←back to thread

155 points stock_toaster | 5 comments | | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
iLoveOncall ◴[] No.45096012[source]
As someone who has been working at Amazon for not far from a decade, the author misunderstands some portions because of his focus on a very specific part of the description.

In particular for "Ownership", the part about "They act on behalf of the entire company, beyond just their own team." does not at all mean what the author implies, and is well connected to the rest of the description instead, about weighing your decisions against the impact it has beyond your team.

Anyways, a lot of those actually exist only to silence the employees, not as real values (although they are used as values within teams). Like the single mention of "Ownership" being enough to legitimate not giving employees annual refreshers on stocks when they have dropped by 50% and so has everyone's compensation. Or "Disagree and commit" when people push back on the return to office.

replies(3): >>45096207 #>>45096256 #>>45096319 #
mikert89 ◴[] No.45096319[source]
leadership principles are relevant to high level amazon employees, L6 and below they are used as a control mechanism/justification to call out low performance
replies(1): >>45096759 #
pvtmert ◴[] No.45096759[source]
As a ~4 year tenured L5, I agree. There is annual performance review system called Forte. During forte, each person is rated in each leadership principles (LPs) by their peers and manager, possibly from away-team members.

As the parent mentioned, nowadays the scope is extremely limited. Citing Ownership (ie. this/that team has the ownership...) reasons. I see LPs are currently weaponised to limit promotions/pay-raises.

I am not a low-performer or anything, in fact, I proactively find problems and fix them. I do not like to complain (which most people do) and if it takes <=10% of my weekly working time (ie. 4 hours or less) then I create a ticket and add this to my personal backlog. Then, when I go through my backlog, I prioritize these things according to their predicted complexity and impact. I take the low-complexity/big-impact things and do those in a 4-hour period.

When I fix the things, I update the ticket and send a CR (pull-request) to the owning team of the package. I even have a script to pick out a recent committer in the repository to add them as an optional reviewer, which helps quite a lot, as most of the teams do not track their CR (pull-request) queues at all. (neither proactively or even with notifications)

Nevertheless, 3 years back to back, I have been rated negatively for the following LPs - Think-Big - Ownership - Bias-for-Action

Moreover, I have not only participated in Hackathons but even organised org-wide (Director/L8) hackathons & events. Not to mention that my manager, my skip, and their manager (director) all in different regions than mine. I didn't had any TPM in my org in my region either.

It super frustrating as an engineer as certain minor occurrences weaponised against (ie. an escalation from away team that I did not respond in time during my PTO, c'mon!) meanwhile I have 10 or more valid scenarios which keep being overlooked.

Which is why the quality is dropping. Because as an engineer, I do not see any return on my investment (time & effort). There are thousands of engineers like me, I see more and more people are silent quitting (rest & vest), elevating minor things as if they were grand problems, increasing the bureaucracy as much as they can. As the layoffs already showed to all, there is no job guarantee at all!

replies(5): >>45097477 #>>45097908 #>>45098392 #>>45099485 #>>45101691 #
1. master_crab ◴[] No.45098392[source]
Forte isn’t used to withhold comp. It’s just a development tool. That’s why it was always held in January after end of year comp. If your manager told you otherwise, they are being passive-aggressive about your prospects.

Second, if you’re a fifth year L5, start interviewing now. L5 technically is a terminal level (is that still a thing there?) but you aren’t supposed to spend five years at that level.

replies(1): >>45100056 #
2. scarface_74 ◴[] No.45100056[source]
Ingenii (sp? I have been gone for two years) was where you put your accomplishments and goals. But Forte is (was?) where your management and peer feedback is managed.
replies(1): >>45102513 #
3. master_crab ◴[] No.45102513[source]
That sounds right. But there was a reason forte was always at the start of year after the end of year comps. So that it wasn’t factored into performance. It’s been a few years since I was at AWS but unless that changed, that’s a key reason why it was always meant to be a development tool. Not a comp tool.
replies(1): >>45104123 #
4. scarface_74 ◴[] No.45104123{3}[source]
Just the opposite, Forte was where your management and peer feedback was and where you found your award for your comp. It actually went down in 2021 during review time because of volume. I was in AWS ProServe and the joke was that maybe we should go multi cloud for resilliance.
replies(1): >>45104644 #
5. master_crab ◴[] No.45104644{4}[source]
They must have changed it, because forte had zero comp related stuff in it when I was there. Purely a 360 process.