As unobjectionable as this advice is, it also doesn't feel terribly useful. Consider this quote: > As software engineers, we already know that a too-rigid pla

As unobjectionable as this advice is, it also doesn't feel terribly useful. Consider this quote: > As software engineers, we already know that a too-rigid plan rarely survives contact with reality. For me this is understating things quite a bit. As someone pretty much exactly mid-career who has done well, I can't really point to long-term planning as providing any value whatsoever. It certainly doesn't hurt to think about the long-term value of what you are doing now as an impetus for change, but thinking too much about specific destinations starts to veer into day dreaming territory. Instead, what I've found useful is first and foremost to take risks and keep my options open. For instance, IC vs EM is not something about which I hold a strong opinion. When it comes time to change my role the best opportunity may not fit into a rigid taxonomy of "career goals" and there are more important factors. All too often I see ambitious young people asking for a roadmap to success. This is especially true at higher tier companies and people that have come up through Stanford/MIT where they have been spent their whole life jumping through rigidly defined hoops. They come into the workforce with the idea if they just do what they're told hard enough they can get promoted on a regular cadence. However doing as you're told has a natural glass ceiling, and personal success has more to do with playing to your strengths and seizing opportunity than playing by the book.