`A good way to think about hiring and growing your team members is to think that they can replace you.`
This is really wrong.
Manager is a path, but an IC shouldn't need to become a manager to keep growing in their career.
> Manager is a path, but an IC shouldn't need to become a manager to keep growing in their career.
I 100% agree with this, but have never really REALISTICALLY seen any of this methodology in the companies that I've worked at. Here's what I usually see instead: if someone is a staff engineer, then they worked their ass off to get there and are generally really good coders, and have wrapped their heads around the business/domain really well.
The managers I've seen are generally skewed towards incompetence, which to me, shows that interviewing to become an EM is MUCH easier than it is to become a staff engineer, yet the pay is identical. So you mostly have staff/principal engs that are VERY smart, and more often than not, have EMs/directors who have stumbled their way upwards by being lucky.
The question is -- do you want to be a principal engineer when you're 45, know the business, the code, the domain inside out, be paid well, but STILL have to answer to directors/managers who are 15 years your prior, who are entirely incompetent and have essentially lucked/bullshitted their way into their roles, and deal with all of that crap on and endless basis or do you become that person and attempt to fix it from the top?
A different angle: most companies have no idea what a staff engineer is, and how to promote from within. However, I've seen midlevel engineers do some decent work, maybe complete a major project, and be promoted to EMs. What's the point of trying to become a staff engineer (assuming part of your goal is to grow your wealth) when you can just easily become an EM at most places and make the same exact amount of money, and just do what you love (i.e coding), on the side. Of course, to each their own and all of that. But at the end of the day, it is much much easier to go into management and incompetence your way around to the top where goals are nebulous and not super calculable compared to being senior IC.
I should finally note that I have had a couple of EMs that were really good. However, those are far and few between IMO.
Anecdotally, as a SWE who doesn't have personal interest in coding, I would be more likely to code if I were a manager and didn't have to do it in day to day life (to get the satisfaction of actually doing everything exactly how I want it). After staring at a screen and typing all day, the last thing I want to do is put more strain on my eyes and fingers after work.
Depends on the organization, some places managers don't have any involvement in anything technical, but at a lot of places they do. Managers are often involved with architecture/design decisions, resolving internal disagreements about technical matters, improving dev processes, negotiating with PMs to translate product requirements into concrete engineering tasks, etc.
These are all things a senior IC should be doing as well, and as a manager these are the kinds of things you can and should start having your team replace you on if they're up for it.
And then of course, some of your ICs likely do want to transition to the manager path. So you can involve them in hiring conversations, phone screens, conversations about team mandate/goals, team structure and head count, etc.
volkk|5 years ago
I 100% agree with this, but have never really REALISTICALLY seen any of this methodology in the companies that I've worked at. Here's what I usually see instead: if someone is a staff engineer, then they worked their ass off to get there and are generally really good coders, and have wrapped their heads around the business/domain really well.
The managers I've seen are generally skewed towards incompetence, which to me, shows that interviewing to become an EM is MUCH easier than it is to become a staff engineer, yet the pay is identical. So you mostly have staff/principal engs that are VERY smart, and more often than not, have EMs/directors who have stumbled their way upwards by being lucky.
The question is -- do you want to be a principal engineer when you're 45, know the business, the code, the domain inside out, be paid well, but STILL have to answer to directors/managers who are 15 years your prior, who are entirely incompetent and have essentially lucked/bullshitted their way into their roles, and deal with all of that crap on and endless basis or do you become that person and attempt to fix it from the top?
A different angle: most companies have no idea what a staff engineer is, and how to promote from within. However, I've seen midlevel engineers do some decent work, maybe complete a major project, and be promoted to EMs. What's the point of trying to become a staff engineer (assuming part of your goal is to grow your wealth) when you can just easily become an EM at most places and make the same exact amount of money, and just do what you love (i.e coding), on the side. Of course, to each their own and all of that. But at the end of the day, it is much much easier to go into management and incompetence your way around to the top where goals are nebulous and not super calculable compared to being senior IC.
I should finally note that I have had a couple of EMs that were really good. However, those are far and few between IMO.
silicon2401|5 years ago
cactus2093|5 years ago
These are all things a senior IC should be doing as well, and as a manager these are the kinds of things you can and should start having your team replace you on if they're up for it.
And then of course, some of your ICs likely do want to transition to the manager path. So you can involve them in hiring conversations, phone screens, conversations about team mandate/goals, team structure and head count, etc.