I think this is a great article explaining exactly why it's okay to step off the career progression ladder and say this is what I want to do. The alternative is the Peter principle where you end up promoted upwards until you fail. OP, I wonder if you had frank talks with your line management about your long term career trajectory or if this was a sudden realization?
> The alternative is the Peter principle where you end up promoted upwards until you fail. I mean... to play devil’s advocate, if each promotion accelerates the compounding of your investments to the point where by the time you fail you’ve already reached financial independence, then oh well? Can always go back down the ladder or jump to different types of ladders at your convenience then.
The Most Dangerous Email (to my career) I've Sent
51–60 of 85 posts
Re: The Most Dangerous Email (to my career) I've Sent
#52There are many different types of "dangerous" things you can do for your career, and some are worse (and more permanent) than others. The most "dangerous" thing for my career was when I started posting about what's happening in Gaza and Palestine on my public social media accounts. I've heard similar horror stories from others, ranging from being let go from their jobs to missing out on new opportunities and position…
Yeah, freedom of speech used to be sacred... No longer.
Re: The Most Dangerous Email (to my career) I've Sent
#53There are many different types of "dangerous" things you can do for your career, and some are worse (and more permanent) than others. The most "dangerous" thing for my career was when I started posting about what's happening in Gaza and Palestine on my public social media accounts. I've heard similar horror stories from others, ranging from being let go from their jobs to missing out on new opportunities and position…
Again, not wanting to turn this into a Palestine/Gaza/Israel thing just pointing out that people on the other side feel the same way.
Re: The Most Dangerous Email (to my career) I've Sent
#54Earlier quoted context omitted.
> they moved too slow, were stuck in their ways, and unable to change This goes beyond just engineering- people generally get more like this in all aspects of life as they get older, and I believe you can prevent it by deciding not to be that way, and taking actions to not be that way. Personally, I feel that I was very rigid and closed minded when I was younger, and I've been learning and working on how to be less l…
I think we must remember to mention "rationality" in such conversations whenever we speak of things like "rigidity". Rigidity is a kind of irrational stubbornness, and unwillingness to consider alternatives when reason compels otherwise. Someone who is principled and has a reasoned basis for his principles isn't stubborn or rigid. He's principled. His certainty isn't irrational, because it is rooted in the best justi…
Re: The Most Dangerous Email (to my career) I've Sent
#55I enjoyed the article and it reminded me of many experiences in my career. However, this sentence bothers me: “I felt like by 40 I needed to move on from engineering because if I didn’t, I’d be like the few older workers I’d dealt with in my career. I felt like they moved too slow, were stuck in their ways, and unable to change - even when faced with evidence to the contrary.” I’m in my forties and none of those thin…
I really, really think that most ageism in tech is driven by similar memories of the old crowd when we were coming up. I mean, I fought for years (years!) to get Linux accepted by the older devs and had to sneak Postgres past the Oracle greybeards. Yet I am not that person blocking progress now, nor do I see the same with my peers. If a new tech has merit, we learn it. We grew up with tech and are plenty used to making those switches.
If anything, I'm way better at handling change than when I was younger and headstrong. And 25 years in industry has given me lots of practice.
Re: The Most Dangerous Email (to my career) I've Sent
#56There are many different types of "dangerous" things you can do for your career, and some are worse (and more permanent) than others. The most "dangerous" thing for my career was when I started posting about what's happening in Gaza and Palestine on my public social media accounts. I've heard similar horror stories from others, ranging from being let go from their jobs to missing out on new opportunities and position…
Since you mentioned Gaza and Palestine, I assume you are against Israel’s response. I don’t want to turn this comment section into that at all. I just wanted to say I feel that I can’t speak in support of Israel. The opposite can also be true. Again, not wanting to turn this into a Palestine/Gaza/Israel thing just pointing out that people on the other side feel the same way.
Re: The Most Dangerous Email (to my career) I've Sent
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
Freedom of speech has never meant freedom from consequences, particularly in one's dealings with private individuals or corporations. At best it's supposed to mean no reprisals from public institutions, such as the TSA, IRS, DMV, and the like.
It should if you have some semblance of professionalism. At work I don’t want to know nor want to know about the politics of the people working with me. If I’m engaged in a business transaction I don’t care about the personal views of the person I’m buying or selling from. Call me old fashioned but the world used to be that way before the rise of social media addictions and the current online echo chambers in our soc…
If I find the person’s views abhorrent, not a surprise I would choose not to do business with them if I had alternatives.
Re: The Most Dangerous Email (to my career) I've Sent
#58Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thank you. I think it is unfounded, but it's still a visceral belief and those can be hard to overcome. I'm hoping with time I can change my feelings on it.
Because I am the bluebird of happiness, there are a couple of things you may want to be aware of here. " I’d be like the few older workers I’d dealt with in my career. I felt like they moved too slow, were stuck in their ways, and unable to change - even when faced with evidence to the contrary. " First, keep in mind that many of your co-workers will still feel this way, even if you provide evidence to the contrary.…
My thesis is that companies should not be (or just be much less) functionally org'd—that is, not divided into Engineering, Marketing, Design, Sales, etc. And that this is the root-ish of many typical problems. I don't really need to argue that's true for my question, but given that most companies are that then leads to functional managers—ie. Engineering Manager or Director of Engineering. The role of that manager sometimes involves being in the weeds of specific work, but mostly doesn't. It's usually not architecting or coding, but mentoring and maybe allocating work. The latter of which might formally be a a responsibility, but is embedded in a network of other people's needs that does some pre-determining.
What does that manager do—and I suppose how do they sleep at night if they care about their work—given they're the mentor and blocker of their IC's rise? What I mean is that if the career path for the IC is sorta mythical, how does that manager guide them? If they're honest, then they're also kinda describing their own role as a bit pointless. That would be a reason the IC shouldn't aspire to the role coming from someone who did and now remains (happily?) in it. Engineering is probably the least problematic in this regard because it tends have a bit of power and sometimes isolation within a company. But take something like design, which fights all the time with product because half of the career path/duties for product design (less so brand or visual designers) is blocked by product. So when a designer tells their manager they're having problems with their PM, there is (1) nothing power-wise for the manager to do because neither they nor their bosses are in the chain of command of product and (2) they themselves never resolved this incompatibility. The best they've done is maybe launched something in spite of it. Or maybe (to the company's benefit?) not launched things because of it.
Does the functional manager just give (knowingly or unknowingly) pseudo-career-advice out of circumstance because that's the job of maintaining civility? Is this mostly a matter of everyone all around (managers and otherwise) looking the other way because employment?
Re: The Most Dangerous Email (to my career) I've Sent
#59Re: The Most Dangerous Email (to my career) I've Sent
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
Since you mentioned Gaza and Palestine, I assume you are against Israel’s response. I don’t want to turn this comment section into that at all. I just wanted to say I feel that I can’t speak in support of Israel. The opposite can also be true. Again, not wanting to turn this into a Palestine/Gaza/Israel thing just pointing out that people on the other side feel the same way.
In the US the more mainstream position is to support Israel, and only recently has there been a semblance in the change in trajectory. That's why both major parties come out in support of Israel.
The lobbyists for the military/industrial complex are numerous and exceedingly well-paid.
> That's why both major parties come out in support of Israel.
Which is how and why campaign contributions have become a systemic evil - it chains the platforms of politicians to the desires of the wealthy and powerful, thereby eliminating any ability for politicians to “do the morally/ethically correct thing”.
Most of the western world was philosophically “on Israel’s side” because of the unrelenting evil of Hamas -- Hamas does’t care if every single Palestinian dies, so long as they “win”. Plus, genocide of the entire Israeli population has been baked into Hamas’ DNA from the beginning. But with this war, Israel has gone all “hold my beer and watch this”, and is making a legitimately successful bid at becoming the materially greater evil.
It’s an ESH situation, with the Palestinian people caught in the crossfire.