Ask HN: Dealing with Career Mistakes

151 points by throwmeawayapr ↗ HN
Two years ago I had an option to go into the management path. My leadership was supportive and wanted me to take up the opportunity. I chose to pivot into the product management instead. My peer took that role. My role change didn’t go very well. Personally i was unhappy and felt unfulfilled at work. While I was respected at work and my manager very supportive I didn’t enjoy it. I quit and joined another company and pivoted into program management. Since then my work hours have doubled and while I am earning the highest paycheck I could have dreamed of, I am extremely unhappy being an IC. I have 25 years of industry experience and I feel I should mentor people instead of moving JIRA tickets around.

Yesterday I saw my former colleague who grabbed the manager role, got promoted to a director. I was hard working and intelligent than him. I could’ve played my card right and be in that place. Yet here I am being ‘advanced beginner’ in a different role every couple of years doing grunt IC work. How do I turn the wheel of time back and undo my career mistake. I feel incredibly stupid. I am losing confidence in making good decisions.

How do I deal with my feelings? Should I seek professional help?

146 comments

[ 3.9 ms ] story [ 201 ms ] thread
It sounds like you don't like being a manager. I don't either, which is why I've remained an engineer since 1996.

Your career takes up a HUGE chunk of your days, so you have to decide: Is more money and status important enough to burn out doing a job you hate, day in, day out?

When you finally retire, nobody's going to care what you were in your past life, and engineers make plenty. So why not optimize for the long game?

Honestly, sounds like they don't like being an IC either, based on the "grunt ic work" comment.

They also haven't figured out that IC and Management are different career paths, since they think IC work is just moving around jira tickets.

> they think IC work is just moving around jira tickets.

I really don't think OP thinks this. It was just a way of expressing how unfulfilling they find the current role to be. Thats how i read it.

I disagree. It speaks to a broader belief. Tie that in with the "I'm smarter and work harder" comment, and it paints a bit of a theme about the poster. Moving JIRA tickets, cleaning up boards and doing various other admin are powerful tools to team organization whatever the tool/process used. A smart person and hard-worker shouldn't have any problem picking that up and moving the team forward.

Likewise a savvy "street smart" person that wants to go into the managerial track needs to understand how to convey to the right people that they moved the team forward or they need to get help from a Scrum Master / BA / PM that should be doing that instead. Maybe convincing their report that there is a gap to grow the team, and that their time could better be utilized.

At first you do tech and coding. Then you get to a phase where coordination is key, that includes admin and processes. After that, only then do you get to the "leadership" or "strategy" and other nebulous parts where you have to drive things forward not by doing work yourself but by putting the right people on the right tasks and enabling them.

>Should I seek professional help?

Perhaps. It might help you focus on what's in your control.

>I have 25 years of industry experience and I feel I should mentor people instead of moving JIRA tickets around.

I'd advise show, don't tell. What I've tended to notice about people who get trusted with more responsibility in any dimension is that they tend to do two things:

1) take responsibility without being asked. 2) find higher and higher leverage things to work on. They don't do everything perfect, but find out what their boss/employer truly values and double down.

Judging by the fact that you were offered a promotion choice in the first place (albeit you think you chose the wrong door), it seems might have just forgotten how to do what you've already known in the past.

It sound like you make choices based on status and income instead of what you like and is good for you and your family.
It sounds like it. Then again, doesn't a vast majority of people?
I don't think so, I think there's quite an evenly spread broad spectrum. And which people you come into contact with will be heavily influenced by your own choices in that regard. Work for a bank or a big corporate company and yes probably most people will be making choices for that reason. Work for a not-for-profit and most people won't have.
Income can be good for your family... it's never just binary choices between good things and bad things, more like 6 of one and half a dozen of the other.
It sounds like you're agonizing over past decisions. Been there, done that!

We're all human and have to make choices with imperfect information. Sometimes we pick the right choice, sometimes we don't. All you can do is learn from it, and this helps you inform your future choices, e.g. we get a bit wiser in the process.

Figure out what your goals are - if you really want a management role, then figure out how you can get there from now and start taking steps towards it. It might be studying an MBA part time for example. Or getting involved in leadership activities, like being on your local HOA board, school board, or similar. Ask your manager what steps you can take to move into a management role. Follow the philosophy of "act like the role you want" and you may get noticed as having leadership / mgmt potential.

Beyond that, if you are agonizing over the past like it sounds like, there may be underlying emotional issues you need to sort out with a professional. Like for me, I have struggled life long with intense self criticism and over analysis of everything I've done. Like agonizing for weeks/months over a decision, something I said, etc. and beating myself up over it. That kind of thinking process _is_ pathological and a professional can help.

I was hard working and [more] intelligent than him.

Being more hard working and more intelligent than the competition won't get you very far in anything except purely practical work.

Those definitely aren't things that make a manager successful. Being approachable, being on the side of the people you're managing, willing to pass on the credit for wins and take responsibility for failures, being willing to make hard calls and tell people 'no' when they're unreasonable etc are the nice things that make a manager a good manager. Being selfish, ruthless, and willing to burn bridges to get further up the ladder are often useful skills too, albeit from a slightly nastier perspective.

Management is psychology and politics. Those things don't require much hard work or intelligence. (I'm not calling all managers stupid; managers need 'street knowledge' and savvy judgement.)

Upvoting this. In my many roles I've had an opportunity to observe and work quite close with executives at several Fortune 100 companies - VPs, CEOs, etc.

I would not rank "hard work" or "intelligence" very high when it comes to common traits of these folks. In fact, I would say maybe half of these folks really stood out in terms of raw intelligence - people who make you say "wow, that person is bright". And we're not talking "Field's medal" smart.

The same characteristics that make for successful politicians makes for successful executive - emotional intelligence, ability to connect with people, confidence, ability to communicate clearly and drive the organization forward. There is a bit of force of personality here - their actions push decision making forward. And that doesn't require a big ego are a silver tongue. I've met quiet, reserved leaders who just have a style that says "I see it like X, so we need to do Y" and everyone else says "of course!" and off they go to do Y.

It's a common trope but "big picture" thinking is a big deal - don't get mired in trivial details, focus on what important, stop people from wasting time on unimportant things. Basically keep the machine well-oiled and moving forward - keep people happy and focused.

I've found that having strong individual contributor skills and having written most of the foundational codebase myself are a dangerous trap as a manager. It's very easy to put yourself on the critical path for delivery, which is really bad for your team. You need to build up those skills on the team instead, trust people who you think might not be ready, and be willing to take the heat when they fail. To the extent I still use my IC skillset, it's to fill in the gaps where I don't have a seasoned developer to lean on. I review a lot of patches. That, and I blow off steam by working on non-critical features.
>Being more hard working and more intelligent than the competition won't get you very far in anything except purely practical work.

Ouch, I really felt that.

Everyone thinks they are more intelligent and hardworking than the people around them.
Not really, lots of people know they aren't the "smartest guy in the room", or "the most specialised" or whatever, but trust their people skills, family connections, visions or simply brute force their way up.

The point is that social skills and networking will get you much much further than being the semi silent, guarded and "honourable" person sitting in the corner of the room - even if you are actually way "smarter" than the socialites or the people with a flair for marketing, social games, politics etc.

Building excellence will always require you following the old adage of "if you're the smartest person in the room, you're in the wrong room". There is exactly one person in the world to whom that doesn't apply in any given field.

Being "quietly smarter than everybody" is a huge alarm signal that you're stuck at your current level and won't grow much further unless you change circumstances.

It's true. I'm objectively more intelligent than my cofounder. He knows it, I know it. He's the far better manager than I am and grew to lead half the company, almost 5x more reports than me.

It's really all about empathy, structure, but first and foremost the ability to pass on the work to _someone else_ and make them succeed at it.

I tend to nerd snipe myself much more often because I like the technical challenges.

Sounds like you are both smart enough to realize and appreciate that while you each have strengths, you compliment each other.

Many would become envious of each other or allow their egos to get in the way, so good on you.

> Those things don't require much hard work or intelligence

They really do. It's different from the work or intelligence you apply to technical problems, but it's there. What you call 'street knowledge' and savvy judgment is commonly known as 'emotional intelligence'. (Your terms are way cooler, though ;)

The "hard work" part is also often on the emotional side. Everything you need to do includes a "how will that make the person feel, and do I want that" component.

First of all don't beat yourself up over past choices, especially ones like this where you have no idea how things would have turned out if you'd acted differently (I know it's easy to say and hard to do).

Should you seek professional help? maybe, having someone to talk to openly about these sort of feelings can be very beneficial and a professional's distance can make them more objective.

You have no way of knowing that you would have done well in the manager role and gotten promoted to director like your peer. You claim to be more hard working and intelligent than him but who's to say what you view as hard working and intelligent are objectively true? Who's to say success in those roles is even a function of hard work or intelligence? Who's to say your peer didn't have some third skill relevant to managering and directoring that you lack in comparison? Maybe the thing that led to your peer's promotion was his boss's partner meeting his partner at a holiday party which put him on the radar. Who the heck knows.

If a man in line behind you at the convenience store buys a lottery ticket and wins a million dollars, do you kick yourself for not buying that ticket when it was your turn in line? Life is chaos; pretending things like this are in your control is useless. Punishing yourself for not knowing what you didn't know in the past is cruel.

Your misery comes from your own self-imprisonement. Happiness will not come from a time machine. Rather you should work on keeping your ego out of the driver's seat. A therapist might help, to teach you frameworks around catastrophization. Eastern philosophy has a lot of answers for dealing with ego as well. Alan Watts' The Book is a good way to experiment on that path.

Forget the past and focus on the present. If you don't like the present, focus on the future.

> Life is chaos; pretending things like this are in your control is useless.

Yes, I've been thinking a lot about this and if free will is just an illusion. I sorta like to think it is just an illusion. It does make it easier to deal with "wrong" decisions.

that kind of thinking could result in repeating your mistakes.
If free will isn't an illusion.
what benefit is gleaned from thinking free will is an illusion?
Not beating yourself up over past mistakes.
but you are saying you dont have a choice about that

i dont really see how you can say free will is an illusion so you shouldnt do something.

Thats a direct contradiction

> Thats a direct contradiction

No, if free will is an illision, then even "choosing" to believe in it and "choosing" to let things go is an illusion. It would apply to every "choice" we make.

if only it were so simple to side step personal responsibility. just call it illusory. to what effect?
I often see this reaction when people suggests that you should care too much about your past decisions since you can't ever imagine control everything.

It's about _past_ decisions, nobody says you shouldn't care about doing the best for you in the present. You can't be sure if your decisions are the best, but you surely have to avoid the bad one if you can !

Don't repeat the same mistakes, it is boring. Make new mistakes, much more learning happens that way. There's probably a Yodaism in there.

The meta level is to recognize classes of mistakes and create a process around preventing them to help avoid future mistakes.

(Not OP but) This quote most likely is not about free will. But how life is random/chaotic. Two people in same situation doing exactly same thing might end up with different end results.

In professional poker there is a rule/saying, "you can do everything right and still loose" (due to chaos). The trick is to not over-think your mistakes, if you made a stupid decision reflect why, if you didnt make stupid decision it might not have been a bad decision, just unlucky.

You cannot control the chaos only adapt and look ahead, instead of if only i did this or that i would be better off. You cannot know for sure if something would happened or not.

You absolutely have free will to do something about your situation, but you cannot guaranteed outcome.

Think of a situation where you think you could have done something better than someone else.

It is likely that you could have using your mind, body and life experience.

Do you think that you could have done the situation better if you were using their mind, body and you had their life experience? I believe that we would all have the same outcome. If that is the case, then free will is an illusion.

Free will is an illusion, but it doesn't change anything.

Lives go on as we cannot predict/simulate our world to 100% predict human reactions and decisions.

> I believe that we would all have the same outcome.

We are not talking about impossible hypothetical situations. We are talking about Bob and Alice, where Bob thinks to himself that only if he followed same career choices as Alice he would be in the same place as her. Since he is smarter and harder working than her. And that is simply not true due to life being chaotic, unfair and luck plays its part. He would have a chance but not guarantee to have same outcome as Alice.

I was having this conversation two days ago. I believe free will is an illusion, everything is ruled by causality beyond our comprehension.

But even as I say write it, in a couple of minutes my brain will jump back into thinking I'm in control. It's very strange.

Agreed 100%. I had an opportunity for a managerial role, I took it, I thought it would make my career better.

It didn't. I crashed, burned, couldn't write as much code as I wanted and managing people is an entirely other and opposite skill than writing code. I quit, I took a break and I'm now planning on writing code as an engineer for the rest of my career. I'll leave herding cats^H^Hdealing with people to more suited candidates.

You can't know that your current choice is a mistake. That's an unproductive attitude to have in life.

Unfortunately, at many places, going into management is considered as career advancement instead of parallel path, and this is reflect in terms of compensation as well (a huge mistake).
At tech companies, this is starting to change. They'll have an IC path and a management path.

But at a non-tech company that happens to have engineering roles (Bank, healthcare, etc.), yeah that's not happening. If you want to write code, you might end up being promoted to "Senior Software Engineer", but you'll stall there and your compensation will fall even farther behind the curve than it already is. You might cap at 150K/year if you're lucky.

>If a man in line behind you at the convenience store buys a lottery ticket and wins a million dollars, do you kick yourself for not buying that ticket when it was your turn in line?

That's a very nice analogy - is it something you came up with ? (I am going to steal it so I would like to know who I'm stealing from :) )

I think it's an example of the post hoc fallacy and is often presented in terms of a casino slot machine, where a player leaves the machine and the next player wins the jackpot. X is assumed to cause Y, simply because X occurred before Y. With the above example, X is 'not buying the lottery ticket when you had the chance' and Y is 'the next person to buy a lottery ticket wins the prize'.
Slot machines are a much worse example because they have programmed minimum prize percentages, so if one has gone without a win for a while then it's more likely to win than average. With the lottery ticket, there was really no reason to have made that decision.
Isnt this the fallacy? Aren't those minimum prize percentages set in advance? As in, if a machine has a 0.0002% chance jackpot it will have that with each pull and no less (ie minimum prize percentage). Minimum prize percentage just means it never goes below a certain percentage (eg it can't go to zero). Also, the smaller payouts can be higher minimum percent. But over the long term the payout is always less than the cost to play.
My understanding is that the algorithm is something like:

   func doTheyWin():
     if timeSinceLastWin < 10:
       winPercentage = 1
     else if timeSinceLastWin < 100:
       winPercentage = 25
     else:
       winPercentage = 99
     return random(100) < winPercentage
      
That is an algorithm designed to meet people's expectations of the gambler's fallacy, basically.

Other comments say that slot machines in Las Vegas are prohibited from using this algorithm, but nothing is stopping, say, video games from doing this. (Hearthstone has a "pity timer" for giving you legendary cards in card packs, for example. It's random until it feels bad for you, or more likely the data shows that you won't buy any more card packs and they'll go out of business if they don't give you a legendary every 40 card packs or whatever.)

In roulette they post the last 20 or so results, the reason they do it is because the marble is not self aware of previous results, each marble roll is an independent event.

I'm unsure if slots are like this, I guess it would depend on the quality of the RNG and trust in the casino/machine that it's configured correctly.

> In roulette they post the last 20 or so results, the reason they do it is because the marble is not self aware of previous results, each marble roll is an independent event.

The reason they do this is the above, but actually because people are dumb and think they can see patterns that dont exist ("look the same number came up twice in a row! i better place a bet")

There was a time when you could infer a wooden roulette wheel's bias by collecting enough samples.

I think now the casinos track this and retire biased wheels, which is why they have the data feed in the first place. And then yeah, why not publish it to make more types of gamblers interested in the game!

> so if one has gone without a win for a while then it's more likely to win than average.

This isn't true. At least, in Las Vegas, by law every spin must have RNG that is independent of previous spins. They can't be programmed to "go cold" after a jackpot, or guarantee a win after a cold streak.

its basically a gamblers fallacy, another one is people will get angry if they were playing a slot machine, losing - got up and the next person immediately won a jackpot. they think it was their jackpot. when in reality it is just RNG at its finest.
Actually that does beg the question - does the randomiser seed for autopicked lotto numbers use a time stamp? Ie, would you have actually gotten the same numbers he would have gotten if you didn’t buy it?
You could replace it with a scratch-off ticket to dodge the problem
Well said. OP is making the classic mistake of comparing them with others and assuming that Grass is greener on the other side. Never compare yourself with others, never. Always compare yourself with YOURSELF. I keep saying this and hoping it helps others.
Well said though I be a bit more soft in the words.
My apologies. It takes me way more effort to write that way, so I don't bother for anonymous comments. But I know you're right and I agree with you.
I agree with everything you say. However,I think this argument is overused. Sure , luck is important and there is always incomplete information but it doesn’t mean you can’t differentiate between good decisions and bad decisions. It also doesn’t mean you can’t improve yourself by improving your decision making skills. For example , there is a lot of luck involved in poker games , but experienced player who can make consistently good decisions are going outperform those who are not making good decisions.
>> Happiness will not come from a time machine

This needs to be framed.

I see this as a positive thing. You now know what you don't like and don't want to do. Does that get you closer to what you want to do? You only have one life. You failed and learned something about yourself. Now move forward.

Turn envy and jealously into a positive emotion like motivation or inspiration. A therapist can only help and if you want to make tremendous career progress I would suggest seeing one. Focus on yourself and what you can change and control in you.

I bet if you learn about your former colleagues life (who is now a director) and work that you would probably not want the job. There's a reason you turned it down right?

You wanted to see if product management was a better fit. But for whatever reason you were wrong. This is not a bad thing. Did you quit too hastily when maybe you could have found another role at your previous company? What made you choose program management after product management?

Ask yourself the deep questions and you will be enlightened.

> You now know what you don't like and don't want to do.

Edison's "10,000 ways that don't work" is a terrible way to invent a lightbulb, but a great way to live your life from my perspective.

Question about this. The career path to high level decision maker seems to pass through JIRA manager. Why is that? Are there other parts to gain decision scope within a company that don’t require a stint in management first?
You don't even know if the other guy is happy or miserable in his director position...
> How do I deal with my feelings? Should I seek professional help?

Yes. If you’re at the point where you need to anonymously seek advice/share on HN, I definitely think it would be a good idea to talk to someone. And please don’t read that as me being flippant. I’m a strong believer in therapy and think it is beneficial for every single person.

I would also suggest talking to some sort of career coach. I used to dismiss executive coaches because I thought a lot of the practitioners were just con artists hawking their wares, but I’ve found real value in executive coaching and have good friends who have as well. Finding a good coach is probably just as hard as finding a good therapist (and the roles are similar), but if you don’t want to talk to someone about the residual anger and resentment you have, you should at the very least talk to someone who can help you make sense of making some sort of game plan to get back on the management track, if that’s what you want, or to find something more fulfilling to do.

The thing is, the grass isn’t always greener. There is no guarantee that you’d be happier or made director if you’d gone the management route. Your work hours would also probably be double. But you can’t change the past and hyper-focusing on that won’t help you feel any better.

You need to move forward and you need a plan. Good luck.

Also, go easy on yourself.

While I'm on board the therapy train, I think the career coach would be the far more appropriate professional help in this case.
It sounds like you're going from success to success, big career mistakes usually end in the unemployment office or at least a demotion. Your old coworker the director is probably making himself miserable because his cousin is a CTO and maybe that cousin went to high school with Elon Musk.

You already recognize the big problem is how you're processing these feelings. The place that I would start is forgiving yourself for having them. It's part of the human condition to feel jealousy, regret, inadequacy, etc. Definitely work on processing them, letting go of them, figuring out where they come from, but try not to beat yourself up for having them in the first place.

1. Professional help is always good - whether you're in a good or sad place. Therapist fit is important so if the first time it doesn't work out, consider "shopping around" until you find somebody that a) You feel understands you b) You feel you can trust c) Is helping you in a way that you feel is helpful and productive. May take some time but most good things in life do.

2. Acknowledge, if/when you can, that a) What you know now is not what you knew then and b) There's absolutely positively no guarantee that you would be happier had you chosen a different path. In fact, I'd go as far as to say that statistically, knowing what you knew then, you made the rational decision - number of technology experts who regret going into or being forced into management, is vast. So don't beat up yourself for having taken decisions that you have. In fact, I'm not even certain that you can confidently brand them as "wrong" decision, based on situation and facts you knew then.

3. Look forward. Hardest but most important part. You are where you are; you cannot change the past; perhaps you can learn from it; where do you go from here, and how?

---

My big suggestion is to spend as much time as you can, with your therapist and loved ones and yourself, to work on your emotional intelligence / mindfulness. That's my personal big lesson in life - I spent 25 years focusing on technical, so I personally am in catchup mode for emotional / personal knowledge and maturity (which still puts me ahead of 90% of my colleagues who most likely will never pay attention to it on a conscious level or put real effort into it).

Because here's the catch - there's ZERO guarantee that, if you had your former colleague's job RIGHT NOW, you'd be as happy in that role as they are (or, to be blunt, necessarily as successful; hard work and intelligence are useful but not sole factors especially in management track). There's the external environment and then there's internal processing and reaction to that environment. You have to acknowledge that your happiness is a combination of external environment and your reaction to it and the weighing could be any which way. I have smart, intelligent, successful friends and family members who change jobs every 6-18 months are are ultimately never happy in any of them; and I have friends who are in a job I would positively hate, but are happy. So my suggestion is to consider working on both internal and external aspects.

(and incidentally, emotional intelligence and soft skills are on average way, way, WAY more important if you are considering management path than subject matter expertise.)

If, worst case, all you are is 2 years behind your colleagues - that's nothing, in the grand scheme of things. If management and specifically people management path is what you want to do, 2 years lost is meaningless (from some perspective, I myself am "20 years behind" those who went into management the day they graduated, versus my two decades of technical and architecture work; and you know what? I'm doing OK :).

But do consider also what is important to you and how you can obtain it. If mentoring people is what you love doing... well, most directors do very very little of it. Best architects and senior engineers, who may be IC's on paper, do tons of it. So take the time to truly grok what you want, rather than focusing on that one Jones in the fast lane who seems happy :).

Best of luck!

Will you still consider it a career mistake if something very positive happens tomorrow that you could have never gotten to without the path you have taken?
You should seek professional help.

I’m sorry if this comes off as mean but from what you wrote it doesn’t sound like you’re someone I would actually like to work with in any capacity. You sound like the lead character of Clerks - “I’m not even supposed to be here today”.

Not knowing anymore than you wrote I’m pretty sure with that attitude if you took that other path you would be in exactly the same spot you are today: thinking about that other guy.

I hope you find some inner peace and career fulfillment.

I wanted to write what you wrote, but yours is on point and way more eloquent. I agree with this comment 100%.

To OP: please, do look for professional help. It's impossible to play dr. House online, but if I pair my experience of dealing with people with the problem you described, I would guess that you're not happy to begin with - and that spilled over to your career life.

Explore whether there's a root problem, if yes - solve that problem. Then the symptoms will go away.

> it doesn’t sound like you’re someone I would actually like to work with in any capacity.

How are your feelings about what kind of people you don't want to work with are relevant here ?

This is a "public forum" where people have "conversations" and "discuss ideas". When people have a "conversation" it is sometimes helpful to express an "opinion".
I was asking gp how it ties to what OP is talking about. I wasn't implying shouldn't have said that.
OP is expressing dissatisfaction with their career progress. My implication is that this lack of progress might have something to do with how well they work with others. Grumpy, unhappy, unpleasant or difficult people are often unaware of how they come off to others.
I think in a management role, you have to think on your feet, even on long term things.

It might be better to transform your role into something that fits what you want while still serving the position/s that you are in.

If you say you want to mentor people, then it is something to develop. I think one key thing in any team is to always be solving problems, whether it be bugs or finding problems to improve. Take a few new or junior people and tackle the bug list together, figure out what can be done better and build on it.

My mistake was not moving to something new (new position, new company, etc.), but it helped to have a manager myself where we can brainstorm on my problem.

[EDIT: Also in my experience, dev teams need voices, whether it be control of the backlog, a way to advocate for the team, etc. I think those who can talk with their team and construct plans when dev teams struggle to find voices. By constantly solving problems with other team members, particularly seeking for them to solve the problems, you are helping them towards giving them a voice.]

I think there's a good chance that you just hate work. Not that you're lazy, not that you hate working or doing work, because that's different. Corporate "work", the institutional nonsense that people have to do to prevent higher-status people from turning off their income, is an awful waste of time and involves very little actual work. It deserves to be hated.

I understand the unhappiness of being an IC, especially in midlife. You're not respected in that position; software is manage-or-be-managed, and if you're still in a "be managed" position at maturity, it's not a good look. Still, I think you'd also hate being a middle manager, to be honest. I know I did. You're not actually "mentoring" people as a middle manager (or as a PM; PMs exist to give executives a second management structure so "product" and traditional managers can be pitted against each other). Instead, you're a performance cop who works for even bigger assholes than you did as an IC. You'll have to be the face of awful decisions that hurt people's careers, and you'll have to make some really shitty ideas look like they were yours, so the execs (who asked you to push said shitty ideas) can distance themselves and be loved. You're in the position of transmitting orders, and you can't really protect your people.

I also don't think you can assume that you would have made Director just because a less-talented colleague did. Capitalist Party politics is its own game, and the people who are good at it are usually good at literally nothing else.

I don't think you should feel stupid for making a career mistake, though. The game is rigged and the Capitalist Party is hopelessly corrupt. If you weren't born into a hereditary upper class, you probably were never presented with any good options--just bad ones that looked good at the time. Your Director-level colleague might be working 70 hours per week and losing his marriage. He might die at his desk of a heart attack at 47. Anything can happen in the corporate world for all bad values of "anything".

As for what you should do, I'm in no position to give advice. I don't know you or your circumstances. You certainly aren't alone, though. Corporate capitalism has to pay people with constant expansion--not only do they expect their incomes to go up, but they expect the rate of increase to go up--to get them to overlook its awfulness, and the system can no longer support this. I won't tell you that it's going to get better (it's going to get worse first) but you're not a loser for making bad choices when you probably didn't have any good ones. You shouldn't feel bad about yourself. You're surviving. That's all most people can do right now. Some people, usually through no fault of their own, can't even do that.

> die at his desk of a heart attack at 47

I'm 47 - fun to see this as the age used to illustrate "too-young-to-go". I agree. If things go well, someday my age won't qualify for this use-case anymore.

What do you like doing? I went management a few years ago, and while sometimes in the back of my mind I think about doing it again, I'm extremely happy as an IC, especially in the challenges of my current role. For better or for worse, I love observability and automation, much more than 'management'. In objective terms maybe my career has gone backwards, but personally it has not.

On Mentoring People: You don't have to be a manager to mentor people. In fact, an interesting part of being a manager that I discovered is that you often don't have nearly as much time to mentor people as you do if you are a senior/lead IC. Probably (rough numbers) 20% of your time is spent managing up, 40% managing sideways and 40% managing down. And there's a lot of work to do in that 40% that is not "mentoring".

But it's never too late. Every new job I start it seems within a year someone is asking me if I want to be a manager. Good managers are hard to find so if that's really the path for you it is not closed off at all.

Given that this is HackerNews, I assume your 25 years of experience are in software engineering/tech, but is it in something else? Also, you say "I have 25 years of industry experience and I feel I should mentor people...". What does 'should' mean in this case? What is the source of that pressure?

Your role in any institution hinges so much on perception and past behavior that a larger change may require a change of workplace. Once perceptions of colleagues are fixed, it is almost impossible to change them and get another "reputation." You'd have to apply somewhere else for a position that better suits your expectations, and if you can't get one, change your expectations or work further on your CV.
Everyone you meet is a knot where two strings intersect. Sometimes these strings twist around each other for a while and it's very natural to judge your path with another. In the very short term this might even be accurate, but then strings diverge and go on towards infinite more collisions. Any comparison of more than the briefest timeframe is meaningless. You don't steer your path as much as influence the variables that determine direction. You do this through both action and inaction.

1. If you want to impact your path, choose intent over accident

2. The direction of your current vector is more important than your life's total displacement

3. Life is lived when strings intersect, with each knot influencing future direction

4. There are no cartesian coordiantes for your final goal. You define an ideal as your target and make progress towards it; both change over time.

More pragmatic: spend some time with your former colleague, reconnect, enjoy their company. Find out what they've been doing with their entire life, not just their job title. Realize that maybe you're focusing on a single dimension in a forest of many, and perhaps your head-to-head comparison isn't as relevant (or important) as you initially thought.

Was in a similar position. The way I coped was not to think of the past, life’s too short to do that. Be in the present and build your future.

Also some good advice: don’t kick yourself for your decision. It was YOU who decided it that way, if you were to rewind the clocks, the same person you were before would make the same decision. That was who you were before, so never beat yourself up over it

There is no shortage of opportunities to go into management. Good managers are hard to come by. So any time you can demonstrate that you have the skills and willingness to be a manager, most employers would welcome that. You can try to find management roles in other smaller companies who might be more open to your lack of management experience. Please don't mind but it seems to me that you are being jealous of your former colleague. It seems you were OK being an IC for 25 years and now that you have seen a peer succeed in management role you hate being an IC. Do not base your happiness on what others have. Know what makes you happy and try to get that regardless of what other people are getting / have gotten. If it helps, I have been an IC for 18 years and plan to be until I retire because I don't like management and I am quite happy with that. I know I'll never make executive salaries but I am ok with that. I optimize for happiness and less stress instead of money.
> Yesterday I saw my former colleague who grabbed the manager role, got promoted to a director. I was hard working and intelligent than him. I could’ve played my card right and be in that place.

The key to happiness is not to compare yourself to others.

My friend tried to convince me to mine bitcoin. I was worried my GPU would die, so I didn’t. He’s a millionaire now, and works a lot less than I do. If I played my cards right, we’d be on a boat together.

But I’ll be on a boat next week, because a fat paycheck has some benefits. Like yours.

I suggest a long vacation, followed by a dramatic reduction in the number of hours you’re putting in. Forget about work entirely while you’re there. When you’re back, spend every day job hunting.

I have to believe that ageism doesn’t exist, and that you can always change careers. Unfortunately I know it does exist, and that it’s not so easy. But if you fail, your next best option is to embrace the mentality of “do less.” You’re putting in more than your job requires; stop that.

Alternatively, if you really can't stop comparing, pick a different reference point until you can stop comparing.

When I compare myself against my peers from when I was a child, I end up horribly depressed because I have no PhD, no company, etc.

On the other hand, if I compare myself to the average in other categories, I'm doing really well. The employment rate for those with MS is around 30%, and I'm a single gay woman from an abusive household (so no parental support) on top of that. From THAT perspective, the fact that I'm a breadwinner for a middle-class home means I'm doing REALLY well.

A lot of the people have significantly less experience than you so heed with caution.