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

Google has eliminated 35% of managers overseeing small teams in past year

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 292 posts

Re: Google has eliminated 35% of managers overseeing small teams in past year

#161

Post by loeg »

dhx wrote: post #110
B-Con wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GOOG has made a systemic push to eliminate the role starting ~3 years ago. At that time my M was a staff level IC TLM with 4 reports who was forcibly converted to EM. In those last 3 years I've only seen TLMs used to assist an overloaded EM. The pattern I've seen is something like: Principal EM |- Staff EM (7 reports, project A) |- Staff EM (8 reports, project B) |- Staff IC (projects A, B, C) |- Senior IC (projects…

Do you have a mapping to roles/levels[1], for example: Principal EM - USD$1.3m/yr per https://www.levels.fyi/companies/google/salaries/software-en... Staff EM - USD$664k/yr per https://www.levels.fyi/companies/google/salaries/software-en... Staff IC - USD$557k/yr per https://www.levels.fyi/companies/google/salaries/software-en... Senior IC - USD$410k/yr per https://www.levels.fyi/companies/google/salaries/software-en…

I believe a TLM is an IC on this scale.

Re: Google has eliminated 35% of managers overseeing small teams in past year

#162

Post by chickenzzzzu »

I currently am an "individual contributor" on a very large (15+) "game team". It is hilariously inefficient to have one manager supporting that many people, as the manager just makes decisions based on heuristics and buzz words. They almost always make the wrong decision, and we just silently ignore those decisions. Since they're so busy, they don't notice.

I have advocated many times and been told no for a situation like, "hey I know a major core problem we need to solve, give me one extra engineer in addition to myself and maybe a part time tech artist and we can deliver this to you."

It is repulsive how many large corporations follow such outdated and rigid processes, and follow the logic of "more engineerer betterer"

Re: Google has eliminated 35% of managers overseeing small teams in past year

#163

Post by litmus-pit-git »

AnotherGoodName wrote: post #11

This was called the TLM role at google. Technical Lead/Manager. You were expected to code and manage a couple of more junior engineers. It’s part of an effort to have dedicated managers and dedicated engineers instead of hybrid roles. This is being sold as an efficiency win for the sake of the stock price but it’s really just moved a few people around with the TLMs now 100% focused on programming.

A recruiter in India was talking to me about some roles for some time and then disappeared. After a few weeks, when I was ready for interviews, I reached back. I was informed that those roles didn't exist anymore. I enquired further asking wahether those roles were filled, and the reply was something on the lines that no, they didn't exist anymore. Bit of a bummer because Google was one of the very few companies here that actually interviewed you pretty fairly even after a considerable employment gap. Those were L7 roles (not sure whether those are around TLM).

Re: Google has eliminated 35% of managers overseeing small teams in past year

#164

Post by siva7 »

para_parolu wrote: post #29
whatever1 wrote: post #9

Around 5 is the correct number for a first line manager of a technical team. Go to 10 and it’s impossible to keep track of things. The day has only so many hours. Managing takes time. For bigger teams (10+) you either need individuals who are very independent and driven, or have dependable line managers.

Every time I see manager with 5 people I know it will be daily 30m standups, friday “summary” meeting, weekly 1:1 and other nok work related activities. If team of 5 people need a babysitter fulltime it means there are no adults on that group.

Matches also my experience if they were overseeing only one small team.

Re: Google has eliminated 35% of managers overseeing small teams in past year

#165

Post by Dylan16807 »

xenotux wrote: post #61
corytheboyd wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

TLM role has always sounded like a trap to me, I would never say yes to it personally. I’m sure it’s sold as an expected 50% code, 50% management but everyone I’ve talked to who has been near it says the expectation is more like 80% code 80% management.

TLM roles are a trap, but not in that sense. There's no expectation that you do two jobs at once. It's just a way to ease unsuspecting engineers into management. If you don't suck at management, your team inevitably grows (or you're handed over other teams), and before long, you're managing full-time. Which means that there are three type of people who remain TLMs in the long haul: those who suck at management; those…

> If you don't suck at management, your team inevitably grows

Inevitably because why?

> those who suck at management

If higher management can figure out not to put more people under them, why can't it figure out to remove the existing people under them?

> those managing dead-end projects on dead-end teams

If "dead-end" just means "not growing" then that sounds fine. When a company does thousands of things only a small fraction of them need to be growing.

> those who desperately cling on to the engineering past and actively refuse to take on more people

"Desperately cling" is a wild way to refer to someone sticking with a job they like. And if they're a TLM it's not the past, it's the present. Wanting to keep your present job is very normal.

And is the end goal to have zero TLMs in this expanded team? If you're going to pick new TLMs to go under the one you push into higher management, what's bad about leaving them in place and putting someone else above them?

Re: Google has eliminated 35% of managers overseeing small teams in past year

#166

Post by Anon1096 »

dhx wrote: post #110
B-Con wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GOOG has made a systemic push to eliminate the role starting ~3 years ago. At that time my M was a staff level IC TLM with 4 reports who was forcibly converted to EM. In those last 3 years I've only seen TLMs used to assist an overloaded EM. The pattern I've seen is something like: Principal EM |- Staff EM (7 reports, project A) |- Staff EM (8 reports, project B) |- Staff IC (projects A, B, C) |- Senior IC (projects…

Do you have a mapping to roles/levels[1], for example: Principal EM - USD$1.3m/yr per https://www.levels.fyi/companies/google/salaries/software-en... Staff EM - USD$664k/yr per https://www.levels.fyi/companies/google/salaries/software-en... Staff IC - USD$557k/yr per https://www.levels.fyi/companies/google/salaries/software-en... Senior IC - USD$410k/yr per https://www.levels.fyi/companies/google/salaries/software-en…

> Does the change mean the most competent solution architect who has successfully designed and implemented many complex systems from scratch is capped in salary package because they're not doing the important job of demanding those around them fill out TPS reports all day?

In house solutions architects are not really a thing at FAANG. Designing and implementing systems is what mid+ level SWEs are expected to do. The solutions architects I have seen were all in the sales org helping external customers better use the cloud. My experience isn't exhaustive of course.

Re: Google has eliminated 35% of managers overseeing small teams in past year

#167

Post by gopher_space »

rubidium wrote: post #155
hliyan wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A few thoughts: (1) As an engineer, I prefer to be managed and guided by someone who actually knows what I work on, preferably better than I know it. (2) A manager who actually understands the tech is often better at unblocking the team. (3) Since senior IC openings tend to grow very thin as you become older, TLM path might be a viable career path for at least some. Can this role work if we don't expect IC output fro…

When you become a good enough IC, “ As an engineer, I prefer to be managed and guided by someone who actually knows what I work on, preferably better than I know it.” is no longer reasonable. Then your managers role is to maximize your ability to make an impact by putting you in the right place/project. As a manager of people who know far more about the things they do than I do, my goal is to assist and ensure in the…

Control issues prevent experienced IC from just roaming the halls looking for trouble.

Re: Google has eliminated 35% of managers overseeing small teams in past year

#168

Post by hliyan »

rubidium wrote: post #155
hliyan wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A few thoughts: (1) As an engineer, I prefer to be managed and guided by someone who actually knows what I work on, preferably better than I know it. (2) A manager who actually understands the tech is often better at unblocking the team. (3) Since senior IC openings tend to grow very thin as you become older, TLM path might be a viable career path for at least some. Can this role work if we don't expect IC output fro…

When you become a good enough IC, “ As an engineer, I prefer to be managed and guided by someone who actually knows what I work on, preferably better than I know it.” is no longer reasonable. Then your managers role is to maximize your ability to make an impact by putting you in the right place/project. As a manager of people who know far more about the things they do than I do, my goal is to assist and ensure in the…

Not sure why you'd take the leap from the idea of technical people managing technical people to "hiring peons who know less than me", that wasn't my intention. Also "as an engineer" was rhetorical -- I'm a manager myself and it's been over 15 years since I've been an engineer. So I do see the point you're trying to make. I still feel the immediate management layer above mid-level ICs should have some level of hands-on knowledge of the system they're developing. At the next level up, I think engineering fundamentals and past technical experience would suffice.

Re: Google has eliminated 35% of managers overseeing small teams in past year

#170

Post by starky »

para_parolu wrote: post #29
whatever1 wrote: post #9

Around 5 is the correct number for a first line manager of a technical team. Go to 10 and it’s impossible to keep track of things. The day has only so many hours. Managing takes time. For bigger teams (10+) you either need individuals who are very independent and driven, or have dependable line managers.

Every time I see manager with 5 people I know it will be daily 30m standups, friday “summary” meeting, weekly 1:1 and other nok work related activities. If team of 5 people need a babysitter fulltime it means there are no adults on that group.

No, 5 is about ideal. If you are micromanaging with that many people on your team then you are neglecting other aspects of being a manager. More than about 7 and you start being unavailable to your team when they need you, and won't have time to do the planning and process tasks.
Post reply on HN