[manigandham]

You're focused on the actions rather than the results. Common mistake.

People become leaders by creating and commanding change that positively affects the company. Land a major deal or create a new product line that doubles revenue? You're getting to the top.

Working harder than the others is part of this process, and sometimes that means you come in at 5am, but it's not a requirement nor is it something that anyone in that position actually focuses on as more than just a means to an end.

[CalRobert]

I remember when I was early in my career and fixed an enormous flaw in ad allocation for a large online publisher. It led to easily over a million extra in revenue that year.

My boss was delighted to take credit for it while also ensuring I stayed on message that it wasn't actually a result of him screwing up and being generally incompetent. I eventually figured I had nothing to lose and talked to his boss (politely of course) just saying how successful that had been and that I had plenty of other ideas for improvement. It was not well received.

But I hear my old boss is doing quite well these days.

[gaius]

It led to easily over a million extra in revenue that year. My boss was delighted to take credit for it

Had a similar experience once. A small change generated $2m/year extra revenue. That amount just about covered the bonuses of two execs while I got the standard 3% raise. Not the only reason, but I left shortly afterwards.

[C1sc0cat]

I recall when I did an early web project in 94 using DSDM (agile) and two of use delivered in a month what another team had quoted 2 years for I got a £25 voucher :-)

I put it together with the one I had from my prior project and brought a rio diamond mp3 player.

[manigandham]

Dishonest people will be a constant obstacle, but communication is also important so others know what your contribution is. There can't be progress without measurement.

Being accurate and quantifiable without becoming confrontational is an art though, but ultimately necessary. Going over people can often lead to worse results. Eventually the truth does come out but whether it's worth the time and effort is up to you.

[CalRobert]

I had another offer lined up when I decided to chat with the boss' boss. It went about how I expected, I took the offer, and learned a good deal about how business works in the process.

Communication is important - very important - but it's also often what people focus on when the reality is just a bigger pain in the ass ("so and so is a selfish twit who takes credit for others' work" is much harder to say than "we need to address communication issues between departments")

[manigandham]

I think that's an issue both in communications and in handling people.

For example, did you have to take credit for that particular situation? What was the true downside of your boss taking credit? Why not cover for him and gain the ally? Build the relationship and you'll often find that it pays back in multiples.

Business is 99% about relationships. The only way you can get what you want is by helping others get what they want.

[justaguyhere]

I don't get it - his boss took credit for his work, likely without his consent or even knowledge (I'd guess he came to know after his boss took credit). And yet, you want him to cover for his boss? He also mentioned his boss was incompetent. How can you trust such a person to watch out for you, even if you let it go?

[manigandham]

Because relationships matter, and that's how you build that trust in the first place.

Why not work with them, teach them, and make them better. Instead of being upset, be on their side. Almost always, they'll help you in return. Being confrontational and going around them though, will only guarantee more negative outcomes. Remember that your boss's boss and other colleagues probably don't want to deal with someone who is seemingly more interested in getting credit rather than getting things done.

[castlecrasher2]

Relationships are often more important than the right solution.

[lotsofpulp]

>Eventually the truth does come out

Why does the truth eventually come out? Or is this an assumption?

[manigandham]

Because performance is unlikely to be repeated and at some point the person who is wrongly taking credit will not be able to perform, but this can take days or decades depending on the organization.

[CalRobert]

Decades? Are you kidding? Nobody's got time for that. Least of all people like myself who started in 2008 when the economy was utter garbage.

If you don't manage to build a decent career/salary/position by your mid-thirties in tech you're quite likely screwed (though before I'm too depressing, I understand there are counterexamples here on HN). Waiting a year or two for recognition is career suicide.

[manigandham]

The point is it's highly variable. As stated in the first comment: whether it's worth the time and effort is up to you.

I'd argue that 1 year is way too short. The lack of patience causes far more problems today than building up the relationships and gaining the network and momentum to get into higher positions. Most people I know who stuck to a clear goal within a organization that has openings have done better than those who kept jumping around looking for the quick rise.

[mooreds]

And if it takes decades, well, their career is made.

[C1sc0cat]

Or they find a scapegoat

[albertgoeswoof]

Did your boss hire you? Did your boss ask you to look at it?

[rfeather]

The boss could very easily at least make it known which engineer did the good work to fix it. If that isn't standard practice, something is seriously wrong. I make it a goal to be clear about who did the work when talking about something my team accomplished, even if I had the idea.

[CalRobert]

No, and no.

[dagw]

Land a major deal or create a new product line that doubles revenue? You're getting to the top.

Be in charge of the department/team that "lands a major deal or create a new product line that doubles revenue" and you're on your way to the top. Being the person who was in the office until 3 am working out the final details of that deal or fixing the show stopping bugs that let you actually launch the product won't get you anywhere.

[manigandham]

But that is your job, is it not? What is wrong with the person in charge of the entire department being recognized for meeting the goal? Are they not working hard in their position? What did they do before their current position and what is stopping you from getting to theirs?

There's a tendency to minimize the work by others because we don't have the same perspective, but it's rarely ever accurate. Or helpful.

[dagw]

What is wrong with the person in charge of the entire department being recognized for meeting the goal?

If they played a material role in meeting the goals then nothing. The question is so much about who is getting recognized as who isn't getting recognized. If you want to get recognized and get ahead then simply putting your head down and doing hard work isn't going to get you there.

[termie]

That would seem to depend on the leadership. You might get the leader’s former job.

[village-idiot]

Depends on the company, and a few other details.

Smart companies reward those workers, dumb ones often do not. This naturally pushes some of the smart and self motivated talent towards organizations where they will be rewarded.

The one other exception is personality. The toxic person who works until 3am will rarely if ever get rewarded, because people judge more on the toxicity than anything else.

[a_imho]

Land a major deal or create a new product line that doubles revenue? You're getting to the top.

From my experience this does not happen at all. Not to underclass developers at least.

[manigandham]

At all? I don't know what you mean by "underclass" developers but it is common to see many devs who spearhead projects get higher titles and progress faster. There are many such examples just in SV companies.

Part of it is making sure contributions are measured and noticed. People can't act on what they don't know.

[theshadowknows]

I started out at my company building HTML emails. I started seeing places things could get better. Better code base so I built it. More sophisticated tooling and build chain so I built it. Problems with the Econ site so I helped find and fix them. Possible places to integrate and become more efficient so I helped build them. 3 years in, 3 raises (I’ve more than doubled my starting salary) and 3 promotions now I’m a Systems Architect. I recently presented to the owner of our parent company and (feel at least) that I’m valued and make real contributions. I work on big projects and am seen as a leader. So it can happen.

[lukeholder]

That's great and I am in no way diminishing your achievements; but a work of caution for others reading too:

It's most likely that you were severely underpaid in the first place, the raises have just slowly brought you up to industry standard, just spread over 3 years.

Your title increase is also great, but keep in mind, having you feel like you are a leader is also a great retention tool for you to keep working for them, producing good work.

I recommend looking in the marketplace for a new job to really see where you can be in your 4+ years. Don't feel like they have been so good to you that you couldn't increase your salary again by 30% by switching employers.

[theshadowknows]

That’s sobering but good advice. It’s easy to fall into the “hey, they do care” trap just for some more money. Good advice also on looking into other places in the same industry - I’m still 3-5% too low for median!

[CalRobert]

"it is common to see many devs who spearhead projects get higher titles and progress faster"

True, but if we're going with anecdata I'd point out that it's also common to see devs (and managers) who are taller get higher titles and progress faster too. My own experience is that the correlation is at least as strong as that with getting stuff done.

[a_imho]

I mean the blue collars sitting with other developers at lunch. We can pretend there is a meritocracy out there, but that's simply not true.

Sure, in theory it might be possible to progress as a developer but in practice the roi of putting in enormous effort is simply laughable compared to the alternatives. A few percent raise realistically. Getting to the top? Not a chance.

[manigandham]

Blue collar (in the US) refers to manual labor positions, not software developers.

There are a rare few who are extremely talented and productive individual contributors but most are not, so try to maximize output by working with others. Even small teams have managed to make big impacts in massive companies so I reject the notion that you can't do anything.

But regardless, many people have gotten very high up in many organizations through persistence and patience. It's not easy, and each level will get harder because you have more intense competition for fewer slots, but saying "not a chance" goes directly against the fact that many have done just that.

[village-idiot]

It’s absolutely not a true meritocracy, that’s true.

But if you’re claiming that individual contributor devs never get promoted for good work, that’s just clearly and utterly wrong.

[a_imho]

I claim no one gets to the top for being a hard working developer.

Also claim quality engineering is only loosely correlated with advancement, it is one of the less efficient ways to secure a promotion/raise. In fact, managers often have no idea who is doing a good job.

[village-idiot]

As an absolute statement that is factually incorrect. My former CTO started as a senior developer at the company 16 years ago.

If you want to make the weaker statement that growing from engineer to CTO almost never happens, you’re going to need statistics.

Realistically, humans are mortal and C suite types are made, not born. While not every engineer will become a CXO just due to disparity in job openings, someone needs to be promoted to take the CXO jobs once the previous crop has aged out of the work force. Some of them will be advanced because they’re good workers, others because they’re good at politics. You’ll need some statistics to back up any claim about what percentage are good workers and what percentage are politicians in business clothing.

[manigandham]

You can't get to the top doing the same job. The responsibilities change. There is no CTO who is a day-to-day developer in any sizable organization. The higher you go, the wider the impact.

Some people don't want that change and are happy where they're at. Others cant make that change. But that's what it takes. You can definitely climb the levels by excelling at what you at that particular level. If you still disagree then I would point to the generations of millions of immigrant families that arrived with nothing and earned their way to the top primarily through raw technical merit.

And yes, as stated, impact needs to be measured to be judged. If you do something that nobody knows about, then there's not much you can say.

[C1sc0cat]

By definition developers etc are "professional" grades.

Unfortunately those who are the first in their family to go to uni and go into a professional job don't always get the support and informal knowledge passed to them.

One example would be read a proper newspaper - I can recall when being asked which newspaper you read was a common interview Q in the UK

[SuoDuanDao]

I would disagree and say that Elon Musk has repeatedly cited working twice as hard as everyone else as the key to his success. But the trick he seems to be following is that if you work flat-out on difficult problems until exhaustion, you spend a lot of time in flow state and consequently learn a lot faster than someone who isn't pushing themselves.

[manigandham]

I'm not sure what you disagree with, since it seems to fit with that I'm saying. Elon doesn't focus on the work, he focuses on the results. The effort he puts in is just what's necessary to meet those ambitious goals.

Waking up at 5am because other people are doing it won't get magically get you anywhere. However when you focus on achieving similar goals, you'll probably find yourself getting up at 5am too.

[gph]

Anecdata. There were undoubtedly many other engineers working just as hard as Musk at other startups that never turned into Paypal.

You can credit him and his cohorts for having the foresight to work on products/services that turned out to be winners, especially given that he's followed that success with other potentially successful ventures. But I don't buy that work alone got Musk where he is.