[natchy]

> The current software delivery process revolves around pushing decisions down to dev teams and forcing engineers to push status updates back up. This system ensures executives are the only ones who have context and can see the bigger picture while engineers do all of the work.

> This is backwards. It holds us back from building the best product and slows us down from delivering faster.

Thats engineering. If you don't like it then try to make a career move into management or product or start your own company (not advised).

I myself had to come to terms with reality and have been making the transition.

You got one life, no use complaining until the day you die. Move into management and make the changes. If you're ambitious enough, you should have learned all you need to learn from engineering after 6 years and can apply your knowledge in a more strategic role, running circles around non-technical PMs.

[yishaibeeri]

> Thats engineering. ...

Engineering really doesn't have to be like that. I've worked for companies where the leaders took care to push context down, not decisions. When done right, results are very tangible, and (most) of the devs much happier. A few devs struggle and feel lost - probably the ones you want least on your team.

[natchy]

> push context down, not decisions

whats the difference? either way the context or decision is defined by someone else, and you're still the one swinging the hammer.

I actually think there's a major problem in engineering where many don't take charge of their lives and want to guide the decisions. Its a weird Stockholm syndrome love-affair with being the engineer. Idealism is also a problem ("it doesn't have to be like that.").

> (most) of the devs much happier

yeah, but not the ambitious ones I was talking about.

I'm not knocking engineering, I'm saying it's a stepping stone in your career, and not a long term place if you want to influence trajectory within a company.