Why do some companies attract design talent, while others struggle to connect

figma.com

Maybe they pay more?

They can't be that talented if money is their primary objective. Further, is 'more money' a better gauge in selecting talent? If it was that easy ..

So no. Talent also interviews the employer, always. When you step into a creative environment, you know it. Just like any other focused human activity, the cognitive tribes have their unspoken signs that communicates group mentality. If you are a talent in software, you know if the guys and gals sitting across the table from you have the chops or not. Don't you? Same for creatives.

I will inform my talented creative friends that their desire to be compensated fairly for their hard work is misguided. Companies themselves are not inherently talented. If the company is creating something that other people will pay (well) for, the company should consider the talents of their employees as the actual "talent" of the company. So for a company to be talented it must attract talented people. To the best of my knowledge having "chops" is necessary but insufficient for a company to be successful. Pixar might be a good example. In "Creativity Inc" Catmull describes how Job's delay in granting stock options to employees was f'ing things up. Talented people need to eat, have shelter and send their kids to school too.

That would be a woeful misunderstanding of what I wrote.

Money can only entice established talent.

Money can not find future talent in the pool of applicant -merely- by throwing money at them. To find talent, to discover talent, to nurture talent, takes much more than just mere money.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com