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

271–280 of 281 posts

Re: Don't become an engineering manager

#271

Post by Cthulhu_ »

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…

It really is arbitrary; I've never really been called senior or whatever, but apparently some people with 3-5 years of experience are already called that. It feels more like politics than a proper scale.

Which is actually an issue in our industry, I think, and it's causing widely different expectations and skills in different companies. A "lead developer" for company A might be considered a medior at best at company B.

Re: Don't become an engineering manager

#272

Post by jghn »

LgWoodenBadger wrote: post #206
jghn wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They matter within a company for the reasons you cite. They mostly don't matter between companies however.

Titles are what “salary comparisons” go by when HR “compares” compensation between employees and “competition.” What else would they be able to use?

> What else would they be able to use?

I tell them what my range is. If they don't want to meet my range, then I tell them to GTFO.

Isn't that what everyone does?

Re: Don't become an engineering manager

#273

Post by nixon_why69 »

jpgvm wrote: post #267
nixon_why69 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

It sounds like you were one of the actual Principal Engineers, then. In my experience, there are some who had presumably done some of that in the past but now had to maintain their position by generating "cross-team impact" which was mostly just a PITA to actual practitioners.

One case in particular, there was a re-org and the new org lacked principals but we had a common vision and a bunch of pieces in place. We needed a new vision that was led by the new principal, for obvious reasons. Whole thing was set back by a couple years while this was figured out. The existing, well-functioning pieces (with lots of users) were shipped to India teams for maintenance while the org slowly figured out facsimile pieces.

Re: Don't become an engineering manager

#274

Post by peddling-brink »

beernet wrote: post #266
JaumeGreen wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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".

That's pretty standard lingo. Would you prefer "reporting to me"?

Re: Don't become an engineering manager

#276

Post by scribblings »

Swizec wrote: post #107
Aurornis wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> that it really depends on the organisation. This is entirely it. Titles should be consistently ordered within an organization, but they are not portable from one organization to another. This is a lesson I’ve had to explain over and over to people at the beginning of their careers. I’ve been asked for advice about which offer to take from people thinking about leaving 10s of thousands of dollars on the table becaus…

> When hiring, titles are basically ignored As a hiring manager, this is completely accurate. I don't look at your title, I look at your scope . Tell me what you did, for whom, and what was the impact. That's all I care about. We all know that Senior Principal Architect Engineer at 3-person startup is somewhere around junior to mid-level at a real company. Whereas some poor schmuck at a larger company with a title li…

[dead]

Re: Don't become an engineering manager

#278

Post by bombolo »

cj wrote: post #40
jrjeksjd8d wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Titles for ICs matter for two reasons: comp, and perf reviews. At bigger companies the amount of RSUs for Staff versus Senior can be substantial. At a startup where equity is worth nothing and salaries are in a tight band anyways it doesn't make a difference. For perf reviews your title dictates the rubric you get evaluated against, but in fact your manager is probably trying to fit a curve and then work backwards to…

> At a startup where equity is worth nothing and salaries are in a tight band anyways it doesn't make a difference. It doesn't make a big difference to the company, but a lot of employees want these titles for ego / resume / status / recognition. And titles are free for startups to give away, so many do.

[dead]

Re: Don't become an engineering manager

#279

Post by bombolo »

8note wrote: post #245
Scarblac wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same for "programmer", "software developer", "software engineer", and so on. People insist that there's a real difference even when I have been all those things and there was no difference.

in canada theres a meaningful difference. Engineers are either EITs or have a professional stamp

[dead]

Re: Don't become an engineering manager

#280

Post by mlrtime »

OJFord wrote: post #205
pkaler wrote: 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…

> L5 or Senior is usually considered a “terminal” role. That means all engineers should be able to get to this role. Doesn't it mean more like it's an acceptable end, a destination - obviously not everyone's career track is to take over the company as CEO one day, but nor is it necessarily to progress to Staff and beyond. The idea being that it's a bit of a role change, to a greater extent than the levels before it w…

The equivalent in IB (Investment Banking) is VP (Vice President)

Everyone is expected to be a VP, if not you move out. But you can stay VP forever.

Post reply on HN