On Becoming a VP of Engineering • Hacker News Board

Re: On Becoming a VP of Engineering

#91

Post by pc86 » Fri, Jul 14, 2023, 2:27 PM UTC

lmeyerov wrote: post #68

marcinzm wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But the vast majority of companies referred to as "startups" versus "small businesses" fall into that category. We can discuss the other case but the person I replied to explicitly said "startups."

Most new and growing tech startups are not in fact VC funded. My point is it's an amazing marketing win by financiers. And here we are now, with what the weird minority do sounding like the expectation for startup business practices vs what most actually do.

"Startup" by definition is companies that need large-scale growth to succeed. Uber, DoorDash, those kinds of businesses are start-ups. It doesn't need to be VC investment necessarily, but it needs a lot of capital to get going and there's a certain amount of network effects. That's not marketing, that's what the word means.

> Most new and growing tech startups are not in fact VC funded.

Then they're probably not startups, but just tech businesses. Nothing wrong with that - they're objectively better in my opinion - but let's not call them something they're not just because we like the word or we want the cachet of being associated with something we're not.

Re: On Becoming a VP of Engineering

#92

Post by strikelaserclaw » Fri, Jul 14, 2023, 2:31 PM UTC

no_wizard wrote: post #87

starcraft2wol wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even though currently less popular, I think Zuckerberg is a great example of this. He went from a college kid to a top 20 CEO with no formal training, except running his company.

Perhaps, but never discount someones background. His parents were successful executives and there were plenty of opportunities for him to be exposed to executive leadership (via Harvard, familial connections etc) Not like he went from nobody to somebody here, his background certainly allowed exposure to things many others would not have. I honestly would put Steve Jobs as the best example you can find of someone who…

I think he would be pretty close to someone who went from nobody to a great CEO and founder but i don't think anyone in this world truly starts off on equal footing. Steve Jobs birth parents were both advanced degree holders, he got adopted by a blue collar family who lived in prime real estate bay area during the first rise of tech. Ultimately it is useless to compare people, we should judge people by their output regardless of where they started.

Re: On Becoming a VP of Engineering

#93

Post by jerrygenser » Fri, Jul 14, 2023, 2:42 PM UTC

Solvency wrote: post #82

This is really self-fellating...and to post it on your own employer's site is brazen to me.

These corporate blogs are almost 100% purpose for prospective employees. This is a way for prospective employees to become sold the corporate culture is rainbow and unicorns.

It's standard corporate PR.

Re: On Becoming a VP of Engineering

#94

Post by MichaelGlass » Fri, Jul 14, 2023, 2:49 PM UTC

sublimefire wrote: post #29

This post is basically an example of a survivorship bias and the rationalization of it. What is missing is the statistical insight into internal moves to the VP positions vs the external ones. I would say it is extremely hard to get an internal move to a VP position, either it is a startup or a big corp. Startups need to succeed and big corps require you to put in years and develop good political relationships. The e…

I don't think the article touches on internal vs external hiring at all. They tried it but eventually didn't do it. But there's no value judgement -- it just seemed like they couldn't find a great candidate and then the author was eventually promoted.

Fwiw the same thing happened at my last startup. We did a search for a VP eventually promoted from within. I hereby claim, that statistically speaking, it definitely happens sometimes.

I guess the author disagrees with your last statement, > If you start at the bottom then you remain there because your skills are not valuable in the top leadership roles.

She says that she had the space to think more about strategy because the "people at the bottom" were doing an good job of keeping the company's infrastructure stable as they scaled. Maybe it's less about top and bottom and more about what types of problems people are good at solving. My tip: if you like planning and management and strategy, you should try to get roles, in the top, bottom, and middle using those skillsets. Lots of even introductory roles involve "manager", and lots of non-management roles are a great career path for many.

Re: On Becoming a VP of Engineering

#95

Post by 9659 » Fri, Jul 14, 2023, 2:59 PM UTC

Swizec wrote: post #84

piva00 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably it's all very hierarchical but it definitely differs in level and degree between cultures. Anecdotal examples: - Brazil (~10 years experience): very, very hierarchical, your manager/boss is up on the totem pole, societal status, etc. In non-tech environments you can expect to be berated, chastised, and generally abused as an underling. There are good bosses, of course, but using a dumb generalisation the cul…

> - USA /../ > - Sweden /../ In my observation, USA is a lot more like your description of Sweden. I think this came with the popularity of servant leadership[1]. Even the military (in some branches?) is aiming for sharing goals instead of orders and promoting self-organizing teams because hierarchies don’t scale. At least according to books like It’s Your Ship and Extreme Ownership. The realization in management sci…

US Military absolutely teaches "servant leadership".

And "Do what I say leadership" at other times.

Re: On Becoming a VP of Engineering

#96

Post by m_rpn » Fri, Jul 14, 2023, 3:02 PM UTC

kasey_junk wrote: post #40

lapcat wrote: post #15

I found this part amusing: "Charity [company founder] has a more intuitive, spontaneous style, often shines brightest in a crisis, is allergic to checklists". It looks like an almost inadvertent admission. In other words, the founder doesn't have the qualifications or characteristics that the underlings assume they need to be in a leadership position. I automatically become CEO, CTO, etc., by starting my own company,…

First, I didn’t read that at all as a remark about someone’s qualifications. It seems a straightforward and friendly admission of where 2 different styles exist. Acknowledging those style differences is a _good_ and healthy thing and not a tacit appeal to hierarchy. Second, your whole comment is littered with implicit reinforcement of the hierarchy. You use terms like underling, bosses, and equate the founding of the…

In modern, tech-enabled knowledge industries managers aren't leaders, they are just a waste of money that could instead go to the people actually getting things done.

Re: On Becoming a VP of Engineering

#97

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Jul 14, 2023, 3:04 PM UTC

lapcat wrote: post #15

I found this part amusing: "Charity [company founder] has a more intuitive, spontaneous style, often shines brightest in a crisis, is allergic to checklists". It looks like an almost inadvertent admission. In other words, the founder doesn't have the qualifications or characteristics that the underlings assume they need to be in a leadership position. I automatically become CEO, CTO, etc., by starting my own company,…

[deleted]

Re: On Becoming a VP of Engineering

#98

Post by parentheses » Fri, Jul 14, 2023, 3:15 PM UTC

marcinzm wrote: post #36

eru wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I automatically become CEO, CTO, etc., by starting my own company, and this is true of anyone who started their own companies, including the ones that are now BigCos. Founders don't need any specific qualifications or characteristics to merit their positions. If you are involved in starting a company, you _get_ the position of CEO, CTO, etc essentially arbitrarily. That's initially. After a while you merit your pos…

>After a while you merit your position by not running the company into the ground, but instead making it succeed. That's not merit for the position but not being a five alarm dumpster fire at the position. There is a difference. As long as the company is lucky or there's enough overall competence in leadership or they hired the right employees that incompetence may not be destroy the company. That doesn't mean they'r…

This is true about a lot of positions. Once secured, as long as nothing goes terribly wrong, nothing changes.

Re: On Becoming a VP of Engineering

#99

Post by kodah » Fri, Jul 14, 2023, 3:22 PM UTC

Swizec wrote: post #84

piva00 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably it's all very hierarchical but it definitely differs in level and degree between cultures. Anecdotal examples: - Brazil (~10 years experience): very, very hierarchical, your manager/boss is up on the totem pole, societal status, etc. In non-tech environments you can expect to be berated, chastised, and generally abused as an underling. There are good bosses, of course, but using a dumb generalisation the cul…

> - USA /../ > - Sweden /../ In my observation, USA is a lot more like your description of Sweden. I think this came with the popularity of servant leadership[1]. Even the military (in some branches?) is aiming for sharing goals instead of orders and promoting self-organizing teams because hierarchies don’t scale. At least according to books like It’s Your Ship and Extreme Ownership. The realization in management sci…

> Even the military (in some branches?) is aiming for sharing goals instead of orders and promoting self-organizing teams because hierarchies don’t scale.

This is incorrect. We consolidate most of our decision making at the small team leader level. Title and role, because of that, are explicitly not intwined. Lance Corporals can lead Sergeants if they possess the experience to do so. This is more common in the infantry. Small team leader have always practiced servant leadership; the idea that you eat last, take first watch, are the first in and last out on patrols is as old as time herself.

Re: On Becoming a VP of Engineering

#100

Post by dasil003 » Fri, Jul 14, 2023, 3:22 PM UTC

marcinzm wrote: post #36

eru wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I automatically become CEO, CTO, etc., by starting my own company, and this is true of anyone who started their own companies, including the ones that are now BigCos. Founders don't need any specific qualifications or characteristics to merit their positions. If you are involved in starting a company, you _get_ the position of CEO, CTO, etc essentially arbitrarily. That's initially. After a while you merit your pos…

>After a while you merit your position by not running the company into the ground, but instead making it succeed. That's not merit for the position but not being a five alarm dumpster fire at the position. There is a difference. As long as the company is lucky or there's enough overall competence in leadership or they hired the right employees that incompetence may not be destroy the company. That doesn't mean they'r…

Hiring the right people is competence when it comes to corporate leadership. That's pretty much the only lever they have. Sure they make a few strategic decisions, but for the most part they are just reviewing and signing off on things that get bubbled up.

I think this bothers a lot of engineers who pride themselves on being able to understand complex things, and see "soft skills" as something ancillary and lesser. It's also not helped by the fact that management skill has a low floor, since it's so hard to assess, thus everyone has had bad managers and they really make your life miserable. But at the upper end of management skill with large org sizes, the problem of debugging orgs and understanding the outputs of systems of people is way harder than software due to the human element. Even just getting accurate information and assessments is non-trivial given the underlying incentives and politics. In this type of environment, competence looks completely different from how a craftsperson thinks about it.