Live data from Hacker News

Don't become an engineering manager

newsletter.manager.dev

251–260 of 281 posts

Re: Don't become an engineering manager

#251
post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Generalist means something very different for big orgs. At FANG size companies have people to setup 401k and health insurance, tiny startups need 1 of 3 people to figure that out even if it just means finding a company to outsource such things it still needs to happen. Payroll doesn’t need to be a complex system but taxes must be paid etc.

That shows an ability to figure out what needs to be done and do it, regardless of whether it fits the formal job description. That can be an invaluable skill in an organization of any size.

It’s a valuable attitude, but not a particularly valuable skill.

Expertise gains value when it can’t be subdivided. A doctor needs to know a who lot of related skills to be a heart surgeon, it doesn’t work to split it into two less demanding roles. However two generalists can sub divide the workload of a generalist with a lot more experience because experienced generalists aren’t particularly skilled at anything.

Re: Don't become an engineering manager

#252
post #150

If you are reading this and you are thinking you want to become an engineering manager, I urge you to think long term what you want that to look like. I've seen too often that developers who want to become managers because they think it's the next inventible step aren't prepared for the people management and HR part of that role. And, as you move up to Director and beyond, those higher often have much less to do with…

On the contrary, my manager doesn't do much outside of the perf evaluation season, and takes home a higher salary than me. He also gets to take credit for pretty much everything that his team does, despite not contributing to it much. Sounds like a fairly easy job most of the time.

A lot of people think this until they become managers and discover all the bullshit they have to deal with from above and below. You're literally something of a human shock absorber, and in the analogy when the road is smooth there's not much to it, but when things get bumpy, you're the one taking the hits.

Re: Don't become an engineering manager

#253
As someone who has been a coder/em/vp/founder for over 40 years.

The last 3 months of using Claude Code has convinced me that in order to have a job in software very soon you will have to a both a coder and an engineering manager.

It takes both of those skills to effectively manager AI, and managing AI teams is all it will be about within 2 years. Problem is if you dont understand coding, its hard to see the traps AI falls into. They are both amazingly smart, and incredibly dumb at the same time. Just like people!

Re: Don't become an engineering manager

#254
post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everybody wants a manager that has engineering experience, but nobody wants to be that manager.

I'm a freelance interim EM and I do it for the same reason the article explains: I genuinely enjoy it. I love engineers and I love tech. I still code daily but I'm not the guy that delivers at the pace of some of the amazing engineers that I had the privilege to work with. I love putting others ahead of myself wherever I can and it's never cost me anything, so I'm not afraid to do it again. I love telling the enginee…

I didn't know freelance interim em was a thing, interesting role.

Re: Don't become an engineering manager

#255
While my friend was offered a bump with the promotion to EM, the total compensation was less than the offers he received for Senior/Staff Engineer at other startups.

"At other startups" is the important bit here. I assume 'startup' means less than 100 people, at which point it switches to 'scaleup', but whatever definition you use the question should really be 'When does an EM actually start being useful?'

Startups don't really need EMs because they don't really need managers at all. There is a strong expectation in a startup that the staff there are capable of managing themselves, plus there are usually fewer business functions that developers need to work with. Where an EM is useful is in a larger business that has many competing demands of engineering teams: features, roadmaps, BAU, KTLO, tech debt, compliance, etc ... it's a long list. There's a necessity for someone to manage that, and support the teams to be doing the right work at the right time, without letting standards slide, and to support the team to navigate and negotiate the political maze of multiple stakeholders wanting their thing to be priority #1.

I've been an EM for a few years and I would not recommend someone takes an EM role in any company that has less than 70-100 staff (assuming about 1/3 is engineering). Once you get to that scale I think the role starts getting interesting, and valued, but if the company is smaller it should be managing those processes fairly easily already. If it isn't then that's a signal there's problems with the way the business works that an EM probably can't solve because they're rooted in the business's leadership culture.

Re: Don't become an engineering manager

#256
post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As others have said, levels and titles are generally for compensation and performance reviews. Each company has their own bespoke ladder but it generally maps to: - L1: Intern with undergrad degree - L2: Intern with graduate degree - L3: Junior - L4: Intermediate - L5: Senior - L6: Staff - L7: Senior Staff - L8: Principal - L9: Distinguished - L10: Fellow Each company has their own numbers and names but it generally…

You're describing a very small number of companies that all copied each other's systems. The idea of a terminal role, for example, is pure Facebook. These do not apply in general across the industry except where managers from those small number of companies came in and shoved them in before they were fired.

Terminal roles are definitely not a Facebook concept originally … Microsoft has had it for at least 20 years.

Re: Don't become an engineering manager

#257
post #219
post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Big organizations need generalists too.

Generalist means something very different for big orgs. At FANG size companies have people to setup 401k and health insurance, tiny startups need 1 of 3 people to figure that out even if it just means finding a company to outsource such things it still needs to happen. Payroll doesn’t need to be a complex system but taxes must be paid etc.

I would say I look at it from a different angle, big companies can afford specialists. Startups cannot afford specialized employee for database administration or setting up 401k.

But big companies would definitely love to have to pay a single salary for someone who does 401k and when this job is done administrates databases then in between reviews tweets searching for mentions of the company. Exaggerated example but I hope clear.

That already shows up with everything getting „Ops” obviously DevOps but I already have seen DataOps, SalesOps and MarketingOps.

Re: Don't become an engineering manager

#258

If you are reading this and you are thinking you want to become an engineering manager, I urge you to think long term what you want that to look like. I've seen too often that developers who want to become managers because they think it's the next inventible step aren't prepared for the people management and HR part of that role. And, as you move up to Director and beyond, those higher often have much less to do with…

Learned something new, about the Peter principle. Thank you. I don't know if I should be surprised that it was published in 1969, and it seems that the principle still holds.

Re: Don't become an engineering manager

#259
I have been both an EM and a Staff software engineer at a bigtech.

Both are great career choices but lately being an EM means spending over 6 hours a day in meetings and having very little agency over your time. Your whole job is basically being in meetings and being a human router for information between people.

This changed when BigTech redefined the roles of an EM. Back in the days, the EM would naturally be the best engineer in the team that wanted to stay technical and grow the team. Since 2010, Bigtech has decided that EM should especially NOT be technical. They should do "People things" only. I think that was a turn for the worse in our industry,

As an IC I have way more control over my time. I can decide when I work.

That being said it depends what I want to optimize for. I think if your goal is to climb up the ladder you will do that more easily as a driven EM than a driven IC.

As an EM if you are driven and put the hours in and play the game well, you could get promoted to Director/Sr. Director. The skills here are not especially difficult. Getting promoted is all about being at the right time at the right place and playing the right game. If you are an EM in a growing company, you will almost certainly grow with the compant and get more scope.

As an engineer it feels way more difficult to get promoted past Staff. After Staff you are competing with people that are absolutely cracked coders and dedicated 12+ hours a day working. Most of them have a talent level that is almost unmatchable.

But really, if you want to manage your time, don't become an EM.

Re: Don't become an engineering manager

#260
post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He doesn't get much say about what thing gets done. He's just kind of there.

The question to ask of course is do you see how your manager interacts with their management? Do the things that get done stay consistent, or are your priorities constantly changing? Do you and your team control your priorities or are they out of your control? I think it's very difficult to see what managers are even doing (I'm not one, I'm a senior IC) until you have a particular level of visibility or exposure to p…

He doesn’t understand enough to have any say. His management tells him what his reports will be doing and he says yes.
Post reply on HN