

Poaching Etiquette: The Right Way To Take Tech Talent - jeremyhfisher
http://www.betabeat.com/2011/11/17/poaching-etiquette-how-to-love-thy-startup-neighbor-while-coveting-their-devs

======
nhashem
These articles frustrate me because nobody asks why the engineers are
'willing' to get poached. It always boils down to a few reasons:

\- The company's prospects and projects are limited. Shopping comparison was
cool in 2003, but it's 2011, and you have an aging flagship product with
limited growth and a bunch of half-assed initiatives that never go anywhere
because there's too much red tape to actually produce code and the executives
are too busy getting fired every six months have any consistency with
strategy.

But if you're getting tech talent "poached" in that case, you're probably
getting all your talent poached, so let's talk about the other scenario.

\- The engineer's prospects are limited. So few technology companies have any
sort of individual contributor advancement path. A star performing sales guy
goes from junior sales associate, sales associate, senior sales associate,
junior manager, senior manager, etc every 6-12 months, with commissions and
bonuses for strong performance.

The star engineer goes from "software engineer" to "senior software engineer"
after like, 3-5 years, and then what? Either you figure out a way to get
kicked into some sort of manager role or you just kind of hang around getting
a pat on the back and a 6% raise every year until some company swoops in and
"poaches" you with a 20% raise, which naturally seems astronomical by
perspective.

Almost every manager I've had, I've had some conversation like this: "You have
to give Joe a raise, and a BIG one. I know he started here out of college, but
he's been here 3 years now. Because of his talent and domain expertise, he is
easily more productive than any theoretical 'senior engineer' we could hire.
Even if he's relatively happy, if you don't give him a raise, it's going to be
way too easy for some recruiter to throw out salary numbers that will at least
pique his interest."

And instead of bumping Joe's pay by 30% (which would still probably be less
than market rates), he gets "poached," and now we have to hire some "senior
engineer" at 200% the salary who tries to convince us to rewrite everything in
Java for six months until he gets fired.

~~~
Woost
There's also Joe's impression of how much his employer values him: If Joe is
perfectly happy working at 10k/year, but you're paying new people just out of
college 20k/year it can cause Joe to start looking for ways to get
poached.(for example)

~~~
dman
This happens surprisingly more often than you think.

------
WildUtah
Anti-poaching sentiment is an attempt by executives to drive down the status,
pay, and perks of talent.

Programmers' and technicians' status and benefits are already artificially low
due to lack of a professional licensing or guild system (thank goodness) and
poor negotiating skills rampent in the profession (bad). Execs who pretend to
value programmers and participate in anti-poaching schemes are stabbing their
workers in the back.

Anti-poaching agreements, formal or implicit, are also illegal everywhere in
the USA and most developed countries. They violate the Sherman Anti-Trust Act
and its successors. These interviewees who brag on about how they're
respecting their investors, partners, and friends by not poaching are
admitting to a federal crime. The US Attorney from New York should be
investigating.

Of course, the execs and our culture have succeeded in driving down the status
of programmers enough that nobody much cares about crimes committed against
them. Maybe they do need a guild.

------
CapitalistCartr
I don't like losing good employees, but when one tells me he's thinking of
going somewhere, whether it's a competitor, school. different industry,
whatever, I don't take it all personally. Sooner or later, I do the same
thing. And that's the reason my people will tell me when they're considering
something else. P.S. My rule of girlfriends and bosses: You learn more about
them when you leave than at any other time.

~~~
thomasgerbe
"You learn more about them when you leave than at any other time."

How so? (honestly, I'm dense)

~~~
maratd
At the end of the relationship, people stop doing things to keep the
relationship afloat. They start to act like they would around anybody else.
It's a learning experience.

------
jroseattle
It's funny, "poaching" in this context refers to hiring away talent from one
company to the next. As if the talent is the property of the company.

I prefer to think of "poaching" in more appropriate terms -- supply and
demand. Limited supply, demand increasing, and the market bears what it will.

Anyone who complains about this environment needs to consider another line of
work.

~~~
roc
> _"I prefer to think of "poaching" in more appropriate terms -- supply and
> demand."_

Exactly. It isn't poaching, it's _competing_. I wouldn't want to work at a
place that thought of talent as property to be "poached".

~~~
snowwrestler
It's just a metaphorical term of art. Most people wouldn't want to work with
"garbage collection" every day, but of course many programmers do.

~~~
roc
Yeah, it's a metaphor that analogizes people and property.

I wouldn't have any qualms about working with, say, purchasing managers who
talked about "poaching" component orders from one another, because they'd be
talking about property as property.

Do you really not see the difference?

~~~
snowwrestler
I think you're really stretching here. The core issue is whether companies
value their employees--that comes through in how the employees actually get
treated, not the use of one word vs. another.

~~~
roc
I think it's pretty hard to truly value and treat someone well if you think
and speak of them as property.

------
johngalt
Love the entitlement attitude of some managers, and the weasel words. As if
it's some sort of moral failure to get paid market rates.

Employee leaves to get paid their market rate = evil poaching! Management
firing everyone to replace with lower cost workers = a necessary market
adjustment

~~~
tomjen3
It may be my limited understanding, but poaching is when a company actively
targets a particular person (say by calling them) rather than putting out a
general call for CS grads with 10 years Rails experience.

But, again, I may be wrong.

~~~
dpritchett
Yes but if the employee is getting more at the new job then they were by
definition underutilized and/or underpaid at the job they were "poached" from.
Collusion amongst employers artificially limits employee earning power and
cripples the invisible hand of labor economics.

Top flight employees should always be working at the edge of their abilities
for commensurate pay. Anything less is an inefficient allocation of capital
that hurts the industry as a whole.

------
bproper
Recruiting has become the most sought after skill among founders and one of
the things companies look for as extra value a VC can bring.

Not sure there is a good way poach, aside from being a good sport and not
rubbing it in. That and following through on the promises you make (looking at
you Zynga).

~~~
frossie
If someone else can offer one of my guys a better deal than what I can (and by
deal I don't just mean money), then I send them off with my good wishes.

I realise this comes across as naive, and I certainly don't want to minimize
the huge disruption someone leaving a busy small team can cause, but if you
start seeing people as property and laying your ego on the line every time you
have turnover, you are going to have a miserable life.

[Disclaimer: I don't work in startups but I do work somewhere where it
typically takes 9 months to re-hire, so don't think I don't feel the pain]

------
swampthing
As an aside, there can be legal consequences to the "no-poaching agreements"
mentioned in the OP's article:

[http://gigaom.com/2010/09/24/doj-settles-with-apple-adobe-
go...](http://gigaom.com/2010/09/24/doj-settles-with-apple-adobe-google-over-
hiring-collusion-charges/)

------
alttag
There are downsides to informal "no poaching" agreements. After I left one
e-company, I applied at another, and later learned I wouldn't be interviewed
because of the previous company on my resume. The first company was major
client of the second, and they didn't want to have even the appearance of
"poaching."

~~~
devs1010
Did they actually tell you this? I would think this must violate some sort of
anti-discrimination law

~~~
alttag
No, the company's representatives did not formally/explicitly say it. My
resume just went into a black hole, where I couldn't get a response from
anyone.

Later, some colleagues who worked there mentioned (after I'd found a job
elsewhere) that it's something of an unspoken policy between the two
companies, and was likely the cause of my experience.

------
bbwharris
Poaching is the modern developers equivalent of "climbing the ladder" or
getting a promotion. There is a limited ceiling for someone who is dedicated
to their craft. They can go into management and "lose half their brain". They
can go out on their own, but being a founder isn't for everyone.

There is no real loyalty. Companies will lay off their employees when money is
a concern. Employees will leave their companies when they can make more money
elsewhere. This is business. It's not personal, right?

------
madao
My father used to tell me stories about when he was a manager within a factory
(a good 30-40 years ago... he is 70 next year) essentially the employment rate
for tradesmen was at maximum and essentially the only way to hire new help was
to go out and offer someone who already had a job more cash/perks I don't
think its wrong in any way to poach. its just a change of how the employment
market will work when there are not enough skilled labor around to fill the
needs of everyone.

