Live data from Hacker News

On Being a Principal Engineer

blog.dbsmasher.com

121–130 of 337 posts

Re: On Being a Principal Engineer

#121
post #8
post #3

Interesting article. A lot of the qualities the author descrives as required trains of a principal are things I always say a senior engineer/tech team lead should have—e.g. ability to act as a force multiplier, leading by example, and being active in less technical activities like mentorship and recruiting. Am I off the mark? I suspect I may just not have been at enough orgs with a well developed career track, what t…

This depends on the culture & hiring philosophies of the company. I've seen many places that "only hire the best" or "only hire seniors" then end up with a bunch of engineers who dont mentor or force multiply but tend to just focus on what ever pice of a system they own. I've also seen senior used only to justify a pay bracket as well. Personally I agree that a senior or lead enginner needs to have these skills.

I guess this is off-topic, but this is hitting a chord for me. I've been fighting with HR for quite some time about this. Over the last 2 or 3 jobs in fact. Yes it's great to hire the miracle senior guys that'll fix everything. It just doesn't happen.

In my book, it's beneficial to stop thinking in titles, and start thinking like trades, in tasks. As a team you have to execute a number of incoming tasks. Tasks collide with a team member, and they can either handle the task or they can't. If they can't, they can ask a more experienced member to split up the task into more manageable pieces.

This has a powerful effect - you can usually add less experienced people to the system to get more throughput. As long as someone can split their own time consuming tasks into simpler tasks they can delegate, there is more throughout to be had.

And this in turn teaches people about the technology involved. Yes, you're just following instructions, but you should be picking up knowledge about configuration management, application management, databases, terraform, and so on along the way.

And with that, it's a lot easier to find people, because we can hire people directly from education. And I'm ethically fine with hiring people from education, because we're teaching them a broad set of valuable skills.

Sorry for the rant. I've been discussing the whole senior shortage for far too long.

Re: On Being a Principal Engineer

#122
post #44
post #3

Interesting article. A lot of the qualities the author descrives as required trains of a principal are things I always say a senior engineer/tech team lead should have—e.g. ability to act as a force multiplier, leading by example, and being active in less technical activities like mentorship and recruiting. Am I off the mark? I suspect I may just not have been at enough orgs with a well developed career track, what t…

The senior/principal distinction is relative, of course. At my org, there are two flavors of principal (when the justification memo is written — the final title is the same.) First, “state of the art”, with publications and recognition by professional societies. This is relatively easy to distinguish from a Senior, because the publications mount up. Second, “state of the practice”, with extensive influence on major p…

Hah, small world! My old man worked as a systems engineer in some of the spectrograph equipment on Curiosity. Did you by chance spend time at JPL?

Re: On Being a Principal Engineer

#123
post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> use your networking, which I consider unethical and don't do it. I don't understand the sentiment. Interviews are a proxy for how good you are. The companies hiring are very limited by what kind of information they can turn up about a candidate just through that process and for higher leveled positions like staff+ that might rarely be enough. Your network can speak much better about who you are and what value you c…

I have seen how groups of people with dubious ethical standards played whole companies, pushing each other forward at the expense of more capable people, later taking their cronies with them to whatever company they landed, applying the same strategy. One of them made it to a director position at Google, largely propelled by "great networking". I can't with clear conscience support cronyism that deprives others of th…

> pushing each other forward at the expense of more capable people, later taking their cronies with them to whatever company they landed, applying the same strategy.

So says you. This can also be thought of more charitably that someone hires people they know because there is much less risk. I've been working in software for ~20 years. I have a decent list of people who I would work with again, know what they bring to the table, and their strengths and weaknesses. If I had to build a new team tomorrow, you can bet I would be calling the people I know first.

Re: On Being a Principal Engineer

#124
post #75
post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

cronyism and networking are quite different things though

I agree that in theory they are different, but in practice they seem to blend quite significantly (viewed with my sample size of 1 of course).

Does that mean that you don't trust yourself to separate them in practice?

Re: On Being a Principal Engineer

#125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I absolutely hated my job as the dev lead for a medium size ($1 billion in revenue) non software company where we were a “cost center”. I liked helping smart developers who wanted to learn, I liked having a seat at the table to decide my own destiny and the level of autonomy to decide the “how”. I didn’t like the red tape, the political jockeying, meetings and more meetings etc. I wasn’t really learning anything that…

Promotions are just a form of vendor lock-in that (especially) small companies employ to keep people longer. I’ve seen barely two years out of college non cs majors promoted to senior engineer based on finishing some “large project” which anyone else in the engineering team could have done. The real sleezy thing is that by promoting someone to senior who isn’t nearly qualified at all, the company has now made it expo…

I wouldn’t even go that far. The dev lead over one of the teams is far more qualified to be the lead over that team because of his company knowledge - he’s been there for five years. He’s a smart guy but I don’t know how well he would fare outside of our company. This was his only job out of college.

I’m one of the three oldest developers - two of us are in our mid 40s and one in his mid 50s. The “architect” is well qualified but he has a lot on his plate. The other dev in his 50s also fought against being made a lead.

Edit:

I usually don’t comment on downvotes, but I’m really interested in knowing what could possibly be offensive or disagreeable about this post.

Re: On Being a Principal Engineer

#126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was hired into a company as a staff engineer, and I probably won’t consider it again. The existing engineers resented me for it, though it was super clear that the product was suffering because the existing engineers had serious skill gaps in critical areas. Meanwhile, to other managers & directors, I was just some new engineer they didn’t know, a political unknown quantity. I hit the ground running and earned a lo…

> The next time I will require the role to be some type of director or IC/distinguished engineer hybrid that is operating with an authority level above that. I've seen this go roughly. A director who brings in a lot of new technical views, challenging the perspectives and opinions held by the team, might not have an easier time than a staff engineer. The director was largely right, but dealt not just with technical r…

If it is going roughly that's on the director. Soft skills come into play when trying to make changes. IMO, "forcing" change means there are already leadership skill gaps with the director.

Re: On Being a Principal Engineer

#127
post #92
post #2

This rings true to my experience. I'm a Staff engineer and of my 40 hour week about 10-15 of those hours are interviews, meetings, and answering questions. Questions about technical feasibility, architectural discussions and planning, long term strategic planning, and lots of one offs from other developers. I enjoy the soft work I do, a lot of emotional labor for other developers, soft sells for tech/feature work aro…

>> I am not sure if the title of "staff/principle" can be transferred It usually can, actually, assuming you're going to a company of roughly the same stature. I.e. if work at a small company, your title doesn't mean much when going to a large company unless you're otherwise known in your field. And if you're a Staff engineer working at e.g. FANG, you can demand the "God Emperor" type title at a small company and you…

I worked with a guy early in my career whose title was "Keeper of the Magic".

Re: On Being a Principal Engineer

#128
post #2

This rings true to my experience. I'm a Staff engineer and of my 40 hour week about 10-15 of those hours are interviews, meetings, and answering questions. Questions about technical feasibility, architectural discussions and planning, long term strategic planning, and lots of one offs from other developers. I enjoy the soft work I do, a lot of emotional labor for other developers, soft sells for tech/feature work aro…

Tangentially: anyone know where this use of the word "staff" comes from?

Re: On Being a Principal Engineer

#129
Re: companies that claim to have a fully equivalent technical track: What I've found is that is mostly lip service. Yes, they publish salaries and requirements for the highest levels of engineering, and those salaries are equivalent to high levels of management as far as pay goes. But if you look a little deeper you see the problem.

At Google and Amazon and Facebook, a Distinguished Engineer is equivalent to a Vice President in pay. But how many of those engineers do they have? I'll bet you could name most of them, because they are world famous experts in their fields. How many VPs do they have? Can you name more than a few?

The ratio of DE to VP is about 1 to 100. To be a DE, you need to basically be the best in the world at what you do. To be a VP, you have to be a great manager. In other words, while they may claim to have an equivalent engineering ladder, if you actually want to have a chance of moving up to those levels of pay, you had better go into people management, unless you think you're the best in the world at what you do.

Re: On Being a Principal Engineer

#130

I am 23, just got my first real job and this has been on my mind as well. Although its early (I have been programming unprofessionally for 10 years),what track I want to go Senior or Principal based on the author's definition. Do I want to be the one who knows the tech stack from the back of my hand or managing people to move the overall goals of the company. Although the author says both roles involves people, at th…

Software is so big and complex today that very little is built as a sole engineer. You may not realize it yet, but you will always be managing people even if you're not their manager. How you convey your ideas, accept their ideas, and work together to solve hard problems is often more important than raw technical knowledge after a certain level.
Post reply on HN