My thoughts about the Principal role • Hacker News Board

Re: My thoughts about the Principal role

#121

Post by spenczar5 » Sun, May 23, 2021, 8:23 PM UTC

Raptor22 wrote: post #117

spenczar5 wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s something I think about often. Sometimes I do wish I had plunged towards passions, but I know a lot of people who burned out by doing that. I think my path was probably a good one; it really is very psychologically nice to not worry at all about money and be able to advance my career in any direction I want now without feeling like I am being selfish, or neglecting my responsibilities as a father, or whatever.…

> I also certainly learned a lot at Amazon (although the thing I learned most was “how to be effective inside Amazon,” which isn’t a particularly great skill in the long run!). Can you speak more to this? Why is being effective inside Amazon different from being effective at any other large organization?

Oh, there's plenty of overlap between those, and I'm sure lots is applicable to other large organizations.

But I also learned things like:

- How do I most effectively advocate for headcount within Amazon's yearly budget process?

- Who is the right person to go to in AWS Networking when we think we have a possible performance problem in the network stack?

- What is AWS AppSec really looking for when a design is going through a security review? (and what are they not looking for)

These have a little applicability, but mostly they're the inside knowledge that just comes from time and experience inside the organization. You learn the shibboleths that open doors or get people to listen to you on the first try. Sorta useful, but mostly not very interesting to me personally.

Re: My thoughts about the Principal role

#122

Post by kevinmchugh » Sun, May 23, 2021, 11:28 PM UTC

jerf wrote: post #67

bob1029 wrote: post #13

> An architect? A big part of my work is to improve systems and platforms. Listen to problems and propose solutions. But I don't feel like the guy who does a plan which must be blindly followed by others. I don't want to be a gatekeeper who says what can be used and what can't. The only area where I feel like you need to be super careful is around architecture. How many chefs can bake the same cake before you have a…

There's some sort of PE analog to the Brooks quote I've been working on, but I'm not quite there yet. Something like "Show me your solution and conceal the org chart, and I shall be mystified by your decisions. Show me the org chart and I won't need to see your solutions, they'll be obvious." It's not quite as determinative, though. See the data and you often really don't need the code, but even understanding the org…

You're getting close to Conway's Law

Re: My thoughts about the Principal role

#123

Post by jerf » Mon, May 24, 2021, 1:14 PM UTC

kevinmchugh wrote: post #122

jerf wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's some sort of PE analog to the Brooks quote I've been working on, but I'm not quite there yet. Something like "Show me your solution and conceal the org chart, and I shall be mystified by your decisions. Show me the org chart and I won't need to see your solutions, they'll be obvious." It's not quite as determinative, though. See the data and you often really don't need the code, but even understanding the org…

You're getting close to Conway's Law

Well, that's part of what I meant by "it's not quite as determinative". Conway's law constrains solutions but it doesn't determine them; it's not a 100% guidepost the way "letting me see your data" almost does 100% show what the code needs to be, at least at some level of abstraction. I feel like there's some stronger formulation that may more strongly narrow down how the architecture has to look than just the org chart.

Re: My thoughts about the Principal role

#124

Post by tibiahurried » Tue, May 25, 2021, 12:39 AM UTC

sys_64738 wrote: post #75

tibiahurried wrote: post #69

Job titles are overrated. Often they are not an indication of skills and/or achievements, but rather political ability to networking and managing up in the company. I have worked with Principals, Architects etc ... they were more an obstacle than facilitators. Most of them, if they were to interview, they wouldn't even be able to get a job as a senior engineer.

At that level it's not what you know but who you know. Your ability to interface with the rest of the org and get things done is where you deliver value. If you see senior people as such obstacles then it suggests you've not worked for a larger org or perhaps the obstacle isn't those other people.

hehe I guarantee you I have worked indeed in many large FAANG and not, tech companies. And it is pretty much the same everywhere.

I think when you get at a certain level, people tend to rest and vest, thus producing little to no tangible value for the company. But, since their networking is strong, they keep sticking around.

Large corp => too many "architects" => meetings => ... and nothing gets done.

Ever asked yourself why big corp innovate through acquisition?