Not who you are responding to here, but I'd put the bar for the highest level of performance significantly higher than that. Any good engineer can "fundamentall

Not who you are responding to here, but I'd put the bar for the highest level of performance significantly higher than that. Any good engineer can "fundamentally question leadership decisions at an exec level". True top performs do it and cause change to happen at that level. I've seen plenty just question and not realize how much (typically non-technical) context they are missing. I've seen multiple ICs regularly effect change at that level and be thanked personally by CEOs and CFOs in multi-billion dollar public companies. These are people who have >50% raises because of their company-changing results (one person had that kind of raise in consecutive companies). These are exceptionally high performers by any standard. I've managed multiple people like that and had them request weekly one-on-ones with me years after I retired (I gladly do it because they are amazing to talk with). I was a highly successful IC for almost 25 years, but nowhere near their level. It turns out some people can coach / manage / mentor well above their own levels. I mention all that because my style had a lot in common with who you are responding to. Nowhere did they say that their reports get 1% ahead of their own abilities and stop there - there is no ceiling. > You likely again have never seen a true high performer I'm not sure why you think you know what everyone else has experienced. Isn't it possible that your experience is less than universal?