I’m glad that finally they accepted intel is not attracting top talent and cannot retain top talent as well. Only because compensation is not competitive. I cannot say how many times raised my concern to fix this broken item.
4 replies (most recent on top)
@1qdp +1 Toxic managers run Intel Result is a disgrace if you have any 'talent' why report to id--ts
Everyone thinks they have 'talent' for information mean IQ is 100, 130 is 'just' 2 standard deviations, your average Stanford EE or Physics phd graduate qualifies at maybe 3 standard deviations or about 1% of the brightest in the World, not in Oregon, is 80 000 000, a group as big a Germany or combined California and Texas with Ohio. Of course intelligence is not the only metric. Take wealth, not salary after tax but accumulated wealth or net worth, 1% in the United States is $10M, one Mac Mansion in the Bay Area or several houses in Connecticut, maybe a lifetime of intel salary at ELT level but who can aspire to stay ELT for life given the competitive situation.? Add the parameters intelligence plus wealth in the 1% throw in 'network', here again everyone thinks their network of salaried middle managers is above average, why work for id--t intel influentials?
Intel is rotting from within.
Intelligent engineers and scientists can tell who knows what.
If you see people above you getting paid a lot of money but cannot tell
the difference between a bowling ball and an electron,
something doesn't feel right and there is no respect given.
Top talent doesn't want to work under 3rd rate execs who BS'ed and DEI'd their way up.
Thanks, but no thanks.
The problem runs deeper than that. Toxic management/culture matters too. Left Intel a year ago for double the money, and certainly wouldn’t go back even if Intel doubled my new salary