Ask HN: Tools or sites you use to scope out a workplace before taking a job?

448 points by bwb ↗ HN
I'd love to know what everyone is doing to scope out a workplace before they take a job there.

Do you email people who work there?

Do you just jump in and hope for the best?

Are there apps or sites you like?

168 comments

[ 3.8 ms ] story [ 224 ms ] thread
Since i'm in IT, DNSDumpster.
This. It gives you can (but not always) give some valuable insights to what services they use, potential security issues, etc.
Companies House - For UK based companies
Glassdoor
I heard that HR departments get paid to write on glassdoor.
Glassdoor, LinkedIn, and emailing previous employees. Current employees aren’t going to give you the low down.
How do you get names and contact info for previous employees?
LinkedIn.

If you end up needing their email address because you can't send a message on LinkedIn, there's a slew of ways to find someone's email. They might list it on their Twitter, Github, or blog. Companies out there will help you guess it (Clearbit, Hunter, VoilaNorbert, etc.). And if all else fails, googling your best guesses as to what their email is (including their gmail) will often yield a match in some random mailing list, press release, or what have you.

Don't give notice yet. Instead, take a week of vacation and start the new job during that week. Make your official decision during afternoon tea on Sunday.
And do what? Just quit your old job on the spot?
Of course not. You tell the old job that you have a personal crisis and that you would love to stay on as a part-time remote consultant...
No offense, but that approach would make me not want to hire someone like that or work with someone like that. It may appear that you’re pulling one over on your previous employer, but if anything, that is probably a blessing for them to no longer have someone that operates in a shady fashion like that employed by them.

Edit: The undesirable behavior was in reference to the lying about a personal crisis. I personally believe in transparency and wouldn’t attempt to capitalize on an employer’s sympathy by lying to them.

It might be doable without telling your new employer at all.
I wouldn't lie about a crisis, but it's business. It's not unheard of to take a better offer and offer to work as a consultant at the previous employer.
The lying about the crisis is the part that I was referencing was shady. Working as a consultant for a previous employer is completely acceptable and provides mutual benefit.
Crisis story can be looked at as advertising or setting the table. You leave your old company with a reason and everyone feels better. Your image is safe and your backstory.

If anyone feels like this is dishonest what do you tell your new employer about why you are truly leaving the old position. Do you tell them the owner was rude and you told him off or do you say you left because of a bad personality fit? You are not lying but perhaps a little dishonest. You can have a personal crisis and that could be the new job.

> Crisis story can be looked at as advertising or setting the table.

I'm sorry, it's simply bald-faced lying. If I found out any of my hires had done this, I'd fire them.

> what do you tell your new employer about why you are truly leaving the old position.

I rarely need to tell them anything, but if they ask, I say "I'm seeking new challenges". It's not a lie, and it avoids potentially bad-mouthing prior employers. But I'll be honest here -- it's only happened twice in my career that I left a job because of something bad about the job.

Seeking new challenges is not being honest either. But it makes you see the person in a different light compared to the other more accurate version. That's what is happening with the personal crisis story.

Would you fire that same person if you discover a year later new challenges meant hated old boss and told them off?

Just curious are the positions you manage that easy to fill that you can fire at random?

If someone I knew was fired for that reason a lawsuit would be very likely. The manager would be let go after they lost cost the company so much money. I'm not in the US so I understand the rules might be different but usually you can't fire someone because they broke your personal moral code.

That's pretty much the same as quitting without notice, not to mention lying.
I'm pretty sure there's issues with holding two jobs at the same time. Have you done this? And do you just rely on people not finding out?
I had two full time jobs for eight months. The only issue was no leisure time
Depends on the country. Here your notice time would be 1 month, so you can't just start "trying out" another full-time job during a holiday.

Edit: mistake in duration

I've done this a number of times, last time 9 months.

Going on vacation for a week and starting a new job is very difficult to time. You come back give two weeks and have to work really hard transfering knowledge just when you need to be learning everything new job related.

This is very unprofessional and a great way to burn your bridges.
Not all bridges have equal value.
To an employer, the employee's track record provides insight on the behavior they can expect from him.
Your track record is what you present. No one is asking for W2s or tax transcripts. There is no central repository you can call upon for employment history (besides the hot garbage that is Equifax's The Work Number; you have frozen your Work Number profile if your employer reports data to them, right?)

https://krebsonsecurity.com/2017/11/how-to-opt-out-of-equifa... (KrebsOnSecurity: How to Opt Out of Equifax Revealing Your Salary History)

Yeah this is quite difficult to do legally in the U.K. for tax reasons. Fun idea, but very impractical.
Putting aside the ethical questions of this approach, I've not been able to determine how good a job will be within the first week. It usually takes me a couple months.
I can't think of a company that would not fire a new hire who was still working at his/her previous employer.

Nor can I think of a company that would agree up front to let a new hire do this. Why would you hire people who screw over their employers? They might do the same to you one day when they have decided to leave.

This is a great way to start out with two jobs and end up with zero.

Glassdoor, company engineering blog and careers page on their website to see what the environment, tech stack and benefits are like. Maybe Stackshare.
If you're a software engineer (or will work closely w/ engineers), I built Key Values (https://www.keyvalues.com) to help w/ this.

Before building KV though, my research process included looking for and reading:

- the company's career and about us pages

- an active blog w/ recent posts (w/in the last 2 months)

- LinkedIn / Twitter / GitHub of founders and existing team members (I'd also look for any old blogs written by (or press written about) these folks before they joined the company)

- checking to see if the company hosts meetups or hackathons I can attend

- seeing if I know anyone who currently works there or worked there before and then reaching out

- cold emailing or Tweeting current team members

Key Values is a very cool idea! Have you thought about adding a location filter?
Yes of course! It'll happen once there are more companies on the site. For now, Ctrl + F works great on the homepage :P
Oh, and depending on the company and their product/service, I'd also look at their other social media accounts. For example, some have active Instagram and/or YouTube accounts which can be incredibly insightful.

Ps. One lesson I've learned: never judge a company based on their marketing website.

It would be great if you could filter for the lack of (or the opposite of) some value... e.g. flat organization.
Nice idea, but I'm very confused what I'm doing or how it works - it starts with non-zero matches, and then for each thing I click it _increases_ the number of matches...

I'd expect it to start large, and then filter down with more things selected. But it's not even like it's acting the other way, including only companies that match at least one thing I clicked, because it started non-zero.

I'm using OR logic until I have enough companies for AND logic to provide a good user experience. I'm looking forward for that day to come, too, trust me!

If you select multiple values, the results will be ordered by number of matches and prioritize the companies who ranked those values highest.

OR is fine (hopefully the sort order is by most matches first though?) - what's confusing to me is that it starts on a non-zero number. Is that the number of companies that don't match anything? Is there any value in listing them at all, if that's the case?
Highest number of matches and the ranking of those matches. For example, if you select values A and B, a company that lists A as #1 and B as #2 will show up before a company that lists A as #7 and B as #8.

Sorry, I'm not sure I understand what you mean by it starting on a non-zero number. Perhaps you have one of the tags selected?

Have you considered adding parameters to the end of the url so selections can be saved and shared?
bookmarked. Will use in the future. I love the simplistic UX.
Maybe I missed the feature but is there a way to search for companies by name over than `crtl+f`? Not a huge deal but might be nice if you researching a potential job found on another site.
Not yet, but I will! There are a lot of features to add once there are more companies on the site. As a team of one, it's all about #prioritization :P
how do you determine the key values for each company?
There are 45 values to choose from and teams select (and rank) the 8 that best describe their engineering culture. I then work closely w/ them to qualify them (aka cut the fluff, answer tough questions, and "prove" it).
This site looks nice but a question and couple suggestions for you.

Question: why not include a "high compensation"/"high equity"/"top of market comp"/etc category? Talk about culture and values is nice but as far as I'm concerned the best way for companies to show they care about engineers is to put their money where their mouth is. There's surely a subset of engineers and companies that agree with me on this. It would be useful for matching.

Suggestions: if you're not doing this already, you should limit the number of categories a company or user can select. (And if you are doing this, you should make it clear on the site.) This will help get more meaningful results. Some of the current categories are meaningless - ie. "Impressive team members" ... what company would not claim this? It's only meaningful if you restrict them to, say, 5 categories. Either do this or just eliminate these categories and keep it on pure culture traits like "eats lunch together."

In reverse order:

2. Yup! Companies are limited to choosing 8 values. They're also forced to rank them in order of importance. As you can see, not all companies select Impressive Team Members.

1. Pretty much every other job board / recruiting tool out there filters on compensation. If you're optimizing for comp, you have plenty of places to go! However, there's no place to discover companies that share your values. There's no place to learn about the team or what your day-to-day might look like before jumping through all of the other hoops (cover letters, apps, take-home tests, whiteboarding questions...). Not until Key Values that is. This is the space I'm working to fill.

Additionally, I'd argue that constraining your job search based on comp is a mistake. After some level of $$$, an additional $10k-$20k/year means a lot less than everything else. Value alignment (aka your happiness) is worth so much more.

As a not-so-extreme example: you couldn't pay me a $300k/year to work w/ people I hated.

Thanks for building this! I will definitely use your site when scouting for my next role.
Lynne, KV is a great tool! Thanks a lot for that. If you find time, would love to see -ve metrics as well. That would cover both aspects of a job search: what am I looking for, and what am I looking to avoid.
I found it a bit strange that adding more criteria, it matches more companies. What kind of method do you use for filtering?
Really cool website - thank you!
Used to use Glassdoor, but it has become progressively more rude/pay-walled over the years, and they allow more paid employer astroturfing than they used to.

I suppose that's just a sign of the times, and I don't necessarily have a grudge against the company for doing so. It does however mean that the site is no longer useful to this end, at least for me.

As for directly contacting a company, I tend not to. Sometimes this works out, other times not. I thought I would hate my current job and thought I was quite unqualified, but it turned out to be pretty fantastic. Just going with the flow sometimes works out that way.

It seems pretty obvious that something is off when a company has 50/50 good and bad reviews, with the bad ones offering a ton of detail, and the good ones way too positive and overly "corporate" with no detail.
Yep, the fastest way to spot a fake positive review is to notice those seem to be written from the perspective of HR, focusing on things like "fast growth" and "lots of opportunities" that are of little to no concern for the typical person, especially if they're listed as the sole positives. A typical dev is less concerned with the growth rate of the company and how many offices are opening in places thousands of miles away -- they're more concerned about their local delivery team, their local office, etc.
Glassdoor is still useful in the sense that you can filter down to the worse reviews. Ignore those that are obviously sour grapes, and get a sense of how bad things are. I see a lot of things like:

Positive Reviewer - "Hypergrowth company! Lots of opportunties, great culture!!!!"

Negative reviewer - "They hired too fast, have no clue what they're doing, and have lots of free food and ping pong."

I saw some time ago that companies were dropping negative reviews by changing company name on glassdoor
(comment deleted)
https://levels.fyi to make sure the level/comp accurately represents what i'm looking for
This is absolutely fascinating. I don't know how folks are earing this kind of cash when you can go to a recruiter, with more than decade of hands-on startup experience, and when you want more than 200k a year they look at you like you just kicked their cat.

Then you see someone at a place like Lyft with four years of real world experience and one year with the company pulling 300-400k a year without breaking a sweat. And now they’re about to jump onto the IPO rocket ship. I want to clarify that I’m not jealous of these people: it’s great. I just gotta stop and ask myself sometimes what the fuck I’m doing wrong.

Then again this is crowdsourced and might be a load of shit.

Co-Founder here. Data is crowdsourced but we manually check it regularly to filter out spam. We have enough data now where outliers are weeded out. We've gotten feedback from the community that our data is some of the best compensation data for Bay Area tech companies.
>> IPO rocket ship

The attractiveness of this depends on whether it goes up or down. It's anybody's guess which way it'll go.

> I just gotta stop and ask myself sometimes what the fuck I’m doing wrong.

Don’t know anything about you beyond your github and HN profile, but I‘ll speculate: perhaps getting hired at 200k or less by the right company is the key to earning 300k+ within a year, while getting hired at 300k is unlikely unless you come straight from a corp/position that is known to pay more.

If you're serious: get a job at a well-known tech company. You might have to move for this unless you're already in a top-tier tech city (NYC, SF, and Seattle, definitely qualify; maybe Zurich, London, Toronto, and Sydney). Work there for two years. Move to a better tech company. You are now worth $300-400k per year.

If you're not already considered top-tier talent, I think Amazon is the easiest way into this right now. They are hiring at an incredible rate, and their engineers are generally considered good hires by Google, Facebook, etc. The lifestyle and working environment is generally considered acceptable if not exemplary.

Also, invest some time to become an expert at technical interviews. They are somewhat orthogonal to everything else that we do, but they are a near-universal shibboleth at top companies and it doesn't take that much time to get good at them. Most of the questions fall into a few broad categories that you can learn to recognize with practice.

This worked for me. YMMV. The key was relaxing the requirement that I stay in my childhood city, although luckily I only had to move a couple hours away.

> You are now worth $300-400k per year.

Are you sure this number still applies if you're outside of US (London, Toronto, Sydney)? My understanding is that numbers in Europe are nothing like those in the US.

London and Sydney have insanely high costs of living so recruiting and retaining skilled people means paying high in the first place. In London or Sydney you can make £100k or $140k as a good developer. Google simply pays double that at L5 so you don't think about leaving.
It doesn't apply to Sydney for sure.

I make $50k-100k AUD less in Sydney compared to Bay Area, with all the same HCOL problems.

A very, very good new grad total comp figure in Sydney is say, $150k AUD. That's $106K in USD, which is less than the salary for a new grad at Google or Facebook in the Bay Area. Throw in RSUs, signing bonus, and performance bonuses, and a new grad is making $50-100k AUD more.

The quirk here is that due to the E3 visa, it's about as easy to hire Australians to work in the US as it is to hire them to work in Australia. So why pay more for folks who stay at home?
> So why pay more for folks who stay at home?

What do you mean by this? I could imagine a scenario where the E3 visa puts positive pressure on Australian Software Engineer salaries, causing them to rise.

Put another way: why pay the same price in Australia?

Most companies want to have folks in the same timezone, preferably in the same office. There's really no substitute for being onsite with your peers.

Yes, this! I can second this as an engineer who is now a professional consultant, working directly with engineers on both interview and negotiation prep, as well as technical and people leadership coaching.

You want to make the most of not only the various kinds technical interviews you might encounter, but also the behavioral conversations, founder/exec chats, even cover letters are a chance to set an intentional narrative. When you're in the loop with specific companies you can even prepare for specific interview loops and negotiation expectations, and thus have particularly targeted results.

>The lifestyle and working environment is generally considered acceptable if not exemplary.

Isn't Amazon known for having the worst lifestyle and working environment out of all FAANG? https://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/16/technology/inside-amazon-...

Ugh. Yeah, I've heard too many of these stories not to believe them. Most of the people I know at Amazon say they haven't experienced toxicity at that level, though, and that it depends a lot on your manager.

In the absence of a strong, healthy company-wide culture, managers create their own islands of toxicity or calm productivity. I don't know a simple answer of how to ensure you end up on the right one.

It’s on the high end of each band but it’s legit. It includes stock though, which can be half of total compensation.
It's definitely not a load of shit. Source: I work at one of those companies.

You're not doing anything wrong - only a select number of employers can afford to throw that much money at their recruits. It's just a method of recruiting, nothing more; most other smaller companies / startups can't (or won't) match it so they gain a major advantage over their competitors.

I just managed to pass their interview - maybe that counts for something, but I definitely am not a top 5% engineer. I think there are a lot of advantages you get from smaller places that you won't find at a large "FANG" company as well.

One thing to remember is that these numbers are typically for Bay Area or Seattle -- places where commuting isn't a feasible option unless you don't mind 2+ hours on the road every day. For San Francisco, making $300k/year you're looking at $185,464 take-home pay.

> In San Francisco and nearby San Mateo and Marin Counties it said $117,400 for a family of four was "low income", while $73,300 (£54,900) was "very low income" - the highest figures anywhere in the country. (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-44725026)

The cost of living in these areas is high and is still growing rapidly. At the end of the day, working in a tech hub is still a middle class to upper middle class job. You can achieve similar or better results in states like Utah and Texas, with a much better work/life balance.

I'm an ex-Californian and moved to a saner state. Total comp for me is roughly ~$150K, with almost all the bells and whistles you'd expect from Silicon Valley (still waiting for 401K matching). My commute is 20 mins and soon to be 5 mins. Property values for a large home where I live are still floating in the $500K range, with only 0.5% property tax. I haven't even topped out the market here either -- I know people making $170K salary + benefits out here.

Holy shit that is depressing - as a senior engineer in the UK working at one of the largest UK tech based companies I struggle to earn even $100k.
It seems like there must be some opening there for companies willing to pay 25% more to poach great talent.
It just doesn't work like that in the UK, even FAANG pay peanuts because they can get away with it.
But why can they get away with it? Is there a glut of talent? Or a market full of developers who have zero interest in making more than $100k?
There's just no other options; it's still one of the best markets in the EU and going to the US is impossible for most developers so they have to accept the lower salaries.
You would think that some startup in NYC would decide to start hiring in London, then. Instead of struggling to recruit senior developers with a middle of the pack NYC salary at $125–150k, they could offer the same salary in the UK and be standouts in the market.
AngelList to get a sense of their current employees/team make-up. If the place is earlier stage, I might look at their investors too.
Here's the core of what I do:

I pore over their website, and do web searches on the company and the company's top executives. If I don't personally know anyone who works for (or used to work for) them, then I hit up my professional contacts to see if I can find someone who does. I then ask those people about their day-to-day experience at the company. I make sure to ask, at a minimum, both what they consider great about working there and what they consider awful about it.

What I'm looking for is a good fit -- does the company operate in a way that works for me? Do I feel good about what the company produces and how they do business? Are the employees generally satisfied? That sort of thing.

One thing I would never do unless I were in a crisis of some sort is to just jump in and hope for the best. It's too easy for that to go horribly wrong.

You make it sound like it a marriage or something. If you don't like it you can always leave. That's worked for me so far.
Indeed you can. But if I want short-term work, I take contracts. If I'm looking for a permanent job, I'm specifically looking for some place that I'll be for years. So it is a bit like marriage in that sense.

Also, it's not a great look on your CV when you've only been at a non-contract job for a very short time.

Spending a bit of time to do research on a job, versus going through the hiring process, possible relocation, training and team familiarization, and all the physical and mental stress involved - only to find out you don't fit and then going through the exit process.
Just jump in and keep your eyes and ears open during the interviews. Check glassdoor, etc but let your instinct take over.
I work at a company of 10.5k employees.

Even considering global offices, there are ~5k employees here on campus.

The problem is that every single team, organization, every executive and the functions that roll up to them, are of course different.

The best advice is what others have said here: go into the interviews bright eyed and try as hard to get a sense of the people who interview.

Are they good people? Is there a good mix of people who are task oriented vs relationship oriented?

At the end of the day, looking at things like Glassdoor, LinkedIn, will only give you a very high level picture so the interviews are your best bet.

Also, if you're anything like me, I value money quite a bit over other conditions, so asking about salary up front is a must.

> Also, if you're anything like me, I value money quite a bit over other conditions, so asking about salary up front is a must.

This is an important point. I'm not primarily money-driven, personally, so this isn't a question I typically ask. But if it's important to you, absolutely ask.

Not to say money isn't important. I do have a minimum salary that I'll accept, and I inform them of it when they ask (and they always ask). If an employer at least meets that, I'm good. Offering more money above that is nice, but isn't as big of a driver to me as whether or not I would enjoy working there.

Blind app. Lots of users now from different companies
Do you actually find the blind app useful? Most of my experience has been that it's "4chan-lite".

Someone posted asking for the best way to let a friend down easy and tell them they weren't romantically interested. Top response: "Bang his roommate."

Yeah you can ask people working there what it's like. I see posts like this all the time and it's kind of funny reading about ones that are burning down
Crunchbase to understand the company's funding

Github to see if they have open source stuff

Company blogs

I've told companies I want to remeet the team after interviews and they've scheduled lunches for me to talk with them in a more low pressure situation

those lunches/coffees are critical
Search GitHub for any code repos with the company name (or abbreviations/acronym of the company name) to see if you can get a heads up on what the code challenge may be.
Blind is really invaluable for getting the inside scoop at companies large enough to have an active presence on that app.
I spent so much time on Blind when I was jumping ship
You can (sometimes) use GitHub to figure out if the company has bad work/life balance, e.g. if you see lots of employees committing code on the weekend on the same dates: https://codewithoutrules.com/2019/01/31/does-company-have-wo...
You'd just end up mistaking commits to my private repositories for work. Also, private contributions have to be enabled in order to show up there.
Isn’t it a bad idea to use the same account for work as well as personal projects?

Currently I have a separate ‘home’ account for personal projects and I never touch the work ID from my home.

If there are separate accounts then the organisation will likely be private, and you wouldn't be able to research the user accounts in the first place.
That's the whole idea of Github Teams. You just add/remove users to teams and subteams as an organization Owner, and you never get access to anything else on their account or even see their private repos or other organizational memberships.
Except that one is still likely using a company-owned laptop/desktop to access that account. Any data or activity on company hardware (such as private keys or cookies) should be considered visible by them as there’s likely to be remote management software, an IT admin account, encryption key escrow, etc. The legal precedent (in the U.S., anyway) gives an employee no expectation of privacy on a company computer or network.
It would still be a CFAA violation for the employer to use those keys to act as the employee against a third-party serivce like Github. So the employee might not be able to object to them seeing that, but they would have no right to use them to access the employee's account on a remote server. Just like if they found a check on your desk they can look at the numbers, but they can't just use them to take money out.

Also, you could and probably should create a new SSH key on the company laptop or a personal access token for HTTPS access so that it can be easily revoked when you leave.

The parent comment speaks to whether many people at the same org are making commits on the weekends. If it is just one person, no biggie, but if it looks like everyone you find is commiting on the weekend then that is a bad signal.

The other edge case would be an environment where every employee is super active in OSS.

I work Tuesday-Saturday, by choice, to align with my wife's schedule. So commits on the weekend may not be a good indicator.
Same boat. I like to take my "weekends" while everybody else is mostly "at work." A lot of things I enjoy doing are very busy on the weekends when a lot of people have the same day(s) off. For instance, going to the beach on a Tuesday is generally a lot better than a Saturday. A lot less traffic to/from, less crowded beaches and restaurants, etc.
That's one of the reasons I built Last10K (https://last10k.com). If the company is publicly traded, they are required to file reports that contains transparent information on a their operations, financial condition and much more. In other words, know how a company actually makes (or doesn't make) money before joining.
Most of the other comments here cover the majority of useful tips/techniques.

However for me, one thing I really like doing is reaching out to employees who quit/left. Ask them for honest information about why they quit and what the existing problems are.

This is interesting. I would assume that negative feedback from these people is less of a signal than positive feedback.

The baseline approval rating from someone who left the company is going to be lower than people working at the company. If an ex-employee is disgruntled or bitter it doesn't tell me that much, unless I hear the same complaint from a lot of people.

If someone left because another great opportunity came along, and they are really positive about their time at the company, I'd say that's a good signal.

you're probably not wrong, but I think this is a good additional data point to have. It's easy to spot disgruntled reviews of anything. But if someone who left or quit has a composed, reasoned description of plausible problems, it should weigh into your decision at least a little
For smaller companies, the fit might not be right for certain people, so moving to a company that allows them a path that works better for them isn’t necessarily bad for the company they left
I've had people find me on LinkedIn and reach out to do due diligence on companies I've worked at, which I thought was pretty smart.

I would do the same if I were looking at a small company with potentially astroturfed Glassdoor ratings.

Yes, if all the spam hadn't driven me to delete my LinkedIn account, I'd do this as well.
TransparentCareer has really robust compensation and satisfaction data for business roles and can be filtered and personalized very heavily. They also display the data in ways that make it more accurate and useful such as showing medians and allowing you to only see recent data. (https://www.transparentcareer.com)