Comment by sam_lowry_ 4 days ago
This is the general culture in Europe. Techies do not get promoted and do not even have a possibility to grow to management. Everything is run by humanities people and we do not even have the right words to describe this situation, although some voiced their concerns for many years, see e.g. The Two Cultures [1] from 1959.
ever work for a manager that barely understood what you do, or how it’s done? Been there, done that. Never again…
Engineers shouldn’t be _forced_ into management but the option should be encouraged if they have the aptitude for it.
You're also making a bad assumption. I'm just saying there should be multiple paths forward. You can promote in any direction you want as long as you decide that your employees can do that. In our fictitious scenario some could go to manage teams some not. Some could focus on their work being a team lead, some just continue doing their thing.
My point is literally at the arbitrariness of promotion and how biased it is. There's a very clear bias that being structured by business people who think business people are the most important. The classic "I do x, so x is more important" fallacy.
My point is to make people just question if what we do is actually reasonable, and if we could do things better.
Besides, I've worked with people who previously knew how to program but lost the skill when moving to management for a decade and they aren't really any better than the manager that never knew it. Neither of these results in smooth operation. But I think to see a solution we'd also need to reconsider the premise. That's what I'm getting at.
Nope.
I do not say that experts have to be put in charge of people instead of doing what they're doing.
I rather say that experts should be in charge of what they are doing.
I think this is the case with real engineering companies. My wife works at Rijkswaterstaat, and there engineers bear direct responsibility for projects that are worth lives, and they can make important decisions about those projects for that reason. For example, a couple of years ago an engineer closed a bridge because of a lack of maintenance. Big scandal about the bridge getting closed, but the real scandal was that maintenance was so far behind. Turned out the engineer had warned about this several times before, but somehow those messages didn't arrive at the people in charge of planning and funding maintenance. So that was the process that really needed fixing (and the bridge, of course).
Heh... Interesting that you bring in Rijkswaterstaat as a counterexample, because I remember it from the story about the Botlek bridge and how they could not fix it for a couple years and when the root cause was identified, it turned out to be rust in an ethernet port [1].
[1] https://berthub.eu/articles/posts/cyber-security-pre-war-rea...
I think this is a good option. I also have no problem with experts being put in charge of people. Truthfully I think the bigger issue is that there's not more ways for growth. But at this point I'd settle for just ways to grow in the technical side without needing to move to management (being a group lead or having people under you is something I'd consider different when your main job is still doing technical work)
Techies can get into management, but they stop programming if they do. I've been told I could get into a higher pay scale if I took on managerial or administrative tasks that I'm bad at and have nothing to do with programming. I'd like to be appreciated for the stuff I'm good at, not for doing stuff I'm bad at.
That's exactly the point. The expectation is that techies stop being techies if want to have a career.
This is exactly why we can't innovate in Europe.
I hate to break it to you, but this also happens in the US - especially at huge companies.
The next step of my career progression at my current company is deciding whether I want to go into the continuing tech route as an architect or staff software engineer or if I want to go into the managerial / people leader route.
The later is quite more lucrative, but I would have to stop programming.
Eng Manager here. At previous jobs I constantly had this assignment of "stop coding and only do code reviews". This to me is incredibly short-sighted as my code reviews are gonna be shit if I don't code.
Also managing a team of even 10 developers was the easiest job I ever had. Hire well, treat them well, talk with them routinely, solve conflicts, allow them to explore things.
The hard part of the job is of course functioning as a therapist for disorganised power-grabbing product people and shielding my team from their shenanigans. I'm so tired of it.
Every bad engineering manager I had two characteristics: they never have time to code but also never have to talk to me or any other employee.
European societies are extremely class based which is brutally visible in UK, France, Netherlands, even Germany. INSEAD and other MBAs see techies as washing machine repairmen.
I think it is deeper than the theory of class struggle.
France rebuilt its educational system under Napoléon to teach science to bright kids from all backgrounds.
Fast-forward 200 years, it degraded into a system that teaches anachronistic humanities to smart and docile kids of upper middle classes.
P.S. For non-French, I am talking about the system of Grandes écoles [1]
Netherland is actually extremely egalitarian. Managers are often just one of the team, you address everybody informally, we're all equals, etc. Except in pay. And especially in larger organizations. Managers and people on track to management are seen as the shit. Programmers are paid fairly well compared to the average job, but even if you're single-handedly pulling an important project, you're never going to make the same as people who push numbers, papers and money.
Europe is egalitarian in the surface but class-based deep down. Your word is worth as much as your title.
Of course I can't speak for every country but that's the reality.
I'm not saying that anywhere else is better, but in other places I worked there was no such illusion.
> you're single-handedly pulling an important project
Never do it on employment contract in Europe. Even if you really are and then quit your job, from next Monday everything will operate as if you never had worked there.
> you're never going to make the same as people who push numbers, papers and money.
That's why the top EU companies are loathed ERP company, perfumes and purses company, and obesity drug for Americans company.
> everything will operate as if you never had worked there.
Well, they wrecked my app after I left. It was blazingly fast, and we has a very fast moving team. Now the team and the app are slow. (I don't even work there yet and I already know why it's slow, and I don't think it will be very hard to fix.)
> informally, we're all equals, etc. Except in pay.
arguably the most important part. :) 2nd being team and company culture imo.
Hang on, why should this even be the goal? I really do want to question the premise of this kind of ladder in the first place. You got someone with a really good skill, one that is critical to your operations and you... want to put them in charge of people rather than keep doing what they're doing? You can just keep promoting people with whatever direction you want them to go in. It is all arbitrary and made up anyways. So why not keep promoting them in a direction where you still benefit from those technical skills?