Big Fish Little Pond vs. Little Fish Big Pond

I've been on both sides of this and it would be interesting to know what others think.

As a big fish, I enjoyed having more influence and authority and I felt like I made a huge difference. As a little fish; I like the additional resources, established environment, and the investment in and exposure to newer technologies.

So big fish or little fish?

Find more posts tagged with

Save $250 on 2025 certification boot camps from Infosec!

Book now with code EOY2025

Button

Comments

QHalo

I'm a big fish in a little pond. Less bureaucracy, decent budgets and bosses that let me actually take command of things and facilitate my success, not hinder it. Been on the other side and it takes to frickin long to do everything and was constrained by upper management agendas. Budgets were amazing though but you never got much say in where it was spent. Nothing like I have now. Here, I'm the master of my own destiny. Love it.

Crikey

Used to work on big government contracts. Was behind on new technology at least 2 years timeline constantly. No budget for training or dev. Small fish.

Now I work in private sector -opposite of above. Big fish.

I enjoy being the big fish.

dave330i

Prefer big pond due to more resources being available.

paul78

Interesting question... I really had to think a bit about it.

I think that the same experience could occur in either a big pond or a little pond. Even in a big pond, there are places to carve a niche. As a fish, you aren't really bigger in a smaller pond, there are just fewer bigger fish.

I think that I like smaller ponds - not because I would be a bigger fish - I'm the same fish regardless of the size of the pond. What I like about a smaller pond is that it's easier to grow that pond bigger at a faster rate.