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

The Seniority Roller Coaster and Down-Leveling in Tech

blog.pragmaticengineer.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 202 posts

Re: The Seniority Roller Coaster and Down-Leveling in Tech

#71

Post by hellisothers »

pcmoney wrote: post #16

“For example, a senior title at Big Tech typically expects more from an engineer than a small developer agency, a non-tech-first company, or a recently founded start-up does” This is simply not true. Seniors at FAANG type companies simply dont do that much. Typically have a narrow specialty and a good grasp on how it fits into the larger Org’s strategy etc. Senior engineers at a small shop do EVERYTHING. Front end, b…

This isn’t the case but your statement is true all the same. Smaller shops engineers DO do everything which is valuable at a small shop but is not valued at all at a large shop because it doesn’t scale. Once you’re working at scale different values surface like being able to communicate and drive consensus, focus on one (high impact) thing, and do higher leverage work. When I went from small-co to big-co I also didn’t understand what others valued and I languished a little trying to do all the things. Now I’m in the groove and look back at how much easier it was to just do all the things.

Re: The Seniority Roller Coaster and Down-Leveling in Tech

#72

Post by Kranar »

romanhn wrote: post #37
pcmoney wrote: post #16

“For example, a senior title at Big Tech typically expects more from an engineer than a small developer agency, a non-tech-first company, or a recently founded start-up does” This is simply not true. Seniors at FAANG type companies simply dont do that much. Typically have a narrow specialty and a good grasp on how it fits into the larger Org’s strategy etc. Senior engineers at a small shop do EVERYTHING. Front end, b…

Have you worked at a FAANG? I'm sure it depends on company/team, but it was pretty common for externally hired senior engineers to struggle (and sometimes flame out) due to consistently high and enforced expectations, different mode of work (extremely cross-org and cross-functional) and very high ambiguity (which can also come with low handholding in fast growing areas).

I worked at Google and Microsoft and left both of them and started my own company precisely because of how hard it is to get anything done at bigger companies, and comparatively speaking Google is one of the less "bureaucratic" companies to work for with much less friction compared to the other FAANG companies.

Working at a start up company allows you to be far more productive than at a bigger company. You are not shoehorned into any particular position and you need to be able to excel at multiple areas and be able to switch gears rapidly. One month I'm using React/TypeScript to implement new front-end web pages, and then the next month I'm working on improving the green-thread scheduler we use for our backend systems in C++, and then after that I jump into Kotlin to work on the mobile version of our app. All of the developers here are able to work across the different projects and pick what areas they want to, some choose to focus just on a particular area and that's fine, but others can jump across a variety of different technologies, and as I own the company I like to get involved in a little bit of everything.

At Google, I'd be lucky to be working on one narrow facet of one of those areas over the course of a year.

Startups are absolutely not for everyone and they can lead to burn out, as is evident from many posts to HN, but for people who really want to immerse themselves in tech and want to work on a variety of different technologies I just can't see working at a bigger company comparing to it. That said it's definitely true that if I didn't have Google/MS on my resume, no one would have taken my startup seriously, so it's worth getting some experience at FAANG for the credential, and then jumping ship after a couple of years if the opportunity arises. Also there were nice things about Google as an environment, like tech talks, and I absolutely miss Testing on the Toilet. You can recreate some of that at a smaller company but the scale at which Google is able to do it is very impressive and hard to replicate. That said you can always go back to FAANG and recruiters from both companies are just an email away.

Re: The Seniority Roller Coaster and Down-Leveling in Tech

#73

Post by ryandrake »

geoffjentry wrote: post #7

The thing that many folks don't understand is that it's not that "Titles don't matter", it's that "Titles don't matter when compared across companies". There's not a universal definition of say, "senior software engineer", so comparing titles across companies will always be an apples/oranges exercise. Titles do matter, but only when in the proper context.

When a big tech (or FAANG) company acquires a smaller company, it very often happens that the smaller company's employees' titles all get adjusted. SmallScrappyCo's CEO becomes the team's Senior Manager. SmallScrappyCo's VP of engineering becomes Regular Engineering Manager. I've worked directly with former Directors who suddenly became "third engineer from the left" after their company was acquired.

Re: The Seniority Roller Coaster and Down-Leveling in Tech

#74

Post by e1g »

whoknowswhat11 wrote: post #54
e1g wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a signal from the market ("employer") that what you currently offer is not what they currently value. If you desire greater rewards/ recognition, you need to discover what they value and decide if you want to offer that. Developers expect that work such as "refactoring", "platform architecture", "R&D", "investing into the future" has some intrinsic value to the business. At the company level, work such as "knowl…

If you have a champion in mgmt things like "refactoring" or "platform architecture" can pay off. Please refactor this app off our oracle DB so we can say $10M - you will be fine and they may start slotting you into key business areas. If you are toiling doing platform, refactoring on a product without a ton of love - then yeah - that may be pretty low visibility for most folks.

Yes, priorities and values are malleable. A strategic worker can help the company understand that they have a previously unknown problem, demonstrate that it's bigger than some other priorities, and show how they can take accountability for fixing this problem. This is what a champion does, and you can be the champion for your own work. Either you help change priorities by educating others or update your own understanding of relative priorities based on that education. Doing this requires a different skillset from actually solving the problem, and anyone who can do both consistently will be fast-tracked in any direction they want.

Re: The Seniority Roller Coaster and Down-Leveling in Tech

#75

Post by DamnYuppie »

MattGaiser wrote: post #66
DamnYuppie wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a somewhat seasoned developer and former executive I can, sadly, state that raises and rewards are rarely tied to your output or how much it brings to the company. If your manager and executive leadership team are not actively marketing/hyping what your team is doing there is little to no hope of getting what you deserve. I get that this sounds "unfair" but there are some reasonable reasons for this. A company is…

How does one effectively do this self promotion?

Have a list of the projects you worked on with measurable benefits to the company.

Start by talking to your manager and then work your way up your reporting structure talking to the directors/cto/ceo's. If they don't know you you need to walk in an introduce yourself, don't drop all your accomplishments on them at once but something I have used many times in the past is just "Hi I am X I work/ed/ing in/on Y, loved helping get project Y over the line and am excited to see its impact on Z. What are your hopes/thoughts on where it will lead us"? Offer to take them out to lunch and get to know them better, you don't even have to talk about work with them, developing connections is personal not business!!

Outside of that when talking to stakeholders the key is to be invested in the business outcomes of what you are building and talk to leadership on their terms. They give zero sh*t's about your technology or methodologies, they care about impact on revenue and cost.

Re: The Seniority Roller Coaster and Down-Leveling in Tech

#76

Post by kodah »

nkingsy wrote: post #5

I got down leveled when I moved to big tech. Spent two years completely remaking the product I was tasked to work on, while the two other engineers on my team, both a level above me, cheered me on and didn’t do much. I turned our product from a total waste about to be cancelled into a promising tech with some momentum, but I spent all my time coding instead of writing about coding, and I likely won’t get promoted aga…

Working in big tech has been incredibly disappointing. I'm a mix of a Software Engineer and a Systems Engineer, so finding jobs (and not getting downleveled) is fairly easy. That said, after nearly a decade in tech, and staying at one firm for over three years I have never been promoted without leaving a company. It's not like I don't have major accomplishments either; but politics is a blood sport and either you or your manager must play it.

My two cents, it's not worth trying to get promoted. Enjoy what you do and once your RSUs have matured, start your exit by interviewing elsewhere.

Re: The Seniority Roller Coaster and Down-Leveling in Tech

#77

Post by asimpletune »

e1g wrote: post #48
azdle wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you me? I spent the last 3 years completely redeveloping the foundation of our platform which will save the company millions of dollars a year. I didn't do it alone or anything. But I started the project, was the only one to work on it full time throughout the whole project, defined the underlying architecture, and implemented most of the lowest layers. I poured all my energy into the project. We launched beginni…

It's a signal from the market ("employer") that what you currently offer is not what they currently value. If you desire greater rewards/ recognition, you need to discover what they value and decide if you want to offer that. Developers expect that work such as "refactoring", "platform architecture", "R&D", "investing into the future" has some intrinsic value to the business. At the company level, work such as "knowl…

I agree with this 100%. Also, perhaps the work you did was super valuable, but the company is simply not equipped to understand things like this. A much more realistic understanding of how the company "sees" and "feels" is through its managers. Unfortunately, they are often detached from what actually matters to the company, or discouraged from swimming outside of their lane. So, in the end, it is unfortunately very common for your "value" to the company to be what your manager values, and it is all too often the case that what they value is not totally in alignment with what actually matters to the company's bottom line (like from the perspective of the C-suite/shareholders).

This is obviously not the case for an early startup.

Re: The Seniority Roller Coaster and Down-Leveling in Tech

#78

Post by JohnWhigham »

eru wrote: post #65
commandlinefan wrote: post #10

When I see "senior" in front of any job title, I generally ignore it as essentially meaningless (and I've been a "senior" for about 20 years now). Unless a job title and description comes with actual managerial responsibilities (so director, VP, etc.), it doesn't seem to correlate in any way with pay, respect, job security or any real say in priorities.

Even VP doesn't have to mean much. In tech, a VP is a big deal. In finance, everyone is a VP.

VP Engineering/Director of Engineering/CTO are all essentially the same role.

Re: The Seniority Roller Coaster and Down-Leveling in Tech

#79

Post by asimpletune »

spoonjim wrote: post #60
azdle wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you me? I spent the last 3 years completely redeveloping the foundation of our platform which will save the company millions of dollars a year. I didn't do it alone or anything. But I started the project, was the only one to work on it full time throughout the whole project, defined the underlying architecture, and implemented most of the lowest layers. I poured all my energy into the project. We launched beginni…

Avoid all work besides that which is likely to get your boss’ boss promoted.

Haha yes, basically just this.

Re: The Seniority Roller Coaster and Down-Leveling in Tech

#80

Post by nostrademons »

nkingsy wrote: post #5

I got down leveled when I moved to big tech. Spent two years completely remaking the product I was tasked to work on, while the two other engineers on my team, both a level above me, cheered me on and didn’t do much. I turned our product from a total waste about to be cancelled into a promising tech with some momentum, but I spent all my time coding instead of writing about coding, and I likely won’t get promoted aga…

Note that at Big Tech companies, almost all code is written by L3/L4 (the untitled "Software Engineers") and the few L5s ("Senior") that enjoy coding. L6-L8 ("Staff" through "Principal") are the political levels, where EQ is more important than IQ, your job is as much wrangling/convincing/selling/negotiating with other people as writing code. Most L6-L8 engineers are managers, but even those who are ICs spend the majority of their time politicking.

Being under the protection of a good L6+ is essential to actually getting anything done, launching, and getting promoted at a big company. Without it, you'll find that you won't get any cooperation from other teams, your projects will get canceled, and nothing you do will ever launch.

Staff+ engineers burn out at significantly higher rates than lower levels. I know a lot of Senior engineers that are quite content to just sit there and never get promoted, because the quality of life at that level is IMHO significantly better than at higher levels. Was talking with another recently-promoted Staff engineer (I'm Staff myself), and we were lamenting that Big Tech doesn't really do demotions, because the job expectations at higher levels get progressively higher, you have progressively lower control over outcomes, and the consequences for screwing up are significantly worse.

Post reply on HN