Working for a Mid-Size vs. a Big Tech Company
If you work in Tech this may help you decide which path to choose based on real-life experience.
Disclaimer: I want to clarify that I am not attempting to make broad generalizations in the discussions presented here. My observations are based solely on my personal experiences, and I acknowledge that these experiences can vary significantly from one individual to another and from one company to another.
I have worked in a Big Tech company and a Mid-size startup; both are very different worlds. There are numerous articles discussing the differences between these two realms.
However, in this article, I aim to explore my personal experiences and approach the same topic from a different angle.
My goal is not to steer the reader toward one path over the other, as both have their own set of pros and cons. In this article, I will discuss in depth both sides of the equation.
I will use the word startup for ease, but what I really mean is Mid-size startup. Here’s a good article about how to determine startup size by Kaylee Moser
Without further ado, let’s bypass the lengthy preamble and dive directly into the meaty stuff.
The Difference Between Early Startup and Mid-size Startup
If you are wondering what’s the difference between both, that’s a good question. One of the main indexes on how to determine that is the number of employees. My definition of that is:
- Early/small startups have from 1–100 employee
- Mid-size startups have from 100–1000
Most people know each other or at least have a vague idea of who someone is. The company has customers, a trendy office, and (hopefully) money in the bank with a few (or more) months to burn. People tuned in to the tech community say “Oh I think I’ve heard of that” when you tell them where you work. — By Kaylee Moser
Startups: Speedy; Established Companies: Not So Much. Yes! But …
Startups
Startups are known for their speed and ability to deliver results quickly. However, depending on the leader’s mindset, taking a slightly slower approach can also be time-efficient, allow for better testing, and favor efficiency, accuracy, and user-centricity.
Conversely, moving too quickly can result in the delivery of buggy and unreliable code, leading to significant technical debt down the road. This can make it challenging to adapt or scale in the long term, potentially damaging user trust and potentially the company’s reputation. It’s one of the reasons why some startups don’t make it in the long run.
Indeed, under the guidance of capable leaders, a startup can aspire to construct cutting-edge systems, harnessing the latest technologies within their code stack.
Long Established Companies
When comparing this dynamic to well-established companies, it’s worth noting the following:
- In established companies, there are often numerous teams, not all of which are consistently engaged in meaningful work.
- These teams may frequently make minor course corrections that end up being discarded, or leadership may deem their efforts unnecessary, causing frustration among developers.
- Regardless of the scope of work, the time invested, even if it’s predominantly spent in meetings discussing tasks rather than executing them, retains its value.
- Such experiences can gradually undermine the trust between employees and their superiors, potentially discouraging employees from performing at their full potential.
Not All Startups are 100% Agile, and That’s Awesome!
Startups
Working at a successful startup that didn’t fully embrace Agile but instead extracted its core purpose of work organization has been a welcome relief for several reasons:
- No more rigid “scrum” time slots for recurrent planning; instead, there are two planning sessions every half year where the team manager or product owner communicates the prioritized projects for the upcoming six months. These projects are typically substantial and span the entire half year, with the flexibility to adapt if priorities change.
- Each workstream is led by an individual responsible for assigning project milestones, defining project completion criteria, and facilitating effective communication. This leader also serves as the primary point of contact with business stakeholders.
- Weekly milestone reviews take place, with 30-minute meetings for each workstream, even if multiple projects are underway concurrently, often with two or three individuals collaborating in one workstream while others engage in parallel workstreams.
- To maintain productivity, most days feature meeting-free periods, except brief 15-minute morning standup updates.
Long Established Companies
Agile made the tech sector lazy — Tim Denning in Agile Software Development Needs to Die (And Everyone Knows It)
This is true as hell, in my previous jobs in well-established tech companies, they used to do all of these useless meetings — Agile Ceremonies, those were completely useless times because of the following (this aligns with Tim’s accurate observation.):
- Planning meetings often lacked real planning and centered on Jira ticket reviews and vague discussions about unnecessarily extended task timelines.
- Some individuals tend to exaggerate the time it takes to complete small tasks to create an illusion of productivity.
- Meetings are often characterized by prolonged discussions, prioritizing opinions and arguments over tangible system improvements.
- Creativity and innovation are flushed into the toilet, because of how bureaucratic this agile strategy is when applied nearly 100%. Because good ideas are often rejected because they are not aligned with the current goals.
People’s Attitude
Startup
Collaboration is cherished in a startup culture
In the startup I work for, Monzo, the atmosphere is vibrant, brimming with creativity, fresh ideas, and a deep commitment to staying at the forefront of technology trends. Above all, the team exudes kindness and empathy.
One of their standout strategies is the “No Blaming” approach, wherein, when issues arise, there is no finger-pointing at individuals. Instead, we thoroughly retrospect the entire project, collectively exploring the sequence of events leading to the specific error.
People are not rigid and opinionated, arguing about useless things all the time.
That’s because they don’t have time for that, they’re doing actual work.
This is primarily because they prioritize actual work and understand that excessive assertiveness and resistance to persuasion are discouraged, and what’s much more encouraged is a collaborative approach.
You might work in a startup where people are not organised
The drawback is that in a startup, you don’t always find people who are organized. Fortunately, that wasn’t the case for me. However, Monzo has been in existence for 8 years now, and it may not be considered a very early-stage startup. In the early stages, I doubt this is the case because they will still be figuring out ways of working effectively and systematically.
Long Established Companies
Opinions and resistance is cherished in a Big Tech Company
In my experience, there are two distinct types of individuals.
- The first type tends to be highly opinionated and resistant, often making it challenging to actively engage in meetings. This leads to the emergence of the second type, individuals…
- Ones who appear disinterested in meetings and discussions altogether. It’s understandable because even if they were to speak up, it would require an immense amount of energy to sustain continuous arguments.
You get the chance to work with people who are highly intelligent
That’s not to say that in well-established companies, you don’t have the opportunity to collaborate with some of the most brilliant minds in the industry. Big tech companies select individuals precisely for their exceptional skills.
I had the privilege of working alongside individuals who were among the finest C++ experts, some of whom were actual contributors to the language.
Additionally, I had the chance to interact with individuals possessing sharp intellects, and one of them served as my mentor. I consider myself extremely fortunate to have been mentored by someone with such a strong commitment to critical thinking and expertise.
This is why I believe it’s incredibly rewarding to start your career in a Big Tech company, where you can learn from industry experts, and then leverage that knowledge to accelerate your journey in a promising startup.
Manager’s Attitude
I believe that whether you’re in a startup or a well-established company, your experience largely depends on how effectively your manager embodies leadership principles and how well you communicate and collaborate with them. I’ve explored this topic in detail in a separate post, which you can read here.
Leveling Up in The Promotional Framework Hierarchy
It’s usually faster to be promoted to the next engineering level in a startup in my experience. I have seen people getting from entry-level to staff engineers in just 5 years. That’s a significant jump compared to long-established.
What’s a So-Called “Work Code Ethics” — Or whatever
Here, in my experience, there’s little differentiation between startups and Big Tech companies. Both tend to replicate each other’s work codes, and even Big Tech giants emulate one another. These codes often outline guidelines for respectful behavior and ethics, but to me, it feels like implying that people don’t know right from wrong and need to be taught. So, I’ll skip this part — it’s rather tedious, anyhow.
Company Perks
Startups tend to copy those too — as their budget allows and they usually iterate over it to make it better by researching the market trends and how other companies are rewarding their employees.
Established companies often excel in this aspect, offering enticing perks such as free meals, gym memberships, cinema tickets, and well-equipped offices with amenities like massage chairs, making the work environment more comfortable and enjoyable.
Pay (A.K.A Salaries)
In my experience, Big Tech companies often offer lower base salaries, but I’ve heard of startups that are competitive in their compensation packages.
As you may be aware, equity in a startup pre-IPO can potentially make you financially independent for life, but it also comes with the downside of not yielding any returns or even incurring costs (especially if you’ve paid for share options and associated taxes with the hope of significant tax savings upon IPO).
Certain well-established companies also offer substantial yearly bonuses or salary increases. Additionally, some provide shares valued at over $50,000, which is great, but it may not be as rewarding as taking a startup equities risk and achieving financial independence.
Exploring both the startup and established company worlds is valuable. Each offers unique lessons. Startups can accelerate your learning significantly, but established companies let you collaborate with top talents and open your eyes to what to seek and avoid in future jobs.
Your choice depends on your career goals — whether you prefer a traditional job, a faster-paced startup, or starting your own independent business. All paths are great if you know what you’re doing!