Here’s my framework for how I think about making career decisions, arguably one of the most important decisions we make in our lives.

I break it down into four categories, ranked by how important each is to me:

1) The People

My top priority is working with great people. Everything else is secondary to that.
1a) Are these smart, passionate, high EQ people that care about their work? Would I enjoy working with them? Do they lift the rest of the team up? Are they welcoming and inclusive? Do they strive to continue learning? Would I learn from them?
1b) It’s sometimes hard to get a good gauge of the people through just interviews. If you haven’t worked with the team prior or knew them for an extended period of time, values are a good place to start.
1c) Talking to past employees at the company and past colleagues at other companies can tell you a lot. Don’t skimp on reference checks. Ask questions like:
- Would you work with that person again?
- How did they resolve disagreements?
- How much did they care?
2) The Mission

Second on my list is the mission. Because I only get to take 1 bet at a time on a company working for them, it’s important that I’m working on something I can get behind.
2a) Is it a mission that gets me excited to wake up and work on everyday? Is it actually something important? Will I be able to make an impact - not just in the company but externally as well?
2b) It’s also totally fine to work for a company not “changing the world”. IMO mission = excitement and it’s whatever will make you happy. Why spend 2,080 hours each year doing something that makes you miserable?
3) The Role

If the people and mission check out, it’s probably important to start thinking about if the role is a good fit.
3a) Does it make sense given my background and skills? Is it a role I’d be good at? Will I be in a position where I can succeed?

A good sign the role is a good fit is if it overlaps with your zone of genius.
3b) I also very much believe in compounding, especially when it comes to careers.

If a role doesn’t compound on the skills I’ve grown throughout my career, probably not a good fit. I like to reflect on the things I’m good at and not so good at and double down.
4) Lastly, upside.

Not everything has to or should be a money driven decision, but it’s important. Everyone’s financial needs are different.
4a) For me, upside has always meant “is my ownership * potential value of the company large enough to help me reach my financial goals.”

For some that could be $1m in net worth, for others $100m.
4b) A q I also frequently ask myself is if I believe this company can be worth 50-100x from today.

Stage of company drives some of this thinking. An earlier stage company can have a 100x growth ($5m -> $500m) but its also possible that a public company does too ($5b -> $500b)
And that’s it. I haven’t yet made a career decision without being able to fit a factor into one of these categories, but curious to hear what others find important as well.

More from Tech

The YouTube algorithm that I helped build in 2011 still recommends the flat earth theory by the *hundreds of millions*. This investigation by @RawStory shows some of the real-life consequences of this badly designed AI.


This spring at SxSW, @SusanWojcicki promised "Wikipedia snippets" on debated videos. But they didn't put them on flat earth videos, and instead @YouTube is promoting merchandising such as "NASA lies - Never Trust a Snake". 2/


A few example of flat earth videos that were promoted by YouTube #today:
https://t.co/TumQiX2tlj 3/

https://t.co/uAORIJ5BYX 4/

https://t.co/yOGZ0pLfHG 5/
So we had to develop technologies like this to barely manage control over limited areas in Iraq's few urban centers. Only ~8 in 100 Iraqi adults owns a personal vehicle. That rate is > 1 car/adult in America yet I have never seen any doctrine paper or work of fiction address this


We've seen and struggled in civil conflicts with instant, local, universal, distributed communications (cell phone era, basically every conflict since 2000). We've seen and struggled in conflicts with instant, global, universal distributed communications (everything since 2011).

The world's most overfunded military and glow in the dark agencies struggle and largely fail to contain conflicts where fhe vast, vast majority of people are locked into a ~5mi radius of their home.

How can they possibly contain a conflict in a nation with universal car ownership and the most developed road network in the world? The average car can travel over 400 miles on one tank of gas, how can you contain the potential of that kind of mobility?

I think that's partially why the system was so freaked out by 1/6. Yes, most of it is histrionics but you don't decide to indefinitely turn your capital into the Baghdad Green Zone with fortifications and 25k troops over histrionics alone.

You May Also Like

“We don’t negotiate salaries” is a negotiation tactic.

Always. No, your company is not an exception.

A tactic I don’t appreciate at all because of how unfairly it penalizes low-leverage, junior employees, and those loyal enough not to question it, but that’s negotiation for you after all. Weaponized information asymmetry.

Listen to Aditya


And by the way, you should never be worried that an offer would be withdrawn if you politely negotiate.

I have seen this happen *extremely* rarely, mostly to women, and anyway is a giant red flag. It suggests you probably didn’t want to work there.

You wish there was no negotiating so it would all be more fair? I feel you, but it’s not happening.

Instead, negotiate hard, use your privilege, and then go and share numbers with your underrepresented and underpaid colleagues. […]