82 ms·
In my experience there's a difference in the level you're operating at. What you've mentioned is familiar from IC level, whereas senior architect/tech director/
by hackerfromthefu 5y ago
In my experience there's a difference in the level you're operating at. What you've mentioned is familiar from IC level, whereas senior architect/tech director/cto roles many were done and made real progress through personal interactions. Often these things involve politics and personalities as much as situational specifics.
- upsidesinclude 5y agoHaha, I can't help but find this humorous! I genuinely can't take this perspective seriously. What most people see is the 'architect' (read: [micro]manager) make 'important' interventions in others efforts... I understand the role, I'm not ignorant of the purpose of these positions. But I'm painfully aware of how many people are b*llshitters and found their positions using these very office politics to get ahead. Their ultimate fear is being assessed on their own for their effort. Largely because they don't actually contribute much at all.
- hackerfromthefu 5y agoFair enough, that kind of thing is toxic and I don't get involved with those kind of places. Personally I moved back from Lead Architect/CTO roles to being a consultant mainly doing IC work where I deliver the entirety of a system myself. In other words I do deliver the goods technically, and happen to prefer that to working politically. So it would seem my observation/perspective is coming from a different perspective than you were thinking of!