Google vs Meta performance culture
I've been an E6 at Meta for a year now and hate the performance culture. So many useless experiments, many of which are expected to lead to neutral results or even degrade customer experience, framed as a "learning experiment". Just pure PSC optimization. I've been considering transition to Google (contacted by a team from there that fits my interests). However, I'm afraid to end up in the same situation. To those here who were in both Google and Meta, what is your impression regarding performance culture in both? Which one has a better culture? TC: 400K after stock drop
Just massage the data until it supports your side? That's what everyone else is doing.
They are identical for the most part. Google used to be worse but has moved toward Metas. To be transparent I do think performance cultures are bad though and prefer them. I don't think learning from experiments are bad and I also haven't worked for Google for many years.
Sorry but your answer doesn’t really tell us anything. You go back and forth so much.
If your main concern is ending up in a similar situation, then you have nothing to lose by trying?
I only worked at Google a couple of years but perf was the focus, you had to run infinite experiments to launch very simple changes to Search, and it was super political. I assume FB is the same way.
It can be worse at Google if the product makes money / is public facing. Endless experiments, can’t launch with neutral, hacking to +0.1% on key metrics and everyone’s happy. In a lot of ways, Google is more metric / perf driven than Meta.