8 ms·
> In the software engineering world, we exist on a ladder. We call this ”Leveling”. Career is a made up game. There are no true levels or ladders in life that
by conqrr 10mo ago
> In the software engineering world, we exist on a ladder. We call this ”Leveling”.
Career is a made up game. There are no true levels or ladders in life that you have to chase. Nobody will care or remember what you did or what level you were given enough timespan. Take the bits that you want (money, skills etc) to live life, but don't get too caught up trying to win the game.
- reactordev 10mo agoIt took me a long time to realize this.
- MobiusHorizons 10mo ago+1. Worth saying this is also not at all a software engineering thing, it’s a large organization thing. I found I could easily discuss career leveling with non-technical government employees. In fact they have much more context than my friends in software engineering that never worked for large companies.
- motbus3 10mo agoTrue. Except for the economics part, it is much more fulfilling to work for a smaller company.
- raw_anon_1111 10mo agoExcept for the money - the entire reason most people work everyday… I’m 51, worked at two F10 at the time companies out of my ten jobs and hated them both - GE and 8 years later Amazon. I purposefully made the choice of pursuing a smaller company and ignoring constant outreach from Google (GCP consulting division). But let’s not dismiss the close to $100K diference I could be making than what I make now. Also a 25 year old SA that I mentored at AWS three years ago is making the same as I am making. They are an L5 (mid level) and I am a staff consultant. They are pre-sales (no commission) and I am implementations.
- ghaff 10mo agoMoney is a factor. I went from, if not scraping by, never really recovered from dot-bomb to a pretty good job at a medium-size public company latterly. It was "mostly" good. But the difference in money set me up in a way that I previously really wasn't (even if not top tech levels).
- BoxFour 10mo ago> Take the bits you want (money, skills) That’s exactly what the author did, and it’s why the leveling piece matters so much. At big tech companies levels very directly control comp, and less directly control the scope of problems you’re trusted with. You absolutely can tackle large, high-impact problems as a more junior IC, but it usually means pushing a lot harder to hold onto ownership. Otherwise it’s REAL easy for a more senior IC to step in and quietly take it over.
- mgaunard 10mo agoIt might be nicer to go work for startups, acquire experience there as you build everything from scratch across the whole stack, then get hired at a high responsibility position. Though most people into entrepreneurship never go back to big corporations usually.
- BoxFour 10mo agoBig tech companies are also notorious for down-leveling if you’re not coming from another big company, so it might not actually be that good of a move.
- mgaunard 10mo agoWell of course, if you were CTO of a company of 10, you can't expect to be hired as CTO of Google.
- BoxFour 10mo agoMy first manager at a big tech co was the CTO of a 500 person company. He was down-leveled to being a first-level manager.
- stickfigure 10mo agoThere is so much interesting to unpack here. He was down-leveled to a first level manager at the company you are at? He accepted this? Why? Do you think he / the new company chose wisely? What ended up happening?
- tamimio 10mo agoExactly, that’s why I feel pity for the people who destroy their lives to get paid extra 5% and having a pizza party with good boy remarks, and of course making someone else wealthier too. It’s not a flex to sleep in a tent at work, while neglecting your health, family, friends, maybe kids, this “grind” culture is pushed by corporations for obvious reasons.
- dkasper 10mo agoExcept at big tech the next level might be 500k more not 5%
- saghm 10mo agoAnd yet, how many people are actually happier with that extra $500k? It's one thing if you're not making enough to allow you and whoever else you might need to support to be happy and comfortable and be able to save enough for emergencies and retirement, but I'm dubious that someone only one other away from a half million dollar raise is in that position.
- immibis 10mo agoSomething that's often overlooked is the time equivalent of money. If the average salary is $50k but you get $500k, you only have to work 1 year in every 10, and that's crazy. Source: got paid 180k and took 2 years off.
- bratwurst3000 10mo agoyes thats true if you survive it. Have two friends with a salary over 300k a year. one worked 5 years and retired the other bought more luxury products to reflect his income and is now completly burned out after 3 years but forced to work because of his 300k a year lifestyle
- ajmurmann 10mo agoAnd the feeling of safety that comes with it. I left my previous employer during an acquisition and took a year off and am taking my time to find the right next gig. I cannot imagine the terror of having to find a new job, any job, ASAP because otherwise we starve and lose the house. Substantial savings are honestly much nicer than spending on a lavish lifestyle.
- lisbbb 10mo agoSee? That's his first problem--he bought into all that corpo bs that is placed there to steal your attention and keep you in their box. If they had liked the guy and he was truly talented, he would have gazzelled right up the org chart. I guess smart people think they're smart about everything?
- godelski 10mo ago> If they had liked the guy and he was truly talented, he would have gazzelled right up the org chart. Logic is weird here. You're operating under the assumption that these orgs work perfectly. Even if you believe they are operating at a very high level of efficiency it is a naïve assumption to make. False positives and false negatives are things that exist in every non-perfect evaluation system. But you are working backwards
- readyforbrunch 10mo agoHaving led the process from the other side, the more often your name comes up in a positive light, the better your chances. Odds are that OPs work simply wasn't mentioned much by his peers. The person you are replying to was absolutely on the money. Promotions aren't a popularity contest, but they definitely are a popularity contest.
- godelski 10mo agoYet what you are saying is a bit different from the person I replied to (which I do agree with your final line). We also only have the information that the OP states. These are asymmetric information games so it is a bit naive to claim this for any response. Especially simple explanations.
- wiseowise 10mo ago> If they had liked the guy and he was truly talented, he would have gazzelled right up the org chart. Oh sweet summer child. How old are you? Genuine question.
- zhach 10mo agoVery much so. Author here. I wanted to do so much more than the box they allocated me in. Once I knew they were not going to let me grow from my box, then I left. Not the level I was worried about, but it's a language most people can understand
- gct 10mo agoThe Box is very frustrating, especially when there's no one handling the other things, yet you're still not allowed to do them because it'd make the wrong people look bad.
- justinclift 10mo agoAny chance the problem with your promotion was someone above you taking credit for your work?
- mattgreenrocks 10mo agoThe purpose of a system is what it does. If the org truly cared about under-leveled employees, it would get fixed rapidly. But they don’t. I’ve seen enough people glossed over repeatedly and then when enough people leave and the org is in a less leveraged position, then the promos are no longer an issue. Such BS.
- CrossVR 10mo agoYou have to realize that a company is always optimizing for efficiency and salaries are no different. Giving out promotions when people are already working at the level they'd be promoted to is simply a waste of money. This is the author's biggest mistake. If you voluntarily work on tasks above your pay grade you are signaling to the company that you don't need a promotion.
- godelski 10mo agoThere isn't a single optimization. Define efficiency. Define over what time frame. The problem the OP faced is that YouTube is optimizing under a short time frame and under the belief that employees are fungible. The latter being a common problem with big orgs, thinking there is no value to institutional knowledge. Yet in reality that is often extremely important
- wiseowise 10mo ago> You have to realize that a company is always optimizing for efficiency Must be “efficiency” why my coworkers have constant coffee breaks to talk about kids/sport/travel while MRs are open without comments for weeks.
- venturecruelty 10mo ago[flagged]
- venturecruelty 10mo agoWhy are people so determined to just shill for companies? Do you know how many people are unemployed for Christmas today, while you're out here tasting shoe leather for these organizations with more money than God? They're not going to take pity on you, you know, no matter how much you grovel and beg.
- venturecruelty 10mo agoCareer is a made-up game, but man, being homeless and hungry sure does suck, eh?
- paganel 10mo agoGetting a salary that pays rent/mortgage and puts food on the table doesn't always have to be about being in a rat race (which is what the "laddering" bs really means), to the contrary.
- wiseowise 10mo agoPeople generally have different needs. Some want expensive Porsche with their mortgage and food on the table.
- mattgreenrocks 10mo agoSure. And they have to accept the consequences of considering that a need.
- venturecruelty 10mo agoSome want luxuries like insulin.
- wiseowise 10mo agoSure, what's your point though? How much % do you donate out of your salary to fix global poverty?
- venturecruelty 10mo agoBecause context is hard, I guess, my point is that "exiting the rat race" is generally something that only people with Mountain View addresses and opinions like "400k TC really isn't THAT much, if you think about it" tend to be able to do.
- deleted 10mo ago
- paganel 10mo agoAt first I though it was a metaphorical hippy way of writing about this industry, which would have been par for the course, but it looks like the author really did mean it, he really does think in the ladder and "levelling" bs. All the best to him when it comes to climbing that ladder.
- wopwops 10mo agoI said "F-this" 20 years ago, moved to the middle of nowhere, paid cash for my property and live on next to nothing. Best decision ever.
- elektrontamer 10mo agoBiggest dream of mine but almost impossible if you're married. Women hate it out it in the middle of nowhere.
- wopwops 10mo agoNot all women. I'm married and have four children.
- raw_anon_1111 10mo agoWhen you have children, your life is mostly about the kids. It really doesn’t matter if you live in rural America. As empty nesters, at 51 and 50, there is nothing interesting about rural America. I’m in South GA now visiting my parents with my wife. They spend all of the their time between yard work doing things around the house and church. My cousins who still live here and their lives are just as boring - unless they go out of town.
- user_7832 10mo agoI (admitedly much younger than you) would think that assuming there's good internet and decent road connectivity, you could spend a lot of time on your interests and hobbies, no? My biggest hobbies (photography, diy audio) don't really need urban environments after the manufactured camera/woofer leaves the warehouse and ships to your home. Even easier perhaps if your interest is purely coding/laptop work (like writing a novel), I would think? (For what it's worth - I myself am a city guy, but only because that's where I grew up in and have spent all my life. A town of 100k people feels desolate for me on Sunday evening, but I also don't live with family.)
- KaiserPro 10mo agoThe worst part about this is that the level is largely made up. Its a social construct. for example a "senior engineer" at a FAANG has more "value" than lead engineer at a no-name startup. However the skill gap between a lead engineer of a team of 6 vs a "senior engineer" at FAANG is massive. a "Senior Engineer" (ie [e|l]5/6 at a faang) makes almost no product decisions. There is a team that makes the GUI, product, marketing, infra, and then a bunch of sub teams that look after the specific part that you are currently dealing with. Your startup person has to make all those decisions them selves and communicate/delegate it Being an 6/7 feels like being a teenager with a coddling parent by comparison. But! the point is this, that name, is all just an illusion. There are plenty of E6s at FAANG that are mediocre, there are plenty of E3s that are leaders. You must make your own worth. Sure you might be working at a no-name company, but that doesn't mean you can't be _good_. The thing that makes you _good_ at the non-coding skills: People, Architecture, communications.
- raw_anon_1111 10mo agoYes you can be good at a no name company. But you won’t get paid nearly as much
- 8n4vidtmkvmk 10mo agoL5 at FAANG makes almost no decisions on their own but has to schedule a dozen meetings and pester a dozen people from various teams to "get alignment". We still have to do the work to get the decision made without the fun part of just making the decision ourselves.
- NetOpWibby 10mo agoMan, I really thought I’d be doing Cool Things at FAANG but startups are a lot more interesting and a lot less backstabby. Sigh
- hdjrudni 9mo agoYep. I've done both now. Pay and perks are better at FAANG but the work itself is way more boring/annoying
- teacpde 10mo agoI am at the stage of life where I appreciate this wisdom and desire the practice of it, but lack the will power to not get caught up “trying to win the game”. Once a while I get anxious about leveling and compensation, overwhelmed by comparison with peers. For people who had the similar struggles but managed to overcome, what worked for you?
- sifar 10mo agoBy telling yourself it is ok to feel this way and going back to things you are good at, things that you love and people you care about and enjoy being with. Also exercise - that works. There is nothing to overcome. These feelings rise up sporadically. Acknowledge and move on.
- physicles 10mo ago- Surround yourself with friends who also aren’t playing the game. - Get really clear about what your actual financial goals are, not what they’d need to be in order to maintain status among game-players. - Get compensated in ways other than money. For me, working four days a week instead of five, and working remote from anywhere, is worth a whole lot of money. And working at a smaller company is a hell of a lot more fun if you like being part of product decisions. - If you can, find ways to do things that your ladder-climbing friends can’t do. Spend a month in Europe without taking any holiday. Spend the whole winter in Thailand. Use that extra mental energy from that day off to do something amazing. I left FAANG about 10 years ago and took a massive pay cut. I’d do it again.
- 8n4vidtmkvmk 10mo agoAre you working from Europe or have unlimited PTO? That much time off at a small company sounds rare.
- raw_anon_1111 10mo agoI could care less about your prestige. Most people care about the money that comes higher up the ladder and more importantly for me, the autonomy. Yes I’m well aware that a “senior developer” in enterprise dev probably makes less than a new grad at BigTech.
- bossyTeacher 10mo ago>Career is a made up game. And yet we know techies love games and structured process. It is a clever way to make them do what you want to. Techies could have so much more power in the job market and yet they give it all up sadly.
- lazarus01 10mo agoTotally agree. In my 25 years in tech, there were no meritocracies. I came from a simple working class upbringing and experienced upward mobility into the white collar class. I differentiated myself by always finding ways to solve problems, that others weren’t willing to do. People expected things to be done a certain way, I expected nothing and did everything myself my own way. I never had mentorship that taught me “how to play the game”. People saw me as a threat, some would copy my work and take credit for it. I don’t have the mentality to fight with people over a game, so I let people win, to my detriment. I never had hunger for title or compensation, so it was never offered to me unless I voiced my desire to exit. My friends who played the game are sitting on a fortune, where they have more material possessions, but their kids are struggling and they are struggling, to find peace and happiness, because they are “owned” by the game. They have no substance in their life and compare themselves to others who play the game. A endless cycle of jealously. I sit here with peace and very high life satisfaction, understanding I have skills that help people, that fulfill a purpose, that comes with healthy integration with my unbreakable values. Learning to think independently while ignoring superficial reward signals with focus on self concordant goals is the recipe to life satisfaction.
- nuancebydefault 10mo agoFor once, I wish I could upvote more than once.
- lazarus01 10mo agoCheers :)
- bicepjai 10mo agoMerry Christmas !!! :)
- stackedinserter 10mo agoThe amount of bits that we want is directly connected to where we are in the game. There are extremes like "Ryan works his ass off for puny $50k/year" but generally you get what you give.
- fsckboy 10mo ago>Career is a made up game. There are no true levels or ladders in life that you have to chase. not sure what you are getting at. Football is a made up game. People who play it well earn fame and fortune. yeah, don't beat yourself up for not being able to play it well, but don't pretend there is nothing there.
- tourmalinetaco 10mo agoI mean, there really isn’t for the majority. Fame and fortune are fleeting; fame has a short half life (hence the phrase “15 minutes” of it) and fortunes can be lost as quickly as they’re made (80% of NFL players face financial distress after retirement). Not to mention that for every pro athlete there’s at least 100 that don’t make the cut. The same is true in every field to varying degrees. For the average individual who can provide for themselves and their families, more money and fame only sounds good on paper. In reality, it invites more stress than anything else. Veritasium made an excellent video on that: https://www.veritasium.com/videos/2024/1/15/what-the-longest-running-study-on-happiness-reveals https://www.veritasium.com/videos/2024/1/15/what-the-longest...
- RickyLahey 10mo agoright. also the whole job is bs to begin with. i don't know why this article is remotely interesting. it's a google job. that just tells me "i have skills but i don't know how to use them to make money"