While interviewing post-FB to other companies as an SRE-type-engineer, it seemed to me that outside of FANN it's not common to give engineers a very wide scope. One company asked me whether I'd like to join the monitoring team or the container team, to which I replied "why can't I work in whatever team needs me the most, and switch whenever needed?". They didn't like that.
After trying and failing to find a part-time position I like (can expand on it if interesting), I ended up joining as an architect to a "fixer-upper" company, where I have a lot of things I can improve and wide scope. The money isn't up to par with FB, but I feel I'm doing meaningful work and making the world better, which was missing from the last couple of months at FB.
Nihilartikel|2 years ago
I'm ex faang and have managed to carve out a comfortable independant consultancy where I can kind of join needful organizations as a roving 'fix-it-up' engineer at large, answering to the directors who (hopefully) only care about things working better.
It's gratifying to swoop in and fix real problems for teams, and also get a view on cross team efficiency opportunities that most siloed org-structures don't have good visibility or agency to tackle.
Backslasher|2 years ago
EDIT saw your reply. That's a great experience! I tried that but the timing / friends / luck didn't pan out there. I'm happy you got it working though :)
sgillen|2 years ago
sul4bh|2 years ago
nine_zeros|2 years ago
Far too many companies are designed as management empires instead of as engineers-as-drivers of change. This means that you are being only hired as a headcount in a reporting chain, not as a versatile engineer that can be help boost a company. They'll impose ineffective policies such as you cannot switch teams before 18 months, or a manager can sabotage your mobility with some reviews. All of this is designed to keep the corporate structure inflexible.
It is a structural problem in most American corporations, that they are unable to get past. Faang, and specifically Facebook, encouraged so much mobility - and it showed in the way they completely smashed larger competitors like Google, Microsoft in the last decade.
outworlder|2 years ago
Well said.
I'll just say that all companies (at least, large US-based ones) are like that. Every single one of them.
The trick is to have a 'management empire' that's large enough that it spans most of the required functions. That way at least some engineers are able to move inside the fiefdom and not bump heads against some other high level manager's domain.
rumblecat|2 years ago
dvfjsdhgfv|2 years ago
Does it mean you felt you were making the work a better place during the earlier couple of years at FB?
Backslasher|2 years ago
By comparison, everything I do now improving the company I work at, and at most times has a direct, positive impact on our users and in a smaller way on society
websap|2 years ago
Also, not sure where in FAANG you had such wide scope. At FAANG either teams are mostly organized by business. For e.g. engineers working on Photos at Facebook, can't suddenly decide they want to work on implementing a feature for container orchestration at Facebook works.
pradn|2 years ago
Still, we like to speak of all these companies in the same breath, but I feel like unless you worked at a few of them, it's hard to say what the actual commonalities/differences are.
francisofascii|2 years ago
I didn't get that impression. OP sounds adaptable/flexible and is willing to work on whatever team needs the most help.
Backslasher|2 years ago
The last sentence is factually incorrect. During my time at FB I contributed code to the container solution, the Jenkins-equivalent, the network routing layer, the bare-metal-provisioner, the monitoring solution and even wrote a feature for the website. I identified a problem, parlayed with the owning team, and shipped that feature. This was the best part IMO about working at FB.
kevinventullo|2 years ago
If they find a manager on the container orchestration team with open headcount who wants to hire them, there isn’t much that can stop them from moving.
Spooky23|2 years ago
The heads of the subdivisions of the company “own” their smaller units, and the units own the people. I think of it as feudal governance. “Sharing” people ultimately makes the overlord look weaker.
nicoburns|2 years ago
jmholla|2 years ago
Backslasher|2 years ago