[shubik22]

I generally agree with the advice in this article; I feel like a lot of the pushback here is people who don’t like the system this post is describing. That’s totally fair! I share many of those complaints. However, in my experience the post is correct as a descriptive matter.

The one point I’d take issue with is:

> You have to be performing at the next level for several months.

This is definitely what you’ll be told (and was the party line at the FAANG company I recently left). I don’t think it makes a ton of sense though (so you perform at N+1 for a month, get promoted and then slip back to N?). And in my experience, it’s more often used as an excuse to avoid promoting people when they should be promoted and then avoid having to justify the outcome. (“Of course I agree with you that you’re performing at an L5 level! But you need to do that for just a little longer, wait until next cycle.”)

This is a somewhat cynical view, and doesn’t apply to every situation. However, I would advise any engineer who gets told this line (you’re doing great, just a few more months!) to not accept it as fact and push back against it every single time.