Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A Plan to Turn Engineers into Managers

firstround.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 198 posts

Re: A Plan to Turn Engineers into Managers

#131

Post by rndn »

eitally wrote: post #46
rndn wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to the Peter Principle [1], the entire concept of promotion is flawed in that people get promoted according to their performance in their current role, not the future role. Perhaps, it would generally be better if promotions would require a test run in the new role over a long time period (e.g. a year) before it is set in stone. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Principle

A lot of companies only promote individuals after they have been acting in a de facto capacity as the higher position.

That’s still just one sample outside their expected competence. Ideally, you’ll want to test people over a long time period to take as many samples as possible.

Re: A Plan to Turn Engineers into Managers

#132

Post by dwmtm »

perlgeek wrote: post #98
jerf wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm continuing to wander slowly but surely into more architecture roles, and while the term has fully justifiably been badly wrecked by people doing "architecture" who think it involves drawing diagrams with lots of boxes and lines and never checking the architecture against the requirements, there is a legitimate architecture role that does exist and there are legitimate skills that are specialized to that role. I'm…

> I'm not sure it's something that can be taught very well, though Why ever not? You can study and discuss existing architectures, their advantages and disadvantages, discuss case studies of existing code and new requirements and what architecture to implement them in etc. Of course, you also need some decent programming experience to come up with architectures that work in practice, but that can be also acquired.

This kind of architecture is akin to surgery, and there aren't enough cadavers available for practice. (Zombies, on the other hand, maybe.)

The Conway's Law factors are also harder to treat "fairly" in a theoretical sense relative to some of the real team-related difficulties that exist in any large enough organization.

Re: A Plan to Turn Engineers into Managers

#133

Post by toby »

michaelochurch wrote: post #128
toby wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FYI, SAG does set minimum compensation, working conditions, meal requirements, etc. It doesn't set upper bounds or demand that more senior people get the better jobs. It's also somewhat difficult to get into. Any aspiring actor can't just go and join.

FYI, SAG does set minimum compensation, working conditions, meal requirements, etc. It doesn't set upper bounds or demand that more senior people get the better jobs. Sounds like what we need in software: downside protection (especially against managerial misbehavior) but no limit on the upside, and no stupid seniority system. It's also somewhat difficult to get into. Any aspiring actor can't just go and join. How do…

I'm sure I'll get this wrong, but the way it was explained to me is that you need to appear in 3 SAG productions in order to apply for membership. Since it's a big hassle for the movie production to get an exemption to hire non-union, you need to be special in some way (the director really wants you in particular, you have some special skill like dance, etc.). It helps to know other actors who will call you and say "hey, they need a ballerina to be in the background tomorrow" or whatever.

Re: A Plan to Turn Engineers into Managers

#134

Post by AnimalMuppet »

DanielBMarkham wrote: post #56

Couple random pieces of advice: 1. Learn management, even if you're never going to use it. Everybody in this world has a manager. The more you know about the job, the better integrated you can be with others, either as a manager yourself or working with managers. That 3-way diagram? Holds true at the developer level as well. 2. Management ain't programming. When I learned to fly airplanes on instruments, the toughest…

> Learn management, even if you're never going to use it.

Yeah. Those who don't do management will still have management done to them.

Re: A Plan to Turn Engineers into Managers

#135

Post by AnimalMuppet »

ryandrake wrote: post #79

The day I decided to make it a goal to switch from developing software to management: I was sitting at my desk at 8:00 at night fixing some bug and I looked across the sea of gray half-height cubicles at a someone 30 years older than me doing the same thing with the exact same job title, probably not making much more than I. At 95% of companies, there is zero career development and advancement once you become a "Seni…

I've been places where I was there for the 8:00 PM bug (or later). At most of those places, my manager/supervisor was still there, too, trying to help us figure it out. If nothing else, they were there for encouragement and food runs. (If your engineers are working through dinner, feed them.)

Doing management right doesn't mean that you no longer are there at 8 PM. It means that you're there at 8 PM more often than any one of the people under you.

Re: A Plan to Turn Engineers into Managers

#136

Post by toby »

toby wrote: post #133
michaelochurch wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FYI, SAG does set minimum compensation, working conditions, meal requirements, etc. It doesn't set upper bounds or demand that more senior people get the better jobs. Sounds like what we need in software: downside protection (especially against managerial misbehavior) but no limit on the upside, and no stupid seniority system. It's also somewhat difficult to get into. Any aspiring actor can't just go and join. How do…

I'm sure I'll get this wrong, but the way it was explained to me is that you need to appear in 3 SAG productions in order to apply for membership. Since it's a big hassle for the movie production to get an exemption to hire non-union, you need to be special in some way (the director really wants you in particular, you have some special skill like dance, etc.). It helps to know other actors who will call you and say "…

I'm also not sure how you'd bootstrap something like this for programmers. The reason it works for actors is that every actor who is even slightly famous is a member, so every production has to work with the union or only get completely random people (you're still allowed to make an indie film with your friends if none of them are members).

Re: A Plan to Turn Engineers into Managers

#137

Post by dwmtm »

msravi wrote: post #39
anotherdatem wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a VP at a mid-sized ($100mm revenue) startup. I report to the CTO, and am his probable successor. I make slightly less than our highest paid engineer. I would recommend finding a company with a true parallel track, rather than dedicating yourself to a job that you don't want, and thus likely won't ever be great at.

An honest question: Does the highest paid engineer know that (s)he makes slightly more than you? If so, does (s)he know of it in an official capacity or has (s)he sort-of figured it out? Oftentimes, I've found that management operates from a position of informational advantage, while a person on a parallel technical track at the same level has access to a lot less information. Hence the question.

Is there any meaningful sense in which a tech-tracker has more official or unofficial access to information?

Re: A Plan to Turn Engineers into Managers

#138

Post by carc »

smt88 wrote: post #20
carc wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FWIW, I know senior engineers that chose the technical route rather than manager route, who make absolutely ridiculous amounts of money. Like close to 1,000,000/year including equity. I don't know any non VP level people making anywhere close to that. Obviously this is anecdotal though.

"including equity" Pretend the equity is worth zero or close to zero (which it almost always is). How much are those people making then?

Equity is almost always worth close to zero? You realize at publicly traded companies, it might as well be a cash bonus because you can instantly cash it out the second it vests, right?

Re: A Plan to Turn Engineers into Managers

#139

Post by sarwechshar »

JustSomeNobody wrote: post #115
tamaatar wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are right about the salary. but what is your opinion on job security and employability. the way I see it, in a tech role, as long as your are flexible and open to learning whatever technology is thrown at you, you will always be employable. But in management,especially in junior management and especially in very large organisation, managers are in most cases dead weight. they don't do much.Don't they feel the ins…

There are a few good managers. Everyone else is a boss. Boss's are detriment to an organization. Managers manage. They don't wait until there's a fire and then start running around tossing the blame ball. Boss's do that.

I would say the type of manager you describe could be more aptly called a leader: visionary (motivating the team behind ideals), willing to do the hardest work (as opposed to handing it down apathetically), respectful (building trust and such) and more.

Re: A Plan to Turn Engineers into Managers

#140

Post by carc »

__abc wrote: post #101
carc wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FWIW, I know senior engineers that chose the technical route rather than manager route, who make absolutely ridiculous amounts of money. Like close to 1,000,000/year including equity. I don't know any non VP level people making anywhere close to that. Obviously this is anecdotal though.

Where? Doing what?

Well known, top tier tech companies. I won't get into more than that they're senior engineers (partially because I don't know that I can answer that with more specificity). They all have 10+ years of experience and are typically tech leads on their teams.
Post reply on HN