Hacker News Reader

Comment by k-mcgrady | Hacker News Reader

I was under the impressions job supply was far higher than demand in the bay area (for engineers). Aren't people always complaining they can't get the talent? So I would guess that the hours you're willing to do above the standard don't matter as, if you're talented, you're in demand.

View on HN

As much as I'd like to believe they are being genuine (as a developer who benefits from being in high demand) I've heard that this statement can really be re-written as "We can't get enough talent at the price we want to pay" thus the push to try to make it easier to bring engineers into the USA (One's they conveniently leave out will accept less for the same job). I'm not saying this is all fact but just that I'm not sure how much I believe that they really are scrambling for talent.

I would agree with this with one caveat. The way I read your comment was, "Large software firms want to hire you for as little as possible" but I think it's more "Large software firms want to hire the best talent for as little as possible."

I tend to believe that the throughput of the top 5-10% can be exponentially more than the next 5-10%. The objective for a lot of these firms is to get the top couple percent and get 4x as much value of out someone but paying 2x as much. As it relates to the parent comment, I think there is an incredibly high demand for the top 5-10% of tech talent and exponentially less demand for the subsequent talent. It's very similar in NYC for finance talent. I know people who work in SF and NYC both who work insane hours but they get paid SO MUCH MORE for it.

So, no one is scrambling for good engineers or good bankers or good consultants but they are scrambling for that tiny sliver of the market that they believe will generate exponential returns and turn into leaders of the company.

The 10x people thing is mostly a myth, or applies to vanishing view superstars -- not engineering employees at a large company. 10x producers are people who work on well structured and balanced teams with good management.

I completely agree with what you're saying about their needing to be context around those individuals. And I also agree that the 10x people are a myth. What I do know is that, in software, I have interviewed software engineers with VERY similar resumes, pedigrees, etc. and there are HUGE gaps when we've actually worked with them. Absolutely enormous gaps.

Perhaps this is simply too anecdotal and I've had a poor experiences, but I can say, in my personal experiences, most candidates we've talked with are doing 1x and there are other candidates doing 2x, 3x, or better. Perhaps not 10x, but I have definitely seen very similar people on paper deliver on VERY different levels.

I think that is a very good assessment. For all the complaining people do about "senior" engineers who can't code for loops and wanting to see more applicants who can code basic programs, there is a chasm the size of the Grand Canyon between being able to code a simple 100-line program and the point that most Valley hiring bars are set at. There are not now, and probably will never be, enough people above those inflated hiring bars to sate all the companies that have them, but none will back off.

I don't believe they're scrambling for talent. I think a lot of the supposed "demand" for labor out here is a combination of your typical resume collecting from the larger organizations and bandwagon-driven "we need PhDs from Stanford to scale our shitty RoR b2b sales app; there aren't enough 'qualified' people to write code" nonsense. Furthermore, there are just more people who are qualified to write code out here. So there may be more demand than elsewhere, but there is also more (much more?) supply of labor to meet it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com