28 comments

[ 4.9 ms ] story [ 67.9 ms ] thread
Missed the part about 100x the stress and politics for 1.2x the pay.
There's a note at the end:

> As always, this blog post is written by me, without any AI, so all errors are my own.

However, the illustrations in the post are clearly made by generative AI, are they not?

That's why I rather want to have LLM as my manager and not the other way around. Having a middleman is worse than having none.
Similar when you climb up the technical path as well, beyond staff engineer. It gets lonely, not many peers, not part of a team, you have to be careful about what you say and to whom as your words carry a lot of significance.
This is very accurate. For me personally, I found the difficulties, friction, and stress, have started to eclipse the pros and decided to move back into an IC role after 15 years as EM/SrEM.

The work life balance was also terrible. You really do ruminate and worry about a lot, much of it outside of your control.

I think this might scare some people off from management unnecessarily.

A lot of what's being described here is important for new managers to understand, but eventually, once you find your footing, you can start to determine where the rules can bend.

For instance, a lot of new managers struggle because they want to keep a foot in the IC world. I think most new managers would benefit from stepping away from the code for an extended period of time. But many experienced managers do eventually return back to writing code while still serving in a management role, although certainly not at the level they did before.

Likewise, it's really important for new managers to understand that friendship dynamics will change. But that doesn't mean that you can't foster very warm relationships with people who report to you. Just like a teacher-student relationship, you can have great fondness for each other while recognizing that there are some lines that absolutely can't be crossed.

Looks like either you are missing the whole point of being a manager or you are selling it for sympathy. Either way it is not all that bad as you paint it. Otherwise why would lot of people dream of being promoted to a manager?

You need to have the taste to enjoy your role. Managers have the power. They are "inside" people for the company while everyone below that level are just workers.

Managers are in the loop for everything. They knew what's going on, they get to know lots of people, they are more visible. They get more opportunities to have some important internal contacts, and show off their leadership skills. People listen to them.

They have decision making power, which means they can turn things into the way they like. They can put people in roles, reward those you like, punish those you don't like. Who don't enjoy that?

You said you bring work home. That's not how a manager works. You need to delegate work. That's' the whole point of having a team. You need to be good at getting work done, not doing it yourself. Just focus on the results.

You don't need to attend daily stand-ups and give status. You fine-tune the calls to your convenience. If you are good, you can create a system that requires minimal effort from you. Automate everything. Assign someone to do that automation. And so on.

middle managers only exist because c suite has no idea/dont care what their employees actually need so there has to be someone in the middle to water down their awful plans. its a hard job nobody should have to take on.

the worst part is when someone is forced to be a bad boss from above when they really dont want to do that so they become hated from both sides. nobody sane can work in that environment and not give up after a few years. i guess thats why so many psychopaths end up as managers when all the normal people burn out and quit. they like watching others suffer.

in a perfect world it would all be independent teams with the leader role rotating between members. the problem with that is teams have to agree on things and thats hard when everyone wants the most for themselves. it can only work if everyone wants the company to succeed and that can only happen if they feel like they have real power. basically what im saying is the only type of org that can work without traditional management is a co-op and our economic system is built to make that as hard as possible. respect to everyone stuck in the middle.

Mostly agree with this article. When I mentor people about managing, some other bits I also usually mention:

1. 'You’re not “part of the team” anymore.' - You're not part of the software dev team, but if you're doing things right, you're part of a team, just a new one. I encourage manager mentees of mine to read a book "Five Dysfunctions of a Team" which talks about figuring out who your "first team" is. Even in environments where you manage an autonomous team, you likely are working alongside other teams towards some bigger goal. Some of the things that worked being part of a software development team continue to work in the new setting, but you also need a new set of tools.

2. It's a two-way door. I've bounced back and forth between IC and manager roles. Some of it is just how the job market is (you look for a job, there aren't manager jobs, you go back to being an IC). Sometimes, people do it intentionally because they like being an IC. It's ok to try out being a manager, and realizing you don't like it.

A lot of what's here isn't specific to managing, and if you advance in your career as an IC, you'll experience similar.

All leadership is like that. Even if you're not a people manager.

I'm an IC in a technical leadership position, all of these hold true with the added constraint that I cannot tell anyone what to do. I hold no carrot or stick.

I have to persuade, convince and influence, I have no reports (nor I want them) so to get anything done I need to get people to align and understand the value on its merits.

One of the more counter-intuitive parts of management that I've found is that your focus shifts from delivering a technical outcome to care-taking a team that delivers technical outcomes. It's a meta-function.

A related physics metaphor - in general as you move from IC to SR to management, your focus shifts from changing the position to changing the velocity and acceleration of those around you.

> You will encounter business decisions you think are terrible but you still have to sell to your team.

This is incorrect. You don't have to. In fact, you shouldn't.

There can be situation in which stuff will need to happen regardless, yes, but that does not require lying and probably works even better when one does not lie.

The post then continues with more such falsehoods and incorrect learnings one could deconstruct, but the spirit of all of them is mostly the same, making that mostly redundant.

Managing is hard and it's easy to fall into these tropes. But they are just that. Easy tropes. They are not the way.

>> You will encounter business decisions you think are terrible but you still have to sell to your team.

> This is incorrect. You don't have to. In fact, you shouldn't.

> There can be situation in which stuff will need to happen regardless, yes, but that does not require lying and probably works even better when one does not lie.

Selling doesn't mean lying. It's usually possible to sell, or persuade, the team to move forward on terrible decisions, without resorting to lying, if you're a good manager.

Having said that, steering a team to execute on good or bad business decisions often do involve withholding information, and some argues -- though I disagree -- that's also lying. If you subscribe to that reasoning, then I suppose you would be right.

I agree with this, but the social dynamic just sucks. I would much rather the manager be part of the team, not feel lonely, be able to joke around about safe things (so, not politics, religion, or identity), and even complain a bit.

>You will not get the training you need

This is just plain unacceptable. It is likely due to companies thinking everyone is replaceable and not investing in their employees though. I don't know how companies can simultaneously want managers to practice the sanitized humanity detailed here while also not providing training to do what they want.

It also has perks. You can bring your friendly pitbull to work, and no hater will dare to say anything!
I will never forget my dad's response to me telling him that I was becoming a people manager: "Everyone else's problems are now your problems."
The reality is that there is no escaping management. A high level IC is pretty much just an unofficial manager. You are responsible for a large technical area - it's your job to meet with stakeholders, design the roadmap, build durable team processes to maintain velocity, mentor and identify the right work for the right people. You may not have back to back meetings but between 1:1s, stakeholders, projects, and ad-hoc fires they're likely still a majority your schedule. You are expected to lead without authority. Leadership will change priorities and reorganize the teams every six months. If you're focused and deliberate, you can maybe get can your project landed before the next reorg.
I went back to a senior IC role after managing for 5 years and I think there are big differences. Yeah, some aspects have to do with leadership (regardless of whether or not you manage) and there's overlap, but... there are also huge differences. I wrote about one I experienced: https://alejo.ch/3g9
This is a lot of asshole puckering over nothing. Is this post really about doing your job, or about protecting your ego? Posturing and a defensive attitude will never be respected by anyone. People just want to trust you to deliver results. They don't care about the rest of you.

There are so many meaningless phrases and words used like "part of the team" and "dumb", "lazy", "tough". There are no examples given of these things. An uncritical reader might let their imagination run wild catastrophizing. Nobody in a leadership role should even have a mind for such quick and empty characterizations. Most of the job is continuous assessment after all.

All that really matters is that you understand the business and the work of the people you're managing. Be flexible with your time and assume good faith in discussions. You're not going to know what you're lacking until you're already in the role.

Mike Tyson quote: "Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth"

> You will encounter business decisions you think are terrible but you still have to sell to your team. You cannot vent your frustration to the people you lead.

I actually disagree with this point a lot, as an IC. My manager shares his honest opinions with us, and I respect him more for it. It seems like the rest of the team feels the same.

I’ve had managers try to sell <obviously bad thing> as something good for the team, and it sucks. It feels like being gaslit. I think honest, open communication is a much better way to run a team. We’re all adults and professionals too; we can handle the truth.

This is an fantastic article (atleast for me as a swede). Most of it can be true depending on your situation but please remember "Being a manager can be fun and fulfilling".

Seeing a peer grow into seniourship or be instrumental fixing a problem in a team is the reward. Yes being a manager costs but there are fantastic moments when it's clear that it was worth it.

"You’ll bring work home with you more often than not."

This happens regardless of managerial position. The only difference in management role is the lack of direct control, which when not yet internalized, keeps the mind in denial and torment (especially at home). Yet, demands from above that don't take into account the limits of control, happens a lot in business environments, unfortunately, for both managers and ICs. This (should be obvious that) is a source of stress, that gets spilled outside of work hours.

"You’re not «part of the team» anymore."

Most often, the managers are the ones choosing to distance themselves from the managed lot and seek the company of other managers or people in the power network. Otherwise, as an anecdote, I know a manager that used to organize free time events for his people all the time, like a true socialite (and getting in everyone's heads when given the chance). Therefore, from what I've seen, given the power (and resources that comes with it), being "part of the team" becomes an unchallengeable choice.

"You need to be careful with every word."

This has more to do with being an adult than being a manager. If nothing else, the power that the managerial position brings is not reflected only in the weight on the shoulders that responsible people feel, but also in the means to control the frame of interaction and with it -- the means to get away with a lot (even with abuse), and afford not to be that careful (with the managed).

"You’ll probably feel very lonely."

It's a choice, an empowered one even.

"You will carry knowledge you cannot share."

This is true. But, ICs have to sign NDAs too.

"You need to network and understand the business."

This is more of a choice that leads oneself to a successful career path, so it's a thing that makes sense for managers (with freed attention and time on their hands) to do. It's also the reason behind the above mentioned "not part of the (powerless) team" choice.

"You will miss being an engineer."

I wish this to have been true for a lot of managers out there, but it isn't. Most of the managers are ambitious people, with clear career plans, that haven't gotten in the industry for their passion of software engineering. Being surrounded by this type of people, "miss being an engineer" comes out just as the right thing to declare for others, or... childish and out of place if one truly believes it.

"You will not get the training you need."

This is just something I hear from managers that haven't yet made peace with the nature of having only an indirect control. Sure, the management game(s) require some learning, but the bar one has to reach is not about its technical aspects mentioned in the article. It's about acting as part of the core group of company (like part of command in an army). You aren't supposed to get training on this bit, you're supposed to "get it" on your own (and play ball once you do).

"You need to be the adult in the room."

Unfortunately, I've seen too many times when the managed ICs are treated like children, and "being the adult in the room" was a designed role to be assumed by the manager as a consequence. Yes, management position gives you a lot to play with, even these kind of unsavory social games. It also gives you the power to demand adult behavior from everyone in the managed team, if you choose to do so.

"You need to learn how to sell." "You must learn how to manage up."

Most of this part is just busy work. You were IC before (becoming a manager), you know how little need you had back then from your manager to get you excited to do your work. Now, the managers above you were once in your shoes too, you can bet they see right through whatever you serve them with, and more. The other departmen...

Anyone willing to put Ghibli themed AI slop on their page has nothing to share about truth, unless their truth is that management is fundamentally unethical.
Two important things missing:

1) You will have technicians working for you that will earn more than you do. They will often act like prima donnas.

2) ( Advice given by a friend that was an IC, then a manager, then an IC again ): “They nip at you from the top, and they nip at you from the bottom.” Meaning that your manager will gripe at you, as well as the people under you griping at you.