
Google employees on Reddit answers questions. - pavs
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/clz1m/google_employees_on_reddit_fire_up_your_throwaway/
======
dotBen
_I don't have a Reddit account as I've never found the inclination to be part
of that community, but the two thoughts on the topic I would raise here (which
pertain to engineering jobs):_

1) For all the perks
([http://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/clz1m/google_empl...](http://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/clz1m/google_employees_on_reddit_fire_up_your_throwaway/c0tiv76))
I believe I can 'buy' them myself for <$10,000 year (expensive lunches, gym
membership, pay someone to wash my clothes, etc). Given that Google only pays
average wages, this means that so long as I am working somewhere that is
paying me over $10k above average salary, then I'm doing better than a
Googler.

2) On bonuses, Google will give several $million to key folks who were
instrumental in the success of high-profile google products (eg Google Maps
folks walked away with several $million each). Don't forget, though, that
unlike a startup the tax situation on that is probably rough - normal income
rather than capital gains.

I guess both of the above indicate that, for me at my stage in my career,
money considerations are a key part of where I place myself as a resource over
'cool place to work' - which is a reason I don't work for Google.

~~~
nostrademons
> For all the perks
> (<http://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/clz1m/google_empl...>) I
> believe I can 'buy' them myself for <$10,000 year (expensive lunches, gym
> membership, pay someone to wash my clothes, etc). Given that Google only
> pays average wages, this means that so long as I am working somewhere that
> is paying me over $10k above average salary, then I'm doing better than a
> Googler.

That is totally true, if your goal is strictly money & material goods.

Google offers the perks mostly as a way to build community. And in this
respect, it seems to work. There are lots of employers in Silicon Valley that
will pay me good money. There are very few functioning communities -
_particularly_ in Silicon Valley, where it seems everybody's out for the
gigantic payday.

~~~
dotBen
Assuming you mean community in the sense of employee community/camaraderie
than I think you are astute and absolutely right with your observations.

As an alternative to a gigantic payday or not, though, I wouldn't want to be
part of the Google world. I interact with it directly and it seems very
insular and elitist (I have friends who work there, I'm involved with a number
of Google initiatives, I visit the 'Plex a few times a year, etc.).

My experience is that Googler's end up down a rabbit hole of their own self-
importance and loose touch of the rest of the professional world. A bit like
college students at an Ivy-League school loosing touch with the real world.

Yes, even without a gigantic payday, I'll take the option that isn't the
'Google community'.

Money and material good are not 'strictly' my goal but I think everyone
involved in entrepreneurial activities has to be focused on wealth creation as
a considerable driver. I'm also double digit years into my career and done the
"big co" thing already.

~~~
sprout
You said it twice, otherwise I wouldn't note it: the phrase is "losing touch,"
not "loosing touch."

To say something directly though, I think that wealth creation is a distinct
from money. Even if you yourself can get many of those perks with a higher-
paying job, the total wealth in the world is less than if that company gave
you those things outright, since a variety of economies of scale would kick
in.

And maybe Google's society is overly insular. That said, I don't really want
the forced walled garden of Apple or the short-sighted pragmatism of Microsoft
to infect Google.

(That said, Google isn't perfect, and they do have a variety of areas where
they seem to be falling victim at least to the forced walled garden stuff.)

------
jmcnevin
Maybe a bit off topic, but every time I read a thread like this, it leaves me
wondering why people in the US are so reticent to discuss actual solid numbers
regarding how much money they make, but do everything to dance around real
figures, even if posting anonymously. When it comes to discussing salaries,
suddenly everyone becomes a politician.

I lived in Bulgaria for two years, and it was pretty common there for people
to ask, straight up, "How much money do you make?" They'd seem genuinely
perplexed if I didn't want to answer. Granted, Bulgaria's economic situation
is pretty different than the US's, but there was something about those frank
exchanges that made me wonder why we do what we do.

Any thoughts?

~~~
ahlatimer
I would imagine a lot of Googlers have it written in their contract that they
aren't supposed to talk about how much money they make. I know most of the
companies I've worked for have at least had it in the employee handbook.

Personally, I was okay with divulging that information even when I was working
for places that told me not to. I figure if a company is willing to fire or
sue me over telling someone else how much they pay me, I wouldn't want to work
there anyway. It seems like such a trivial bit of information.

------
jacquesm
It would be great if google employees would simply answer questions on google,
but it seems that if there is one thing that google really sucks at it is
communicating with their customers. Especially adsense suffers from a total
lack of attention on behalf of google, I can't recall a single time when I
tried contacting them that I actually got a relevant and timely answer. If I
did get an answer it usually was some totally non-related cut-and-paste stuff.

Invariably followed by a 'how did we do' email asking for some kind of
biscuit.

Incredible.

------
philjackson
So it's high quality fudge that's the key to poaching a Googler...

------
angusgr
I hate myself for being such a grammar nazi, I really do.

"Google employees on Reddit answer questions"

 _collapses in a heap_

~~~
ErrantX
Ummm. It's a perfectly ok sentence :) stylistically bad, perhaps.

~~~
tome
No, the original is "Google employees on Reddit answers questions"

~~~
ErrantX
Yeh apologies. I misread earlier.

------
minus1
Someone mentions the bonuses Google gives for successful launches. Isn't this
generally considered a bad way to motivate "knowledge workers"? Anyone on the
inside have any thoughts?

~~~
andreyf
I'm trying to answer your question, but it seems a little vague. In general,
I'd say this a good rule of thumb that doesn't apply in Google's
culture/implementation of cash awards. To be more specific, I'd have to
speculate about why such policy would be "generally considered a bad way to
motivate". Maybe it would be better if you gave some specific reasons,
instead?

~~~
_delirium
I'm not the original poster, but he/she might be referring to reports like
this one: [http://www.management-
issues.com/2006/8/24/research/bonuses-...](http://www.management-
issues.com/2006/8/24/research/bonuses-fail-to-motivate-workers-or-improve-
performance.asp)

There's an absolutely gigantic literature in management, economics, and other
areas on pros/cons of bonuses and specific bonus schemes in all sorts of
contexts, though, so I'm not sure it's fair to say there's any consensus on
them being considered bad for knowledge workers. My recollection is that there
are some arguments about it coming from an intrinsic/extrinsic motivation
perspective, arguing that knowledge workers are most motivated intrinsically
(because they like the job, find it engaging, like problem-solving, etc.), and
that extrinsic motivation like bonuses might not help, or might even harm
motivation (there's evidence from some psych studies that the presence of
extrinsic rewards can reduce previously existing intrinsic motivation).

~~~
andreyf
_63 per cent felt their bonus scheme was ineffective in improving workplace
performance_

The Founders' Awards aren't really a "bonus scheme", but more like a Nobel
Prize (which may or may not be a good way to motivate "knowledge workers").
Regarding intrinsic/extrinsic motivation, I can't help but feel it's
oversimplifying things: where does social recognition fall? I'd need to think
a bit about it before having a coherent answer.

