A friend of mine was walked out of Microsoft today.

I’m not talking about Stuart Scott, the now former Microsoft CIO who was canned for “violating company policies.” No, another friend decided to leave the MSN Live Search team and join Google Kirkland. In contrast, when I gave notice, I had the luxury of two weeks to wrap things up, say good-bye, and all that. In truth I didn’t need that long, as I was at a good stopping point, but the courtesy two weeks is there for both parties: I had two weeks to wrap up the stuff I wanted, and Microsoft had two weeks to have me wrap up the stuff they wanted. Another thing that this does is I felt I left Microsoft on good terms, and while I love my new job, should circumstances change in 5, 10, or 15 years, I’d certainly consider going back to Microsoft for the right opportunity. In fact a number of people have done that, including my former manager at Microsoft as well as our former VP, Christopher Payne. And presumably, Microsoft would want me not just for my experience at Microsoft, but also for my experience outside of Microsoft (apparently, Steve B is pursuing VPs from outside the company rather than promoting from within, as they need some new blood at the top!)

Other colleagues I knew from Microsoft that went to Google were shown the same treatment. So why was I shown the love and not my friend? Well, as near as I can tell, Microsoft doesn’t want someone who has decided to leave for Google around so that other employees can ask all the obvious questions and think about going to Google themselves. Google is clearly the competition, and while it’s OK to leave Microsoft and do something random (like work for Amazon), leaving to compete with Microsoft is an unforgivable offense, apparently up there with violating company policies.

I still have a lot of respect and admiration for Microsoft and the people there, but this is one policy I wish they’d rethink. Companies are groups of people, and the people move from one to the other. At times they’ll compete, and at times they’ll work together. Treating someone as the enemy because the company they’re joining is currently competition is short-sighted and naive; all it does is reinforce the negative image of Microsoft as the black hat and Google as the force of good. And it destroys a potential future rehire… after all, who would want to go back after being shown the door like that?

Update 11/9: Tim Faulkner at ValleyWag, you are a total hack. If you’re going to source my post and then exaggerate the Hell out of it, at least have the courtesy of citing a source. Of course, you’re misrepresenting what I’m saying so you can ensure your nose is that Googley pastel brown, so I can see why you might not do that. Hack.

Update 11/10: Looks like I made Mini again! Probably making some former co-workers grumpy. As I think about the above, there may be other reasons to show some people the door immediately besides worrying that a person leaving might inspire. I can’t think of any that aren’t lame, but that’s me.

Update 11/11: Huh, I made SlashDot… hopefully my small little server will survive. Some points for those reading: I highlighted above, it’s my pure speculation that MS folks don’t want people leaving for Google to stick around to talk to other employees. There are other reasons, which feel… well, I’ll let you make the call:

• Microsoft is fairly free internally about schedules, new anticipated features, and so forth. Microsoft may not want someone going to a competitor to learn anything new and imminent.
• Other employees may want to talk to the person leaving, and that might put said person in breach of the non-solicit.
• Employees going to the competition aren’t necessarily motivated to do a good job wrapping up, so best to cut things off now.
• Going to the competition is declaring yourself as competition. Get out now.

In truth… I suspect that it might be the last that’s the real reason, petty as it is. Everything else, even the worry of people talking to the guy going to Google, feels like a weak reason. People will still contact the guy after the fact to find out what was going on. Schedules don’t change that quickly. Talking about how green the grass is on the other side isn’t breach of non-solicit. And professional employees are professional. So… it boils down not to a logical, business reason, but an emotional one.

This all being said, the facts are that people leaving Microsoft don’t stay their two weeks. They might not be given the perp walk out the door, but their badge is turned off pretty damn quickly. And this isn’t just the one friend who left recently; I can name three others that this happened to as well. But those who are leaving elsewhere are given their two weeks, and typically there’s a farewell lunch or dinner. It’s a crappy policy, and should change.

And Microsofties reading this — yes, I did bring this up when it happened to the first guy, and was told by our VP that “X is our past, not our future.” It was clear this wasn’t a fight I was going to win, and shouldn’t even pursue.

This entry was posted 2 years, 4 months ago on Tuesday, November 6th, 2007 at 10:40 am and is filed under Microsoft, Search and Industry. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.