
Ever left a company because of tech stack direction? - halfmatthalfcat
I recently joined a company that, during the interview process, was reassessing their tech stack and planning to shift in a different direction, both front and backend. I was hired to help with that.<p>During the interview process, we talked about future state architecture and it sounded like they wanted to move into exciting directions.<p>Alas, months into the job, they’ve decided to move toward more legacy frameworks and less-exciting languages for business reasons (hirability, establishes technologies, etc). I understand the decision but feel like it won’t help forward me career like I thought it would have prior to joining.<p>Has anybody else experienced this and did you end up staying with the company or move on?
======
gregjor
No. If a candidate gave that as their main reason for changing jobs I would
take it as a bad sign.

Companies hire people to solve business problems and add value, not so they
can use their preferred languages or tools. Your “stack” counts for a lot less
than what you’ve accomplished. A professional programmer resume lists
accomplishments in terms of problems solved and value added, not tech “skills”
in terms of languages and frameworks.

Learning a business domain, solving real problems, working with a team, and
understanding trade-offs count for more for your career growth.

------
ianamartin
Honestly, the tech stack is the last thing I consider about a job--within
reason. I wouldn't consider a job where the decision was to, say, move towards
Flash, or something. But even that would be as much about the other things I
care about as Flash specifically.

The most important parts of a job are the team you're working with and direct
management you have and the kinds of problems you get to solve.

If those things are all good, the specific stack doesn't matter. You'll grow
and develop as a technologist, and hopefully in a sustainable way. As long as
the choice is defensible, I wouldn't care about it at all. If it's completely
idiotic (like Flash would be today), then that says a lot about the quality of
management and team you'll be working with.

On the face of it, it may not be a big deal. But one thing to be wary of is a
bait and switch. If you were specifically hired to do something that was a big
part of your decision to take the job, and then all of that goes away, that's
a bit of a flag, regardless of how acceptable a legacy decision might be on
its own.

I would try and figure out that piece of the puzzle: did the hiring manager
manipulate you to get you to take the job? OR was this a decision that was
still largely in progress and you're coming to grips with some slightly
wishful thinking?

One of those is a legitimate problem. The other is possibly some excitement
and enthusiasm that was a little misplaced.

