4 ms·

Good for you. I was in startups for 25 years, (except for a few years in an acquiring company), and I had this ongoing debate with myself and my bosses for man

Good for you. I was in startups for 25 years, (except for a few years in an acquiring company), and I had this ongoing debate with myself and my bosses for many years: Should I stay on the technical side (developer, architect), or go into management? On one hand, I thought that I "should" go into management because ... that's what people do, right? On the other hand, I loathed management. Even as a team lead, meetings made me literally sick to my stomach, (well, once). I kept torturing myself with this decision over the years, until my boss cleared it up for me. He said that if I hated being a manager, that I would suck at it, and be constantly miserable. So don't do it. It was so obvious once he said it. So I didn't become a manager, and I never worried about it again.

smileysteve 6y ago
> On the other hand, I loathed management. Even as a team lead, meetings made me literally sick to my stomach, I don't know that you should use this criteria as the sole deal breaker. Managers should be shielding teams from unproductive meetings and pushing for productivity (action items) from the meetings that happen - holding their peers to a degree of standards. Now, if you hate 1:1, org planning, and successful meetings, that's another thing.
- geophile 6y ago
  Everything about it. Every moment spent organizing, planning, reviewing, coordinating, is just torture. If, at work, I am doing anything but working on code, or preparing to (researching, reading, etc.), I feel like I am wasting my time, and it is just draining. At the end of a work day, my mood is completely determined by how much time I spent on code.
  - strgcmc 6y ago
    I'm always thrilled to hear stories from people who have or reach this level of self-awareness, about what determines their mood/satisfaction. It's so wonderfully freeing to know yourself to that level, and understand part of what makes you tick internally. I myself am a former-engineer and current-manager, and I also remember absolutely loathing meetings as a waste of time, explaining things to people who don't really care that much about what I have to say, and plus why should I contort myself to speak "their" language and why can't they be bothered to learn to speak "my" language as an engineer? But over time, I think I've come to develop a taste for, the style of communication that happens in most typical business meetings. If you think about coding and entering a "flow" state, to me the core of that flow is being able to clearly and concisely conceptualize the software abstractions you have in your head, mapping them effectively from business concepts or technical requirements and into code, and being able to just churn out a beautiful representation of all those things into something tangible (an application, a service, etc.). Believe it or not, in roundabout ways, meetings can achieve that kind of "flow" state as well, creating a shared understanding of a beautiful abstraction, and resulting in high-bandwidth exchange of ideas. Certainly it is much harder to achieve "flow" for meeting communication than for coding/engineering (IMHO at least) since it involves lots of other people with lots of different backgrounds and different levels of understanding, but I find that nonetheless it is something I can find enjoyment from the pursuit of that state. Not every meeting succeeds in reaching that "flow" state, but more and more I can perceive and introspect why/why-not it didn't, and come out with tangible lessons for myself for improving. So long as I have a flywheel for getting better, it doesn't feel so draining or so pointless anymore even when I "fail". And sometimes, I really do come out of the most productive meetings feeling very energized, and hearing from my peers how much clarity they gained or how much more confident they are about a decision that was previously questionable/uncertain, is truly a great feeling (at least as good for me, as producing a solid piece of beautiful code).
  - allenu 6y ago
    I feel this too. I've been working in industry since the early 2000s and for me I've known for a while now that I do not want to be a manager. There have been times where I've considered it, but like you, I find organizing, planning, reviewing, coordinating tortuous. I would rather design and implement a system, or work with others to do so, than spend time doing the meta-work to get work done. That said, to get a title promotion, I've found that you have to do more of the organizing, planning, coordinating stuff to be noticed. Performance reviews are biased towards "the next step" in your career and companies are forever trying to get you to do more "meta-work" which I really dislike.
  - dbrueck 6y ago
    Exactly this! A couple of times in my career I've stepped over into management, and regretted it each time, in large part because I can never get to the point where the manager-y stuff "counts" as work; instead it's stuff that gets in the way of doing "real" work, so the job is constant misery.
  - munchbunny 6y ago
    I'm glad that people are becoming increasingly aware of this. I found that I don't mind managing, but it's such a different type of work. As an IC I went home (before COVID anyway) mentally exhausted. As a manager I went home emotionally exhausted. Different people are better at recovering from either state of exhaustion.
- noelsusman 6y ago
  The work of shielding my hypothetical team from useless meetings sounds just as miserable as the useless meetings themselves. Now that I think about it, my own boss shields us from these meetings primarily by taking the meeting himself.
lucifersam 6y ago
I have this dilemma at the moment. My company has a management and non-management track. I feel like the company is pushing me up the levels and that all focus across engineering is on getting promoted to the next level. My problem is now that I've got to Staff level I feel like I'm a manager even though my manager insists I'm not. I hardly ever get to code, and my calendar is full of meetings. I spend a lot of time writing planning documents and having meetings about spreadsheets and OKRs and to be honest I absolutely hate it. I've been trying to work out if it's like this everywhere, or if this is specific to my company. I spoke to a few people and they pretty much said "Yeah, the more senior you get the less you get to code". The articles I read about Staff Engineer level seem to imply it's more about architecture and planning. I'm really tempted to demote myself back to Senior and just stick there, but I'd probably take a salary cut and I also feel like I'd taint my career and be viewed as a failure. I thought we'd move forwards by creating twin tracks that means engineers don't automatically have to go into management to get ahead, but it feels like it hasn't changed that much. I know some people are great at that level of engineer role, and I can see why companies need it. I keep coming back to the question: why do we take people who are good at coding and say "OK, you're great at that so I'm going to promote you into a role where you hardly ever get to do it"? For what it's worth, I enjoy mentoring and explaining things, writing docs, and being involved in design of systems and influencing technical strategy. It's nice to be making technical choices. But when you're more familiar with a spreadsheet than an IDE, something has gone wrong.
- johannes1234321 6y ago
  Seniority to some degree is about enabling others and having the overview. The big problems are rarely the precise code being written (it /can/ be the case when working on a specific algorithm or something) but large parts are about architecture, code review, ... and understanding the business needs aside from core technical skills. If a senior shares their experience with 5 juniors it is (especially long-term) better spent than them hacking something alone. But as always: ymmv
- quicklime 6y ago
  At the companies that I've seen that have a good IC track, including some of the FAANGs, the staff+ level engineers are measured by impact. There are many ways to have that impact, and that could be by architecture, design and influencing technical strategy, or it could be by churning out tons of code, or it could be by highly specialized domain knowledge. It's fairly normal for staff-level engineers to spend a lot of time in meetings, but there are also staff engineers who spend most of their time coding.
rewgs 6y ago
I'm looking at a career change (possibly to tech), and I can't help but wonder: is there a way to be one of these managers, but without being a coder first? Weird question, I know. But I'm an advanced beginner of a programmer who knows that I'd make a better manager than a SWE. Almost would prefer to just leap-frog to management since, as it is, I'm already looking at a career change and know my strengths.
- biotechiscool 6y ago
  Check out QA. Get promoted from QA analyst up to manager and then transfer into other management type roles outside of QA.
- doktorhladnjak 6y ago
  You have to have credibility with engineers to manage them or they will not respect you. At least at leading companies with a Silicon Valley type culture. It's about more than knowing how to program, but rather the ins and outs of development, architecture, technology. Plenty of more typical Fortune 500 type companies and small, non VC funded companies let managers from non engineering backgrounds manage engineers.
- dagw 6y ago
  is there a way to be one of these managers, but without being a coder first? There is, but probably not in a Software company, since they tend to prefer promoting experienced programmers to managers based on their tech skills (for better or worse) Companies that work in logistics, banking, engineering etc. and have in-house software teams, but don't ship software as their primary business are far more open to hiring non-programmers as software team managers (for better or worse). If you have any domain knowledge about the area they're operating in that often weighs much higher.
  - renox 6y ago
    My previous manager was non technical, my current manager is an ex-developer, it makes things a bit simpler to have an ex-developer as manager but it isn't 'that' different, it just meant that before I had to simplify the description of the issues, which is a good thing anyway (most of the time). And the best thing my manager can do for our team is political: each team/site competes for the more interesting features to develop..
benhurmarcel 6y ago
Did you take a pay cut? Usually people go into management because it pays more.

smileysteve 6y ago

> On the other hand, I loathed management. Even as a team lead, meetings made me literally sick to my stomach, I don't know that you should use this criteria as the sole deal breaker. Managers should be shielding teams from unproductive meetings and pushing for productivity (action items) from the meetings that happen - holding their peers to a degree of standards. Now, if you hate 1:1, org planning, and successful meetings, that's another thing.

geophile 6y ago
Everything about it. Every moment spent organizing, planning, reviewing, coordinating, is just torture. If, at work, I am doing anything but working on code, or preparing to (researching, reading, etc.), I feel like I am wasting my time, and it is just draining. At the end of a work day, my mood is completely determined by how much time I spent on code.
- strgcmc 6y ago
  I'm always thrilled to hear stories from people who have or reach this level of self-awareness, about what determines their mood/satisfaction. It's so wonderfully freeing to know yourself to that level, and understand part of what makes you tick internally. I myself am a former-engineer and current-manager, and I also remember absolutely loathing meetings as a waste of time, explaining things to people who don't really care that much about what I have to say, and plus why should I contort myself to speak "their" language and why can't they be bothered to learn to speak "my" language as an engineer? But over time, I think I've come to develop a taste for, the style of communication that happens in most typical business meetings. If you think about coding and entering a "flow" state, to me the core of that flow is being able to clearly and concisely conceptualize the software abstractions you have in your head, mapping them effectively from business concepts or technical requirements and into code, and being able to just churn out a beautiful representation of all those things into something tangible (an application, a service, etc.). Believe it or not, in roundabout ways, meetings can achieve that kind of "flow" state as well, creating a shared understanding of a beautiful abstraction, and resulting in high-bandwidth exchange of ideas. Certainly it is much harder to achieve "flow" for meeting communication than for coding/engineering (IMHO at least) since it involves lots of other people with lots of different backgrounds and different levels of understanding, but I find that nonetheless it is something I can find enjoyment from the pursuit of that state. Not every meeting succeeds in reaching that "flow" state, but more and more I can perceive and introspect why/why-not it didn't, and come out with tangible lessons for myself for improving. So long as I have a flywheel for getting better, it doesn't feel so draining or so pointless anymore even when I "fail". And sometimes, I really do come out of the most productive meetings feeling very energized, and hearing from my peers how much clarity they gained or how much more confident they are about a decision that was previously questionable/uncertain, is truly a great feeling (at least as good for me, as producing a solid piece of beautiful code).
- allenu 6y ago
  I feel this too. I've been working in industry since the early 2000s and for me I've known for a while now that I do not want to be a manager. There have been times where I've considered it, but like you, I find organizing, planning, reviewing, coordinating tortuous. I would rather design and implement a system, or work with others to do so, than spend time doing the meta-work to get work done. That said, to get a title promotion, I've found that you have to do more of the organizing, planning, coordinating stuff to be noticed. Performance reviews are biased towards "the next step" in your career and companies are forever trying to get you to do more "meta-work" which I really dislike.
- dbrueck 6y ago
  Exactly this! A couple of times in my career I've stepped over into management, and regretted it each time, in large part because I can never get to the point where the manager-y stuff "counts" as work; instead it's stuff that gets in the way of doing "real" work, so the job is constant misery.
- munchbunny 6y ago
  I'm glad that people are becoming increasingly aware of this. I found that I don't mind managing, but it's such a different type of work. As an IC I went home (before COVID anyway) mentally exhausted. As a manager I went home emotionally exhausted. Different people are better at recovering from either state of exhaustion.
noelsusman 6y ago
The work of shielding my hypothetical team from useless meetings sounds just as miserable as the useless meetings themselves. Now that I think about it, my own boss shields us from these meetings primarily by taking the meeting himself.

lucifersam 6y ago

I have this dilemma at the moment. My company has a management and non-management track. I feel like the company is pushing me up the levels and that all focus across engineering is on getting promoted to the next level. My problem is now that I've got to Staff level I feel like I'm a manager even though my manager insists I'm not. I hardly ever get to code, and my calendar is full of meetings. I spend a lot of time writing planning documents and having meetings about spreadsheets and OKRs and to be honest I absolutely hate it. I've been trying to work out if it's like this everywhere, or if this is specific to my company. I spoke to a few people and they pretty much said "Yeah, the more senior you get the less you get to code". The articles I read about Staff Engineer level seem to imply it's more about architecture and planning. I'm really tempted to demote myself back to Senior and just stick there, but I'd probably take a salary cut and I also feel like I'd taint my career and be viewed as a failure. I thought we'd move forwards by creating twin tracks that means engineers don't automatically have to go into management to get ahead, but it feels like it hasn't changed that much. I know some people are great at that level of engineer role, and I can see why companies need it. I keep coming back to the question: why do we take people who are good at coding and say "OK, you're great at that so I'm going to promote you into a role where you hardly ever get to do it"? For what it's worth, I enjoy mentoring and explaining things, writing docs, and being involved in design of systems and influencing technical strategy. It's nice to be making technical choices. But when you're more familiar with a spreadsheet than an IDE, something has gone wrong.

johannes1234321 6y ago
Seniority to some degree is about enabling others and having the overview. The big problems are rarely the precise code being written (it /can/ be the case when working on a specific algorithm or something) but large parts are about architecture, code review, ... and understanding the business needs aside from core technical skills. If a senior shares their experience with 5 juniors it is (especially long-term) better spent than them hacking something alone. But as always: ymmv
quicklime 6y ago
At the companies that I've seen that have a good IC track, including some of the FAANGs, the staff+ level engineers are measured by impact. There are many ways to have that impact, and that could be by architecture, design and influencing technical strategy, or it could be by churning out tons of code, or it could be by highly specialized domain knowledge. It's fairly normal for staff-level engineers to spend a lot of time in meetings, but there are also staff engineers who spend most of their time coding.

rewgs 6y ago

I'm looking at a career change (possibly to tech), and I can't help but wonder: is there a way to be one of these managers, but without being a coder first? Weird question, I know. But I'm an advanced beginner of a programmer who knows that I'd make a better manager than a SWE. Almost would prefer to just leap-frog to management since, as it is, I'm already looking at a career change and know my strengths.

biotechiscool 6y ago
Check out QA. Get promoted from QA analyst up to manager and then transfer into other management type roles outside of QA.
doktorhladnjak 6y ago
You have to have credibility with engineers to manage them or they will not respect you. At least at leading companies with a Silicon Valley type culture. It's about more than knowing how to program, but rather the ins and outs of development, architecture, technology. Plenty of more typical Fortune 500 type companies and small, non VC funded companies let managers from non engineering backgrounds manage engineers.
dagw 6y ago
is there a way to be one of these managers, but without being a coder first? There is, but probably not in a Software company, since they tend to prefer promoting experienced programmers to managers based on their tech skills (for better or worse) Companies that work in logistics, banking, engineering etc. and have in-house software teams, but don't ship software as their primary business are far more open to hiring non-programmers as software team managers (for better or worse). If you have any domain knowledge about the area they're operating in that often weighs much higher.
- renox 6y ago
  My previous manager was non technical, my current manager is an ex-developer, it makes things a bit simpler to have an ex-developer as manager but it isn't 'that' different, it just meant that before I had to simplify the description of the issues, which is a good thing anyway (most of the time). And the best thing my manager can do for our team is political: each team/site competes for the more interesting features to develop..

benhurmarcel 6y ago

Did you take a pay cut? Usually people go into management because it pays more.