All three companies build frontier models, but published talent samples reveal different organizational emphases: product and design stand out at OpenAI, commercial and customer roles at Anthropic, and explicit research titles at Google DeepMind. This article brings together institutional reports on functions, technical roles and career backgrounds to examine how those differences connect to the work each organization does. The function comparison currently covers US samples for the first two companies; the technical comparison covers all three in the US, UK and France. Detailed definitions and evidence accompany the interactive charts and appendix.
The clearest difference appears at the product and customer ends of the organization. In the same Metix US sample, Product / Design accounts for 12.7% at OpenAI and 6.8% at Anthropic; GTM / Customer accounts for 12.7% and 22.6%, respectively. The first category concerns how people use a product, while the second connects commercial development with customer adoption. This offers one way to read their organizational priorities: building the product experience is more prominent in OpenAI’s sample, while bringing the product into customers’ businesses is more prominent in Anthropic’s. Original report, sections 02 and 06
Hiring backgrounds add texture to that picture. The immediate-prior-employer categories show a stronger enterprise-software presence at Anthropic and a stronger large-technology-platform presence at OpenAI. These patterns align with the functional differences: building products for users and connecting models to enterprise work call for different combinations of experience. The background view therefore separates immediate previous employers, employers appearing anywhere in a career, and career-record spans, allowing readers to follow the functional comparison into the experience people bring.
Within technical teams, job titles become a revealing difference of their own. OpenAI and Anthropic make extensive use of Member of Technical Staff (MTS) in the samples, while Google DeepMind more often explicitly distinguishes Research Scientists from Research Engineers. More of the first two companies’ division of work sits beneath a shared title; DeepMind’s research track is easier to read from titles. The interactive comparison therefore gives MTS its own column alongside research, engineering and Safety & Alignment. Recorded PhDs provide an additional view of technical-team backgrounds. Original report, sections 3.4 and 9.1
Google DeepMind also has a distinctive organizational setting. It was formed by combining DeepMind and Google Research’s Brain team in 2023, placing the research organization within the larger Google and Alphabet system. Official organizational announcement The 2024 financial statements of the UK entity DeepMind Technologies Limited say that its workforce is directly employed by other Alphabet group companies. Understanding the organization means considering both the research team and the division of work across the group. The comparison consequently preserves Google DeepMind’s team boundary and marks its missing full-function breakdown in the third column. Official financial statements, printed pages 3 and 20
Pay adds a cost perspective to the technical-team comparison. BCG provides a 2024 annual MTS salary reference of US$353,000 for OpenAI and US$320,000 for Anthropic. These historical references draw on H-1B-related position data, exclude equity and bonuses, and do not cover Google DeepMind. Reading them after the role breakdown is more informative than looking at company salary figures alone: the particular role, seniority and location still determine which technical positions make a useful comparison. BCG, PDF pages 7–8, Exhibit 5.2
The most useful additions would be Google DeepMind’s full function distribution, the division of work within the combined commercial/customer category, and the research, software-engineering and infrastructure work performed under MTS titles. They would connect the product, commercial and research-track differences already visible to more specific teams.
Download complete JSON dataset · Download observations CSV · Download source register