Hacker News Reader

Comment by smiler | Hacker News Reader

Would be great if he had expanded on the 'no career path' section - that will probably be something that most people want to know about - surely there must be different levels of developers to some extent? Moving from development to management?

Any Apple employees on here like to comment?

View on HN

Any Apple employees on here like to comment?

Probably not ;-)

Lack of a career path is part of why I left Apple to start my own company. The hierarchy is quite flat, and the departments are quite compartmentalized. Because of this, if you want to move up, you're probably quitting and applying to a new job that also happens to be at Apple. Of course, it was a wonderful place to work in a lot of other ways.

Apple is trying to hire me to do server side stuff.

It's a job that I'm pretty good at, but I'm not very excited about anymore. My thinking was that I could transfer into another group after a year, and it would be easier once I'm "in the system."

Given your statement, is it a better idea to just wait until I'm good enough at the stuff I want to do, before applying?

If you're not excited about something, don't do it - even at Apple.

Unless you're broke.

Loads of people leave and come back, too. I knew several.

I heard about a guy who did this named Steve.

Employee 0 (apocryphal).

Indeed. Moving up by starting a company and being acquired back into the fold is a great way to go.

The way he mentions that Apple HR confirms that there are 'no career paths' at Apple makes me think he's referring to a more regimented promotion system (a la GE).

This is probably what he means. It's the case at a lot of companies, and particularly tech companies. There's probably no set rulebook along the lines of "You will spend X years in Y position in Z department, then you will be promoted to Y+1, where you will spend another X years until Y+2," etc.

That kind of structured progression seems to be going away in a lot of industries, with the notable exceptions being the big client-facing industries (consulting, banking, law, and so forth).

If you look at company reviews on glassdoor.com, you'll notice that people either complain that their company has too many layers of management, or that there are no opportunities for advancement.

I've never heard anyone claim that Apple is overly bureaucratic.

People have tried to make that claim, but Apple's Reality Distortion Field picked it up and the guilty parties were taken out back and shot.

Remember that 1984 video? Yeah.

Could you elaborate more on the system?

Either that or a Google-style flat hierarchy. There may simply not be that many manager positions to get promoted into.

Almost certainly he's referring to a formal career plan, of which I saw none at Apple. On the other hand, I know many engineers who have made director -- but only by switching gears to management. If you want to stay an individual contributor, you can, but "moving up" at Apple is largely confined to management. There are a handful of DESTs, but they are the exception, rather than the rule.

How does that effect compensation? Do people plateau in compensation because of the lack of formal levels, or is compensation not tied so tightly to your title/# of reports/etc.

I don't know; they keep that data pretty close to their chest. You wouldn't get up into the eye-watering RSU/option grant territory until you made director, but the engineers (and team leads, &c.) are well compensated. The stock going berserk has changed the equation, of course.

EDIT: Oh, how about I answer the question? Compensation is highly discretionary, so it varies pretty widely. But the real cheese is in equity grants, and those are heavily weighted towards management. A common complaint is that there's no realistic path up out of being an "individual contributor".

Reply on news.ycombinator.com