It's not so bad. The stress at these places is far lower, the work load is realistic, and the salaries are pretty good, sometimes the base is higher than you'll make at FAANG because they can't entice people with stock.
What's best is these companies welcome wisdom over leet coding. They aren't going to be like Amazon where the way you advance is by stabbing your coworkers in the back. They just have steady revenue streams they want to protect, with no delusions about ever becoming a unicorn.
One way would be to look at the company headcount statistics on Linkedin or Crunchbase. If the headcount stays the same, it is likely a zombie company or has insane churn. I worked for a company like this. 4 years after I left, they're still about 50-60 people, but everyone is different except C-level and HR.
I see. How much does it suck to work at such a place? I mean in terms of disorganization, constant fire fighting, time to fix existing issues vs implementing new bugs?
Basically I don’t mind working at a boring company so much, what I want is serenity and calm so that my job doesn’t end up taking over my non work time by polluting my mind with stress and worry. Wondering if zombie companies fit the bill.
If you aren't a 25 year old kid trying to win the startup lottery at a future unicorn, or getting fat at FAANG, then these jobs are great. They move slower, so their processes are often very well refined, the churn is low and the change/velocity is even.
There are few fires to fight in a stable company with moderate growth, a low change rate, and predictable customer behaviors. Disorganization and exhaustion is usually a side effect of hyper growth.
When I hit 40 or so, I accepted I wasn't going to be a billionaire and that I was too old and too mediocre to get a job at a unicorn. I still provided a lot of value for my customers in last few years of work before I retired from tech.
If you are ready to transition from "My life is my work! I'm going to kill it, crush it, and get my lamb" .. Then look for a stable, low growth company which disappointed investors but not customers.
I think that's more on a case by case basis. In the example I gave, the CEO is capricious so there's a lot of churn because the vision is a moving target, and the company itself isn't growing much so people do their 1-2 years and move on.
Sounds like about 50% of the employees at every company I worked at over 30 years. In the '00s and '10s, there was no such thing as raises unless you were at a public company, so the only way to increase your salary was to job hop every 18-24 months. When you hit your 40s, however, that resume history makes you unhirable I found out.