This week, two developers on my team shared feedback that highlighted a gap I’ve been working to bridge — the one between what our dashboards show and what’s actually happening on the ground.
I would be interested in learning more on how you find that right person up front. What are the things you are looking for in the resume stage? Would you rather see an applicant with smaller work experience but specialized to your work or an applicant that has done much more in the same amount of time but only has some of the skills listed on the job posting?
Also, does this impact more on young hires as they have a lot more training you need to invest into them or more experience applicants due to higher wage?
I do find the engineers not growing with the companies an interesting topic. I have worked with senior engineers that don't want to touch anything outside their very specific domain of expertise even when the subject at hand is very close to their specific domain not requiring too much additional learning. I always wonder if that is due to not want to grow or heightened fear of possibly making a mistake.
I am curious on the engineering retention, what are the major reasons for loosing or keeping an engineer and how that is different than other disciplines (if any).
Great question about engineering retention! In our company, we have a really strong focus on hiring - we spend a lot of time and effort trying to find and follow the "right person, right seat" principle. Most often, the main challenge is actually finding the right person upfront rather than keeping them once they're here.
As for departures, they happen quite rarely. The core of our engineering team has been with the company for years - we have really strong retention overall. But when engineers do leave or get let go, it's usually because the company has outgrown them and they didn't want to grow with us.
It's important to note that we actively encourage learning and development - we provide training opportunities, support career growth, and invest in our people's development. So when someone doesn't grow with the company, it's typically a personal choice rather than lack of opportunity.
This creates an interesting dynamic: we're not losing people to better offers or greener pastures elsewhere. Instead, the rare departures happen when there's a mismatch between the evolving role requirements and someone's willingness to develop new skills or take on different responsibilities.
I think this is somewhat unique to engineering compared to other disciplines. Engineers often have very specific technical comfort zones, and as companies scale, the technical challenges and requirements evolve rapidly. Some engineers thrive in that growth environment, while others prefer to stay within their established expertise areas.
The "right person, right seat" principle becomes even more critical in engineering because technical skills, problem-solving approaches, and adaptability to new technologies vary so much between individuals. Getting that initial fit right seems to be our biggest predictor of long-term success.
(Relying in order of comment)
I would be interested in learning more on how you find that right person up front. What are the things you are looking for in the resume stage? Would you rather see an applicant with smaller work experience but specialized to your work or an applicant that has done much more in the same amount of time but only has some of the skills listed on the job posting?
Also, does this impact more on young hires as they have a lot more training you need to invest into them or more experience applicants due to higher wage?
I do find the engineers not growing with the companies an interesting topic. I have worked with senior engineers that don't want to touch anything outside their very specific domain of expertise even when the subject at hand is very close to their specific domain not requiring too much additional learning. I always wonder if that is due to not want to grow or heightened fear of possibly making a mistake.
will create a post about that
I am curious on the engineering retention, what are the major reasons for loosing or keeping an engineer and how that is different than other disciplines (if any).
Great question about engineering retention! In our company, we have a really strong focus on hiring - we spend a lot of time and effort trying to find and follow the "right person, right seat" principle. Most often, the main challenge is actually finding the right person upfront rather than keeping them once they're here.
As for departures, they happen quite rarely. The core of our engineering team has been with the company for years - we have really strong retention overall. But when engineers do leave or get let go, it's usually because the company has outgrown them and they didn't want to grow with us.
It's important to note that we actively encourage learning and development - we provide training opportunities, support career growth, and invest in our people's development. So when someone doesn't grow with the company, it's typically a personal choice rather than lack of opportunity.
This creates an interesting dynamic: we're not losing people to better offers or greener pastures elsewhere. Instead, the rare departures happen when there's a mismatch between the evolving role requirements and someone's willingness to develop new skills or take on different responsibilities.
I think this is somewhat unique to engineering compared to other disciplines. Engineers often have very specific technical comfort zones, and as companies scale, the technical challenges and requirements evolve rapidly. Some engineers thrive in that growth environment, while others prefer to stay within their established expertise areas.
The "right person, right seat" principle becomes even more critical in engineering because technical skills, problem-solving approaches, and adaptability to new technologies vary so much between individuals. Getting that initial fit right seems to be our biggest predictor of long-term success.