3 ms·

I think this is a great move. My understanding is that some reporting chains in facebook have 12 links between IC and Zuckerberg, which is crazy inefficient. En

I think this is a great move. My understanding is that some reporting chains in facebook have 12 links between IC and Zuckerberg, which is crazy inefficient. Enormous organizations are able to run effectively with 5-6 links from IC to CEO. Managers managing managers managing turtles all the way down is a horrible form of "administrative bloat". You see bloat like this in enormous organizations like colleges, governments, and now monopolistic tech companies. This is besides the point that I don't think that big tech has successfully groomed many managers into people are capable of actually managing businesses; they don't drive value, they preside over decisions and make a case for higher headcount in the next planning cycle.

warner25 4y ago
Wow. I'll say that even in the Army, famous for its bloat, there are arguably fewer than 12 links (following the legal chain of command) between the lowest ranking private and the President of the United States... Private -> Team Leader -> Squad Leader -> Platoon Leader -> Company Commander -> Battalion Commander -> Brigade Commander -> Division Commander -> Corps Commander -> Combatant Commander -> SECDEF -> POTUS Of course we also pad that with a lot of senior enlisted advisors, executive officers, chiefs-of-staff, deputy commanders, etc. who can effectively be additional buffers between each echelon.
yowzadave 4y ago
If you want a flatter org structure, it seems like it would be easier to achieve this if manager/IC roles were distinct. If a manager is also writing code, then they won't have the time to manage as many other employees, and the total number of managers/layers would need to increase.
- 0xB31B1B 4y ago
  yea, I don't think the manager/IC thing is a point of leverage TBH. I think the real issue here is that you have senior managers that manage 4 ICS and 1 manager of a 6 person team, and that manager should just report to a director and the senior manager should be retitled "manager" and manage 8 ICs instead of 4.
- itsdrewmiller 4y ago
  They might be pushing hybrid manager/coders to move back to full IC / tech lead type roles, while keeping the dedicated managers with bigger spans of control. That would have the effect they want, anyway.
aprdm 4y ago
Do you have source for 12? That indeed seems pretty crazy.
- 0xB31B1B 4y ago
  IC reports to tech lead manager (link 1). TLM reports to senior manager (link 2) senior manager reports to other senior manager (yes, this happens, link 3), senior manager reports to director (link 4) director reports to senior director (link 5), senior director reports to VP (link 6) VP reports to SVP (link 7), SVP reports to C level (link 8) C level reports to CEO (link 9). I saw these reporting chains when I worked at FAANG, and I can imagine its pretty easy to stuff 3 more links in here to hit 12.
  - p0pcult 4y ago
    >i can imagine So, no, you haven't seen 12? Just imagined them?
- yolovoe 4y ago
  I have seen such chains at Amazon. IC -> Manager -> Sr Manager -> Director -> VP -> SVP -> CEO of AWS -> CEO of Amazon. That's only 7, but some links repeat. For example, I have seen Sr Manager report to another Sr Manager. Likewise, a VP report to another VP, and a Director report to another one.

warner25 4y ago

Wow. I'll say that even in the Army, famous for its bloat, there are arguably fewer than 12 links (following the legal chain of command) between the lowest ranking private and the President of the United States... Private -> Team Leader -> Squad Leader -> Platoon Leader -> Company Commander -> Battalion Commander -> Brigade Commander -> Division Commander -> Corps Commander -> Combatant Commander -> SECDEF -> POTUS Of course we also pad that with a lot of senior enlisted advisors, executive officers, chiefs-of-staff, deputy commanders, etc. who can effectively be additional buffers between each echelon.

yowzadave 4y ago

If you want a flatter org structure, it seems like it would be easier to achieve this if manager/IC roles were distinct. If a manager is also writing code, then they won't have the time to manage as many other employees, and the total number of managers/layers would need to increase.

0xB31B1B 4y ago
yea, I don't think the manager/IC thing is a point of leverage TBH. I think the real issue here is that you have senior managers that manage 4 ICS and 1 manager of a 6 person team, and that manager should just report to a director and the senior manager should be retitled "manager" and manage 8 ICs instead of 4.
itsdrewmiller 4y ago
They might be pushing hybrid manager/coders to move back to full IC / tech lead type roles, while keeping the dedicated managers with bigger spans of control. That would have the effect they want, anyway.

aprdm 4y ago

Do you have source for 12? That indeed seems pretty crazy.

0xB31B1B 4y ago
IC reports to tech lead manager (link 1). TLM reports to senior manager (link 2) senior manager reports to other senior manager (yes, this happens, link 3), senior manager reports to director (link 4) director reports to senior director (link 5), senior director reports to VP (link 6) VP reports to SVP (link 7), SVP reports to C level (link 8) C level reports to CEO (link 9). I saw these reporting chains when I worked at FAANG, and I can imagine its pretty easy to stuff 3 more links in here to hit 12.
- p0pcult 4y ago
  >i can imagine So, no, you haven't seen 12? Just imagined them?
yolovoe 4y ago
I have seen such chains at Amazon. IC -> Manager -> Sr Manager -> Director -> VP -> SVP -> CEO of AWS -> CEO of Amazon. That's only 7, but some links repeat. For example, I have seen Sr Manager report to another Sr Manager. Likewise, a VP report to another VP, and a Director report to another one.