Opinion on "big boring companies"

rewardStyle darkling

Feb 18 23 Comments

Bookmark
COPY LINK
function

As a software engineer in the very general "web development" space, what is your opinion about looking to work at big companies like Cisco, Pizza Hut, Nike, and the like? I know it's a very generalized question, but if you ignore FANG and the flashy startups of the world, what kind of companies are worth shooting for if you're optimizing for learning and career growth, especially for non-traditional applicants? (most of the engineers at my company don't have a CS degree).

A few more more-or-less representative examples:

-Bank of (insert anything here), excluding quant-trading positions
-Macy's/Nordstrom/H&M
-Walmart, Kroger, Costco
-VMware, Adobe, Intuit
-Adidas, Under Armour, Sports Authority
-Ford, GE, Texas Instruments

I could go on, but hopefully that gets the point across. Hit me with any questions, or if I'm just asking the wrong/dumb questions. Thanks people.

3 23

Want to comment? LOG IN or SIGN UP

TOP 23 Comments

Microsoft UMbR31
The best learning (and future outlook on TC) will come from companies where the output is software (say, Microsoft). Rather than companies (say, Nike, Instacart) where software is used to support their effort to create a non software output (shoes, deliver groceries). Nike would pay tons for marketing instead.

This distinction is more important than big-boring vs small-exciting.
Feb 188 9
- rewardStyle darkling
  OP
  Would you tie this to the scalability of software, or something more along the lines of "a direct software company will by extension provide the best exposure to said software", or something else in the business model?
  Feb 180
- Microsoft UMbR31
  It's not about scalability. For example, the tiny Netherlands based "Sketch" company makes a great desktop app (with no scale), I'd be eager to hire someone from there for example. It also has very little to do with business model.
  
  Companies pay best attention and resources towards their own output, rather than supporting functions. An extreme example is athlete/coach vs finance manager in a sports team.
  Feb 186
- rewardStyle darkling
  OP
  Thanks man, that makes a lot of sense. Like being an accountant at a software company perhaps...they're definitely viewed as a cost center here. Same with HR, but what else is new right?
  Feb 180
- Microsoft UMbR31
  Accurate.
  Feb 181
- Twitter CronoSlice
  Then Uber and Lyft are no-go.
  Feb 182
- Dropbox / Eng100k🔗🐼
  Or Airbnb?
  Feb 182
- Bloomberg 21$aVaE
  Are you a cost center or a profit center? I think you have better potential where software is a profit center.
  Feb 182
- Microsoft UMbR31
  I'd consider Uber Lyft as exceptions. I even interviewed with both. Airbnb is a no go in my mind. It's just a personal outlook.
  Feb 182
- Dropbox / Eng100k🔗🐼
  Yeah uber/Lyft’s business depends on the app being good and all that ...but Airbnb’s product is housing. Other than a website (which every business has), I don’t see how tech is a revenue generator there...
  Feb 193
VMware ugcnfdjn
I would exclude -VMware, Adobe, Intuit
As they are actually SW companies...
As oppose to rest of list
Feb 188 1
- rewardStyle darkling
  OP
  I guess I was just trying to include what some might term "mature" companies, but outside of the darlings of SV zeitgeist. Software is cool with me. I do work in software after all.
  Feb 180
American Express D.BCooper
I worked and managed a team at Kroger.

It is slow boring and all white but the company wont lay you off. People's entire families work there, kids, dad's, grandparents. It is crazy. If you worked in the store or as a store manager, youre annoited for corporate management.

CEO is super humble, cheap house and he knew my work personally. Not kidding. I wasnt even that high up. Spoke with him a few times.

Id find him on late night commercial flights back from Atlanta to Cincinnati. That stuck with me. No other CEO I know does that.
Feb 196 0
Square TjLf64
Great question. Tech is more inclusive than you think. Rather than aim for the non-FANG companies you mention, I'd aim for smaller (50-100 people) high-growth startups with product-market fit. There's a lot more whitespace to grow your career and own your outcome. In those big companies, tech is usually viewed as a cost center so you are always just following orders instead of driving growth. Although that's changing rapidly too.

My answer assumes that you don't need the incremental security of a stable established company. With a family to feed, one might prioritize stability over growth.
Feb 184 3
- rewardStyle darkling
  OP
  As someone at Square, would you characterize your company as such a high growth startup? Or more of a mid size deal ironing thing out? A company like LinkedIn for example (before being acquired by Microsoft) is technically a start up but sure looks like a mid size if not full on corporate company from the outside. Correct me if I'm misinformed.
  Feb 180
- Square TjLf64
  Square and LinkedIn are public companies, so they favor traditional pathways for most people. They are certainly more open to diverse backgrounds than FANG are. When I say startup, I mean Opendoor, Figma, Airtable, Chime, Omni.
  Feb 181
- rewardStyle darkling
  OP
  Appreciate that, I think I'll take a look. I'm nontraditional but get shit learned when I need it to get shit done, and proud of it.
  Feb 180
New / EngBanjosemore
The kind of work that big boring companies do allows a person to pursue other things than a relentless drive for TC. Big boring companies often have very strong wlb perks and literally zero stress. Sure, they may not be as shiny as FAANG but you meet veterans and grow your network tremendously in them
Feb 181 2
- rewardStyle darkling
  OP
  That sounds great actually. I've got other things outside of work that I'm prioritizing too. Looking to grow at a place that respects that, which was why I was curious. Appreciate the input. Also, is the relentless drive for TC something you've observed a lot to someone's career detriment? Just curious.
  Feb 180
- New / EngBanjosemore
  I think that the drive for TC is bad but I don't think that means it will be detrimental to one's career.
  
  I know a dozen people who have relocated for a higher TC but hate it because their family is elsewhere. I know that nothing, not even TC, can replace time with loved ones.
  Some of those people who have relocated have actually been offered jobs at higher positions.
  
  Thus, from my anecdotal experience, pursuing TC isn't the be all and end all.
  
  I would also think about wealth and how it goes down from generation to generation. Most of that wealth will be expended by generation 3. So this TC rat race is causing harm to nothing but yourself and your loved ones.
  Feb 181
eBay seatmore
There’s nothing wrong with those companies, they’re just not as visible in the tech world as software isn’t their product. I know that The New York Times has a very talented web team but not very many people are aware of that
Feb 182 1
- rewardStyle darkling
  OP
  That's actually exactly why I'm interested. The current hypothesis is I want to find solid teams to grow with, that are outside the hype bubble and/or won't fall over if a funding round falls through next year. Glory and growth is great, but given my table stakes I'll settle for growth.
  Feb 180
Intuit gdnf4012
Intuit definitely most boring full of legacy codebase and not a tech company
Feb 192 0

Transferring to tech

blind

All Topics

Opinion on "big boring companies"

comments