5 ms·

I'm a Principal engineer at a ~300 person organization and I feel a bit stuck/ineffective. In theory, we aligned the ladders in a manner that Principal sits pa

by tibbon 4y ago

I'm a Principal engineer at a ~300 person organization and I feel a bit stuck/ineffective. In theory, we aligned the ladders in a manner that Principal sits parallel to Directors in the management track. I'm expected to impact org-wide culture, policy, technology direction, strategy, etc... but so rarely am I allowed into the rooms where decisions are being made, let alone discussed. I don't know (at all) what is being discussed, and by the time I find out about it things are set in stone. I do what I can with mentoring and team culture, and lead by example for code-related things, but that is all very zoomed in and tactical. We've been told explicitly that we're holding off on having people write technical strategy/vision until we have organization-wide direction from those in upper Leadership. That has been the promise for a long time, but for one reason or another keeps failing to materialize. At this point, upper Leadership won't even meet with someone of my rank/position, as they only respect others with VP to C-level titles to work with. This is the type of reality I fear encountering at other organizations. I worry that despite the allure of Principal title, the reality is that too often such things happen and that when it comes down to it, VPs and C-levels only respect similar, and want Principals or Distinguished Engineers simply as "advanced fixers" for problems in a short time.

liveoneggs 4y ago
Who told you to not do stuff and why are you listening to them? Who do you report to?
vp8989 4y ago
If I understand you correctly, I have felt similar angst before in this kind of role. Basically, you see "org-wide" work that needs to be done but it requires some level of "org-wide" alignment that doesn't yet exist. So you feel like you are twiddling your thumbs doing code reviews and making the tests faster while you wait to get the green light to "do your actual job". At least for me, in hindsight, a lot of that was just in my head. It's fine once you earn the level to not always operate at it. Just as long as when that's needed again you are able to step up.
- Swizec 4y ago
  > while you wait to get the green light to "do your actual job" In my experience as a pre-staff – it is your job to create the green light. You’re director level, there is no-one to say “make it so”. You’re the one who’s supposed to do that. Org-wide stuff not happening? Guess what, you have to go figure out how to make it happen. Even if that means getting buddy buddy with some of the other directors and building informal networks within the company. That’s the job. Making things happen. Poking the right person at the right time, cashing in favors, building a rapport, etc. And yes, sometimes pulling a VP into a meeting and asking “hey can you pull a string”
  - vp8989 4y ago
    I am talking about non-technical roadblocks. Cross-team product engineering projects can sometimes involve ownership changes which affects the company in non-technical ways. Some influential product/design lead might lose some control of their UX, some engineering team will become "redundant" and need to be reorged or refocused to other types of work etc ... You might be able to help with those politics but it's probably also not your job to do that. That's partly why actual engineering and product managers are on-staff to focus on things like that.
    - Swizec 4y ago
      I think it is your job to deal with those politics at that level. At the very least to bring them to the attention of the people who can implement a solve and to make a case for why your thing should be solved over other things. If the principal engineer doesn’t champion technical issues created by org design, then who?
      - vp8989 4y ago
        Ownership disputes often stem from non-technical issues. Two orgs with different agendas might feel they require ownership of a given piece of tech to drive their own agenda forward. This can be expected to happen in firms that have multiple product lines but perhaps some shared functionality across them, as just one example. I sense that we have different experiences and so can't relate to each other's points without getting more specific so I will make this my last reply. I will just say that a common trope I've seen in online discourse on this subject is basically that you aren't a real <verySeniorIC> unless you are effectively doing the job of (or heavily carrying) your peers in the org chart who explicitly hold management roles. I broke my own back, metaphorically, trying to live up to that ideal with nothing to show for it and at the expense of the output that was expected of me and so I reject that notion. The <verySeniorIC>s Ive seen who hold those titles with longevity aggressively delegate politics to management and focus on the tech.
chasd00 4y ago
"advanced fixers" is probably spot on. I know many companies will invent titles and hand them out (sometimes pay raises too) in order to keep people from looking elsewhere. My advice is to get close to the money, if you can tie your work and decisions to bank deposits you get a lot more attention.
giancarlostoro 4y ago
You should consider taking the initiative to meet with them every week where you get future / current initiatives from them and status on anything they need to do moving those forward. Maintain a spreadsheet you can share with them (or whatever they prefer) and you just get new statuses. The goal is to be on the same page and have some familiarity before you even bother telling anyone else in IT correct? So make it happen. I say this because I host such a call with our marketing team. I know what's coming down the pipeline before any developer even hears about it. My boss also uses it as an opportunity to interject and remind marketing that they already are trying to push too many initiatives our way, so they have to push some back. Keep titles, descriptions, projected development start dates, and projected release dates, and a column for all status updates (date them, and put a name to the last status).
donavanm 4y ago
Im a principal at AWS. Ive worked across similar org sizes in the past. If we were having coffee Id ask who you report to, as org charts matter to perception. Why your input isnt (apparently) valued for business & technical strategy. Who youre trying to influence, and how. And who told you that you shouldnt be informing those decisions.
SilverBirch 4y ago
This sounds very surprising to hear from such a small organization. How many principal engineers are there? Because I would expect from that org size and your seniority you would be the most senior technical person in the company, and reporting at least to the head of engineering/CTO. If you're not on of maybe 3 principal engineers at most, and if you're not reporting directly to a C-level person, then they've probably just diluted the title. If you genuinely are that senior you probably should have the clout to have an open conversation with your boss about making sure you're in the right meetings, and hell - make the meetings! If you get together with a group of engineers across the organisation and define a set of best practices or strategy vision for the company you're making it happen - you don't need an invite. But at this level, you're meant to be doing "influencing without authority" which is bloody difficult and basically means "be inspirational".
mytailorisrich 4y ago
> In theory, we aligned the ladders in a manner that Principal sits parallel to Directors in the management track. That seems extremely high in my personal experience, which is that Principal Engineer corresponds to Manager on the management side. > I'm expected to impact org-wide culture, policy, technology direction, strategy, etc... Also in my experience this sounds more like Technical Director level as that really having input into directing the org. An issue is that as an org grows it tends to create more titles in order to cater for egos and the pecking order among people who may have been there for a long time. So you have Junior Engineer, Engineer, Senior Engineer, Principal Engineer, Senior Principal/Associate Director, Director, Senior Director... In which case Principal Engineer certainly isn't on same level as Director on management side.
- aix1 4y ago
  I don't know about other companies, but at Google the titles are as follows: Level - SWE ladder - Eng Manager ladder L8 - Principal software engineer - Director L9 - Distinguished software engineer - Senior director
  - mytailorisrich 4y ago
    Oh I see, they have Staff and Senior Staff between Senior and Principal, and no Director, which makes Principal very senior compared to my personal experience. The principle remains, though, that titles multiply to make people feel good in the pecking order.
anontrot 4y ago
As a Staff Engineer, at least for now I'd be happy with the money that comes with the Principal title
WastingMyTime89 4y ago
> In theory, we aligned the ladders in a manner that Principal sits parallel to Directors in the management track. That’s pure HR talk and is indicative of where you might stand compensation wise. It doesn’t really give you equal standing in the company. It’s not a question of title. It’s the reality of what you can do. If you think about it, it entirely makes sense. Directors leverage their team to achieve results. You only have yourself and the example you can set.

by tibbon 4y ago

liveoneggs 4y ago

Who told you to not do stuff and why are you listening to them? Who do you report to?

vp8989 4y ago

If I understand you correctly, I have felt similar angst before in this kind of role. Basically, you see "org-wide" work that needs to be done but it requires some level of "org-wide" alignment that doesn't yet exist. So you feel like you are twiddling your thumbs doing code reviews and making the tests faster while you wait to get the green light to "do your actual job". At least for me, in hindsight, a lot of that was just in my head. It's fine once you earn the level to not always operate at it. Just as long as when that's needed again you are able to step up.

Swizec 4y ago
> while you wait to get the green light to "do your actual job" In my experience as a pre-staff – it is your job to create the green light. You’re director level, there is no-one to say “make it so”. You’re the one who’s supposed to do that. Org-wide stuff not happening? Guess what, you have to go figure out how to make it happen. Even if that means getting buddy buddy with some of the other directors and building informal networks within the company. That’s the job. Making things happen. Poking the right person at the right time, cashing in favors, building a rapport, etc. And yes, sometimes pulling a VP into a meeting and asking “hey can you pull a string”
- vp8989 4y ago
  I am talking about non-technical roadblocks. Cross-team product engineering projects can sometimes involve ownership changes which affects the company in non-technical ways. Some influential product/design lead might lose some control of their UX, some engineering team will become "redundant" and need to be reorged or refocused to other types of work etc ... You might be able to help with those politics but it's probably also not your job to do that. That's partly why actual engineering and product managers are on-staff to focus on things like that.
  - Swizec 4y ago
    I think it is your job to deal with those politics at that level. At the very least to bring them to the attention of the people who can implement a solve and to make a case for why your thing should be solved over other things. If the principal engineer doesn’t champion technical issues created by org design, then who?
    - vp8989 4y ago
      Ownership disputes often stem from non-technical issues. Two orgs with different agendas might feel they require ownership of a given piece of tech to drive their own agenda forward. This can be expected to happen in firms that have multiple product lines but perhaps some shared functionality across them, as just one example. I sense that we have different experiences and so can't relate to each other's points without getting more specific so I will make this my last reply. I will just say that a common trope I've seen in online discourse on this subject is basically that you aren't a real <verySeniorIC> unless you are effectively doing the job of (or heavily carrying) your peers in the org chart who explicitly hold management roles. I broke my own back, metaphorically, trying to live up to that ideal with nothing to show for it and at the expense of the output that was expected of me and so I reject that notion. The <verySeniorIC>s Ive seen who hold those titles with longevity aggressively delegate politics to management and focus on the tech.

chasd00 4y ago

"advanced fixers" is probably spot on. I know many companies will invent titles and hand them out (sometimes pay raises too) in order to keep people from looking elsewhere. My advice is to get close to the money, if you can tie your work and decisions to bank deposits you get a lot more attention.

giancarlostoro 4y ago

You should consider taking the initiative to meet with them every week where you get future / current initiatives from them and status on anything they need to do moving those forward. Maintain a spreadsheet you can share with them (or whatever they prefer) and you just get new statuses. The goal is to be on the same page and have some familiarity before you even bother telling anyone else in IT correct? So make it happen. I say this because I host such a call with our marketing team. I know what's coming down the pipeline before any developer even hears about it. My boss also uses it as an opportunity to interject and remind marketing that they already are trying to push too many initiatives our way, so they have to push some back. Keep titles, descriptions, projected development start dates, and projected release dates, and a column for all status updates (date them, and put a name to the last status).

donavanm 4y ago

Im a principal at AWS. Ive worked across similar org sizes in the past. If we were having coffee Id ask who you report to, as org charts matter to perception. Why your input isnt (apparently) valued for business & technical strategy. Who youre trying to influence, and how. And who told you that you shouldnt be informing those decisions.

SilverBirch 4y ago

This sounds very surprising to hear from such a small organization. How many principal engineers are there? Because I would expect from that org size and your seniority you would be the most senior technical person in the company, and reporting at least to the head of engineering/CTO. If you're not on of maybe 3 principal engineers at most, and if you're not reporting directly to a C-level person, then they've probably just diluted the title. If you genuinely are that senior you probably should have the clout to have an open conversation with your boss about making sure you're in the right meetings, and hell - make the meetings! If you get together with a group of engineers across the organisation and define a set of best practices or strategy vision for the company you're making it happen - you don't need an invite. But at this level, you're meant to be doing "influencing without authority" which is bloody difficult and basically means "be inspirational".

mytailorisrich 4y ago

> In theory, we aligned the ladders in a manner that Principal sits parallel to Directors in the management track. That seems extremely high in my personal experience, which is that Principal Engineer corresponds to Manager on the management side. > I'm expected to impact org-wide culture, policy, technology direction, strategy, etc... Also in my experience this sounds more like Technical Director level as that really having input into directing the org. An issue is that as an org grows it tends to create more titles in order to cater for egos and the pecking order among people who may have been there for a long time. So you have Junior Engineer, Engineer, Senior Engineer, Principal Engineer, Senior Principal/Associate Director, Director, Senior Director... In which case Principal Engineer certainly isn't on same level as Director on management side.

aix1 4y ago
I don't know about other companies, but at Google the titles are as follows: Level - SWE ladder - Eng Manager ladder L8 - Principal software engineer - Director L9 - Distinguished software engineer - Senior director
- mytailorisrich 4y ago
  Oh I see, they have Staff and Senior Staff between Senior and Principal, and no Director, which makes Principal very senior compared to my personal experience. The principle remains, though, that titles multiply to make people feel good in the pecking order.

anontrot 4y ago

As a Staff Engineer, at least for now I'd be happy with the money that comes with the Principal title

WastingMyTime89 4y ago

> In theory, we aligned the ladders in a manner that Principal sits parallel to Directors in the management track. That’s pure HR talk and is indicative of where you might stand compensation wise. It doesn’t really give you equal standing in the company. It’s not a question of title. It’s the reality of what you can do. If you think about it, it entirely makes sense. Directors leverage their team to achieve results. You only have yourself and the example you can set.