4 ms·

The "safety" of your job depends on the value you add, and on making that value legible to the company. Sometimes, you have frontline managers who make a team

The "safety" of your job depends on the value you add, and on making that value legible to the company. Sometimes, you have frontline managers who make a team amazing - I'm talking multiples of productivity. They're rare. You shouldn't fire them. If they lack the skill to make that impact visible, they'll still be on the list. Sometimes, you have director+ folk who do great work at strategically aligning a group. Same thing: If they can make it visible that's what they do, and how it impacts the bottom line, they're in a better position than if they can't. But in general, management value is harder to make immediately visible than IC value, and managers are producing less immediate and more long-term value. If you're about to run out of cash, they are an easy cut. You can always hire them back if you survive. Cutting ICs means cutting immediate value delivered, so they are less prone (if they deliver value. Fire your low performers) If you're an IC thinking about management right now? Think carefully. Make sure you have a large IC component remaining in your portfolio. I'd still say "go for it" if you truly enjoy the challenges that come with managing, the differences aren't that stark. But if you're looking to optimize for career growth and retention, this is a higher risk path.

thiago_fm 3y ago
That's incorrect. Plenty of high-performing people were laid off from key projects in the last 2 years. Most tech layoffs had directors needing to meet a quota, so no matter how good people were or how core their work were to the company, they had to pick people to be laid-off. Once software is built, it takes much less effort to maintain it. Middle management is vunerable because it's operational(not tactical or strategic), you can increase a lot the wingspan of a manager of managers without having big consequences and tech companies have done it and cut out the managers that didn't have the minimum wingspan. Job prospects for managers of managers at the moment isn't good, but I'm guessing any of them can still jump back one step and go back to a manager of ICs and still do a good job. I'd recommend that anybody that works in tech, no matter what rank they are (even director), still keep their tech chops up to date to a certain degree, you never know if you'll still be perceived by your peers as somebody that can bring value. And it's simpler to prove you can deliver value by being a senior engineer than a VP. Overall, for those that were laid off from big tech, I hope they end up actually founding new businesses or moving back to startups, building real stuff.
- groby_b 3y ago
  Re-read the part on making the value legible to the company. That's the same as you saying "prove you can deliver value". If you can't do that, or if you truly don't add value, then yes, your number will come up. And while there might be a quota, the way folks will look at that is "who'd least impact my team if I laid them off". Which also means that you should avoid being purely operational. If that's all you do... Maybe you should treat your operational work as a paid job search phase, because that will only last as long as there's plenty of money.

thiago_fm 3y ago

That's incorrect. Plenty of high-performing people were laid off from key projects in the last 2 years. Most tech layoffs had directors needing to meet a quota, so no matter how good people were or how core their work were to the company, they had to pick people to be laid-off. Once software is built, it takes much less effort to maintain it. Middle management is vunerable because it's operational(not tactical or strategic), you can increase a lot the wingspan of a manager of managers without having big consequences and tech companies have done it and cut out the managers that didn't have the minimum wingspan. Job prospects for managers of managers at the moment isn't good, but I'm guessing any of them can still jump back one step and go back to a manager of ICs and still do a good job. I'd recommend that anybody that works in tech, no matter what rank they are (even director), still keep their tech chops up to date to a certain degree, you never know if you'll still be perceived by your peers as somebody that can bring value. And it's simpler to prove you can deliver value by being a senior engineer than a VP. Overall, for those that were laid off from big tech, I hope they end up actually founding new businesses or moving back to startups, building real stuff.

groby_b 3y ago
Re-read the part on making the value legible to the company. That's the same as you saying "prove you can deliver value". If you can't do that, or if you truly don't add value, then yes, your number will come up. And while there might be a quota, the way folks will look at that is "who'd least impact my team if I laid them off". Which also means that you should avoid being purely operational. If that's all you do... Maybe you should treat your operational work as a paid job search phase, because that will only last as long as there's plenty of money.