I think some people have different "career goals" than other people. Some people want to show up and keep their chair warm from 9-5 every day for 4 years, to get their small pay increase and title bump.
Others want to come into the company with the title "Awesome Excellent Programmer", work on something cool, and leave the company after they've done something interesting with the title "Awesome Excellent Programmer". These people do not get upset when they are not promoted for doing nothing, and do not tend to write bad reviews. They also tend to be the better programmers.
(I realized this recently. To get a bump up in my title and salary at my current job, I basically have to "serve my time". The fact that I'm much better at programming than other people does not accelerate the process; promoting me now would make the "time" that others have put in less meaningful. If I was promoted, then they would all quit and write bitter reviews like the one linked in this thread. "This company sucks, all they do is hire long-haired hippies that tell me to write tests! I have 20 years of experience, why would they let this nobody have a minimally meaningful title!?", it would read. Now, if it was my company, I would want highly-paid people that can't program to leave. But I am not a highly-paid person that can't program, and they make the rules. Oh well, at least I get a good laugh.)
I realized this is how it is at my current employer too. They have very strict processes around this to manage seniority. For example, I am currently at a lower title (level 2) than another developer on my team (level 3) who I spend at least half an hour a day managing and coaching. We have to be very diligent with code reviews for this person because there is a lot of stuff they miss. I feel like they would be a good fit for a junior (level 1). However, they've put in their five years and received their promotions and pay raises.
They have a lot of process tied to seniority. You can only get a title increase every few years and no more than one title at a time without a review all the way up to the VP. You can't ask for more vacation as it is formulaic and HR isn't interested in making exceptions.
This is definitely a company for those who like to keep their seat warm and then go home to their families in the evenings, all the while enjoying the job security and lack of autonomy.
Since my interview at Google didn't pan out, I'm working on a startup on the side to keep myself sane. In the mean time I reason it will be a good experience of what not to do.
I think every company is like this, which is what's depressing. Solid and reliable software is not in demand, and where it is, it's assumed that process (not creativity) is what gets it.
It's OK, though, because I can write solid software faster than other people can write shitty software :)
I think the companies in general are better than in your one-sided opinion.
For instance, think about hundreds of companies that need to manage financial data. They create solutions to take data from database A and put it into database B. People who maintain this code are usually 100% more critical to the company than an average "awesome programmer". And these people get promoted based on the years of service.
This. Although I've found in my career that at companies like that, once you reach your mid 30s and are married, or have a family, for some reason they feel you are more stable and reliable and are more likely to promote you to some position like team lead or architect.
It really sucks, but for some reason, the most talented developers who are usually in their early 20s are seen as "less reliable" and more likely to jump ship taking a lot of product specific knowledge with them, so they are usually not trusted with positions of seniority.
Then, by the time we're in our 30s and have more important obligations like family, etc, we are promoted to positions where our 22 year old self would be more suited to the work load. Hopefully in the 15 years between these two phases we have gained some wisdom.
Meh, people have different experience. Yours might be like that because you _are_ in that position.
In my experience, most of these people tend to write quick hacky solutions numerous times. Get a pat in the back. And quickly run away when the said hacky solutions start to smell really bad.
These people do get away with the title "Awesome Excellent Programmer" and tend to continue leaving bad code trails. Unfortunately nobody bad mouth companies for having bad code because it's internal.
Others want to come into the company with the title "Awesome Excellent Programmer", work on something cool, and leave the company after they've done something interesting with the title "Awesome Excellent Programmer". These people do not get upset when they are not promoted for doing nothing, and do not tend to write bad reviews. They also tend to be the better programmers.
(I realized this recently. To get a bump up in my title and salary at my current job, I basically have to "serve my time". The fact that I'm much better at programming than other people does not accelerate the process; promoting me now would make the "time" that others have put in less meaningful. If I was promoted, then they would all quit and write bitter reviews like the one linked in this thread. "This company sucks, all they do is hire long-haired hippies that tell me to write tests! I have 20 years of experience, why would they let this nobody have a minimally meaningful title!?", it would read. Now, if it was my company, I would want highly-paid people that can't program to leave. But I am not a highly-paid person that can't program, and they make the rules. Oh well, at least I get a good laugh.)