Ask HN: Accept better position or better company? | Hacker News Reader

Ask HN: Accept better position or better company?

I'm trying to decide between 2 offers. One is a better position - I would be running a small team doing some cool tech, but I'm not so sure about the company.

The other is a worse position - I would be the equivalent of ON the team, not running it, but the company is "better" (better investors, people seem smarter, are closer to market).

Assume I'm making competitive compensation in both places (so the first place is less cash, more equity). Which job do you take and why?

View on HN

If you are going to be running a team, I would recommend the people who will be reporting to you should be factored into the decision. Do you get to hire them or are you coming to manage an existing team?

Also, just in general, since you mentioned "less cash, more equity". More equity shouldn't be considered a balance to earning less cash in evaluating a job offer. Equity has an expected value based on probability of success. For startup employee equity I've heard people use an EV of ~$0.00 as safe rule of thumb. I'm not a fan of that approach but at the very least "more equity" at the worse of two companies is often worth less or worthless. Up to you how much this matters, if at all.

Hard to answer this with info provided, but I wouldn't take either at this point unless you have to. Kick the can on the offers or get more info from each company that will help you decide.

I get to hire the team.

Good point re: equity, I was trying to say compensation is competitive for both situations.

The pay for working for a "real" company... salary, normalized expectations around work/life balance, 401k, benefits, name recognition on your resume for future projects... it's almost always significantly better at "real companies" vs smaller agencies or start-ups.

That said... we wouldn't have Microsoft, Apple, Dell, etc. if everyone followed that advice.

Which boss do you like more?

> name recognition on your resume for future projects

This is a great point. No one might care if I have a big shot title at a company no one has ever heard of.

> Which boss do you like more?

The guy at the 'better' company seems kinder and has more experience. The smaller company guy is younger and less experienced and tougher. Probably would be "easier" to work for the former, but I don't know if I would develop as much professionally.

Depends on what skill sets you want to improve on. If you want to start managing people then no better way to acquire that skill than to actually do it. If you don't want to acquire managerial skills then you should stick with better people.

In general when I'm making these decisions it always comes down to which group of people I like better regardless of the technology stack.

Take the manager role. It's the hardest to get between the 2. There are many great companies and a zillion individual contributor positions out there. Stay in that company for 1-2 years and apply at a better company as a manager. Stupid recruiters will look at your current title. So either move horizontally or vertically...

Don't really have anything to add, just wanted to say this is a very good point.

I would always choose the company with smarter people, it will be better in the long run I think (learn from them, push your limits, grow your network with smart people and their network, etc.)

I think I would go with the better company. Im not sure I would want to be in charge of a team when you might not see eye to eye with your bosses.

Do you intend on founding your own business or leading other businesses?

My dream job is CTO / founder at a tech company. I've attempted a few ideas but nothing's taken off so I'm trying to do the next best thing in someone else's company.

Lead the small team. You will grow more.

If you want to be a founder, it only makes sense to surround yourself with other brilliant people you can build with. Managing any team is beneficial for the resume, and that doesn't matter much if you're dedicated to building your own company. I'd recommend whichever option you believe empowers you to innovate; while giving you the flexibility to understand the context/foundation to successfully running your own business.

I would be big fish in small pound rather small fish in big pound.

Thanks for your response! Could you explain why?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com