[danpalmer]

"Senior" means different things to different people.

I've interviewed "senior" engineers who I wouldn't hire into an internship, and I've interviewed regular (non-senior) engineers who are exceptional.

It also means different things to different companies. At a startup, a "staff engineer" might just be the best engineer on a team of 5-10, but at a big tech company it means a completely different thing. I've also worked with senior engineers at big tech companies who would be less productive than a new graduate in a 3 person startup.

Apply to a job description, not a job title.

[re-thc]

> At a startup, a "staff engineer" might just be

They're clearly wizards that hold a staff.

> I've also worked with senior engineers at big tech companies who would be less productive than a new graduate in a 3 person startup.

That doesn't sound like the engineers' fault? In reverse would the new graduate be productive in big tech?

> "Senior" means different things to different people.

It usually just means old.

[danpalmer]

> > I've also worked with senior engineers at big tech companies who would be less productive than a new graduate in a 3 person startup.

> That doesn't sound like the engineers' fault? In reverse would the new graduate be productive in big tech?

It's no one's fault, it's that different companies need different things and can utilise productivity in different ways.

[okdood64]

Yea, a lot (not most) of seniors at Big Tech spend 50+% of their time writing docs that never result in anything or otherwise really did _not_ need a doc, or "generating ideas" and "fielding questions" from someone 3 teams away from them.

The mid-levels engineers are doing a lot more of the grunt work of writing code. At a small company, new ideas are great, but you really need someone that can just sit down and pump out code. Move fast, bias for action.

Source: I've worked at various sized companies from 5 person seed, to 300 person high growth, to Big Tech.