In software, when an engineer exits the team(medium.com)
medium.com
In software, when an engineer exits the team
https://medium.com/@solidi/in-software-when-an-engineer-exits-the-team-1e550303cff8
178 comments
Also worth remembering: Managers directly influence the performance of developers. If you don't have anything nice to say, it's not necessarily your fault, but you should ask the departing dev if they feel you got them what they needed.
I just realized how much higher my performance was under managers who thought I was talented, and how little I ever completed when my managers questioned my mental abilities.
The other part is dont over praise them. Last year we had a guy leave and the boss spent 10 minutes talking about how he was the best dev he's ever seen and wondering how we'll cope without him. Geez, he wasn't that good, I'm sure we'll be OK but now I'm wondering why the boss doesn't like us.
You can praise someone without putting anyone down.
If someone is the best ever, that means you are worse. In that sense, this specific praise is putting everyone else down.
"We'll really miss his excellent work. He lived up to the team's high standards."
Yeah, this. "We'll really miss your excellent work that lived up to our team's high standards" is a much different message than "Your work was the best that I've ever seen, and it's going to be hard for us who are left to step up and fill your shoes".
The latter doesn't explicitly put anyone down specifically, but it does heavily imply....
The latter doesn't explicitly put anyone down specifically, but it does heavily imply....
They don't have to say anything, the feeling is enough.
People should leave. Engineers do better learning new systems - learning from new people. You should leave every three years. I don't cry when an engineer leaves - they should!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epoch%C3%A9
has this word ever cropped up in the workplace/culture?
has this word ever cropped up in the workplace/culture?
+1 to you because I hadn't come across this concept before and it seems like a useful thing to have in the back of my mind.
Could you perhaps give a layman’s tl;dr? The article looks like it requires a lot of background knowledge.
I think in many cases, it's that outsiders get hired in at a higher salary while doing seemingly the same job. I could understand how that would make all existing team members feel like they also need to switch jobs to get a raise.
Especially, it seems, because software engineers are quite shy about negotiating in general. I know several people who are grossly underpaid in my opinion, but they prefer to avoid the discomfort of disagreeing with their manager. Still, I believe that's a bad long-term strategy for the manager. It makes them extremely easy to hire away if I can offer them our usual salary and it's double of what they currently earn.
Especially, it seems, because software engineers are quite shy about negotiating in general. I know several people who are grossly underpaid in my opinion, but they prefer to avoid the discomfort of disagreeing with their manager. Still, I believe that's a bad long-term strategy for the manager. It makes them extremely easy to hire away if I can offer them our usual salary and it's double of what they currently earn.
Who cares for drama. Berate if you want. My service is my brain as a CPU not human drama service.
As someone who leaves every two years: don't take his words for gospel. Do whatever works for you.
It is absolutely possible to grow in the same company. Never worked for me but I've seen it many times.
Staying with the same company for too long might not be the most efficient way to make more money, though
It is absolutely possible to grow in the same company. Never worked for me but I've seen it many times.
Staying with the same company for too long might not be the most efficient way to make more money, though
>But this role wasn’t a fit, and the timing was off. The environment was not correct. The work didn’t have the impact they wanted, finding their dream job instead. Perhaps I was ineffective at communications, championing above, or slow at sponsoring elsewhere
This seems to miss the most obvious reason. That they found more money elsewhere. Of every developer I have seen leave, their primary motivation was a higher pay. Having a team you like is nice and all, but owning a house or being able to go on nicer holidays is better.
The company I worked at this year is falling apart because all of the actual talent has found higher paying jobs and all that is left is the juniors who will struggle to keep things running.
This seems to miss the most obvious reason. That they found more money elsewhere. Of every developer I have seen leave, their primary motivation was a higher pay. Having a team you like is nice and all, but owning a house or being able to go on nicer holidays is better.
The company I worked at this year is falling apart because all of the actual talent has found higher paying jobs and all that is left is the juniors who will struggle to keep things running.
> Of every developer I have seen leave, their primary motivation was a higher pay.
That's the polite thing to say, without bruising egos or burning bridges. I left my last job because I felt unappreciated after being skipped over promotion, even after accomplishing all the tasks I had agreed to with my manager would give him the capital to push for my promotion. Instead, other members of my team got promoted - and that was the primary reason I started looking around.
The fact that I'd be paid more wasn't the primary reason, few people leave a job for a lower paying one, so it's often an effect, rather than a cause. When asked in my exit interview, guess what I said my primary motivation was? Hint - it wasn't "I'm disgruntled because you didn't keep your end of the bargain"
That's the polite thing to say, without bruising egos or burning bridges. I left my last job because I felt unappreciated after being skipped over promotion, even after accomplishing all the tasks I had agreed to with my manager would give him the capital to push for my promotion. Instead, other members of my team got promoted - and that was the primary reason I started looking around.
The fact that I'd be paid more wasn't the primary reason, few people leave a job for a lower paying one, so it's often an effect, rather than a cause. When asked in my exit interview, guess what I said my primary motivation was? Hint - it wasn't "I'm disgruntled because you didn't keep your end of the bargain"
Curious why you didn’t feel it was worth it to be honest with them in that moment? It’s not like they could stop you from leaving.
I left a job recently and had a great conversation with my boss about what went wrong and how I think they could improve and after talking to some old coworkers, it seems they have taken a lot of what I said to heart.
I get it not wanting to talk about it, but at the same time I think that feedback is the most valuable and I would want someone to tell me if I was in their situation.
I left a job recently and had a great conversation with my boss about what went wrong and how I think they could improve and after talking to some old coworkers, it seems they have taken a lot of what I said to heart.
I get it not wanting to talk about it, but at the same time I think that feedback is the most valuable and I would want someone to tell me if I was in their situation.
> why you didn’t feel it was worth it to be honest with them
Being "honest" with folks who might be persuaded to give terrible references later and tell all their friends you are an ungrateful piece of shit is a bad idea. Never be honest with people that have more power than you, unless it is praise.
Being "honest" with folks who might be persuaded to give terrible references later and tell all their friends you are an ungrateful piece of shit is a bad idea. Never be honest with people that have more power than you, unless it is praise.
...or you care more about your word, and society, than maximizing your 401k.
If I can be ruined by saying the wrong thing (this means any kind of criticism) then your portrayal of what I do is entirely missing the mark and frankly extremely dismissive of the realities of life for people that aren't filthy rich.
if the manager had any brains, he connected the dots without feeling offended. whether he takes action on that or not, not the OP's problem anymore.
to put it bluntly, there's no upside to telling the whole truth.
to put it bluntly, there's no upside to telling the whole truth.
Depending on how well your manager takes criticism, you might burn a bridge there without gaining anything.
> Of every developer I have seen leave, their primary motivation was a higher pay
I've never seen this ever in my entire 37 year career. I'm not saying it doesn't happen just that I've personally never seen it. All the devs I know work on stuff they choose to work on and are passing up money for jobs they're less interested in.
I've never seen this ever in my entire 37 year career. I'm not saying it doesn't happen just that I've personally never seen it. All the devs I know work on stuff they choose to work on and are passing up money for jobs they're less interested in.
Since we're sharing anecdotes, every single person who has left a team I was on left for more money, sometimes even after much thought because they loved the work and coworkers. All the devs I know have families and hobbies and things that require money like an addiction to clothing, shelter, and food, and these things cost money.
I was going to argue with you, but every job I’ve left has had other factors that would’ve made me leave even if they raised my salary.
Money has always been my primary motivator.
Check Blind
"tc or gtfo"
for everyone else: Blind app is where all of your developers and a few other personalities are talking about industry workplace cultures. Every post also ends with people posting their "total compensation" or tc, which is a meme on that app but absolutely serious. That app pretty much only lets in tech and finance grunts. The situation is similar to how HIRED only has jobs for devs and occasionally other roles.
for everyone else: Blind app is where all of your developers and a few other personalities are talking about industry workplace cultures. Every post also ends with people posting their "total compensation" or tc, which is a meme on that app but absolutely serious. That app pretty much only lets in tech and finance grunts. The situation is similar to how HIRED only has jobs for devs and occasionally other roles.
Depends on what amounts we are talking. You and the people you know are probably already on the top end of pay and can chose anything. The devs I know saw $40k-$60k AUD pay bumps by switching to remote work for companies in higher paying areas. That kind of extra money is pretty life changing especially when they offer almost exactly the same work environment.
Anecdotally, most developers I've seen leave companies over the past 10 years have left for money reasons.
I use to assume it varied by the company, but it doesn't seem to. Invariably, shifting companies seems to be the way to get more money.
I use to assume it varied by the company, but it doesn't seem to. Invariably, shifting companies seems to be the way to get more money.
Companies seem to hand out only crumbs for pay rises but are willing to drop mountains of extra money when hiring fresh people. In 3 years of working at one company, they gave me an extra $20k in pay rises. After leaving that job for another one, My pay went up $60k AUD in one go.
I've seen this with many friends right now in Melbourne. People are easily leaving for $30k-$50k with recruiters emailing and calling daily.
I've also seen manager friends hire like crazy in the past few months only for those new hires to leave for more money as well.
I've also seen manager friends hire like crazy in the past few months only for those new hires to leave for more money as well.
Yeah I just went from an average Adelaide job to a highish end Melbourne job working remote from Adelaide and the change has been amazing. Almost everyone from my last company just left for remote jobs paying way more.
100%, the Adelaide and regional cities IT job market has imploded. Great time to start a consultancy if you're regional.
I'm looking at moving from Sydney to Adelaide, any way I can reach out to you to get an idea of the industry over there? I'm hoping to do a remote job from Adelaide too, but would still like to understand the lay of the land.
Nice. Hope you're enjoying it :)
This is an instance where anecdotes will vary wildly depending on the kind of company you work for.
Meanwhile, I saw a coworker do it in the past 37 days for a better paying job at Microsoft that he "couldn't pass up"
I really liked my company and the people I worked with, but pretty gladly left recently for 40% raise. Felt foolish to not do so.
I will add my two cents, which are that people don't tend to look until they are at least slightly dissatisfied with their current job, and then hop when they find a position with a high enough raise. That has been universally true in my circle of friends at least.
Mostly the same. I have had two ex-coworkers who said they were leaving for the pay raise, but were both clearly unhappy with their jobs prior to leaving. I suspect "I wanted a raise" is just a much easier reason to tell people than "I hated the people I worked with", especially when it's the people you worked with asking.
Hmm, for me it always comes down to “I don’t get paid enough for this shit.” They can then reduce the amount of shit, or increase the amount I’m being paid.
If some other company wants to pay me more for the same shit, then that is where we are going.
If some other company wants to pay me more for the same shit, then that is where we are going.
This is it. Everyone's line of what they're willing to deal with is different, and changes based on where they are in life, what their mood is that month/week/day, etc. It only takes so many days of crossing that threshold for someone to start looking around.
If a job is crappy in general, the pay is likely to be part of the crappiness. Or from the other side of the yin-yang, part of what can make a better job better is better pay.
I think it is little bit both I bet if offers would be lower most people would just suck it up and continued cranking code.
This certainly happens quite often. However, speaking purely anecdotally just to add a data point - in my current team at a big tech firm, none of my teammates have left because of compensation. We've had quite a bit of turnover over the years and the vast majority left due to a myriad of other reasons, many even having taken pay cuts in the process.
It probably depends on your market.
In areas where going from one company to another as a "senior" only ends up with like a 5k gross pay difference, it's almost negligible.
In Silicon Valley hopping companies can be like $100k/year or more gross pay difference. In a few years you might leverage that when switching companies again to get even more. Adds up fast.
In areas where going from one company to another as a "senior" only ends up with like a 5k gross pay difference, it's almost negligible.
In Silicon Valley hopping companies can be like $100k/year or more gross pay difference. In a few years you might leverage that when switching companies again to get even more. Adds up fast.
>>In Silicon Valley hopping companies can be like $100k/year or more gross pay difference.
That has limits too. Its not like you can hop 20 companies in 10 years and end up making like $2+ million an year.
Eventually you will max out of levels to get promoted too. Then the only options are to startup on your own or be an exec at a large company.
Plus Im guessing any reasonable increase in your levels comes with fair degree of risks, workplace politics, up-or-out workplace policies and if you have a history of hopping 2 companies/year serious shops aren't going to hire you to only replace you 6 months from now.
That has limits too. Its not like you can hop 20 companies in 10 years and end up making like $2+ million an year.
Eventually you will max out of levels to get promoted too. Then the only options are to startup on your own or be an exec at a large company.
Plus Im guessing any reasonable increase in your levels comes with fair degree of risks, workplace politics, up-or-out workplace policies and if you have a history of hopping 2 companies/year serious shops aren't going to hire you to only replace you 6 months from now.
Leave one or two stints off your resume and say you were having a sabbatical at burning man and never left the desert until the universe aligned you with that specific founder’s mission, problem solved
fwiw I’ve lied about passion (for their mission) at every company I worked at until I could qualify as an accredited investor via income test and buy preferred shares in any company instead of earning common stock gambles over years at whichever silly startup hired me
I was passionate about specific frameworks, corroborable years of experience, and making sure I occassionally had at least 2 years of experience at one place
But I would lie about my interest in their mission or whatever these culty developer daycares were up to, for the compensation boost and sustaining that.
(Yes I eventually got lawyers and CPAs to validate my accredited investor status, and eventually learned what “self certification” really meant)
It was super strange to me that feigning passion was the gatekeeper instead of simple work integrity.
Anyway it worked. Priorities. If I was a betting man - which I am - I’d bet you’ve run into people like me.
I was passionate about specific frameworks, corroborable years of experience, and making sure I occassionally had at least 2 years of experience at one place
But I would lie about my interest in their mission or whatever these culty developer daycares were up to, for the compensation boost and sustaining that.
(Yes I eventually got lawyers and CPAs to validate my accredited investor status, and eventually learned what “self certification” really meant)
It was super strange to me that feigning passion was the gatekeeper instead of simple work integrity.
Anyway it worked. Priorities. If I was a betting man - which I am - I’d bet you’ve run into people like me.
> until I could qualify as an accredited investor via income test
What does this mean?
What does this mean?
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/a/accreditedinvestor.asp
It means you have enough money around to throw at things that aren't certified as safe for the general public.
It means you have enough money around to throw at things that aren't certified as safe for the general public.
> Having a team you like is nice and all, but owning a house or being able to go on nicer holidays is better.
You spend maybe two to four weeks a year on a nice holiday. The rest of the time, for around 8 hours a day minus weekends, you are going to be spending with a team. Even if you live in a nice house and you're remote you're still going to be spending that 8 hours a day with a team.
If you don't like the other people in that team, or they don't like you, that's a big chunk of your life that's not going to be pleasant, however much more money you make.
You spend maybe two to four weeks a year on a nice holiday. The rest of the time, for around 8 hours a day minus weekends, you are going to be spending with a team. Even if you live in a nice house and you're remote you're still going to be spending that 8 hours a day with a team.
If you don't like the other people in that team, or they don't like you, that's a big chunk of your life that's not going to be pleasant, however much more money you make.
I think bigger house and nicer holidays are mere examples of what to do with more money. There is no point in comparing them in particular with the effects of working inanities team. The good thing about money is that it buys you freedom to do whatever you think is worth.
For example, I know people that look for higher paying jobs so they can work 2 years and not work 1 year. So the “spending 8 hours a day with a team” calculation is very different. You are looking for a higher paying job precisely to not need to spend 8 hours with people working. Which kind of applies to everyone when you give the option to retire earlier and have good money to take care of themselves and their family when old. You are earning ore to work less.
Lastly, you seem to apply a correlation between higher paying jobs and not liking people I your team. In my opinion, there is zero correlation. So leaving a job for a higher pay doesn’t mean at all that you will find a team that you enjoy less working with. The chance of actually enjoying more is just the same.
If you happen to find yourself in a team that makes you unhappy, but all means, leave immediately. But not changing jobs to a earn more because tou are afraid it will be a team that you will enjoy less working is the wrong thing to do.
I think looking for a higher pay (be it by negotiating promotions in the same company or by changing jobs) is almost always the right choice. And I do not mean in the “greedy” sense, I mean that is a very effective way to achieve more happiness.
For example, I know people that look for higher paying jobs so they can work 2 years and not work 1 year. So the “spending 8 hours a day with a team” calculation is very different. You are looking for a higher paying job precisely to not need to spend 8 hours with people working. Which kind of applies to everyone when you give the option to retire earlier and have good money to take care of themselves and their family when old. You are earning ore to work less.
Lastly, you seem to apply a correlation between higher paying jobs and not liking people I your team. In my opinion, there is zero correlation. So leaving a job for a higher pay doesn’t mean at all that you will find a team that you enjoy less working with. The chance of actually enjoying more is just the same.
If you happen to find yourself in a team that makes you unhappy, but all means, leave immediately. But not changing jobs to a earn more because tou are afraid it will be a team that you will enjoy less working is the wrong thing to do.
I think looking for a higher pay (be it by negotiating promotions in the same company or by changing jobs) is almost always the right choice. And I do not mean in the “greedy” sense, I mean that is a very effective way to achieve more happiness.
The thing is though that higher pay, at least where I live, entails considerably higher taxes. "Fuck you" money is never going to be a possibility, outside of winning a lottery ticket or coming into an inheritance. Friends/relations I know who have at least a slim possibility of a comfortable retirement aren't necessarily those with high salaries - they've just been able to play the property market with sufficient skill/luck over the past couple decades juggling buy-to-rent mortgages & inheriting houses at the right time.
So I could jump ship for a 10-15% raise, my take-home after taxes would be maybe an extra few hundred a month. Nice, yes, maybe I can have a slightly nicer HDTV or slightly bigger apartment or stay in a nicer hotel when I go on holiday, but I'm still chained to a laptop for the foreseeable future, even if I save every penny instead of buying nicer things.
So I could jump ship for a 10-15% raise, my take-home after taxes would be maybe an extra few hundred a month. Nice, yes, maybe I can have a slightly nicer HDTV or slightly bigger apartment or stay in a nicer hotel when I go on holiday, but I'm still chained to a laptop for the foreseeable future, even if I save every penny instead of buying nicer things.
10-15% is a pretty low raise for changing jobs. A lot of people who have stayed at the same job for multiple years without significant raises can get more like 50-100%.
I get away from this by just not caring about work or what happens on a personal or emotional level. If I'm getting paid good money and I'm physically comfortable, I'm not really bothered what is going on because I won't stress or lose a minutes sleep over it.
Eventually I want to save up enough money to be self sustaining off investments and then spend my time doing whatever I want to do.
Eventually I want to save up enough money to be self sustaining off investments and then spend my time doing whatever I want to do.
There's always the risk that you don't get there or you get there too late and you might realize that you've been a drone on autopilot for 40 years.
Agreed. Don't be 100% money focused in your 20s and 30s.
And the few that don’t leave for higher pay, leave to go work with those that left for higher pay or because morale is low because of people leaving.
By my estimates from hundreds of informal exit interviews I have done with colleagues that have left, I’d wager 60-70% left for higher pay or due to second or third order effects caused by those that left for higher pay.
Half of the remaining engineers left to pursue new opportunities. Almost always these were engineers whose first job out of school is at the current company and they hit 4 years. Many of these won’t cite pay, but almost all got offers way higher than what their first employer out of school is paying them four years later.
Those that left because of a bad manager were in the minority. Most engineers frustrated over a bad manager transfer teams within the company instead of leaving the company.
By my estimates from hundreds of informal exit interviews I have done with colleagues that have left, I’d wager 60-70% left for higher pay or due to second or third order effects caused by those that left for higher pay.
Half of the remaining engineers left to pursue new opportunities. Almost always these were engineers whose first job out of school is at the current company and they hit 4 years. Many of these won’t cite pay, but almost all got offers way higher than what their first employer out of school is paying them four years later.
Those that left because of a bad manager were in the minority. Most engineers frustrated over a bad manager transfer teams within the company instead of leaving the company.
Large tech companies, your profile says you're at Google, have fairly different dynamics than other companies. And most engineers do not work at FAANG. Many people join them explicitly for the money, especially nowadays, and so you're filtering at the onset for employees who follow money above other things. So it's not surprising they leave for more money. There's also generally a decent work culture so changing managers may actually improve things. The company is also large enough to have many managers and divisions with different approaches.
My experience at startups has been that people mostly leave because of management or business collapse.
My experience at startups has been that people mostly leave because of management or business collapse.
I would never badmouth a manager on my way out the door. There's no point to it and anyone I am talking to may or may not be a sympathetic ear; in any case, if they're still there, they still need to work with that individual and it's really no longer my business.
"Dream Opportunity" or "Better Pay" are easy explanations that nobody will question. Best just to leave it at that.
"Dream Opportunity" or "Better Pay" are easy explanations that nobody will question. Best just to leave it at that.
Haha exactly. Of course the leaver is getting more pay, you'd have had to seriously mess up for them to leave for less pay.
They're not likely to burn bridges on the way out though so that's all you hear. No point complaining when you're done
They're not likely to burn bridges on the way out though so that's all you hear. No point complaining when you're done
I’ve never known a toxic manager who people didn’t know was toxic. Me repeating that will have no influence, so why bother?
1. They don't know it themselves and you'd just make an enemy for nothing.
2. Not everyone knows it, otherwise they wouldn't have a job. Or they're being accepted for other reasons. In both cases, you're pissing someone off, probably higher up.
The ego boost is not worth it.
2. Not everyone knows it, otherwise they wouldn't have a job. Or they're being accepted for other reasons. In both cases, you're pissing someone off, probably higher up.
The ego boost is not worth it.
Fat people doesn't like you when you call them fat. It is the same. People are emotionally influenced by things you say even if nothing of it is new to them.
> out of hundreds of exit interviews
Datapoint here, I didn’t say the truth at my exit interview. I left because I was angry my team lead wouldn’t help me reach a new level in my career, but I pretended it was for higher pay. Blaming it on my manager would have been useless and closed doors if I wanted to rehire in the higher position. Saying it wouldn’t have given them an opportunity to fix it, because I needed to learn skills to become a team lead, which I hadn’t, so they couldn’t have just promoted me.
Datapoint here, I didn’t say the truth at my exit interview. I left because I was angry my team lead wouldn’t help me reach a new level in my career, but I pretended it was for higher pay. Blaming it on my manager would have been useless and closed doors if I wanted to rehire in the higher position. Saying it wouldn’t have given them an opportunity to fix it, because I needed to learn skills to become a team lead, which I hadn’t, so they couldn’t have just promoted me.
For me, they are "informal" exit interviewers. I'm not a manager. I'm not in HR. I'm an IC that has asked people informally with whom I've developed good rapport. I generally don't ask people that I don't expect to be candid with me because I don't know them well enough. No one has a motive to lie to me about why they are leaving.
That's the stock and safe answer. Left for hire pay or new opportunities.
Most of the time we leave because management failed us. We would never say this because nothing good will come of it.
Most of the time we leave because management failed us. We would never say this because nothing good will come of it.
> Those that left because of a bad manager were in the minority
hehe I've seen the complete opposite - a whole dev team rise up to get rid of the manager. And when the manager didn't leave, it was set in stone that most of the devs left within weeks.
hehe I've seen the complete opposite - a whole dev team rise up to get rid of the manager. And when the manager didn't leave, it was set in stone that most of the devs left within weeks.
> because morale is low because of people leaving.
A broader point, here: Maybe in specific instances people are leaving for legitimate or systemic reasons, but it's still sad that humans still operate on the flawed basis of social proof in 2021.
One would have hoped we'd have advanced past primitive signaling, but I guess not.
Social proof is the perennial mind-killer of humans, everywhere.
A broader point, here: Maybe in specific instances people are leaving for legitimate or systemic reasons, but it's still sad that humans still operate on the flawed basis of social proof in 2021.
One would have hoped we'd have advanced past primitive signaling, but I guess not.
Social proof is the perennial mind-killer of humans, everywhere.
Can you explain how social proof factors into people leaving companies?
I just looked up what social proof is, essentially a phenomenon of people conforming to other people who they think understand or know more than them. It's supposed to explain her mentalities.
I guess I don't see how this leads to people leaving companies. Maybe I don't understand social proof.
I just looked up what social proof is, essentially a phenomenon of people conforming to other people who they think understand or know more than them. It's supposed to explain her mentalities.
I guess I don't see how this leads to people leaving companies. Maybe I don't understand social proof.
Social proof is a second order effect. Losing users, layoffs, or operational failures are the first order effects - usually of mismanagement.
> One would have hoped we'd have advanced past primitive signaling, but I guess not
We are what we are. We don't "advance"
We are what we are. We don't "advance"
As a lead/senior, money was a factor, especially because I was being underpaid compared to the rest of the industry for my experience. But I was working in a field for a company doing things that I wouldn’t find in most roles. I turned down a significantly higher paying role once because I wasn’t very interested in the work that I’d be doing.
I hate my current job. I'm looking for new jobs internally and externally. I don't find any of them interesting. The closest thing I found to something that might have been interesting was a senior Android dev at a medical start up (with a 50% increase!), but I wasn't qualified (I have a couple basic apps, but no 'real' experience) .
I guess I feel like all the other jobs will be just as bad, so why leave this one.
I guess I feel like all the other jobs will be just as bad, so why leave this one.
I don't think every job has to be so terrible. There's definitely places out there that value transparency and offer opportunities for growth. Especially in this market.
Where I work now, I'm actively hiring for a Senior Android dev role. We're very open to candidates who demonstrate potential for all our engineering positions. Building a couple small apps definitely counts in that regard. If you're interested in hearing more feel free to reach out! My work email is in my profile.
Where I work now, I'm actively hiring for a Senior Android dev role. We're very open to candidates who demonstrate potential for all our engineering positions. Building a couple small apps definitely counts in that regard. If you're interested in hearing more feel free to reach out! My work email is in my profile.
Not saying you're wrong, but that's also a great reason to give when you don't want to talk about the real reason.
I quit my job with the primary motivation to work on something else, with someone else. The old company just was no good fit, not good for me. I effectively earn less money now, two yearns into the new job, than when I left, but I am more happy.
Sometimes, the grass really is just greener on the other side, and it may not be because of the money.
Sometimes its tasks, culture, or even people.
>> Of every developer I have seen leave, their primary motivation was a higher pay
My motivations for leaving so far:
- Working with more relevant technology. Maybe higher pay in the long run
- Getting experience in different roles. Again, long run thinking
- Getting out of anything related to real estate in 2006
- Moving across the country to chase a girl
- Knowing that my manager was going to quit and that he was the only one allowing me to work remote.
- Douglas
- Entire department off-shored. Was working remote so I could have stuck around I guess. Wasn't worth it.
My motivations for leaving so far:
- Working with more relevant technology. Maybe higher pay in the long run
- Getting experience in different roles. Again, long run thinking
- Getting out of anything related to real estate in 2006
- Moving across the country to chase a girl
- Knowing that my manager was going to quit and that he was the only one allowing me to work remote.
- Douglas
- Entire department off-shored. Was working remote so I could have stuck around I guess. Wasn't worth it.
What companies don't seem to get is that they are stack ranked constantly according to a very brutal standard.
In this ranking system there is no place for every employer from position 2 down, even if they're a good prospect.
This is not at the instigation of the employee, but the employers themselves, who all have contracts saying "while you work for us you can't work for anyone else".
Covid has exacerbated this, as these days the work you need to put in for an annual performance review (more forms) often approaches what it takes to land a new job (zoom) ... so if you have to sell yourself to your current company, why not repackage the assessment and send it to a handful of other companies and select the top bidder.
In this ranking system there is no place for every employer from position 2 down, even if they're a good prospect.
This is not at the instigation of the employee, but the employers themselves, who all have contracts saying "while you work for us you can't work for anyone else".
Covid has exacerbated this, as these days the work you need to put in for an annual performance review (more forms) often approaches what it takes to land a new job (zoom) ... so if you have to sell yourself to your current company, why not repackage the assessment and send it to a handful of other companies and select the top bidder.
> Of every developer I have seen leave, their primary motivation was a higher pay.
YMMV. Of developers I saw leaving, including my direct reports, almost no one was driven by money. There are actually two primary reasons. 1) their performance was suboptimal and it was easier to change the company than to push themselves uphill 2) relocation. Most of those who chose that patch was taking siglificant lifestyle downgrade, even if net pay was somewhat better.
YMMV. Of developers I saw leaving, including my direct reports, almost no one was driven by money. There are actually two primary reasons. 1) their performance was suboptimal and it was easier to change the company than to push themselves uphill 2) relocation. Most of those who chose that patch was taking siglificant lifestyle downgrade, even if net pay was somewhat better.
Most folks don't look for higher pay if they're satisfied with their job. Once they are unhappy and start looking, then it always looks like "They left for higher pay" which is technically true. But doesn't address the root cause.
Agreed. Salary discrepancies and less equity have been the biggest reasons I've seen cited by peers who left, along with getting a promotion.
I've left many positions, but never once has it been because of pay. Usually, it's because I grew bored with the position.
I'm a senior engineer with over a decade of experience. Most engineering jobs I've left, it was because the manager viewed themselves as an authority with power to force me to do things their way rather than as an enabler who would trust my expertise and help remove blockers to getting things done. In those roles, I'd spend more time chasing the managers' scattered thoughts through endless link trails deep in the bowels of Slack and Jira than actually doing engineering work. When I left, and the managers asked me for feedback, I always told them that everything had been great and I had just accepted a new opportunity. Leaving is not the time to burn bridges.
In my ~9 years of experience, most engineering jobs I've stayed have been because the manager was an enabler who trusted my experience and would help remove blockers to getting things done.
I know we like to shit on engineering managers a lot here at HN but having worked with great managers, terrible managers and playing the role for a short stint myself (a humbling experience, where I was not happy with my own performance), I realise the critical role a good manager can play to bring out the best in the team, and conversely how a bad one can bring out the worst.
I know we like to shit on engineering managers a lot here at HN but having worked with great managers, terrible managers and playing the role for a short stint myself (a humbling experience, where I was not happy with my own performance), I realise the critical role a good manager can play to bring out the best in the team, and conversely how a bad one can bring out the worst.
In my ~13 years of experience, I've never worked under a manager who enabled or trusted me. I've always left a job because of new management, a policy instituted by a manager, or because the manager made me work on holidays, or being available to clients on my vacation. Generally, it's the 'shit on the employee in the name of the client' that pisses me off.
I'm of the opinion now that managers are a waste of resources and amount to baby-sitters who attend meetings, approve time off, and try to get me to work more.
I haven't met a manager yet who made a positive contribution to a project. There's a reason people shit on them!
I'm of the opinion now that managers are a waste of resources and amount to baby-sitters who attend meetings, approve time off, and try to get me to work more.
I haven't met a manager yet who made a positive contribution to a project. There's a reason people shit on them!
In the current employees' market, I feel that a manager's primary responsibility is preventing their engineers from quitting.
There are such managers (enablers who trust you). The irony is that usually you get them on doomed ships that refuse to change their ways anyway.
When I was promoted to manager the COO who was above me gave me the following advice: "For an employee, the direct manager is the company. People will judge the company, and decide to stay or leave depending on how you perform".
It's funny how looking back this is exactly why I decided to change companies, before and after. I absolutely loath interviewing, but it only takes an unsupportive manager to tip me. On the other hand, my direct superior now, a CTO, is completely different from every other manager I had, so I have zero desire to leave, the risk is just too much.
It's funny how looking back this is exactly why I decided to change companies, before and after. I absolutely loath interviewing, but it only takes an unsupportive manager to tip me. On the other hand, my direct superior now, a CTO, is completely different from every other manager I had, so I have zero desire to leave, the risk is just too much.
The default expectation is: people are not going to stay long in your company. It's a given. What you can do to improve things it a bit:
1) pay a bit over market rate (5-10% is ok)
2) create a culture where approachability, kindness and responsibility are more important than anything else
3) offer (but don't enforce) specific workplace settings
4) offer (but don't enforce) work-from-home/work-from-office balance
5) periodically encourage people - feedback is very important
1) pay a bit over market rate (5-10% is ok)
2) create a culture where approachability, kindness and responsibility are more important than anything else
3) offer (but don't enforce) specific workplace settings
4) offer (but don't enforce) work-from-home/work-from-office balance
5) periodically encourage people - feedback is very important
This is a solid list, and it is true.
(Kindness/Responsibility) If I’m well paid, but someone is a full-on jerk to me/my team (particularly if they are at a very high level — in fact the higher the level the smaller the slight needs to be to have big impact), I will start to look, and it’s only a matter of time until more money finds me.
(Balance) If my wife starts telling me she misses me, or that my kids miss me, or asking why I couldn’t come to the performance, I will start to look, and it’s only a matter of time until more money finds me.
If I’m paid under market.. we’ll, I’m gonna find out soon, and then I will start to look…
One I didn’t see in your list is working to align people with work they want to do. Not always easy, but something can always be done, and the effort to try is almost as important as the result. If I’m stuck doing meaningless work, or never able to complete something, or (worst of all) watch the new hires come in and do my projects because I’m stuck working outages, I will start to look…
(Kindness/Responsibility) If I’m well paid, but someone is a full-on jerk to me/my team (particularly if they are at a very high level — in fact the higher the level the smaller the slight needs to be to have big impact), I will start to look, and it’s only a matter of time until more money finds me.
(Balance) If my wife starts telling me she misses me, or that my kids miss me, or asking why I couldn’t come to the performance, I will start to look, and it’s only a matter of time until more money finds me.
If I’m paid under market.. we’ll, I’m gonna find out soon, and then I will start to look…
One I didn’t see in your list is working to align people with work they want to do. Not always easy, but something can always be done, and the effort to try is almost as important as the result. If I’m stuck doing meaningless work, or never able to complete something, or (worst of all) watch the new hires come in and do my projects because I’m stuck working outages, I will start to look…
6) offer a professional development path where people feel they are growing and not stagnating doing the same thing over and over again
Agreed.
On Office vs Remote: This is a really, really difficult one.
The company I just left moved to a remote-priority hybrid model, where the office was "heavily suggested" two days a week and "absolutely optional" every other day. As you could imagine, those two statements mean the same thing; its optional every day.
I left because I love the office. I love the separation between work and home. I love the drive in; getting time to listen to podcasts or new music. Most of all, I love the company; I love collaborating in person, spontaneous low-stakes communication about little issues in their dev environments or problem solving, stuff that would never make it into Slack, but we're better off talking about it.
Not enough of the team feels the same way, so most days it was just me and maybe 3 or 4 other people (out of a dozen+). So, I left to find a company that was more aligned with what I want.
But, here's the ironic part: in the frank conversations I had with other team members, many are on the opposite side of the fence. The two-day-a-week "heavily recommended" was too much office time. They want full remote. Some of them were bold enough to just do it; management (and COVID) isn't at the place right now to enforce too harshly. Many still feel guilty about it; how there are people like me going in most days, which is aligned with the corporate mandate, and they're not doing it. One person left, citing this as a deciding reason.
Point being, I think any model can work; full office, full remote, or hybrid. No matter what companies do, there will be churn, because every choice is different in some way to what employees have either gotten used to (remote during pandemic -> full office) or what employees miss (full office pre-pandemic -> remote). And if you choose hybrid, you seriously need to enforce it; if you enforce it, some people will be unhappy with the model you pick, but that's better than not enforcing it and causing everyone to be unhappy.
On Positive Feedback: For me, it feels the best if its specific feedback not on the basic completion of tasks, but on the quality of completion. Not "Thank you so much for staying late to help with that customer issue", but "The way you solved that customer issue was pretty creative man, thanks for jumping in on that." That feels so much better (for me).
One of the big things I took too long to learn, and am still trying to improve in, is understanding how valuable positive peer feedback is. Not just approving great PRs with zero feedback or a "LGTM" "+1" ":thumbsup:"; I love putting line comments in that say genuine positive things I feel about lines, like "That's an awesome solution" or "I didn't know you could do that in typescript" or "I really like this, I'm definitely going to start doing that". The first hurdle I had to cross was, actually, having these thoughts more often; to reframe PR reviews from "its how we control risk on production merges" toward "its an opportunity to help the submitter improve their code" and even further into "its an opportunity for me to stay up-to-date on how the entire codebase is evolving, and how other devs solve problems."
Be specific, and be genuine. If I can't give genuine positive feedback, then either: the person I'm giving feedback to isn't really living up to any positive feedback, or in my experience more commonly: I'm not seeing the good in their work and effort, and its my responsibility to improve my ability to recognize it, so I can actually be genuine.
On Office vs Remote: This is a really, really difficult one.
The company I just left moved to a remote-priority hybrid model, where the office was "heavily suggested" two days a week and "absolutely optional" every other day. As you could imagine, those two statements mean the same thing; its optional every day.
I left because I love the office. I love the separation between work and home. I love the drive in; getting time to listen to podcasts or new music. Most of all, I love the company; I love collaborating in person, spontaneous low-stakes communication about little issues in their dev environments or problem solving, stuff that would never make it into Slack, but we're better off talking about it.
Not enough of the team feels the same way, so most days it was just me and maybe 3 or 4 other people (out of a dozen+). So, I left to find a company that was more aligned with what I want.
But, here's the ironic part: in the frank conversations I had with other team members, many are on the opposite side of the fence. The two-day-a-week "heavily recommended" was too much office time. They want full remote. Some of them were bold enough to just do it; management (and COVID) isn't at the place right now to enforce too harshly. Many still feel guilty about it; how there are people like me going in most days, which is aligned with the corporate mandate, and they're not doing it. One person left, citing this as a deciding reason.
Point being, I think any model can work; full office, full remote, or hybrid. No matter what companies do, there will be churn, because every choice is different in some way to what employees have either gotten used to (remote during pandemic -> full office) or what employees miss (full office pre-pandemic -> remote). And if you choose hybrid, you seriously need to enforce it; if you enforce it, some people will be unhappy with the model you pick, but that's better than not enforcing it and causing everyone to be unhappy.
On Positive Feedback: For me, it feels the best if its specific feedback not on the basic completion of tasks, but on the quality of completion. Not "Thank you so much for staying late to help with that customer issue", but "The way you solved that customer issue was pretty creative man, thanks for jumping in on that." That feels so much better (for me).
One of the big things I took too long to learn, and am still trying to improve in, is understanding how valuable positive peer feedback is. Not just approving great PRs with zero feedback or a "LGTM" "+1" ":thumbsup:"; I love putting line comments in that say genuine positive things I feel about lines, like "That's an awesome solution" or "I didn't know you could do that in typescript" or "I really like this, I'm definitely going to start doing that". The first hurdle I had to cross was, actually, having these thoughts more often; to reframe PR reviews from "its how we control risk on production merges" toward "its an opportunity to help the submitter improve their code" and even further into "its an opportunity for me to stay up-to-date on how the entire codebase is evolving, and how other devs solve problems."
Be specific, and be genuine. If I can't give genuine positive feedback, then either: the person I'm giving feedback to isn't really living up to any positive feedback, or in my experience more commonly: I'm not seeing the good in their work and effort, and its my responsibility to improve my ability to recognize it, so I can actually be genuine.
I think your experience is going to be not atypical of many tech jobs and it highlights an important point. Even if someone is fine in principle with others working remotely as much or as little as they want, if you really want a pre-pandemic mostly in office as was the case at many companies, that basically requires that teammates be willing to come in regularly. Otherwise, you're effectively in a rented coworking space.
I've been suspecting for many months that people will end up shifting to workplace styles that match their preferences if they can and this is a good example.
I've been suspecting for many months that people will end up shifting to workplace styles that match their preferences if they can and this is a good example.
I enjoyed reading this. _As an engineer_, I have always had trouble with determining how to go about putting in my notice. I know that it’s “just business”, however I still get consumed by how my manager at the time will take it. Reading this gives me a sense of relief and I hope it helps when that time rolls around again.
As a manager, one of the great joys of my job is watching people I've trained and mentored grow and outgrow my organisation, and leave to take on far better roles that are more exciting and challenging that anything I can offer them if they stay.
It's also one of the biggest challenges to me, replacing those people, who are often top performers on my teams. But that's my job. It's what I do for this organisation. "As an engineer" I hope you never consider holding your own career progress back just to make that part of my job easier. If that's a serious problem for me, then that's because I failed at _my_ job. I need to have contingency plans and succession plans and we both need you to not be irreplaceable. When I've got my ducks in a row, my reaction is "Right, time to accelerate $otherDev's seniority, temporarily move those @responsibilies to @colleagues with a handover, and call up HR/recruiting to hire in someone with @skillset. Let's plan some celebratory drinks."
When you're ready, and when a great opportunity presents itself, do not spend a second worrying about how I'll need to deal with you leaving. While you've probably just made a whole bunch more work for me as I scrabble to fill the gap you're leaving, I will genuinely be happy for you and proud of you for getting there.
(And I will try my hardest to communicate that pride and happiness much better than I show my frustration and stress as I do the hard parts of my job.)
It's also one of the biggest challenges to me, replacing those people, who are often top performers on my teams. But that's my job. It's what I do for this organisation. "As an engineer" I hope you never consider holding your own career progress back just to make that part of my job easier. If that's a serious problem for me, then that's because I failed at _my_ job. I need to have contingency plans and succession plans and we both need you to not be irreplaceable. When I've got my ducks in a row, my reaction is "Right, time to accelerate $otherDev's seniority, temporarily move those @responsibilies to @colleagues with a handover, and call up HR/recruiting to hire in someone with @skillset. Let's plan some celebratory drinks."
When you're ready, and when a great opportunity presents itself, do not spend a second worrying about how I'll need to deal with you leaving. While you've probably just made a whole bunch more work for me as I scrabble to fill the gap you're leaving, I will genuinely be happy for you and proud of you for getting there.
(And I will try my hardest to communicate that pride and happiness much better than I show my frustration and stress as I do the hard parts of my job.)
"As a manager, one of the great joys of my job is watching people I've trained and mentored grow and outgrow my organisation, and leave to take on far better roles that are more exciting and challenging that anything I can offer them if they stay.
"
That's the correct attitude. View your team as a pipeline that produces top people. It's much more rewarding to work that way.
That's the correct attitude. View your team as a pipeline that produces top people. It's much more rewarding to work that way.
Found a good one!
I'm feeling somewhat guilty right now and all I've done is chucked out a few resumes and booked in a few interviews
Fact is though I wouldn't be looking if the company was as loyal to me as vice versa I guess. I actually really like the job and the people but I need to at least keep up with inflation to avoid feeling like a clown haha
Fact is though I wouldn't be looking if the company was as loyal to me as vice versa I guess. I actually really like the job and the people but I need to at least keep up with inflation to avoid feeling like a clown haha
You do not owe your employer loyalty. The only thing you owe your employer is an honest day's work for a day's pay. That's it.
Those feelings are from wiring that makes sense in a small tribe of about 150 people where the social contract will involve mutual loyalty. It easily goes bad places if it is one-sided.
Good luck with your job hunt.
Good luck with your job hunt.
[deleted]
[deleted]
As did I, it was refreshing to see this.
I'm not necessarily in software engineering (operations/architecture), but the weight on my manager(s) at times has been what's kept me here.
Not always directly on them, but the vacuum they mention. Everyone on my team is a champion of their realm, and I can't help but assume the worst if I were to leave.
I might not love the place, but the people and the core of what we do - absolutely. Sometimes it indeed just isn't the right time.
I'm not necessarily in software engineering (operations/architecture), but the weight on my manager(s) at times has been what's kept me here.
Not always directly on them, but the vacuum they mention. Everyone on my team is a champion of their realm, and I can't help but assume the worst if I were to leave.
I might not love the place, but the people and the core of what we do - absolutely. Sometimes it indeed just isn't the right time.
"however I still get consumed by how my manager at the time will take it."
Usually nobody really in management cares unless they are complete psychos. And the team will not miss you much either because other people usually step up. People who leave are forgotten quickly.
Usually nobody really in management cares unless they are complete psychos. And the team will not miss you much either because other people usually step up. People who leave are forgotten quickly.
I either don’t care at all and am glad to be out or I care so much that I tell my manager ahead that I’m dusting off my resume and starting the hunt.
In the later, the team has a head start finding and onboarding my replacement. As we all know, the main issue here is that the customary 2 week notice is insufficient time to find your replacement. If it’s truly just about money or something like that, it also gives them an opportunity to give you what you feel is fair or they know what is going to happen if they don’t.
In the later, the team has a head start finding and onboarding my replacement. As we all know, the main issue here is that the customary 2 week notice is insufficient time to find your replacement. If it’s truly just about money or something like that, it also gives them an opportunity to give you what you feel is fair or they know what is going to happen if they don’t.
Leaving a company is a six-week process where you give your notice four weeks in, after all your loose ends are already cleaned up. Part of that first section is finding out from both your manager and HR how they expect/want to get notice. There’s no way to do that without foreshadowing a bit, which also makes things easier when the time comes.
It's faster if you just put a bag of popcorn in the office microwave for way too long.
>No one is irreplaceable, and no one is an island.
I've watched a business fall apart slowly after the only developer on the legacy project left. Nobody knows the old framework, nobody wants to waste time learning something that won't advance their career, and finding an existing person familiar with it is search for a needle in a haystack.
A developer can find a new position in a matter of weeks. A business takes months to fill a position, then months more to ramp up as the new hire has to learn the unfamiliar code base. In a market with lots of competition, it can be catastrophic, but management has the mindset that we're all cogs until it's too late.
I've watched a business fall apart slowly after the only developer on the legacy project left. Nobody knows the old framework, nobody wants to waste time learning something that won't advance their career, and finding an existing person familiar with it is search for a needle in a haystack.
A developer can find a new position in a matter of weeks. A business takes months to fill a position, then months more to ramp up as the new hire has to learn the unfamiliar code base. In a market with lots of competition, it can be catastrophic, but management has the mindset that we're all cogs until it's too late.
If someone is so irreplaceable and integral, the company should be paying over and above market rate to ensure they don't look outside.
There is such a thing as "key man insurance" or person. It pays out if a person leaves or dies or what have you. It depends on management recognizing a person's importance so they can purchase the policy before someone leaves.
In this type of case, the lack of succession planning is the root cause. The problem with succession planning is that management think that it applies to them, even though their skillset is more transferable and their roles are much more malleable, whereas it really needs to apply more to the specialists.
> management has the mindset that we're all cogs until it's too late
I hate reading this. Not because I think people who say it are wrong, but because so many engineers have had experiences that lead them to believe it. During my management career, I risked my own standing in a company more than once to back up people in my org. If a manager isn't willing to risk their own skin to make sure their team is treat with dignity and respect they aren't a leader, they're just a politician.
I hate reading this. Not because I think people who say it are wrong, but because so many engineers have had experiences that lead them to believe it. During my management career, I risked my own standing in a company more than once to back up people in my org. If a manager isn't willing to risk their own skin to make sure their team is treat with dignity and respect they aren't a leader, they're just a politician.
It's tough to avoid this thinking because examples of employees being treated like cogs are often systemic and very public -- like stack ranking at big companies that everyone (even people that don't work there) either knows about or ends up knowing about. Meanwhile, examples of managers risking their own skin are more likely to be individual and private -- sometimes to the point that the affected employee doesn't even know it happened because it was behind the scenes -- like a manager defending a performance review of an employee in a calibration meeting with other managers.
> A developer can find a new position in a matter of weeks.
Maybe, but it's not been my experience. It's taken a year and a half. It previously took a year.
Maybe, but it's not been my experience. It's taken a year and a half. It previously took a year.
A tangent: I think it would be a smoother transition we extended the professional expectation of giving two weeks notice to employees before they are let go. I'm more or less serious.
As it stands, employees give at least two weeks notice to employers before quitting, and employers give no notice whatsoever.
The benefit of the employee giving notice (from the company's perspective) is that management has a little time to move people around and try to cover for the missing person. The benefit from the offboarding employee's perspective is that they won't get a bad reference for their next job.
But, if an employee is leaving because they've found a new job (the most common case, I think) then they probably don't need a reference from this position, because they have their next job lined up already. Maybe it would be nice to have one later, but it's not strictly needed. At most, it's a weak enticement.
The obvious argument against giving notice to employees from a management perspective is that the employee will either sabotage the company, not do any work, or just take two weeks of vacation.
However, this is the case where the employee would actually need a good reference from their current company, because they do not already have a job lined up. If anything, you'd expect them to be less likely to behave badly than they would be in the typical case, where they find their next job and put in their two weeks notice afterward, because they need that reference.
When a company lays off an employee, they never give any notice, and the team with the missing team member is left to figure out what to do about it. Even though this can be a major disruption to the team, we don't typically hold it against the company: it's just how things are done. But, should it be?
Of course, the other reason to lay someone off without notice is that you can't afford to pay their salary for even two more weeks, but that's another situation. I'm talking about when someone is being laid off because of pro-active downsizing, or because they're not living up to their potential, or whatever.
As it stands, employees give at least two weeks notice to employers before quitting, and employers give no notice whatsoever.
The benefit of the employee giving notice (from the company's perspective) is that management has a little time to move people around and try to cover for the missing person. The benefit from the offboarding employee's perspective is that they won't get a bad reference for their next job.
But, if an employee is leaving because they've found a new job (the most common case, I think) then they probably don't need a reference from this position, because they have their next job lined up already. Maybe it would be nice to have one later, but it's not strictly needed. At most, it's a weak enticement.
The obvious argument against giving notice to employees from a management perspective is that the employee will either sabotage the company, not do any work, or just take two weeks of vacation.
However, this is the case where the employee would actually need a good reference from their current company, because they do not already have a job lined up. If anything, you'd expect them to be less likely to behave badly than they would be in the typical case, where they find their next job and put in their two weeks notice afterward, because they need that reference.
When a company lays off an employee, they never give any notice, and the team with the missing team member is left to figure out what to do about it. Even though this can be a major disruption to the team, we don't typically hold it against the company: it's just how things are done. But, should it be?
Of course, the other reason to lay someone off without notice is that you can't afford to pay their salary for even two more weeks, but that's another situation. I'm talking about when someone is being laid off because of pro-active downsizing, or because they're not living up to their potential, or whatever.
When you get fired sometimes you do get notice, at times 3/6 months.
Many places will let you go immediately but are required to pay notice pay.
As an employee working notices are soulcrushing fearful periods where you have to find new work while working with esteem low. The layoff with pay allow you to refocus and reframe your experiences with a safety net.
Many places will let you go immediately but are required to pay notice pay.
As an employee working notices are soulcrushing fearful periods where you have to find new work while working with esteem low. The layoff with pay allow you to refocus and reframe your experiences with a safety net.
From my experience at several (large, well-paying) software companies, I feel like this is already the case.
Employees who leave voluntarily will usually give as much notice as they can. There is no fixed guidance or expectation, but just good form to tell at least your manager as soon as you have made a decision. It isn't uncommon for people to publicly announce their departure 6-8 weeks in advance.
For people who are fired for bad performance, there is usually a PIP or other probationary period which would count as notice.
For layoffs, there will be severance (2-3 months is common).
The only time I have seen abrupt departures is for entirely unavoidable reasons – theft, sexual harassment, family issues, visas.
Employees who leave voluntarily will usually give as much notice as they can. There is no fixed guidance or expectation, but just good form to tell at least your manager as soon as you have made a decision. It isn't uncommon for people to publicly announce their departure 6-8 weeks in advance.
For people who are fired for bad performance, there is usually a PIP or other probationary period which would count as notice.
For layoffs, there will be severance (2-3 months is common).
The only time I have seen abrupt departures is for entirely unavoidable reasons – theft, sexual harassment, family issues, visas.
Yeah, it's pretty rare to get a PIP that isn't basically a "You're being fired in 3/6 months" notice. It's unfortunate because getting PIP'd is pretty stressful, so it hurts your ability to find another job as well.
In US tech companies the norm absolutely is not to fire people with zero notice or severance. It's typically more of a six month process where employees are explicitly told that they're on the way out at months before they're fired. When people are terminated immediately, it typically comes with a severance package of some sort (usually in exchange for a legal agreement to not sue the company).
[deleted]
So in my country the legally mandated minimum employer to employee notice after an initial three months is two weeks, plus an additional two weeks for every five years service of the employee up to eight weeks total. The exemptions are mostly limited to gross negligence or criminal misconduct. They can put you on garden leave for that time if they really don't want you in the building, but they have to pay you.
> But rarely do I find something to keep the person on, their mind already made up. I respect that. When I close the video meeting, I settle. My mind is racing. “Can I try something to bring the person back?”
It's interesting reading this, as I have always been too -- shy? underconfident? I don't know -- to ever mention my job search to my manager, until I got an offer and accepted it. I worry about it being obvious that the time off I request is for interviewing and perhaps them placing obstacles in my way. I wonder if it's ever a good idea to mention a job search when one doesn't have any offers in hand yet.
It's interesting reading this, as I have always been too -- shy? underconfident? I don't know -- to ever mention my job search to my manager, until I got an offer and accepted it. I worry about it being obvious that the time off I request is for interviewing and perhaps them placing obstacles in my way. I wonder if it's ever a good idea to mention a job search when one doesn't have any offers in hand yet.
I would (and have) kept my cards close to my chest when searching for a new job. I think the employee/manager relationship is a delicate one because on the one hand you're human beings and you develop a relationship as human beings working together. There might be some friendship there. On the other hand, your boss represents the company and will do what's best for the company.
When you're looking for a new job, you're doing what's best for you; what's best for the company is secondary. If you let your employer know you're searching, they'll start prying and trying to make changes to make you happy. That's reasonable, but at this point they may make promises they can't keep. Obviously, if you are unhappy and think they can change things, share those concerns, but if they aren't doing enough for you that you want to look for a new job, then you've sort of given up on them.
When you're looking for a new job, you're doing what's best for you; what's best for the company is secondary. If you let your employer know you're searching, they'll start prying and trying to make changes to make you happy. That's reasonable, but at this point they may make promises they can't keep. Obviously, if you are unhappy and think they can change things, share those concerns, but if they aren't doing enough for you that you want to look for a new job, then you've sort of given up on them.
IMO no, it's never a good idea.
Once you announce your intention to leave, you've broken trust with your employer and manager. Why assign the good projects to someone with one foot out the door? If they decide not to leave, was it because they want to be here, or because nobody wanted them? Are they going to leave in a few months anyways?
It's like when your significant other says they want to break up with you - "no, please I can change!" is never the right next step. You can end up together, but spend at least 3 months apart first.
Once you announce your intention to leave, you've broken trust with your employer and manager. Why assign the good projects to someone with one foot out the door? If they decide not to leave, was it because they want to be here, or because nobody wanted them? Are they going to leave in a few months anyways?
It's like when your significant other says they want to break up with you - "no, please I can change!" is never the right next step. You can end up together, but spend at least 3 months apart first.
It sounds like you experienced a situation where that trust never existed in the first place?
I've been on teams where on more than one occasion colleagues have mentioned to me one day that they were thinking of leaving, and then a couple weeks later when I asked them about it they mentioned that they raised the explicit thoughts of departure with their manager (as well as their concerns that lead to it) with respective changes manifesting that kept them on the team for a number of years.
In the model you mention, it seems like it would never be worthwhile to retain employees who have an offer and are at that point announcing their departure?
Edit: I am not sure why what I am saying is controversial.
Either a person has a trusted relationship with their manager, or the they don't. I've had managers for whom I trusted and others I did not. It can also be assessed on how they treat others who report to them as well as how they speak of others of others on adjacent teams. Concerns can and should be raised over time, and not just bottled up and delivered at the end. A good manager should be probing for them as well.
There's obviously risk involved in any conversation, but I disagree with "it's never a good idea."
I've been on teams where on more than one occasion colleagues have mentioned to me one day that they were thinking of leaving, and then a couple weeks later when I asked them about it they mentioned that they raised the explicit thoughts of departure with their manager (as well as their concerns that lead to it) with respective changes manifesting that kept them on the team for a number of years.
In the model you mention, it seems like it would never be worthwhile to retain employees who have an offer and are at that point announcing their departure?
Edit: I am not sure why what I am saying is controversial.
Either a person has a trusted relationship with their manager, or the they don't. I've had managers for whom I trusted and others I did not. It can also be assessed on how they treat others who report to them as well as how they speak of others of others on adjacent teams. Concerns can and should be raised over time, and not just bottled up and delivered at the end. A good manager should be probing for them as well.
There's obviously risk involved in any conversation, but I disagree with "it's never a good idea."
I have actually told a manager I trusted and it was no big deal, although, in retrospect I don't see any way for this to have benefitted me and a ton of ways in which it could have hurt me.
> IMO no, it's never a good idea.
I thought so in the past.
But I have learned to be open about this and so far it seems managers appreciate it. It helps plan the transition better and prioritize closing projects.
I made friends this way.
I thought so in the past.
But I have learned to be open about this and so far it seems managers appreciate it. It helps plan the transition better and prioritize closing projects.
I made friends this way.
The default should be to just never do it. If you do it, be very very sure that you can trust that person.
One of my guys shared it with me for example and it was totally fine. We always were and still are on great terms and talk to each other from time to time. But we also both 'clicked' from the start. Never really a manager/employee relationship feeling. And while I tried to keep him with us I understood and wished him all the best. He's much happier at his new place now.
Guessing whether your manager might appreciate being able to plan transitions? Forget it! The best you should consider (depending on your level) is to give more notice than the required one. That can be a good compromise but I do hear that in some companies you shouldn't even consider that. But if you feel that they won't escort you out the building the second you give notice anyway than this can be a nice touch. It's a hard decision even then though because you are trying to be nice to your immediate colleagues but make no mistake that in the opposite situation they would not give you more than the mandatory notice period. Even if your manager might want to. HR is HR.
One of my guys shared it with me for example and it was totally fine. We always were and still are on great terms and talk to each other from time to time. But we also both 'clicked' from the start. Never really a manager/employee relationship feeling. And while I tried to keep him with us I understood and wished him all the best. He's much happier at his new place now.
Guessing whether your manager might appreciate being able to plan transitions? Forget it! The best you should consider (depending on your level) is to give more notice than the required one. That can be a good compromise but I do hear that in some companies you shouldn't even consider that. But if you feel that they won't escort you out the building the second you give notice anyway than this can be a nice touch. It's a hard decision even then though because you are trying to be nice to your immediate colleagues but make no mistake that in the opposite situation they would not give you more than the mandatory notice period. Even if your manager might want to. HR is HR.
I’ve always regretted not being more honest with my manager 20 years ago when I’d made the decision to move back to my home town but wasn’t ready to pull the trigger. She knew I was getting married, knew we were trying to decide where to live; I could have given her more warning.
If you’re out there, Peggy, I am indeed sorry.
If you’re out there, Peggy, I am indeed sorry.
I think it really depends on why you're leaving. If it really is simply a physical presence thing, then I do agree, one should be open about that. So consider this a partial retraction. Assuming you're sure of course.
The conventional wisdom would be to never mention a job search until you have an offer in hand and you are ready to hand in your resignation letter. If you do mention it, you will be perceived as having half a foot out the door and if your job search falls through (as many do) then you have just telegraphed the fact that you're highly disengaged.
But you don't need to actually mention the job search. If you can put your finger on what's wrong with your current role and you have at least a little trust with your line manager, then you can just say "I'm not happy about XYZ in my role, I want to improve it, have you got any ideas?". And be prepared to bring it up several times.
I don't think anyone is expected to tell their employer they are job hunting.
But you don't need to actually mention the job search. If you can put your finger on what's wrong with your current role and you have at least a little trust with your line manager, then you can just say "I'm not happy about XYZ in my role, I want to improve it, have you got any ideas?". And be prepared to bring it up several times.
I don't think anyone is expected to tell their employer they are job hunting.
It's really depends on your relationship with your manager. 99% of the time, it's a bad idea to say you're interviewing. If your manager is someone you trust, and they genuinely have your interests in mind, you can talk to them and they can use their influence to try to solve whatever problem is making you think about leaving.
If you're not confident that's the case (and unfortunately it's rare), it's too risky to make it known you're interviewing. It is often better to discuss whatever is making you unhappy, but without saying that you are considering leaving because of it.
If you're not confident that's the case (and unfortunately it's rare), it's too risky to make it known you're interviewing. It is often better to discuss whatever is making you unhappy, but without saying that you are considering leaving because of it.
I’ve been in that situation with the 1% manager, and it still doesn’t end well. The manager resigned on my behalf after getting “drunk and sad”, which I had to rescind, then that same manager out of shame eventually fabricated a story to get me fired which led to a legal dispute due to the nature of the claims. Sounds fine so far right? Bullet dodged?
Until I applied for another role 6 months later and the CTO knew the CEO of the former company, where overnight I went from completely technical and culture fit to even my recruiter being ghosted by the company.
The moral of the story here is if you’re exiting then don’t really bring it up unless you’re entirely prepared to exit that same day. When things go south, they hit rock bottom and the consequences go beyond the four walls of your office.
Until I applied for another role 6 months later and the CTO knew the CEO of the former company, where overnight I went from completely technical and culture fit to even my recruiter being ghosted by the company.
The moral of the story here is if you’re exiting then don’t really bring it up unless you’re entirely prepared to exit that same day. When things go south, they hit rock bottom and the consequences go beyond the four walls of your office.
I was once fired after sharing with my manager that I was looking elsewhere. I had other managers at the same company who were safe to share this with, but my manager at the time was not, in retrospect.
Keep it to yourself; it just isn't worth the risk.
Keep it to yourself; it just isn't worth the risk.
But that’s the worst that can happen. If you’re prepared that this could be your last day, it is nice to tell them.
I told my boss later into the process when I was sure I was going to get an offer. He could have fired me on the spot, but he appreciated the extra notice.
I told my boss later into the process when I was sure I was going to get an offer. He could have fired me on the spot, but he appreciated the extra notice.
The best thing in the world is to be fired on the day you receive a better offer. You get all of your notice pay while you are getting paid at your new employer.
> I wonder if it's ever a good idea to mention a job search when one doesn't have any offers in hand yet.
The modal manager's response is to fire you if you mention it.
The modal manager's response is to fire you if you mention it.
> Or the baffling outcome, their asks were all achieved as they exit.
It is not baffling.
It is self respect.
I don't like important stuff that has not been completed. If I spent months on an important work it would feel like giving up. I would feel like a fraud abandoning it and letting it go to waste, because of my own decision. And so I try to focus one last time and push hard to have quality closure.
An interesting observation is how your focus suddenly improves when you have made your decision. You know all your long term plans no longer make any sense and so you stop worrying. You can finally have quality rest at home as various problems prevent you from achieving peace of mind. You know you can ignore bullshit. Or it suddenly stops being irritating anymore because you know you will not have to deal with it for long. You know you can finally say no to all distractions.
It is not baffling.
It is self respect.
I don't like important stuff that has not been completed. If I spent months on an important work it would feel like giving up. I would feel like a fraud abandoning it and letting it go to waste, because of my own decision. And so I try to focus one last time and push hard to have quality closure.
An interesting observation is how your focus suddenly improves when you have made your decision. You know all your long term plans no longer make any sense and so you stop worrying. You can finally have quality rest at home as various problems prevent you from achieving peace of mind. You know you can ignore bullshit. Or it suddenly stops being irritating anymore because you know you will not have to deal with it for long. You know you can finally say no to all distractions.
I read this as, everything the leaving employee was complaining about and said they wanted finally happened, but they still chose to leave. I'm not sure which is right.
The phrase too little too late comes to mind
As the current top comment says: if they knew about it weeks in advance, why was it only after resignation was handed in they thought "oh wait I could try salvaging this"
People don't quit jobs, they quit managers
As the current top comment says: if they knew about it weeks in advance, why was it only after resignation was handed in they thought "oh wait I could try salvaging this"
People don't quit jobs, they quit managers
I read this in context of another sentence:
"And for those that care, a burst of contributions.
"And for those that care, a burst of contributions.
Another article where managers show how detached they are and just regurgitate empty manager speak about how emotional and empathetic they are. No single mention to promotions. For some reason companies prefer to waste money and time hiring and training replacements rather than having proper career progression internally. For most developers leaving is the new career progression.
Open your eyes. Reality is shouting in your face. The dozens of dubious management books by "experts" are just making you feel good about not tackling the problem.
Open your eyes. Reality is shouting in your face. The dozens of dubious management books by "experts" are just making you feel good about not tackling the problem.
Oh, come on: I found the piece a bit woolly, but you're making an awfully big assumption there.
Just because the author didn't talk about promotions doesn't mean they don't happen or that the company concerned doesn't have a "proper career progression internally".
They may well have a "proper career progression": they might even have multiple career tracks for engineers (we do). You simply don't know.
Either way, it doesn't matter: turnover will still happen because there are often fewer of the more senior positions available than there are of the less senior. This is less of an issue in rapidly growing companies, because there are generally plenty of opportunities to progress.
It's natural for people to move on to new roles with new companies from time to time and, as a manager and a leader, is something I'm supportive of when it happens. There are many reasons they do this, progression being one, but money often being another.
Of course, I don't deny that plenty of companies exist that don't consider progression, or have any structures in place to facilitate it, but from the information we have here you can't infer that's the case for this company.
Just because the author didn't talk about promotions doesn't mean they don't happen or that the company concerned doesn't have a "proper career progression internally".
They may well have a "proper career progression": they might even have multiple career tracks for engineers (we do). You simply don't know.
Either way, it doesn't matter: turnover will still happen because there are often fewer of the more senior positions available than there are of the less senior. This is less of an issue in rapidly growing companies, because there are generally plenty of opportunities to progress.
It's natural for people to move on to new roles with new companies from time to time and, as a manager and a leader, is something I'm supportive of when it happens. There are many reasons they do this, progression being one, but money often being another.
Of course, I don't deny that plenty of companies exist that don't consider progression, or have any structures in place to facilitate it, but from the information we have here you can't infer that's the case for this company.
I gave notices (verbal) twice during my employment in the 90s (On my own since 2000). In neither case I was eager to leave but I've felt that my remuneration had fallen too much comparatively to a market rate. In both cases I first went and got an offer for much better money and then asked my CEO to match it (we both understood what will happen if he will not). In both cases the offer was matched and the case settled.
So, author, you claim to see the breakup coming. Yet, at the moment the employee gives their notice:
> find levers to negotiate
The time during which you "see it coming", when I the employee am asking more … pointed questions, usually about the company, how its run, the team's responsibilities or work or pay etc. … that, that is when you have the levers to negotiate. That is when you are still the BATNA.
But by the time I'm giving you notice, those levers are gone.¹
I also am pretty sure the last manager I gave notice to did not see it coming. He had a very quizzical look when I asked for the 1-on-1 mentioned in the article. He too, tried to fight what was by then destiny.
¹just in case someone tries to argue "everyone has a price": yeah, I'd agree. But I've not had anyone offer it, and by that time, it's far too high because of what you'd be asking. (Me to renege on a deal, me to stick with something I'm dissatisfied with, and it'd be a "pay replacing happiness" sort of an offer, which is why it'd be costly. You've had the chance to change the "happiness" part, and usually, the demonstration has been "we're unwilling to address those grievances")
(Also, too often, I think, the "problems" run deeper than the authority of the direct manager has control over. My last manager was in that situation: there was very little I think he could actually do. And that, in itself, is a problem.)
> find levers to negotiate
The time during which you "see it coming", when I the employee am asking more … pointed questions, usually about the company, how its run, the team's responsibilities or work or pay etc. … that, that is when you have the levers to negotiate. That is when you are still the BATNA.
But by the time I'm giving you notice, those levers are gone.¹
I also am pretty sure the last manager I gave notice to did not see it coming. He had a very quizzical look when I asked for the 1-on-1 mentioned in the article. He too, tried to fight what was by then destiny.
¹just in case someone tries to argue "everyone has a price": yeah, I'd agree. But I've not had anyone offer it, and by that time, it's far too high because of what you'd be asking. (Me to renege on a deal, me to stick with something I'm dissatisfied with, and it'd be a "pay replacing happiness" sort of an offer, which is why it'd be costly. You've had the chance to change the "happiness" part, and usually, the demonstration has been "we're unwilling to address those grievances")
(Also, too often, I think, the "problems" run deeper than the authority of the direct manager has control over. My last manager was in that situation: there was very little I think he could actually do. And that, in itself, is a problem.)
I think the author was talking about a low false negative rate (all the people who leave showed signs of leaving), but not a low false positive rate (many of the people who show signs of leaving don't leave).
> (Also, too often, I think, the "problems" run deeper than the authority of the direct manager has control over. My last manager was in that situation: there was very little I think he could actually do. And that, in itself, is a problem.)
Yep. Particularly at larger companies your immediate manager can often do little more than perhaps offer a mild pay raise or slightly alter working conditions.
I'm currently planning on leaving some time in the next couple of years (sticking around for family reasons in the near-term) because I've realized our business model isn't what I thought it was when I joined, and that engineering really is a cost center past a certain baseline, which explains the utterly mediocre equipment/procedures and lack of leadership/low morale. I'd rather work somewhere where engineering is a profit center. Nothing my immediate manager can do about that.
Yep. Particularly at larger companies your immediate manager can often do little more than perhaps offer a mild pay raise or slightly alter working conditions.
I'm currently planning on leaving some time in the next couple of years (sticking around for family reasons in the near-term) because I've realized our business model isn't what I thought it was when I joined, and that engineering really is a cost center past a certain baseline, which explains the utterly mediocre equipment/procedures and lack of leadership/low morale. I'd rather work somewhere where engineering is a profit center. Nothing my immediate manager can do about that.
> because I've realized our business model isn't what I thought it was when I joined, and that engineering really is a cost center past a certain baseline, which explains the utterly mediocre equipment/procedures ...
This is a good point. I am seeing about same thing at work. Over obsession with Agile processes, tracking hours, third rate light duty computers, rigid working hours and so on. Many good engineers have already left instead banging head against "process" wall. And funnily today managers saying on call that they are finding difficult to hire and people are leaving left and right.
This is a good point. I am seeing about same thing at work. Over obsession with Agile processes, tracking hours, third rate light duty computers, rigid working hours and so on. Many good engineers have already left instead banging head against "process" wall. And funnily today managers saying on call that they are finding difficult to hire and people are leaving left and right.
Here's the reality that took me waaaay too long to accept: some companies are optimizing for mediocrity.
Mediocrity (often achieved through process) has cold advantages:
- It's cheaper because you're paying people less.
- It's more resilient because people are easier to replace.
- It's more predictable because you're not asking for groundbreaking work.
- Etc... you get the idea.
The only real downside is you're not going to build an exceptional product. But here's the rub: not every product needs to be exceptional in every way. Thus most departments in a company are perfectly fine with mediocrity.
Those "good engineers" aren't wanted.
Mediocrity (often achieved through process) has cold advantages:
- It's cheaper because you're paying people less.
- It's more resilient because people are easier to replace.
- It's more predictable because you're not asking for groundbreaking work.
- Etc... you get the idea.
The only real downside is you're not going to build an exceptional product. But here's the rub: not every product needs to be exceptional in every way. Thus most departments in a company are perfectly fine with mediocrity.
Those "good engineers" aren't wanted.
My company held an all hands and when someone asked about the salary based attrition this is basically what the response was. And I believe it. It certainly seems like the company is geared toward attracting mediocre talent for mediocre pay and letting them slide by for 40 years. The company inevitably comes out ahead when inflation eats away your salary.
Agreed; if you’ve accepted a job offer, reneging on that deal because your current employer made you a better offer isn’t a great look. It’ll be remembered by the hiring company and the individual who made the offer, and that can follow you around for a long time, making future job searches a lot harder.
> Agreed; if you’ve accepted a job offer, reneging on that deal because your current employer made you a better offer isn’t a great look. It’ll be remembered by the hiring company and the individual who made the offer, and that can follow you around for a long time, making future job searches a lot harder.
I disagree. I've personally hired people who previously did this exact back and forth dance of getting an offer, then rejecting it because their current employer made them a better off. If a company is petty enough to hold it against you when you act in your best interests, you probably don't want to work there.
I disagree. I've personally hired people who previously did this exact back and forth dance of getting an offer, then rejecting it because their current employer made them a better off. If a company is petty enough to hold it against you when you act in your best interests, you probably don't want to work there.
Making an offer and having it refused is different than having it accepted and then reneged.
As a manager, even if you see The Signs, you rarely have 100% confidence: it's hard to tell if they're taking days off because they're interviewing or because their toddler is sick again. And if you take a punt and ask if they're going to leave, that's not going to go well: even if they are, they're going to deny it until the offer is signed, and it's going to come off as adversarial.
IMHO, once the switch of "I can't take this anymore and I want to leave" has been flipped, it's very difficult to flip that back. So your job as a manager is to do regular check-ins at sufficient frequency to identify and correct any issues before they get to this stage -- although as you say in your last paragraph, often these are outside your control. Which is why I've had X people leave my team in the past year, and am currently interviewing myself.
IMHO, once the switch of "I can't take this anymore and I want to leave" has been flipped, it's very difficult to flip that back. So your job as a manager is to do regular check-ins at sufficient frequency to identify and correct any issues before they get to this stage -- although as you say in your last paragraph, often these are outside your control. Which is why I've had X people leave my team in the past year, and am currently interviewing myself.
Good luck
I don't think the author was suggesting that it was the right time to think about this - they were more just reflecting on their emotional response.
When I close the video meeting, I settle. My mind is racing. “Can I try something to bring the person back?” A list of grievances sets in, and I go through a loss cycle for days. It’s a breakup. I let go.
That doesn't read to me like they're thinking that finding something to bring the person back is a plausible outcome.
When I close the video meeting, I settle. My mind is racing. “Can I try something to bring the person back?” A list of grievances sets in, and I go through a loss cycle for days. It’s a breakup. I let go.
That doesn't read to me like they're thinking that finding something to bring the person back is a plausible outcome.
I’d say these are pretty classic stages of grief. We instinctively go into bargaining mode even when we know we’ve already lost.
The "stages of grief" is not especially well supported scientifically and probably is a stretch to invoke it here. Negotiation is a natural reaction to an employee resigning because employment is a negotiated agreement.
> The "stages of grief" is not especially well supported scientifically
As a therapy aid, no. But as a general model for describing (or recognizing) the most common experiences post loss, still considered useful.
> because employment is a negotiated agreement
This does not logically follow the rest of the sentence preceding it.
The fact that negotiation takes place at the beginning of one’s employment does not have an automatic connection to the things a manager experiences when that employee resigns.
As a therapy aid, no. But as a general model for describing (or recognizing) the most common experiences post loss, still considered useful.
> because employment is a negotiated agreement
This does not logically follow the rest of the sentence preceding it.
The fact that negotiation takes place at the beginning of one’s employment does not have an automatic connection to the things a manager experiences when that employee resigns.
[deleted]
Whoever wrote this sounds like an awful manager: extremely self-centered and mixes poor rationalizations with pseudo empathy so as to seem as a decent person. In other words, I find that managers with that much... personality are the hardest to manage (harhar!); they can be extremely flippant in their behavior and unpredictable with demands. Maybe they take the job too seriously? You just need to keep push some boxes around on zenhub and send some emails my dude, this isn't the crusade and you sure ain't no knight (lmao).
Here's a real-world story of getting "exited" of my humble self - more a programmer (or code monkey) than an "engineer" really - see The Strange Case of Mammad Kabiri @ Uniqa Software Service. [1]
[1] https://github.com/bigkorupto/mammad-kabiri-uniqa
[1] https://github.com/bigkorupto/mammad-kabiri-uniqa
You should rename the article, I guess. Like this, it my first impression was that it would be another one of those posts where some random outsourcing employee complains that Google didn't hire them.
How about: "Wage theft by Uniqa Software Service and harrassment by Mammad Kabiri"
It might also make sense to point out that this is an EU court, because everyone knows that means worker protections actually have teeth. In the US getting fired like that is no issue in at-will states.
"EU court trial: Wage theft by Uniqa Software Service, Harrassment by Mammad Kabiri"
That's a good summary in my opinion.
Also, unrelatedly: Your text reads to me as if you could gain by improving your self-marketing. "code monkey" doesn't exactly sound like "that one guy we'll treat super nicely because we are afraid he might leave". But you certainly want to be in the latter category in your manager's mind. And chances are, after 10 years of working, you will have invaluable experience that helps your team. So it's probably mostly a matter of advertising your skills correctly.
How about: "Wage theft by Uniqa Software Service and harrassment by Mammad Kabiri"
It might also make sense to point out that this is an EU court, because everyone knows that means worker protections actually have teeth. In the US getting fired like that is no issue in at-will states.
"EU court trial: Wage theft by Uniqa Software Service, Harrassment by Mammad Kabiri"
That's a good summary in my opinion.
Also, unrelatedly: Your text reads to me as if you could gain by improving your self-marketing. "code monkey" doesn't exactly sound like "that one guy we'll treat super nicely because we are afraid he might leave". But you certainly want to be in the latter category in your manager's mind. And chances are, after 10 years of working, you will have invaluable experience that helps your team. So it's probably mostly a matter of advertising your skills correctly.
When I first saw this I figured it was going to be about what it does to the team, that managers don't seem to get. I was told once, after losing half the team, that they didn't want to lose momentum.
That's not the only problem here, when we stay with same company our salary and revision are less when compare to later hire. So money matters. Also new tech and knowledge are also lacking.
I was going to comment exactly this. Looking at this part:
> I could have improved the environment, the work, the team — myself. I write the conclusions down to be taken care of, reflecting on what I’ve learned.
From my personal experience, most people leave because it is almost impossible to get a significant raise internally versus changing jobs.
> I could have improved the environment, the work, the team — myself. I write the conclusions down to be taken care of, reflecting on what I’ve learned.
From my personal experience, most people leave because it is almost impossible to get a significant raise internally versus changing jobs.
Work is work, folks get too involved. I don’t think it’s healthy to take it personally if someone chooses to leave the team. In fact I’ve never understood this.
My role as a manager is to ensure you grow enough to move on to something better. That’s the contract, you give your best to the team while you’re here and we try our damndest to find good opportunities for you regardless of what it means for us.
I just have no misconceptions about our relationship, you’re here to push it and I’m here to challenge you to do that.
My role as a manager is to ensure you grow enough to move on to something better. That’s the contract, you give your best to the team while you’re here and we try our damndest to find good opportunities for you regardless of what it means for us.
I just have no misconceptions about our relationship, you’re here to push it and I’m here to challenge you to do that.
Beautifully written - I don't necessarily mean the content, but the quality of writing. Have you tried writing more serious things (I mean more than blog posts)?
> I wasn’t expecting those intense feelings when walking away the first time. They don’t write that in any of the books I read.
I want to make a movie to capture the feelings :)
I want to make a movie to capture the feelings :)
Large hierarchical orgs are surely one of the circles of hell. The way the whole manager-culture setup warps peoples minds never fails to amaze me.
If I can give any advice to engineering managers when someone quits: If you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all. The last three people that have left my team are people I know personally. Hearing an engineering manager berate and degrade someone who I have been through incidents, significant refactors, mentoring, debates, and late night delivery with is a new experience entirely. The first time it happened I had to talk the engineering manager down from making someone a non-rehire, the second time I didn't even bother. My judgement of them was fully passed on to the company and the leaders above this engineering manager that gave them accolades and excuses.
Most of the time when I leave a team it's because something either in the management chain like a process or a manager themselves failed me on such a deep level that the hope that gets me out of my bed that says, "We'll do something great today!" has departed me. This post reads to me like that is inevitable, but it is not. If you listen, ask questions without assumptions or judgements, and act as an enabler instead of a Lord or Lady then you'll strike long careers out of engineers. They may leave out of better bonuses or incentives, but they at least won't leave because of you, and one takes a substantial more amount enticing than the other.