Best Places To Work In IT

jcatcw writes "Computerworld's annual summary of the best places to work in IT lists companies that excel in five areas of employment: career development, retention, benefits, diversity, and training. According to the scorecard, the top five retention methods are: competitive benefits; competitive salaries; work/life balance; flexible work hours; and tuition reimbursement. Of the top 100 companies, 64 expect the number of U.S.-based IT staffers to increase in 2007, on average by 7%. Here is the whole list. The top three are Quicken Loans, University of Miami, and Sharp HealthCare."

Comments

Do people take these seriously?

[Anonymous Coward]

My company is on the list, top 20 even, and I'm sorry but it's a joke. This is a miserable place to work, with most people answering these things positively because if they don't they get subjected to even worse "morale improvement" exercises.

Re:Do people take these seriously?

[Null Nihils]

Monsanto was on there at #27. Monsanto are the people that patent genes, have lobbied to have certain legislation* added to the new Iraq constitution, have engineered plants that are sterile and can't be replanted so people have to keep buying new seeds... that's not even the half of it, and lets not even get started on their history of litigation.

Once I saw them on there, I promptly closed the browser tab.


* Note: the article I linked came at the top of the Google search, but it may not be the most correct or objective.

Re:Do people take these seriously?

[Architect_sasyr]

There is no way job at Quicken Loans is better than Google or Microsoft by any stretch of the imagination. Accurate and insightful... my bet is that the people at Google or Microsoft are too busy making new products / putting out fires to take surveys like this.

Re:Do people take these seriously?

[Venik]

Agree. Money is why I have a job. Don't give me a "Thank you" card or the "Employee of the month" coffee mug. I appreciate the extra attention, but let the dollars do the talking. I don't care who I work with - whites, blacks, males, females, transvestites, or hermaphrodites. If they know their stuff and do what they've been hired to do, we'll get along just fine. They can be loud, rude, ugly, and smelly. If I don't have to do their jobs for them - I will love them with all my heart.

As to the questioners on which this and similar ratings are based - what a bunch of hogwash. I know people who spent their best years in a dead-end IT job. They desperately grab on to anything positive about their situation - like a new water filter in the lunch room coffee maker. Isn't it wonderful to work for a company that replaces water filters at least once a year? I am sure it creates a real family atmosphere.

Re:Do people take these seriously?

[ocbwilg]

My company is on the list, top 20 even, and I'm sorry but it's a joke. This is a miserable place to work, with most people answering these things positively because if they don't they get subjected to even worse "morale improvement" exercises.

I agree, this list is largely a joke. If I'm not mistaken, it's based on survey responses and voting. I was surprised last year to see that a company that I used to work for shortly after Y2K was listed in the top five on the list. I was surprised, mainly because my personal opinion of the place (don't want to get sued, of course) was that there were a large number of incompetent people working there, and that senior IT management was primarily concerned with consolidating power and making sure that things were done "their way," regardless of the technical feasibility or sensibility of doing it that way. Pay, benefits, and training spending (as reported in the article) weren't any better than average, and in some cases were below average for the area that I live in (central Ohio).

Fast forward to the end of 2006, and that top-five company acquired the company that I was working for at the time. Normally I would have had some reservations based on my previous experience, but since they had been ranked so highly in Computerworld's Top 100 Places to Work I went into it with an open mind. Unfortunately, little had changed. They still had most of the same people in the same positions. Upper management hadn't changed a bit. Many of their IT staff were (again, in my opinion) either incompetent, unmotivated, or both. The pay and benefits were below-average, and the training spending was almost non-existant compared to the company that they had just acquired. Most of the technical staff that I worked with at the acquiring company had been with the company for 15+ years, meaning that they had had little exposure to new technologies or methodologies that came from sources outside of their company. Unfortunately, their technology infrastructure was still woefully out of date (servers running Netware/NT4/Win2K and 10mbit network infrastructure, etc). They were also severely understaffed and overworked. I was told that they were excited to have me coming onboard because the most recent addition to their engineering staff had been made several years ago, and they hadn't been allowed to hire anyone else since (despite significant growth in the company). Management at the new company told people in our IT team that we were overpaid, and that we would no longer be eligible for raises with the new company (even though our salaries were close the the market averages). In reality, the place was a trainwreck. After working with these people for several months I decided that I would be better off going somewhere else, so I put in my two weeks notice with the management of the old company. At the time I was told by another one of their engineers that I was smart to get out before they completed the HR transition to the new company, because under their rules you had to give a minimum of 30 days notice before quitting or else you would not be paid for unused vacation and would not be eligible for rehire, etc.

Of course, I wasn't the only one who felt that way. Most of the rest of my IT coworkers also resigned around the same time. The people who were left in IT afterwards were, unsurprisingly, the least marketable and least technical of our staff. Many of them have tried to move laterally within the new company into other areas that aren't under the direction of the IT management structure.

After we left, the senior management in the new company's IT department started making up stories about why we left. At first they would tell people that we left because we just weren't capable of handling change. When people pointed out that leaving the company altogether and going somewhere else was an even bigger change, they started telling people that we had all been dissatisfied with the old company. The rationale was that there's no way that we co

Noticeably Absent...

[EtherAlchemist]

...Google. Weird. I really expected to see them.

The best place to work in IT is from your own car

[grapeape]

After being with several corporations from small local companies to fortune 500, I have found the best place to work in IT is on your own. Make some business cards, invest in a van or other vehicle with room for parts, build an overhead of replacement parts and supplies, then hit the pavement and get the word out. Signage on a vehicle can be a good way to get the word out as well. I get most of my customers via word of mouth but have more work than I can handle most of the time. What I cant handle I pass on to others I know doing the same thing. Clients are happy because they get individual attention and someone to call that they can depend on. I am happy because they treat me like im really helping them rather than as some flunky who is beneath them. The money is much better than the average IT job and with the occasional unavoidable emergency, I pretty much set my own hours. It's not for everyone, you have to be self motivated, people friendly and confident in your skills, but its well worth it.

Re:The list skews to larger corporations

[Anonymous Coward]

And not only larger organizations, it skews towards public organizations. I worked for Bloomberg in NYC, and they were pretty a secretive and would not participate in a survey like this- but they treat their employees damn well. Technical/finance training, fully stocked kitchens, well decorated offices, pay is generally excellent, etc.

Before them, I worked in a small group that would not show up on this list- very profitable, and again treated us very well (.com days too, so a little too well- though they are still around and doing well). I now work for a hedgefund, and let me tell you that while the hours are harsh, they make damn sure we want to stay there. I was not around during the 80's but the excesses that went on must be a pittance to what goes on there.

obvious claptrap

[Kooshman]

This is obviously a thinly researched fluff piece, considering it doesn't have National Instruments mentioned anywhere. It's been on the Forbes best 100 places to work list for eight years running. It's happy to send its employees to the University of Texas for additional education, and actively encourages its employees to move around within the company.

No Google?

[humblecoder]

It is interesting that Google did not make the list. Google is always held up as being the best company to work for, if you believe geek lore. They are the pinnacle of the "nerf guns in the office" culture that was heralded in by the dotcom bubble. However, there are nowhere to be found...

Either something is wrong with that survey, or Google isn't as good as advertised.

I also don't see Microsoft on the list. Love em or hate em, they are also considered to be a top geek employer. I guess it might be because those stock options aren't as great as they used to be.

Re:Drug surveys

[Kadin2048]

Still, it's disadvantageous (if you're a student who does drugs and just wants to be left alone) to respond to the surveys honestly.

If answering "yes, I use drugs" causes the people giving the survey to spend more time or money investigating who's using drugs, making the respondent's life difficult, then there's no reason for them to respond that way.

More generally: why should one person, who knows that their goals are diametrically opposed to someone else's, ever help that other person accomplish something, when they know it'll only come at their own expense?

How about setting up on your own? How About China?

[Bit-Simple]

Yes I know this about companies and great working environments, but isn't one of the great joys of I.T. the daily challenges that you have to face? Geeks want to learn new geeky things, for many of us it is why we do the job we have chosen. If an employer can't provide the challenges you need to get your daily fix then all a trays of blue M&Ms in the world won't fix that.

I was getting those challenges for many years for a good company back in the UK, they also treated us pretty well. But problems/projects started getting a bit samey. So I took a career break off to teach English in China for a year, and ended up starting an IT company up there.

Now it is fair to say that the perks I give myself are much less impressive than I got in the past. But I can't complain that things are boring. I see every possible technology and industrial sector coming in through the door, from customers all over the world. I have to be lead consultant, I have to recruit and train people, I can offer pretty good local salaries and pick the cream of local graduates.

I also find that people here are pretty fun to work with, once you get over the language problems.

Would I go back to the old life? The workload is high but so are the benefits in terms of lifestyle, sense of adventure, the feeling of being an individual, so the trade off remains in favor of staying here.

I am not exactly recommending that everyone move to China to start their own company, but I am saying that in choosing an employer you should look at the bigger picture. Murals on the walls may make things more pretty but I you don't get a sense of accomplishment and purpose from what you are doing, then you are still just working for the man?

Re:Nothing on that list for me...

[gatesvp]

So why the hell are you not doing what you love everyday? Why do you spend your days doing stuff that doesn't fill the soul? If you really love your horse, then why don't you become a professional horse trainer? Then you can spend time with her everyday.

Sure your current job allows you to "help her have a better life.", but that doesn't mean that you couldn't give her a better life while doing something that "fills the soul". I mean, it's great to hear nuggets of wisdom like this one: "Company X, the best place in the world to work, will can your ass the moment the numbers do not add up for keeping you.", until you realize that that's pretty much how everything works out in life. (didn't take me 28 years in the field BTW) If my SO doesn't get her cut in the relationship deal she leaves, if my boss doesn't pay me enough or treat me well, I leave, if I can't carry my own weight at the company, then I get dumped, if I can't pick up the rebounds then coach benches me. It's pretty darn simple.

So I go to a job I love doing every day. And as a direct result of the fact that I love my job I'm not worried about getting canned b/c I'll find another. Just b/c some company dumps me doesn't mean that I can't find deep spiritual enjoyment in my work. Being fired doesn't mean I'm inadequate at what I do either, it's just a wrong time/place. Heck your beloved horse is going to die someday soon, probably before you will, how's that any different than getting "downsized" from a job that you love?

You may be a horse whisperer masquerading as an IT guy and for that you have my deepest sympathies. But I'm an IT guy and that's tattoed on my breast. It sounds really corny, but that's what I do, I'm not here to "die a slow death for some company", I'm here to throw in my 2 cents the best way I can find. I have loves outside of work, but I surprise the most people and do the most good in this world by solving and automating complex processes and problems. If I'm "dying" at a company, then I'm not really contributing as best as I can and it's time for me to go.

So if you're pissed off at companies and the job in general after 28 years, then you're just in the wrong field or suffering some major emotional breakdown. Cash out now, take the retirement money and go train horses. I mean, isn't that what you're saving for anyways? So that you can "retire" and spend the days with your girl? So if that's where you want to be, if that's what you're good at, if that's what you're "passionate" about, then you'll find a way to make the money from working with horses. You said it yourself, this money is just a "means to an end", so why not use your means and find an end you enjoy? Why not pick a life and then make it happen instead of picking a job and then hoping that you can find a life?

Re:Nothing on that list for me...

[Bucc5062]

Well that got a good chuckle out of me today. It was passionate. Off the mark, but passionate. I would not be 28 years in this industry if I did not have a passion for my work. I love solving problems. I find art in writing code. I am an "IT Guy" though it may not be tattooed on my breat.

I was mainly commenting on the thought that "perks" make a better company. They help, but was makes the job a positive experience is good management, being recognized for ones effort, for helping others get the job done, and great reward in a heartfelt thank you.

When I started I could not believe I was getting paid to do what I love. 28 years later there are still moments like that, but less and less because I have watched the shift of business from employee centric to customer centric. This translates into less consideration for the employee needs as those considerations will impact the bottom line (customers can include stock holders). Spend less, get less.

As to horses, that I could wotk with the all the time would be wonderful. That I have the time to learn how to be a professional horse trainer, not likely. Life is trade offs, compromises as it were so I work in the IT world (somwhat jaded) and find better satisfaction of life in things outside IT. That you find the same feeling in IT is great.

Re:Nothing on that list for me...

[jafac]

YES.

Last job I left;
In my exit interview, they asked why I left, what they could do (and could they offer me more money).

I told them that for the past 3 years, I have continually brought up the issue to my supervisors, that I need more money. Yes; I made some shitty decisions and overextended myself in certain areas - but the bottom line is, it costs x dollars to live in this area. And they just don't pay that.

Every single time I brought it up, they wheeled out the charts and stats that said that people at my level, in my discipline, make a certain amount of money - period.

Then I worked very, very hard, and earned an internal promotion, to a new, higher-level position. And they gave me a really crappy (IMO) increase, and said; it was HR policy that nobody in the entire company could get more than a 6 percent increase without VP-level or above approval. Even from an internal hire.

So I worked my new job for a few months.
Then I left.

I got a job at another company - and with it, a 15% increase.

So that's what I told them in my exit interview:
I said: you can't afford me. Yes, money would have kept me - but your own HR policies say that you CAN'T get me that much. So just forget it. I have a family, I have kids, I have a house payment. I will need to save for my kids' college. I will need to save for retirement. This stuff isn't cheap.

I believe that there is a certain myopia, among those who are coming up with pay rates and job market statistics. And I think that there are some players who are just WAY OFF. There's especially a big fuzzy grey box that they put people in, called "Systems Engineer" - and it's way too vague in terms of skill-set and competence valuation. My new employer didn't hire me as a "Systems Engineer" - my new employer hired me based on the story my resume told me. My new employer did their homework, and actually READ my resume before calling me into an interview. He knew what I would be worth, and was willing to pay it. To my former employer's detriment.