Pending written veriosn but have received a verbal offer from Splunk for a non-technical/non-sales role. Was part of last years LR and debating between 2 offers. Splunk would be the familiar given it's in tech and similar to old Cisco role. Other offer isn't in tech. With the upcoming departure of GS, should Splunk now be avoided? Both positions are similar salary and remote. I was leaning towards Splunk until I saw this news. Now worried it would just be another LR waiting.
10 replies (most recent on top)
OP, I guess it's mostly about what you feel most comfortable with, where you are in your career, and what your goals are.
Which job will help you most in the future as you look for the next job? Do you want to work in a non-tech job and will it make you happy? Is there a long-term career in it and will switching lead you to success and future jobs?
Joining Cisco in a Splunk role will just put you into the selection pool of "tributes" for the annual Hunger Games. And you'll also be at risk for the stealth LR's we don't hear much about. If you are marketable and confident you can find work quickly, taking the Splunk role and collecting a big severance check might be a good way to make months of pay. If you're not marketable and can't find a job quickly, then stay away as you could end up losing the severance package and more staying afloat while looking for work.
...having two goes at the same company is not a good look on your resume
it looks like you just failed back to your comfort zone
It can look that way. But it also can be viewed positively. I've done this multiple times at multiple companies and hiring managers have told me it was the boomerang effect that put me above other candidates.
In my case, I had one company that had a 12 month limit, 90 day "break" period for contractors so having multiple stints at the same company showed that I was good enough that they wanted me back. It's not your fault for leaving due to the mandatory 90 day break between contracts.
Along similar lines, I've started at Cisco, another company, and then Cisco again. In all three cases, I started as a contractor and was thought well enough of to be hired. Yes, I left Cisco due to a LR, but when it's an LR affecting 5K+ employees, it's not about my performance and it's about budget. Saying I left the other company to come back to Cisco in a higher level role shows promotion/growth, not failing back to a comfort zone. I did another stint, this time as a direct hire at another company after the 2nd Cisco opportunity and I left it due to it being a sh-t company and being micro managed by a Director and getting conflicting priorities between the manager and Director. I got fed up and quit. Now I'm back at Cisco for a 3rd time, again in a role with more responsibilities showing progress/growth. (No, I don't work on or support legacy Cisco products, so that's a plus on my resume.) Now all I have to do is explain why I had the short tenure at the sh-t company w/out talking trash about them.
Again, it's all about how you sell your resume and why you've boomeranged to companies. The hardest part is getting the initial interview when people like you look at the circular employment pattern and automatically dismiss it.
There are other industries where being a boomerang is considered a plus. I've had family members who worked in the nuclear industry. They would work a refueling outage and rack up their annual whole body radiation count of 5,000 mrem, or 5 rem in just a few months. Then they'd travel and sightsee for the rest of the year, and work another refueling outage at another plant and do the same thing. Since refueling outages tend to be 18 months after the previous one ended, and the timing of their annual whole body count, they'd have to see which nuclear plant had a refueling event scheduled and work there. It was common to work at 3-5 plants and cycle between them. If you did a good job and worked hard, you were sought after and crew chiefs would contact you to see if you were available for their upcoming outage. I've heard that there are divers who will do a dive into the "heavy water" pool to replace parts and they only work a couple of weeks a year doing a handful of dives and train the rest of the year. They make bank because of the risk they take and are highly sought after. So it's not about "failing".
When a company buys another company, there is a h0neymoon period, after which, the buying company starts pushing their processes and strategies into the acquired company. I'd say if Splunk is doing great, this period might be 3/4 years, but if Splunk lags, this period maybe over in 2 years, after which Cisco will start building more teams in India and layoff people in the US.
Sometimes their change if strategy works but sometimes it has negative impact and execs dont take any blame for that. The impact is felt by people under them and there might be no accountability.
Run
Been through an acquisition… first couple years are awesome. Once Cisco starts mandating everything the eventual enshitification takes hold. I wish I would have left earlier.
Having worked on the Splunk acquisition for Cisco, you’re not any better or worse working for Splunk. Your job will be at risk at the same level it is if you are in Cisco proper.
If you want to go back to that game have at it.
In typical Cisco fashion, Splunk's integration into Cisco is moving very slowly. They still use Google email & calendar vs. OL, Slack vs. WebEx, and still consider themselves Splunkers vs. Cisconians. (GS's departure won't make any difference.) I worked for another Cisco acquisition for 18 months & experienced the same. It was an "us vs. them" mentality & I hated it. If you're okay with that than go for it.
you are going from Cisco back to Cisco
I have been downvoted here before for dunking on boomerang employees, but I'll say it again...having two goes at the same company is not a good look on your resume
it looks like you just failed back to your comfort zone
downvote away, I'm not changing my tune
All of Splunk SE’s are offsite in Las Vegas this week for training. That’s a huge expense if Cisco was planning on cutting that org.
I personally believe Splunk is a good option. GS leaving is not an indicator of danger, GS is a CEO and wants to be a CEO again, CR is not leaving any time soon.