I recently had to have one aspect of this issue pointed out to me, since it was never a major concern of mine and I'd been completely blind to it: seniority.
I do not currently work for a start-up, or even what you would typically consider a technology company. However, the group I work with, the program in the businessy sense, is not very old. The original kernel of the group began less than ten years ago, and has grown in fits and spurts. Many, if not most, of the "founders" are still here, as well.
When the program started, many of the founders were young and relatively inexperienced. Today, they're still young but are more experienced---in this specific project. And at least some of the people who have been hired since are older or more experienced---at least in terms of having worked in a wider variety of environments---or both.
As a result, in some situations, someone with more experience and skills is being supervised, managed, or lead by someone with significantly less experience. The situation isn't improved by weird incentives that place emphasis on some jobs more than others, similar to the cliche about sales versus engineering.
So, how's this for a weird situation: people who would be senior are doing junior work, because "job market"; people who would likely be junior are in charge, because of good timing (For those of you who plan to be future Zuckerbergs, what are you going to do when you really do need to hire a rocket scientist?); people who are ready to move up can't, because nobody is leaving or dying off; and people who might be better off leaving won't, because they would be taking a pay and prestige cut.
[Note: I am absolutely not talking about myself. I knew what I was doing when I got here. I have no real urge to "move up" in the world. I'm a technical guy. I'm mechanism, not policy.]
I do not currently work for a start-up, or even what you would typically consider a technology company. However, the group I work with, the program in the businessy sense, is not very old. The original kernel of the group began less than ten years ago, and has grown in fits and spurts. Many, if not most, of the "founders" are still here, as well.
When the program started, many of the founders were young and relatively inexperienced. Today, they're still young but are more experienced---in this specific project. And at least some of the people who have been hired since are older or more experienced---at least in terms of having worked in a wider variety of environments---or both.
As a result, in some situations, someone with more experience and skills is being supervised, managed, or lead by someone with significantly less experience. The situation isn't improved by weird incentives that place emphasis on some jobs more than others, similar to the cliche about sales versus engineering.
So, how's this for a weird situation: people who would be senior are doing junior work, because "job market"; people who would likely be junior are in charge, because of good timing (For those of you who plan to be future Zuckerbergs, what are you going to do when you really do need to hire a rocket scientist?); people who are ready to move up can't, because nobody is leaving or dying off; and people who might be better off leaving won't, because they would be taking a pay and prestige cut.
[Note: I am absolutely not talking about myself. I knew what I was doing when I got here. I have no real urge to "move up" in the world. I'm a technical guy. I'm mechanism, not policy.]