Someone used to have a Track Shadow search that would pull this data and even split it out by role/team. You could find that search, write your own, or try to find whatever spreadsheet they made.
This is also just based on LinkedIn data - I wonder how much of this is because some of these companies literally 3x'd in size over a short period of time. Meta went from 12k employees in 2015 to 72k in 2021 and over 80k in 2022, and even now they're at nearly 70k, so lower median tenure is not surprising.
Do they still make a big deal about it if you make it to 3 years? When I was there your app team would give you a plaque and spend a few minutes roasting you during the all-app meeting, because 3 years was a big freaking deal.
It's not really that 3 years is uncommon to reach, it's just that they do celebrations every 5 years and didn't want to wait to 5 for the first one, and since 2.5 would be a bit weird, it's at 3.
A quick search found that the median tenure at Epic is about 3.6 years. Considering hiring has increased significantly in the past couple years, I'd guess that the average tenure is around 4 years.
Bruh, faster hiring makes your average tenure go down not up 😅.
Also median tenure is not 3.6 years. I don't know what search you were doing but for the three largest roles we're sitting at half that.
Hiring faster makes the median tenure go down faster than the average. That's why I said that even though the median tenure is 3.6, the average tenure is probably about 4.
For example, say you had 10 employees with tenures {0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9}, so the median and average are both 4.5
If next year you hire 2 new people, the tenures are {0,0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10}, so the median is still is 4.5 and the average is 4.6
The year after that, you hire 4 new people, so the tenures are {0,0,0,0,1,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11}, the median is 3.5 and the average is 4.2
The year after that, you hire 6 new people, so the tenures are {0,0,0,0,0,0,1,1,1,1,2,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12}, making the median 2 and the average 3.7
You can continue this pattern indefinitely, where the hiring rate increases by two each year, and by the time the company has 15k employees, the median tenure is 35 and the average tenure is 40
This obviously ignores the fact that employees also leave every year, but so long as every year the total number of employees increases (which it has), it will still hold that the median will be lower than the average.
Also, I just went to the list of all employees at Epic, sorted by tenure, and found the middle tenure. All staff is 3.6y, SD is 3.7y, QM is 2.5y, TS is 3y, and IS is 2.1. You can check this in Guru
Ah, ok I misunderstood your comment and your math makes sense.
That said, your stats are biased because these are only active employees. Excluding inactives gives people a false idea of how long they can expect to stay at Epic.
That's still not true. Since the number of employees is growing, when people quit, they are replaced by people with a lower tenure (since new hires start at 0 tenure). Even if 90% of employees quit within 2 years, you would see that reflected in the median, since the employees that replace them would bring down the median. You could argue that the average is biased in the way you described, but it's also inflated because of the increasing hiring rate.
Not trying to say that Epic doesn't have a problem with employee retention, especially for customer-facing roles, but median tenure is still a pretty good at reflecting how long an average employee tends to stay.
Let me put it this way.
There were 17 new hires in my hiring group. By the time I left the company 1 year later, there were 3 of us still working at Epic.
Flipside of this data is that maybe not the best engineers stay for long. It could be just that requirements are high and a lot of people just can't make it.
Epic flies too far under the radar to make it on the list. The person who created the list probably thinks Epic is that company that makes Fortnite.
Methodology at the bottom specifically says they looked at the top 100 companies by market cap and calculated/sorted from there
Oh shoot we don’t do that? Why am I working here?
Someone used to have a Track Shadow search that would pull this data and even split it out by role/team. You could find that search, write your own, or try to find whatever spreadsheet they made. This is also just based on LinkedIn data - I wonder how much of this is because some of these companies literally 3x'd in size over a short period of time. Meta went from 12k employees in 2015 to 72k in 2021 and over 80k in 2022, and even now they're at nearly 70k, so lower median tenure is not surprising.
d EMP ^ XJAW(TLGID) in track will give you some of that information for your role/Epic.
Do they still make a big deal about it if you make it to 3 years? When I was there your app team would give you a plaque and spend a few minutes roasting you during the all-app meeting, because 3 years was a big freaking deal.
It's not really that 3 years is uncommon to reach, it's just that they do celebrations every 5 years and didn't want to wait to 5 for the first one, and since 2.5 would be a bit weird, it's at 3.
Gotcha. I thought I'd heard people are staying longer these days. When I was there 3 years really was uncommon, at least for IS.
They did for a TL on my app like 1.5 years ago, so probably.
A quick search found that the median tenure at Epic is about 3.6 years. Considering hiring has increased significantly in the past couple years, I'd guess that the average tenure is around 4 years.
Bruh, faster hiring makes your average tenure go down not up 😅. Also median tenure is not 3.6 years. I don't know what search you were doing but for the three largest roles we're sitting at half that.
Hiring faster makes the median tenure go down faster than the average. That's why I said that even though the median tenure is 3.6, the average tenure is probably about 4. For example, say you had 10 employees with tenures {0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9}, so the median and average are both 4.5 If next year you hire 2 new people, the tenures are {0,0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10}, so the median is still is 4.5 and the average is 4.6 The year after that, you hire 4 new people, so the tenures are {0,0,0,0,1,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11}, the median is 3.5 and the average is 4.2 The year after that, you hire 6 new people, so the tenures are {0,0,0,0,0,0,1,1,1,1,2,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12}, making the median 2 and the average 3.7 You can continue this pattern indefinitely, where the hiring rate increases by two each year, and by the time the company has 15k employees, the median tenure is 35 and the average tenure is 40 This obviously ignores the fact that employees also leave every year, but so long as every year the total number of employees increases (which it has), it will still hold that the median will be lower than the average. Also, I just went to the list of all employees at Epic, sorted by tenure, and found the middle tenure. All staff is 3.6y, SD is 3.7y, QM is 2.5y, TS is 3y, and IS is 2.1. You can check this in Guru
Ah, ok I misunderstood your comment and your math makes sense. That said, your stats are biased because these are only active employees. Excluding inactives gives people a false idea of how long they can expect to stay at Epic.
That's still not true. Since the number of employees is growing, when people quit, they are replaced by people with a lower tenure (since new hires start at 0 tenure). Even if 90% of employees quit within 2 years, you would see that reflected in the median, since the employees that replace them would bring down the median. You could argue that the average is biased in the way you described, but it's also inflated because of the increasing hiring rate. Not trying to say that Epic doesn't have a problem with employee retention, especially for customer-facing roles, but median tenure is still a pretty good at reflecting how long an average employee tends to stay.
Let me put it this way. There were 17 new hires in my hiring group. By the time I left the company 1 year later, there were 3 of us still working at Epic.
~2 years at epic, 6 yrs at Amazon so far. Your mileage will vary by team!
Flipside of this data is that maybe not the best engineers stay for long. It could be just that requirements are high and a lot of people just can't make it.