|
|
|
|
|
by patates
6 days ago
|
|
> That's just not accurate. I've seen these systems run at multiple companies, and in every case they had a lot to do with skills and experience > I am an L63 but the work I was doing, was something an L60-L61 could do So you and OP believe that, these systems are good indicators of skills, so much that the last statement sounds normal? I was thinking like that once, as well, but I got disillusioned. These stuff tend to be gamed. > Why does Alice get paid 3 times as much as me to work on cooler and more important stuff? "Alice is L7 and I'm L4" is often an easier answer to accept than "Alice is a better engineer than I am" or "People with Alice's experience have more options than I do". Sure, that's why these system exist. They justify pay, that's all there is. |
|
I do. I think it's good not to box people in, where certain work is only for (my company's equivalent of) L63s and an L60 isn't even allowed to try. But when I do see L60s try, they usually need someone to come by and intervene, because there are critical skills that come with seniority that they don't yet have.
To be more concrete, one thing I often notice in junior engineers I mentor is that they're very "task brained". They understand their job to be nothing more than a sequence of development tasks, so they struggle to understand what's happening or how to help when it comes time for important things that aren't tasks. One guy I knew was frustrated that he didn't understand how priorities are set, and yet would never read the customer stories in his email that the company used to set priorities.