[CharlieDigital]

Sure, but the premise of the article:

    Welcome to the very first post on Path to Staff Engineering! Subscribe, and I will teach you the skills to level up to Staff faster

Is basically "here's why you can't get promoted".

This is the classic "Maker vs Manager" dilemma that we've created with regards to technical career path ascension. A staff ENGINEER is still an engineer; reserve that role for your strongest ICs. Make them an engineering MANAGER or DIRECTOR or VP if their role is to manage people, situations, and communications.

I postulate that one of the many reasons organizations eventually fail to innovate is that they bias towards manager instead of maker. Once that happens, you've taken some of your strongest ICs and given them only one option to "level up": "Go manage people".

[convolvatron]

I don't care about promotion. what gets lost here is how we drive the product. we vest all the authority to a manager, and the manger rightfully sees their role as mataining the culture and the group. how do actual engineering decision get made. how to we decide how to evolve the product? thats not in the wheelhouse of the manager. increasingly ICs are encouraged to see their work in isolation - they get a task, they get to decide how to do it, and retire it in two weeks or less. How do we set direction as a group? How do we actually make a cohesive design rather than just dig a pile of feature requests. mostly it seems we just don't.

as an engineer I don't want to deal with scheduling people's vacations. I do think there is a real need for a manager to build and shape a group. To treat people like people instead of just contributors. but broadly as an industry we are totally failing to make decent strategic technical decisions and follow through.