The same 106 people who told me what they earn also told me what would make them leave. Money came up most. It was rarely the only thing people wanted.
Last month I asked 106 design engineers what it would take to make them leave their current job. 91 wrote something back. My favourite came from someone six-plus years in, on €150k or more:
"Remote work, I value my work life balance, it's just the internet kids!"
6+ years, €150k+
Money came up more than anything else, in 44% of answers. It also wasn't what most people led with, and the further into their career someone was, the less it featured at all.
What people actually said they wanted
44%Compensation. The most common single theme, and rarely mentioned alone.
34%The work itself. An interesting product, a problem worth solving, something they believed in.
25%Remote or flexibility, usually stated as a condition rather than a preference.
21%Team and culture. Who they'd be working with, and whether those people are any good.
15%Growth, ownership, or a clearly defined role.
Based on 91 written answers. Most people mentioned several things, so these add up to more than 100%.
Almost nobody named one thing. The typical answer was a list, and the list nearly always had money in it alongside two or three other conditions, all of which had to hold at once.
"Same or more money, but also fully remote, some hybrid, interesting work, nice colleagues, working on something that has purpose, not just making profits for investors."
6+ years, €130–150k
That answer is representative in structure rather than content. Money first, then four more things, and the offer only works if all five land.
Seniority changes what people want, and it isn't subtle
Split the answers at four years of experience and the priorities move.
UNDER 4 YEARS · n=36
50%
mentioned money
6%
mentioned remote work
4+ YEARS · n=55
40%
mentioned money
25%
mentioned remote work
Money slips as people get more senior. Flexibility climbs steeply, from a footnote among the newer engineers to a quarter of the experienced ones, and it usually appears as a hard condition rather than a nice-to-have. Several people said plainly that they would not consider a role that required relocation, whatever it paid.
"I wouldn't. There are plenty of remote roles with top salaries that no on-site can match. I'm fine with travelling a dozen times a year."
4–6 years, €150k+
"Not interested in moving now that remote is an option for many companies. I would have pre-Covid because it was the only way to find great opportunities."
6+ years, €100–130k
The experienced group is also simply harder to shift. Roughly one in ten said they weren't looking at all, against one in sixteen of the newer engineers. So the experienced end of the market is both the hardest to reach and the least responsive to the lever most companies reach for first.
The people who lean design want different things
The other split that showed up cleanly was between people who describe their work as mostly code and people who describe it as mostly design.
Among the code-leaning half, 50% mentioned money and 26% mentioned the work being interesting. Among the design-leaning group those numbers roughly invert: 31% money, 46% the work. Read alongside the last piece, where the design-leaning group also earned €25k less, that's an uncomfortable pairing. The people paid least for this role are also the least likely to name pay as what would move them.
The design-leaning sample here is small, 13 people, so treat the direction as real and the exact figures as soft.
The lever a small company actually has
Money, remote work and an interesting product are all things a well-funded company can offer more of than a seed-stage one. But two themes came up that work the other way round.
Equity and upside appeared in 10% of answers, and growth, scope or seniority in 15%. Together that's a meaningful share of people describing something other than salary, and describing it in terms a small company can actually deliver.
"Equity and salary increase, with the right idea and hungry people."
0–2 years, €100–130k, currently at a non-startup
"More upside, getting in at an earlier stage with equity. And working on an interesting product."
2–4 years, €130–150k, currently Series B
Both of those are people at larger or later-stage companies saying they would move earlier down the funding ladder for a bigger stake. Which is worth knowing if you're seed-stage and assuming you can't compete for this talent because you can't match a Series C salary. The people who said this weren't asking to be paid more. They were asking to own more of what they build.
The same is true of scope. A few respondents named a specific level they wanted rather than a specific number.
"Staff or principal level IC role in a design or product org, with a mix of design and code."
0–2 years, €80–100k, currently at a large company
That's someone two years into their career naming the level and remit they want rather than a salary. Scope is one of the few things on this list that doesn't cost anything to offer.
The thing that kept coming up unprompted
Running through the answers is something I didn't ask about and didn't expect to see so often. People want the job to be a real job.
"A proper design engineering role, not something that falls under a product designer doing some code on the side."
2–4 years, €60–80k
"It would take a well defined role in a well defined team, which is doing well to keep up with the industry."
6+ years
One person laid out the risk in more detail than anyone else, and it's worth quoting at length because it explains why the definition matters so much:
"Joining as a design engineer is quite the risk. Joining a really small pre-revenue team can put you in a situation where you get two-plus jobs as full time design plus full time engineering. Many companies don't handle this well, so working remotely makes that gamble a bit less impactful when it doesn't pay off. Joining a team where they don't have to rely on you for all the design work makes that way easier."
4–6 years, €150k+
That is a person describing, in the language of risk management, why a badly defined role is dangerous to take. The first piece of this research found that this role is posted under a dozen different titles and that nobody agrees what it is. This is the same problem from the other side of the table, and it turns out to be a live consideration when people decide whether to move.
What this adds up to
Money is the most common answer and the least sufficient one. It gets a conversation started and it doesn't finish it, particularly with the experienced people who are hardest to reach in the first place.
The things that came up alongside it are mostly not expensive. A product someone finds interesting. Colleagues who are good at their jobs. Not requiring someone to move house. A role with a clear shape, defined well enough that the person taking it isn't quietly signing up for two jobs. None of that requires outbidding anyone.
Which is roughly the opposite of how most searches for this role are run.
How we did this
This comes from the same anonymous survey of 106 design engineers across Europe as the compensation piece. The final question was open text: would you move for the right role, and what would it take. 91 people answered it. I read every answer and grouped them by what people asked for. Answers often mentioned several things, and each one counts in every group it belongs to, which is why the percentages add up to more than 100. Quotes are verbatim, lightly trimmed for length, published anonymously with the respondent's experience and compensation band for context. The segment cuts are shown where the subgroup is big enough to mean something; the design-leaning group is 13 people and is flagged as directional.
Rocío Galiano
Design & Product Engineer Search @ Hymera
Independent research on the design and product engineering market. Stay connected.
