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

Don't become an engineering manager

newsletter.manager.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 281 posts

Re: Don't become an engineering manager

#261

Post by AdamN »

drdec wrote: post #153
kubb wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Until you are dealing with a difficult employee or struggling with whether to put someone on a PIP or being asked to deliver things you don't have direct control over or dealing with penny-pinching edicts from above etc. etc.

Also when the project becomes a dumpster fire and you have to save it - or go through months of justifying what path is being taken or be clear with leadership what needs to change or be fired for the failure.

Re: Don't become an engineering manager

#262

Post by disgruntledphd2 »

rvz wrote: post #195
jghn wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They may, but the amount of information they're getting is low. As a hiring manager I'll look at progression of titles *within a company*. This shows a track record of upward mobility. But if they go from "senior" in one company to "principal" in another, I find it meaningless.

> As a hiring manager I'll look at progression of titles within a company . This shows a track record of upward mobility. That's quite shallow for those who are 'Member of Technical Staff' which does not have this which is why titles are meaningless for experienced candidates. Someone can give themselves that title, all because they know the founders; thus it can be exploited. So instead, I get the candidate to exact…

> In this era, "titles" aren't enough and you need verifiable proof of work with monetary returns in the millions and I favour those who just build things that make money without asking permission from a manager.

While I like this approach personally, it's worth noting that lots of companies will fire people like you say you want, particularly if their manager is threatened by them (or they're difficult to work with etc).

Re: Don't become an engineering manager

#263

Post by croes »

> Thanks Unblocked for supporting today’s article!

> Unblocked changes the economics.

> It builds organizational context from your code, PR history, conversations, docs, and runtime signals.

Is that article an ad?

Re: Don't become an engineering manager

#264

Post by fingerlocks »

hawaiianbrah wrote: post #256
madhadron wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I'm guessing the terminal role is the 64 Senior? That's nearly everyone on my team. Someone has to retire or die to get a shot at Principal.

Re: Don't become an engineering manager

#265

Post by cucumber3732842 »

JaumeGreen wrote: post #160
kubb wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Engineering Manager can be a social role with some tech aspects. You attend meetings, negotiate deadlines, evaluate people, navigate project minefields, take decisions or force people to take them,... and the technical aspects are quite minimised. Depending on the company this is not an upgrade, it's a lateral move. I have people under me who earn more than me, and I agree with that. The job it's not easy, it's diffe…

No clear objectives, blame when it goes bad and no credit when it goes good sounds a lot like being an IC with a crap manager.

Re: Don't become an engineering manager

#266

Post by beernet »

JaumeGreen wrote: post #160
kubb wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Engineering Manager can be a social role with some tech aspects. You attend meetings, negotiate deadlines, evaluate people, navigate project minefields, take decisions or force people to take them,... and the technical aspects are quite minimised. Depending on the company this is not an upgrade, it's a lateral move. I have people under me who earn more than me, and I agree with that. The job it's not easy, it's diffe…

> I have people under me who [...]

Instant red flag. You're a manager. You are managing. There is no one "under you".

Re: Don't become an engineering manager

#267

Post by jpgvm »

nixon_why69 wrote: post #18
yodsanklai wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Within a given company, I think these roles are well-defined. In a big tech company, a principal engineer will influence decisions at a much higher level then a senior whose isn't visible outside his team. And an engineering manager support, evaluate, represent the team, and help with goal alignements.

Maximally cynical take, tongue somewhat in cheek: If we measure principal engineers by "cross team force multiplier impact and its visibility to management" (second part being key), what kind of behaviors do we incentivize? Are there, possibly, bunches of mid-level and senior engineers dealing with extra hassles to demonstrate this impact?

Sort of?

My journey up from Senior/Staff was mostly on the back of proposing and then leading cross-functional projects.

Which means I was doing Principal work before being granted the title. To be honest it was (and remains) a huge amount of work and I wouldn't continue doing it if the recognition and compensation hadn't been forthcoming in the following perf reviews.

If you are doing this stuff and aren't moving up where you are then you should be going somewhere else as that is probably a very exploitive work relationship.

Re: Don't become an engineering manager

#268

Post by jordiburgos »

halper wrote: post #4

I cannot be alone in feeling that titles (within "tech" in particular) are almost completely arbitrary? What constitutes a "senior", "lead", "principal" and "staff" X, respectively, has so much overlap that it really depends on the organisation. I myself have been called all of those things, but have honestly not been able to tell the difference: in some cases, I have had much more responsibility as a "senior backend…

I went from Programmer to Staff, moved to Senior, jumped again to Lead, then only "Developer" promoted to Senior.

Each company has its own way to name things.

Re: Don't become an engineering manager

#269

Post by zelphirkalt »

Swizec wrote: post #193
zelphirkalt wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, what do you even mean by "put your scope on the resume"? Do you mean literally "Scope: blabla" for each occupation? Or do you mean something more implicit?

> Do you mean literally "Scope: blabla" for each occupation? No I mean > Tell me what you did, for whom, what was the impact. It's really that simple. Just tell me what you did at your job. What was it that you worked on. Why did it matter. Did you own a workstream (or 5), code monkey all day, own a critical service, play code janitor, ... what did you do ?

Ah OK, gotcha, thanks.

This is what I did in some interviews already. But maybe I can adapt my CV a little as well.

Re: Don't become an engineering manager

#270

Post by InfiniteRand »

keeda wrote: post #170
kubb wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Here's how I see it: Ideally a manager / reportee relationship is a symbiotic relationship. A manager becomes more successful by making their reportees more successful, and both roles grow together. And repeating this across teams, the whole company grows as well. There's a lot of nuance but here's a simplistic overview: a manager tries to land a big project for their team, which lets the team stretch their abilities…

I think a good manager should also be a cushion between the higher up politics and his team, so they do perhaps get more praise than is deserved for their team's successes but they should also absorb much of the criticism for their team's failures
Post reply on HN