[ereyes01]

I think this phenomenon is evidence of the value ceiling of IC work. What is the point of diminishing returns on paying an IC more money to do what they already do well vs hiring an additional younger and less expensive person to do the same thing, though not as well? Of course, an experienced IC can transition to mentorship, and different companies value this differently, but that may have a value ceiling as well.

Personally, I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing when IC's who max out their value writing code transition to other things. I agree not everyone makes the transition successfully, but it's a great opportunity for personal growth, and the potential for upside is high, since an organization can gain a leader with very nuanced and deep insights into product + market.

[rightbyte]

This is not my experience. It might depend on the field. Unless there is a "peak IC" doing stuff development stagnate and no matter how much time or resources is put into something the great results never comes. Things turn out good, yes, but not great.

It might be that I see this from an engineering perspective and that "the market" and stockholders wont notice in the short term until the brand gets a quality reputation in 10-20 years from user hearsay.

Managers on the other hand seems to mostly have the duty of fighting fires and putting out fires - with the most important quality of not litting fires themselves. There is no way a great engineer working as a manager have time to deal with deep proactive technical issues where I have worked.