What The HECK Comes After Senior Software Engineer?

Transcript is auto-generated and may contain errors.

Hey folks, we're going to go to the experience dev subreddit for a topic around role levels, titles, and specifically those uh that come after the senior level. So this this post was really talking about this idea that someone's observing seems like once you're at the senior level, it's like significantly more difficult to go beyond that. And so this is always a weird one because um depending where you work and stuff like all the like titles aren't super consistent like obviously what's probably more consistent is this idea of like a junior developer uh into midle into senior and regardless of however it's specifically labeled it could be like s2 could be sui 2 and then like senior like the specific specifics don't really matter, but this concept of of basically like junior, mid-level, and senior, it's pretty uh pretty standard or common. Uh sometimes not even like splitting that across three different levels, just kind of like developer and senior developer.

I've talked about this in previous videos where I used to work before Microsoft. Uh you know, for the eight years that I was there, we didn't have anything but like developer and senior developer. Um there were was like an architect role that was never like fully figured out. I think right when I was leaving that was like the next thing uh on the sort of tech career path or technical career path they're trying to sort out because even as a for me I was what was considered a technical manager and even on the management side um they had like manager director and like I actually didn't have a role that existed above me on like a technical manager track. Um, so like literally uh there was no they hadn't even defined like a career path uh that was like that. So that was going to be sort of one of the next um things that was addressed and I'm sure since then they figured all sorts of different stuff out.

But my point is that please hit the brakes before you enter the intersection. Um my point is that depending where you work these things can look different and then it gets even you know more nuanced and and weird and different uh beyond senior how like I was just saying where I used to work there wasn't even anything beyond senior and it's some places especially like in in big tech companies we'll see or companies that mirror it um like staff or principal level roles um like at Microsoft there's staff, but there's principal above senior. Um, and then you'll have like these other modifiers. So, you'll have like uh principal level software engineer, you'll have partner, you'll have um there is like a distinguished engineer. Um there just like there's there's all sorts of going on. And so this person was saying like, "Hey, what's what's up with this?" Right?

like once you're at senior, why why does it seem like it's so difficult to go beyond that? Um, so I I have made videos about this before. Um, I have talked about this idea that um I was even thinking like I don't know exactly what specific parts of this I want to talk, but I want to acknowledge like yes, this is a real thing and I want to acknowledge that it's a real thing. I think for a few different reasons and I I think one of the things I wanted to kind of caution is the wrong word like um call out I guess I don't know is like I don't think this is like a an AI related thing.

I realize that uh right now these days, it's kind of easy to point at at anything that where there's friction or something weird going on and be like, "Oh, it's it's because AI." Um or it's because of, you know, the effect of AI on companies like they're not allowed to have, you know, people at those level. I don't I think it's just too easy to look to AI and then start to to make it like the reason. And I think that um I don't think that this has anything to do with AI specifically. Um is is is AI affecting literally everything? Sure. Yes. I just don't think this is caused by AI. So with that out of the way, um the couple of different things I wanted to look at and I'll try to just touch on them in some order that I come up with is like uh title inflation.

uh senior as a terminal level and then like sort of the the reality of like what's an organization needs um in terms of like level spread. So I guess where do I want to start with this? Um let's go with title inflation. I I think that what's been going on and I don't have like and I don't have data to back this up, right? So, take it for what it's worth. Uh if you if you'd like to disagree with me on this, totally cool because I literally do not have data to back it up. Um but maybe someone does. Maybe someone's seen this kind of thing. I suspect that over the years, um I've been in the industry for around 15 years.

uh I suspect in a good chunk of that time perhaps before I don't know but I suspect that what's been happening is that when people are getting into software engineering to go from one level to the next that period of time is shrinking uh andor the expectations around that are shrinking and so I think that's maybe the more important part is that regardless of what reality is I suspect reality would show someone collected data on this that the time frame between going between levels is shrinking. Um but I think the expectation is is shrinking and outpacing that. And so the side effect of that is that people are constantly expecting to get to the whatever the next level is faster. Okay? And um I think there's a lot of different reasons for this. So, I'm not I'm not making this video to be like uh you know, like back in my day or something like that.

I don't I don't think I'm I hope I'm not old enough to be able to to do that. Um I maybe I am. I don't know. But uh I I think there's like many reasons and it's not blaming like any one group. I think that sure there's probably something to say about like different generations of people coming through software engineering or into their career with different expectations. I also think that applies to people uh in different generations as managers coming through this kind of thing. I think there's probably some like I don't know like different economic pressures around that, right? where um to get people brought into companies, let's say, like to make it more attractive to hire them. Like, sure, yes, we can we can make the title or the level like that can be like a bargaining chip, right? Like, okay, we can't uh you know, we can't add 50K to your salary, but we could make you the next level.

How does that sound? Right? And it's like that that becomes something that you can have on your resume. And then if you're going to jump between companies, I think there's just a whole bunch of different reasons why uh like title inflation is I think a very real thing. And so that to me creates this this pressure around like well I mean I don't think it's a surprise to people but it's not linear right like uh career progression and your levels in software engineering should apply to to lots of places is not linear. It's not you know from level one to two is one year from level two to three is one year three to four is one year because then what like are does that mean that everyone must be CTO in like by year 10 everyone is CTO like you know it just it

just doesn't make sense so it's not linear it will be some type of like exponential thing going on and um I think that title inflation creates this pressure that we want to see that curve be more flat, right? We expect it to be. We we want it to be. Um and then there's this pressure from both uh you know from employees and on employees and then from managers and on managers around making this a reality. So I think that's one part of it. Okay. Um the other thing I've talked about before is terminal level. And so, uh, this is always a weird one to talk about. Uh, I don't I don't like the word terminal sounds like even just like kind of weird and dark and shitty, but it's like it's not like a bad thing.

It's it's this reality that um you know for a lot of people and this isn't just like specific to software engineering just that we're talking about software engineering there's this realistic sort of I don't know if you call like a stable point a terminal level if you will that like many people in their career get to it it's not like unachievable takes work to get there but it should be like achievable in their career and like you get there and it's the reason it's a terminal level is because from a company's perspective it it makes sense for someone to be at and operate at that level indefinitely. And that's not a bad thing, right? Like it's it's not it's not wrong. It's not bad. It doesn't mean you failed. If anything, like that's a great that is a great career like to to finish on. And so as a senior software engineer, like that is an accomplishment.

And being a senior software engineer at some level like again this depends on if you have sub levels like even at Microsoft there's like there's two different levels at senior, right? So being at the same level at senior like in that band for years is or like the rest of your career is like not a failure. That is considered a terminal level and different places will have different terminal levels perhaps or the specifics around that but probably somewhere around senior makes a lot of sense. It means that you are very much like an extremely capable software engineer. You're very dependable. you have, you know, a lot of good productivity. Uh, you're, you know, you are someone that can be relied on to get done, high quality and high high throughput. Like that's a very successful level to reach.

And I think one of the challenges is that of course like I think especially in software engineering that you have a lot of people that are very smart very much you know I don't know how you call different personality types and stuff but very much like hey like I'm motivated to go keep kicking ass and I want to get to the next level like you is that like type A or something I don't know I don't know about that kind of stuff in terms of the labeling But I think you have people that are very much like, you know, motivated to keep to keep growing and and exceeding. And that's not everyone, right? There's some people where, especially by the time they're at that level, they're like their their priorities in life maybe look different. It's a family. It's whatever else. Um, and that's totally fine, right?

There's no there's no right or wrong answer here, but I think there's a lot of people that are extremely focused on like how do I get to the next level? And so upon reaching senior, this is for a lot of places considered a terminal level. It is considered like uh for a lot of places that going to the next level genuinely is a very big step up, right? getting to senior was a step up and then going to whether it's staff or principal depending on where you are or some other label like genuinely that is regarded as an even bigger step up and it's just because the breadth and scope of impact is even greater often uh across an organization and so it's it's like just on the terminal level part it's not wrong to to be at senior and to be there for whether it's a long time or the rest of your career or something like that.

It's not wrong. It's not bad. And then so you might be wondering like, okay, well, what the hell is supposed to happen with like my my salary, like rewards, things like that? There's these things are uh related but also decoupled. So, and obviously depends on where you work. Of course, when you're promoted, there's there's usually like a uh a sort of different tier of bump in uh salary andor different like bonus compensation like it could be stock options, you know, cash bonuses, things like that. Um there's a sort of different uh jump in that. So, just to make up numbers, okay? Like don't don't focus on the numbers. Maybe every year uh there is a a 3% you know um increase in salary and other rewards or something just sort of at a a baseline level if you're you know uh successful in your role right I'm just making this up again and then if you're promoted uh you know for that year things are increased by like 10%.

Right? So there is a there's a bump because it's another sort of level uh that you're jumping between. But then you know the year after that if you're not promoted it's okay like here's another 3% or something. Again don't fixate on the numbers. I'm just using it for illustrative purposes. So you could be senior hopefully getting paid what feels like you know you're you're feeling valued and then you continue to get steady increases due to performance. And then again depending where you work they might have um like perfor uh performance bonuses that are on top of that right. So for example uh even at Microsoft right just if you have a a period where you know for the year you could be rewarded uh higher than target and that doesn't necessarily mean like therefore you must get promoted like if you're usually if you are sustaining higher rewards for a period of time then that would mean that that you are uh for the most part operating at what would be considered a higher level.

But that doesn't they're not the exact same thing. It's kind of hard to uh distinguish. But my point is that if you are say at a senior level and you're at 100% of your target rewards, if you're where you work has bonuses and things like that, um you may have done well and so you get higher than your target. Great. and then like the next year or next period higher than your target, great. Uh that at at senior that might still not be enough to be operating at what would be considered the next level. Often if I mean realistically often if someone is continuing to do that, it's because they are someone who is continuing to push and try to focus on operating at the next level. So it likely means they're very much working towards genuinely that next level, but it's not like a guarantee.

My point is that these things can be decoupled and that doesn't mean that like you have to be operating at the that next level to get the title is the only way to progress. You could be at senior that could be a really good balance of like expectations on you and you could be kicking ass at the senior level and being compensated fairly and all sorts of things. So, it is not a bad thing. Okay, last part because I'm almost home. This person's an absolute idiot. Okay, let's do that. Um, the going through the intersection and my camera's pointed at me, not ahead so you can't see. Last part is really around like what do companies need, right? And I I kind of want you to to think about this. So we could talk a little bit about AI here briefly but um you know my my take on this is that for a healthy organization you need uh spread across different levels.

Um and so what that means is that you know hire having a team of people that is the highest level of software engineer doesn't make sense. Sure, like in a video gamer on paper you'd want a team of people that are like max stats. Like sure, but like that's not real life. Um it's just not how that works. You need some sort of continuity. You need to make sure that the people that you have on your team, there's the right spread of work for people to be engaged at that level. So it's not stack a team with highest level people. Um, conversely, uh, you know, for comp, this is where the AI part comes in. For companies that are like, "Oh, we don't need juniors. Like, we'll just replace them with AI." Like, I got news for you. It doesn't work. Uh, surprise. And the other part is that um there's no continuity if you stop bringing in people at a more junior level.

So people that are mid-level and senior like this having people that are more junior than them creates an opportunity where they can coach, they can mentor, they can be delegating work or as a manager you can be delegating work uh in a way that the juniors are focused on stuff that makes sense for them to be focused on and the seniors uh can guide them, can mentor them and still focus on more complex tasks. So there is this idea of I think continuity that's very important and that means having a spread of different levels and so that could mean if we were to draw this out um at the base uh you probably don't want to overfill a team with like brand new hires because then that creates a ton of uh operational overhead on the only couple of say more senior people you have on the team and you don't like I said you don't want to stack the team with just like principal or staff and like that's it.

So I would think that you have um probably the most mid-level right andor followed by senior so that should be close that should be the bulk and then juniors and uh you know staff principal sort of at the other end but those would be smaller in numbers. If anything, I would I would say like having fewer staff or principal on a team and having more junior than them creates continuity. And so it is a bit of an imbalance at the top and bottom level especially in the middle. That's where it's the the widest in terms of uh number of people. So uh why right like why why does this matter? And I think the reality is that the expectation of the type of work that you're doing at that staff or principal level, again depending on where you work and how these things are labeled, you don't need hordes and hordes of people like say the majority of your company trying to do crossorg efforts.

It it stops making sense. like you actually need more and more people that aren't at that level that are actually carrying out a bulk of that work alongside those people that are doing, you know, the the crossorg efforts. And so it it stops making sense from an organizational perspective to like just completely blast people into these upper level roles because it doesn't it doesn't help the company scale. So like maintaining like what would be considered a high bar to get into those continues to make sense. And I wanted to finish up this video by saying like I think that genuinely does create this weird friction. I'm not I'm telling you all this not to say like hey look that's why it needs to be gatekept and like too bad like I got to principal and like haha no um I'm trying to say I I

genuinely think that this creates this really weird friction where you have lots of people who are trying to be successful in their careers for a lot of people as measured by their title their level and what ends up happening is that they're trying to continue to progress they reach a point and they're like I am aiming for this next thing because that's what I need to do to be successful in my career and a lot of the organ organizational setup is almost such that there needs to be this pressure backwards to be like we can't just have literally everyone get into this role. It's an exa like if I exaggerate it, it's like you don't need a company of CTO's. It it doesn't make sense, right? Like there aren't like at say a Microsoft, how many how many SAS are there, right?

And then if you were to go down like there's sure there's lots of uh different executives and stuff, but you can't just keep putting people into those roles and it like it just doesn't work. So there's I think like this natural expectation or like I don't know like a steady state or from the the perspective of the organization there's like roles that need to be met but it certainly does not scale from an organization's perspective to keep blasting like more and more people into these roles. So you get this pressure one way and then you have pressure from people in their careers trying to advance. And I don't know what the solution is. And I think that this feels especially complicated because of things like title inflation.

I I would think that, you know, maybe historically with less uh you know, when say the the time period to get to senior and such was longer that you would go maybe a pretty good chunk of your career before these types of conversations started to be like kind of like, hey, what the heck is going on here? Like this is a weird balance. And I think that we're just compressing the timeline for that for it to become more apparent where we're like, "Hey, it does seem kind of weird or um I don't know, like disjoint maybe where I could be progressing like level one, two, three, and then all of a sudden it feels like I'm hitting a wall." It's because at some point the wall is needed. Not because you're not good, not because you're not supposed to progress in your career, not because you know people don't want to see you succeed.

It's because it like literally from an organization's perspective may not make sense. And so with that said, um I think that there's going to be all sorts of different reasons that people maybe are at senior feel like they're hitting a wall. I would genuinely say like, you know, if you're if you're trying to kick ass, you feel like you're doing that and it feels like you're perpetually like I know people are told this by their managers like uh like uh what's the the thing like the dangling the carrot on the stick, right? And it's like, oh, like well maybe next time. And then you try to kick ass for the whole next year. Oh, like so close. Maybe next time.

If you feel like that and you genuinely feel that you're operating at that next level, I would say like it might be it might be worth looking because it could be a million different things, but just the reality is there might be there enough back pressure in the org that it may not make sense to promote and that's coming through in weird different ways from your manager. So, um I'm just saying this because like I don't know like I I can totally acknowledge that people will feel at some point maybe stuck like they're not progressing. But um I'll finish this off with just a reminder like being at being at senior is not like failing in your career if you're just there uh and you stay there. I think being at senior and kicking ass at senior can be considered a very very successful career. So um hope that helps but I would love to hear your thoughts on this.

Do you see different reasons like maybe the title inflation is not a thing? Do you uh have different friction points? Love to hear it. Uh leave them in the comments. Uh or you can write in at codecute.com whether it's this topic or something else you want me to make a video about. Thanks for watching. I will see you in the next one. Take care.