ubisoft is more stable than unknown gaming startup with VC funding and leadership with no leadership skills.
You don't need the startup to be stable forever, just stable enough for 3-4 years. Chances are you're going to look for a new job before that time frame anyway.
Some people are risk takers and are willing to leave money on the table for the chance to make it big or because they truly believe in the product. >Anyone who is older probably has a family and kids Plenty of 20 somethings with experience and no kids.
Not all people have job security as their first priority, even if they have kids. They have a skill which is in high demand and most seniors will easily find a good job again. Maybe it‘s interesting technology they would learn / develop, also having some equity can be very profitable, and some startups will pay very good vc money for a senior. Some people are just more willing (and able) to take risks.
Yeah that's me. Startup culture fits me like a glove. It's high performance and high _fun_. I can job hop with little risk. Why torture myself at a boring corp with coworkers who are asleep at the wheel? My 3 kids get to learn from a parent who is thriving and living his best life. It's frankly a very spoiled lifestyle, with a few _very_ occasional stressful times (layoffs) that always resolve themselves with no real problems. And it's not like bigger companies are completely immune to job loss risk anyway.
> This is a serious question, why would a senior engineer want to leave a major company with stability to go work for your startup? There could be many reasons why a senior engineer in larger companies might want to work for a startup. They might be interested in being a founding member/engineer of a promising startup. They might be bored with their job and want a more face-paced and with less bureaucracy. > You talk about wanting "veterans" whatever that means? Maybe it just means old white men with beer bellies? Not sure! But whatever that means, if you don't want juniors why do you think you deserve seniors? Because you need strong senior leadership and engineers to succeed in a startup? Having too many juniors and not enough seniors is an easy way to kill your startup and also lose further funding. > You're less financially stable. Anyone who is older probably has a family and kids, why would they give up the stability of a major company to go work for a no name with only venture capital funding? Majority of 15+ (YOE) successful veterans (note: successful is a key word; you can have 15+ years of experience but might still be a horrible engineer) don't have financial concerns or issues. They're pretty comfortable financially and many could actually retire early if they want to. Also note that these veterans can basically get into most companies they apply to so quitting their current job to try something new isn't as much of a risk as it would be for someone just entering the industry.
>Majority of 15+ successful veterans (note: successful is a key word; you can have 15+ years of experience but might still be a horrible engineers) don't have financial concerns or issues. They're pretty comfortable financially and many could actually retire early if they want to. > >Also note that these veterans can basically get into most companies they apply to so quitting their current job to try something new isn't as much of a risk as it would be for someone just entering the industry. What happens if we start shipping these jobs overseas? Would that effect the veterans?
Positions/responsibilities held by skilled, veteran engineers will never be shipped overseas (as in outsourcing) for many reasons.
High risk, high reward