[seanmcdirmid]

Google has to get someone to work on the boring but necessary projects! Google appears to hire high-end passionate talent; these are the people who aren't going to be satisfied doing something they aren't interested in and/or don't involve many hard problems, just lots of necessary grunt work (all projects require grinding, but some more than others). They care too much and are not in it just for the money.

I would be surprised if Google did not know what projects are problematic, but finding solutions would be another matter.

[varelse]

And that's exactly what happened to me. I was senior level talent at the preceding employer with a fantastic track record. When I started at Google, I was effectively told to start over from scratch. I'm not just in it for the money. The money can briefly distract me, but if I don't feel passionate about what I'm doing, I tune out, and ultimately leave.

[seanmcdirmid]

Microsoft (my employer) at least doesn't really have this problem. First, we hire from a broader talent base so we usually have talent for teams that aren't as sexy as others. Second, you interview to the team you will be working with, even if it is an internal transfer. This is bi-directional: they aren't just interviewing you, you are interviewing them. Perhaps Google simply needs to make the interviewing more bi-directional at the project/team level to fix the problem. From what I understand, right now allocation works only in one directly: teams bid for the new employee, but the employee doesn't get to bid on the teams!