The MVP Award is an annual award that is given to people who actively share their technical expertise with the world. Among other benefits, MVP awardees get a certificate from Microsoft, a free subscription to MSDN / TechNet and early access to software much before they get released to public.

Jon Skeet, who now works as a developer at Google, has been an MVP (Most Valuable Professional) since 2003 for his contributions to the C# programming language – he even wrote a book – C# in Depth.

The MVP award is valid for one year so when his renewal cycle was near, so when Jon asked his employer (Google) if he could apply to get the award renewed, he "was advised not to do so."

As renewal time came round again, I asked my employer whether it was okay for me to renew, and was advised not to do so. As a result, while I enjoyed being awarded as an MVP, I’ve asked not to be considered for renewal this year.

This doesn’t sound very Google-like and I may have had trouble believing the report had it not come straight from the horse’s mouth. Is it a good idea to deny "recognition" to an employee just because the organization giving away that award is your rival?

Jon is working on the Google Sync (Mail/Contacts/Calendar) project but says that his 20%time (a perk) will still go for C# related stuff though his no longer an MVP.