[monkeyfacebag]

I mean, not to discount the value of working hard or anything, but you describe this as a self evident truth when it can't possibly apply across the board. I am an existence proof. I've had to work relatively little for my success, including in interview situations. Again, this is not to say that I believe hard work has no place, but to frame hard work as some kind of self-evident key to success is exactly the disingenuous framing I expect from leadership seminars.

[seibelj]

I work in an industry that is more merit-based than most (tech startups) and being good in your job is heavily dependent on hard work and success. This is across the board in all departments. If you find a job that pays a very high compensation without any hard work, I think you hit on the very high-end of luck.

[monkeyfacebag]

I think you're just wrong about how merit-based our industry is. I don't think it is meaningfully more merit-based than other industries, nor is it more challenging, despite the fact that it is often presented as both of these things.

I doubt there is anything I could say to convince you of this, so I guess we should call this one a draw.

[seibelj]

It is difficult compared to most other jobs, and within tech startups the people who make outsized returns are the executives / VPs / upper management. Getting a job at that level is not easy, or at least in my experience at a mix of failing / middling / successful companies, the successful ones have a very high bar.

I think compared to other industries, you can make a comfortable upper-middle class salary by being a fairly competent person. But to succeed in a very high way is as brutal as any other industry.

[monkeyfacebag]

> But to succeed in a very high way is as brutal as any other industry.

I agree with this.

The common ground unite us all.