Starting a career... start-ups worth it?
 

So I'm getting into the market for a job, starting after I graduate this spring. We just had two career fairs at my school, so I've just handed out my resume to a couple dozen companies and I'm starting to schedule interviews. But I thought I'd ask some of the people here if they have any advice regarding where to start a career. I'm just wondering what opinions you might have towards starting out at a start-up (there's a ton of 'em around here) vs. starting at an established company (e.g. Microsoft, Amazon, etc...).

As I see it the (dis)advantages of each are about as follows:

For start-ups:
+ work in a smaller environment, get to be in with the guts of a project where your contributions are very noticeable.
+ lots of encouragement for creative ideas
+ chances for job advancement are very good
- more pressure to perform, since the team depends on you more
- higher chance of company having financial/marketability issues

For established companies:
+ better mentorship/training programs in place
+ better benefits packages, possibly better pay
+ unlikely for the company to go under
- less opportunity for advancement
- contributions less noticeable ("Oh, I wrote the button in the save dialog...")

I'm thinking that it's better to start at an established company, and consider start-ups later on when I have more workplace experience (though I'll still be considering each offer I get). What do those of you who've been through this before think? Anything in particular to watch out for?

My personal preference was for small companies/startups. This was a good match for my personality. The pay was always as good (sometimes better) as the larger companies. The benefits were sometimes less, but stock or stock options were a gamble that I valued more. I had two absolutely top-notch mentors (at two different places). As soon as I had enough money to tide me over (5 years), I detached and started contracting on my own. That's indicative of what I mean by my type of personality. As a contractor, I was every bit as loyal to my client as any full-time employee. I also looked around and picked up pieces that employees were neglecting and did those jobs, in addition to what I was hired for. This virtually always resulted in an offer of a full-time position. I always turned it down until I got into the area of fixing engineering management problems. Then, I'd take the job until it was done (people frown on contractors firing permanent employees), and detach again. As you can see, one has to have the personality for that; it isn't everyone's cup of tea. If security is an issue, best not to do it.

To address some of your points, from my view:

You get more experience with a small company because you wear more hats.

You do have more performance pressure.

Mentors developed by personal relationships are available, but formal training usually is not.

You will be encouraged by the bottom-line oriented if you do a good job, but you will be discouraged by those who perceive you as a threat.

There is definitely a good chance for the company to go under. If you can drive profitability by reducing costs, increasing performance, increasing quality, and increasing efficiency, you will be highly valued and rewarded for it. You will best be able to do that by broadening your range of disciplines.

In my, admittedly far more limited, experience the startup I worked for paid much less than the more established company I was hired at afterwards. The startup went into liquidation shortly after I left, though, so I guess I should add that the pay is only good if the startup in question isn't having financial difficulties ;)

You gotta catch 'em right after they catch the venture capitalist ;) .

In my experience...

I started off as a contract student with the US DoD, which I enjoyed. I stayed there until I went to college.

At college I worked for a startup that did not pay much, which is ultimately the reason I left. The only real benefit I got there was free drinks (mountain dew)...

I worked for around five stable companies during college and did a lot of contract programming on the side.

After graduating I worked at one job for a while (with an established company) then went home where I was planning to work for a start-up that was in the running for a few years. While I was working out the deals with that startup, I got an extremely good offer from a US DoD contractor (different division than my first job, but same facility) that I couldn't resist, so I abandoned the deals with the startup and went to work the next day. About a month later, the startup was gone... bankrupt. Here I am now, with the DoD contractor enjoying my annual raises, bonuses, 401k, insurance, and intelligent co-workers.

I still do work on the side, and I'm planning to get a business off the ground in which I can gradually merge into full time.

My suggestion would be to start off with an established company, get the feel for how clients will be and what is required of you to make ends meet... get comfortable with the technologies, etc. If you really want job security, go to work for the government. If you want to focus on one thing and work in smaller teams, startups would be a good approach too. You will soon find out that companies want employees with experience, but if no one hires you because of that, how do you get the experience? :)

I think that smaller companies are more of a risk, but if you're not supporting a family then the benifits could be worth it. But if you're supporting someone it may be wiser to go with a more established employer. There is more room for advancement in a smaller environment.

NOTE: I am not saying this from experience but only from research I have done on my own.

That's a benefit? I guess this is a good example of the wide range of tastes among people; I myself can't stand Mountain Dew (I'd much prefer a Coke or Dr. Pepper).Did they let you ride the horses?

I thought everyone knew what stable meant?

Stable in this particular context refers to "firm and dependable; subject to little fluctuation; "the economy is stable""

when in doubt .........
google -> define: stable ...

Yes, I suppose I ought to have used a smiley; then it would have been more clear I was making a joke. :)

Yeah, I was on the other side of the spectrum from a joke, I thought you were being a smartass. :)