[jkaptur]

Sheryl Sandberg described a similarly thorough weighing of her decision to join Google.

Mayer: "I had a long analytical evening with a friend of mine where we looked at all the job offers I had received. We created a giant matrix with one row per job offer and one column per value. We compared everything from the basics like cash and stock to where I'd be living, happiness factor, and trajectory factor—all of these different elements. And so we went to work analyzing this problem."

Sandberg: "After a while I had a few offers and I had to make a decision, so what did I do? I am MBA trained, so I made a spreadsheet. I listed my jobs in the columns and my criteria in the rows, and compared the companies and the missions and the roles."

It's a fun bit of trivia that Sandberg put the criteria in the rows, which enables sorting the criteria - a nice way to see the upsides and downsides of each choice.

[4thaccount]

I don't think this is a rare thing to do. I've done it and so have co-workers. A simple pro/con chart is really all you need.

[batty_alex]

Sorry to weigh in this way, but yes it's a rare thing to do. Most people don't have multiple offers sitting on the table. It's a privilege.

It's rare, that's all.

[4thaccount]

I'm referring to comparing your existing job to a new one. Everyone does this and it can't be rare.

You have to look at quality of work, work life balance, the area, commute time, cost of living, salary, 401k match, benefits, chance of advancement, company culture, job safety, bonus amount, job security...etc. For a lot of people the choice is a no-brainer, but there are comparable and even worse jobs out there.

I apologise for the seemingly privledged attitude, but I'm assuming most on HN are Software Developers, Engineers, Mathematicians, and Scientists which generally have options and change jobs on occasion. Every single person who changed has done a pro/con comparison. Even if it was a no-brainier, the comparison would've taken place subconsciously.

[barry-cotter]

You shouldn’t apologise for a personal attack, whether on the internet or in person. Anyone who says you’re privileged is your enemy, at worst, and completely indifferent to your welfare at best.

[Udik]

The issue is that almost all the factors you mentioned- quality of work, work-life balance, chance of advancement, company culture... - are all aspects you can only have the vaguest of ideas about before you start in a new company. And a mistaken evaluation of even a single one of them can change completely the score of the offer.

[4thaccount]

Not 100% true. It depends on the industry, but I have a pretty good idea of the good and bad of many of our competitors. You're right that some of those factors are fuzzy.

[Aeolun]

I guess that’s more a factor of graduating from Stanford at that location at that point in time than it is of their personal ability to receive multiple offers (not completely unrelated of course).

[JohnFen]

> Most people don't have multiple offers sitting on the table.

Maybe not (although I don't think that's vanishingly rare).

But don't most people do something like this when deciding what they want to do next even if there aren't any active offers on the table at all?

[maxxxxx]

"I had a long analytical evening with a friend of mine where we looked at all the job offers I had received. We created a giant matrix with one row per job offer and one column per value"

I think this is a luxury problem. How many people have competing job offers that are even close to each other in attractiveness?

[shalmanese]

Doesn't putting the criteria in rows disallow (easy) sorting? Spreadsheets are designed to sort by column.