Google has a problem retaining great engineers? Bullcrap.

"...the value Google is getting out of my work is worth many multiples of my total compensation. And that’s a position that every engineer should strive for, since that’s how you can be confident that you will remain gainfully employed."<p>As an entrepreneur, something about this statement bothers me... something about all the value I create getting skimmed off the top and taken away by someone else. Yeah, that's probably it.<p>But if you just want to do neat engineering work, then, sure, I get it.

<p><pre><code> They are about business model discovery. So if you are fundamentally a technologist at heart, whose heart sings when you’re making a better file system, or fixing a kernel bug, you’re not going to be happy at a startup. </code></pre> There are plenty of storage startups in Silicon Valley that would be happy to pay someone to do filesystem work.<p>Web 2.0 startups are not the only game in town. There are plenty of other companies at which to do serious engineering work.

Okay, so Google has a problem retaining the subset of great engineers who're also entrepreneurial.<p>That's still a problem.

FTA: "A startup is totally the wrong place for me."<p>There are startups out there that depend on superior engineering for their living. Off the top of my head, this guy would do very well at Heroku, Dropbox, RethinkDB, Clustrix and FlightCaster.

From the perspective of working on file systems, I don't see a viable way to innovate and monetize. I completely see the OP point of view, from his perspective. I disagree with the conclusion though.<p>It is true that a lot of the big startups aren't innovating in technology. They are innovating in the business model space. But that doesn't mean you can't create some innovative technology to build a startup around it.

In Sweden, Google has aquired Marratech and Global IP Solutions. Both are all about hardcore codec innovation, not business model discovery. Google was licensing tech from GIPS long before they aquired it. If big companies are where heavy tech is developed, aquisitions like those would never happen.<p>NB. Another Google aquisition from Sweden was Trendalyzer, Hans Rosling's visualization technology famous from his TED talk, making Sweden the country with most Google aquisitions in Europe, Middle-East and Africa.

Google, like almost any other company of sufficient size, has a problem retaining great engineers who prefer smaller companies. Those preferences are not about the false dichotomy between "engineers" and "entrepreneurs". Mr. Ts'o enjoys a job in an established company where he can be paid well, work only on specific technical problems, work reasonable hours, etc. That's a fine choice, and the right one for many. It is, however, still exactly that: a job. People who start companies are not often looking for another job. Mr. Ts'o should be thankful that is so. Had Larry and Sergey taken his advice the company for which he works would not exist.

The following sentence is very not true and quite misleading:<p>&#62; Similarly, you don’t work on great technology at a startup. .. They are about business model discovery...<p>If that is true, then why do technology startups exist at all? Isn't discovering business model very much connected to discovering new technologies (new, more efficient ways to solve problems)? In other words, if a technology startup is not planning to invent something, then it not should probably exist in the first place.<p>It is true there are some Web 2.0 startups which are not about technology at all, but these startups are anyway not looking for great engineers.

Reading the article title I immediately thought of those leaving Google for Facebook. This IS happening. They're doing it to catch the FB IPO.<p>OP mentions this topic but mostly talks about his view, which I get. On the other hand, I've spoken with plenty of ex-Google employees who've left because Google is getting so large and has so many 20% projects that it no longer feels so entrepreneurial being at Google and so they leave. These are employees that don't care about a business model and just want to see their projects see the light of day.<p>So, Google has a problem retaining great engineers? Sure, it doesn't apply to OP, but that doesn't mean it's bullcrap.

I find this article misleading, Google certainly does not have problem retaining talents joining early stage startups. Those talents probably joined Google pre-IPO and funding their own startups now. The problem for the late Googlers is that they and their uncles all want to join the multi-billions dollar pre-IPO "company". And yes, their scale is big enough and affect millions, and the up side is, one day they can move on to be entrepreneurs.

Since Theodore brought this up: "(And those stories about Google paying $3.5 million and $7 million to keep an engineer from defecting to Facebook? As far as I know, total bull. I bet it’s something made up by some Facebook recruiter who needed to explain how she let a live prospect get away. :-)"<p>I'm pretty sure it's real. Someone who either posts on here or who is frequently submitted -- I think piaw, or something like that? -- is an early Google ops person. Anyway, on piaw's blog, he or she mentioned that he or she had personally spoken to a G employee who got a counteroffer within 20% of the 3.5MM. So perhaps Theodore should be a little less sure of himself. Sorry for being vague, my memory is a little hazy, but I've read this in the last 2 weeks.<p>Also, he's doing something much closer to pure infrastructure work, so of course fewer -- but not zero -- web startups will be interested. That being said, I think it highly unlikely there are no jobs in SF / valley for highly experienced linux kernel file system devs.<p>Edit: link I referred to above <a href="http://piaw.blogspot.com/2010/11/counter-offer-conundrum.html" rel="nofollow">http://piaw.blogspot.com/2010/11/counter-offer-conundrum.htm...</a><p>"People asked me yesterday if the Techcrunch $3.5M story was true. I said it was believable, because while I wasn't involved in negotiating that particular counter-offer, I had some role in assisting someone land a counter-offer within 20% of that number some time back."