If having worked at a top company is more correlated with success than any combination of one's own metrics, then I'd look for ways to improve the recruiting process.
Or they're suffering from brand recognition. Google and Disney have a reputation for excellence, so just having it on your resume biases the interviewer into projecting those attributes onto you.
Reasonable if the top company's needs with respect to engineers matches yours. Just because someone was what Google wanted (or thought they wanted) does not mean the same is true for you.
Good point. Google is something of an omnivore. If you're talented, they can hire you and then try to figure out what to do with you. For a smaller company, your needs are often much narrower.
Comments
If having worked at a top company is more correlated with success than any combination of one's own metrics, then I'd look for ways to improve the recruiting process.
Well, it's maybe an admission that the top company's hiring process is better than your own. Which, if you think about it, might be reasonable.
Still, yes, it's a sign that your own isn't top-company-worthy yet...
Or maybe the most naturally talented candidates self select into the bigger best known firms from the onset?
Or they're suffering from brand recognition. Google and Disney have a reputation for excellence, so just having it on your resume biases the interviewer into projecting those attributes onto you.
Yeah, having worked for a couple of Fortune 500 companies, 1 was fine to work for, the other was absolute hell.
Reasonable if the top company's needs with respect to engineers matches yours. Just because someone was what Google wanted (or thought they wanted) does not mean the same is true for you.
Good point. Google is something of an omnivore. If you're talented, they can hire you and then try to figure out what to do with you. For a smaller company, your needs are often much narrower.