Apple aggressively pursued talent from Tesla during the development of its now-scrapped electric vehicle project, codenamed “Project Titan.” The recruitment tactics, described by Tesla CEO Elon Musk as a “carpet bombing” of offers, highlight the intense competition for engineering expertise in the EV sector and raise questions about the ethics of aggressive poaching. Musk’s recent comments shed light on a period where Apple reportedly sought to rapidly accelerate its automotive ambitions by acquiring key personnel from the industry leader.
According to Musk, Apple’s strategy involved a relentless barrage of recruiting calls to Tesla employees. The offers weren’t simply competitive; they were often significantly higher than Tesla’s compensation packages. Musk stated that Apple frequently offered double the salary, and, remarkably, often did so without requiring formal interviews. This aggressive approach, he suggested, forced some Tesla engineers to disconnect their phones to avoid the constant outreach.
While Musk acknowledged a tendency to portray himself as a victim, the accounts align with documented departures of key Tesla personnel to Apple. Doug Field, who spent five years working on the Model 3, transitioned to Apple. Chris Porritt, a former vice president at Tesla and previously an engineer at Aston Martin, also made the move. CJ Moore, who led software development for Tesla’s Autopilot, and Michael Schwekutsch, responsible for powertrain systems, were also recruited by Apple.
The timing of this recruitment drive coincided with Apple’s significant investment in Project Titan, an ambitious effort to develop autonomous vehicles. At its peak, the project involved up to 5,000 employees. Apple’s pursuit of Tesla engineers can be seen as an attempt to quickly acquire the specialized knowledge and experience needed to compete in the rapidly evolving EV market. However, the project ultimately faced numerous technical challenges and leadership changes, leading to its cancellation in 2024. The 2,000 remaining employees were reassigned to focus on generative AI initiatives.
Musk coined the term “Tesla dust” to describe the belief that simply hiring engineers from Tesla would guarantee success in the automotive space. He admitted to falling into a similar trap himself when recruiting from Google and Apple, suggesting that expertise is not always transferable between companies and cultures. The context of a company and its internal dynamics play a crucial role in innovation.
The situation was further complicated by Tesla’s location in Silicon Valley, which facilitated job switching for engineers. The concentration of tech companies in the area created a highly competitive talent market, making it easier for rivals to attract Tesla employees. Tesla’s engineering-focused culture, Musk noted, also made it an attractive target for companies seeking to accelerate their own innovation efforts.
The aggressive recruitment tactics employed by Apple underscore the challenges companies face when attempting to enter new and complex industries. While financial incentives can be effective in attracting talent, they are not a substitute for building internal expertise and fostering a culture of innovation. The story of Apple’s pursuit of Tesla engineers serves as a cautionary tale about the limitations of simply “buying” success.
The episode also highlights the broader dynamics of competition in the tech industry. Companies are constantly vying for talent, particularly in emerging fields like electric vehicles and artificial intelligence. While healthy competition can drive innovation, it can also lead to aggressive tactics that raise ethical concerns. The case of Apple and Tesla demonstrates the lengths to which companies will go to gain a competitive edge, and the potential consequences of those actions.
