Even more true at Meta. Focus on impaccc.
You ha impac?
Here as well
True everywhere and at every level. VPs and CEOs are no exception. The right interview question: how many v2+ products did you work on? Senior candidates with an answer of zero are disqualified.
This is so true that it is really sad. It is a bit different in GCP though.
Is there any large tech company which doesn’t “punish” you for taking v2 products? Airbnb? Netflix?
I feel like we miss the upside of this. From Google's perspective, the promo process produces 20 Google Stadia for every Kubernetes, Blaze, Borg etc it makes. Internally, a (slightly) higher ratio of successful "launches" turn into successful internal products I imagine. I'm sure there are buckets of internal white elephants as well. Google is likely extremely happy with the ratio of 20 white elephants to 1 Blaze.
Why is this bad? Launching a service is more difficult than maintaining one. It's also a way to retain talent because often the engineers that like to build don't like to maintain and would grow bored and leave. It's far from perfect, but you won't find a perfect solution. What would you suggest as an alternative?
I think it is bad practice; you will never see software getting evolved.
Soo.. why doesn't leadership recognize this and adjust?
Because fixing won't give you a promo
That’s easy. They launched the new promo program, got a promo themselves, then abandoned the program.