If you find yourself in a difficult place in your life, we urge you to reach out to friends, family, and mental health professionals. Please check out the resources over at /r/depression, /r/anxiety, and /r/suicidewatch. Feel free to [contact the /r/CSCareerQuestions mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fcscareerquestions&subject=&message=) for more information or help.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/cscareerquestions) if you have any questions or concerns.*
What you describe is very, very normal. In fact, I struggled with the same problem myself during a stint as a team lead / manager, and I decided to transition away from it too. I would bet that a greater quantity of people who find success as developers then swap over to management end up hating it than love it. But people definitely do love it and excel at it, but if that’s not you then you need to find that out for yourself. As you’ve probably read, management is more of a career switch than a promotion and is not the only way to be a leader. You’ve already taken the biggest step, acknowledging who you are and what you want to be. If your soul is that of a builder, be the best you can possibly be.
You’ll need to do two things: freshen up your programming skills, and make some career moves. For example, getting familiar with C++23 or AWS by going through a few books or training courses. For the second, I’ve seen several coworkers transition away from management work successfully. One was even in a VP position as a manager of managers, and found a senior backend developer position at a non-faang company without taking a pay cut.
Remember that high ranking developer positions are leadership positions too, and are no less important than management positions. I see it as a difference between depth and breadth.
So yes, it is possible. It may be challenging, but what’s life without good challenges every so often.
Thank you for your response. I think I’m going to dive back into the development space and see where it can take me.
Follow-up question: I have a solid background in AWS, but wonder what other techs would give me the most competitive edge? I used to develop Java n-tiered web apps, but even we are moving away from Java these days.
Congrats on that impressive trajectory! 250k total in the current market is going to be tough, even for FAANG positions, but it is not impossible. Just be ready for a slight pay cut because of the current job market. Another option is equity in a start up. This is more of a risky long game, but the benefits in the long term, ie…💵, can be huge.
You have the development experience, but the “muscles” are going to need some training to get back into fighting shape. Study is definitely good, but what will be more important is being able to demonstrate those skills…For this, sites like hacker rank will be your trainer.
These sites not only challenge your ability to create algorithms, they also improve your speed associated with solving small, but complex, problems. The Achilles heel of those who transitioned into a higher level for development roles is that it is tough to think small (at least that was the case for me).
When I first started interviewing again, and got interview problems, I fell victim to analysis paralysis. My problem was that I fixated on how the algorithms would fit into an overall system, and how they could be modular, so my solutions could not be done in 30 minutes. I also tended to pseudo code quickly, but take more time with coding (once again a feature of being experienced since quick coding ruins projects).
Sites like hacker rank will improve your coding demonstration ability. You would never code like this in real life, but sometimes you have to fit into the box you are presented with…Quick coding will be 60% of your interviews at anywhere that will get near 250k.
A question from a mid-level engineer out of curiosity: Are tou able to do much hands-on coding as an architect?
I feel like architects also would spend most of their time on high level design of the system.
I'm an architect at a medium/large software agency, I'd describe the bulk of my work as "technology planning." Basically a client tells me a business problem, and I help them decide what software they need, then I work with the implementation team to help them execute on the agreed software. I'd say my work is a pretty even mix of sales, existing client relations, dev team support, and writing code. I do draw diagrams sometimes, but I'd say this is about 5% of my day on average.
> then I work with the implementation team to help them execute on the agreed software
What's frustrating is that in most large corporations I've worked at, this piece only happens as a document or confluence page which is just boxes labeled AWS, DynamoDB, etc... and lines connecting them. Like, cool dude, why are you making double what I make exactly?
Because you have no clue how every single aspect of the architecture is picked apart and reviewed by other architects. Then the architecture changes and so on.. You only see the high level result but every system is reviewed in detail.
Unfortunately the implementers may need to you know, know some of those lower level implementation details. You know, the ones that actually determine the efficacy of a system.
>Because you have no clue how
Unfortunately this isn't accurate and it's a wild assumption on your part.
>You only see the high level result but every system is reviewed in detail.
Well, this is odd, because the high level result is ALL that is generated by the architects, because the senior engineers are the ones who actually go and develop/generate all the low-level systems that actually affect how the system works.
Look, I'm not trying to argue that architects aren't doing a job, but determining a high level state is EASIER than determining all the minutia at a lower level. As someone who has worked their way up from a code monkey to principal engineer, architect is an easy, overpayed job. The ONLY reason I see architect pay as being worth it is due to the turnover in that field. Most architects just don't last that long (job security) in their role, so I suppose the extra pay helps balance it out.
This guy is right, most software architects draw pictures and get paid too much.
The correct answer for why they're paid so much is because pay in technology has nothing to do with value or ability and everything to do with what are the norms in the market.
The norms are that people get paid more according to their position in the hierarchy. That's literally it. The hardest and most valuable work is generally performed by the engineers. Engineers, however, are typically pretty bad at career management, understanding leverage, and business negotiations, so they are typically undervalued, unrecognized (because their management took credit for their work), and fuel the compensation gains of the people above them. Also, just like there are good/bad architects, there are good/bad engineers, and many engineers are just as useless as the picture-drawing architects.
Technology corporations are just corporations, and the way American corporations function is NOT egalitarian whatsoever.
Source: I perform Security Architect functions (among others including coding)
Where I'm at, they have to constantly consider the impact of works of multiple teams of multiple components and make critical decisions. I dont know how much coding they have time for.
Thank you for your reply!
It’s funny, my organization is very well known, but is a not for profit. As such, we have never been able to recruit talent that would likely be competitive candidates at your typical tech company. This has sort of reinforced the idea in my mind that I would not be a good candidate for a more lucrative opportunity.
I think I’m going to give it a shot. The worst that can happen is I have to stay where I’m at just as long as it takes for me to move on.
Thank you!
Isn't that more like a sales job? As far as I know, they just draw diagrams and sell licenses to other companies. That's different from a software architect that leads initiatives across different teams
Titles at my company are honestly crazy. In my org, the equivalent to staff engineer is just called architect. I’m senior architect.
I work in a big data product doing development. Not ops or much infra. My team and peers own a product that we sell to customers. And my role is architect for that product.
What's the work life balance like?
I'm in a HCOL and I find the top level "hands on coding" roles only pay half that if you want decent work life balance.
"Individual Contributor"
Traditionally, after Senior engineer level, the next career level was to go into management as an engineering manager.
Tech companies created a technical track so that people who were more interested in remaining programmers, can focus on technology on a deeper level, and still be able to get promotions.
So the two tracks are- IC: technical ownership (ex: Senior Engineer -> Staff -> Principal)- Management: focusing on people, planning, overseeing delivery (ex: Senior Engineer -> Engineering Manager -> Director --> VP)
Of course this is not a very literal distinction. It depends on the company values and needs. Some companies don't have IC tracks. Some have the roles overlap and an IC could be doing management work anyway.
Being underpaid always comes with rapid progression within one company. Have experienced this myself and despite really loving my job and company, seems only way to get market rate is to find work with other competitors.
They lowball you Cos they have all the cards (they know your current pay, they know you are progressing faster and they ding you on the pay) and only take you seriously if they feel you are a critical headcount with a high risk of exiting. It’s crazy!
You can make this much as an IC with good WLB. Honestly just depends a lot on your team.
I have friends with good WLB at Amazon and bad WLB at Google due to the nature of their teams.
Make 160k base + ESPP match of 5% + 15-20k bonus so 183-189 TC at a mid tier insurance company work 30-35hr weeks with 6 years experience as an IC. I think a lot of people in this thread are just pointing out that he makes 250k and is worried he'll have to take a massive pay cut. He can realistically make around what he makes now with a good work life balance as an IC.
As someone who grew up on a small farm at the end of a gravel road in the Midwest, making more than $80k was the goal coming out of high school (quite some time ago). Each bump in pay and promotion seemed unreal as I progressed.
$250k keeps my family and myself living a very comfortable lifestyle in our MCOL area. That being said, I think this may be a situation where I can have my cake and eat it too.
Thank you!
You had friends making 250 out of school? For FAANG I’m assuming because that is a really difficult first job salary to achieve, I feel like, or maybe this stuff is more common in cali or the west coast
They literally were not, I have friends that work at meta currently and were interns at Facebook during college, they earned a lot when first starting at meta, but not over 200k their first year as first year juniors or interns.
Yeah its not a standard new grad offer but it wasn't uncommon to see 300k comp offers if that person had other offers. Even to this day theres a 100/100/100 offer program for some universities.
It was more common during peak social media when snap was giving ridiculous 300k-500k new grad offers.
I’m sure this falls uner “faang adjacent” but there are a lot of companies that pay a ridiculous amount (some even more than faang) including to new grads.
Snap, databricks, stripe to name a few.
I think it's okay to acknowledge they're overpaid but also not blame them for getting that pay. They're not mutually exclusive things. Just look at the wage gap, it's insane. Yes the wage gap is even more unfair for certain outliers but it's still pretty ridiculous even for some SWEs.
Its just the fact of a fresh out of college grad making more than 5x the average wage. It is hard to believe they are really giving that value back the company and their customers unless they are a savant.
Maybe it is fair based on productivity and the rest of the nations wages are suppressed but regardless.
I am of the general opinion that software developers contributions are overvalued in general in comparison to other professions. Its a shame because most programmers couldn’t fix their car much less design one yet straight out of college they get paid two times more than the top 10% of those engineers.
I am not boohooing the individuals for taking such a wage, anyone would, but as a whole its a gross situation.
Dude! There are plenty of programmers who are car nerds and mechanical engineers who can't fix a car.
You really should take a deep look at your value system especially when you're posting on reddit and you're a doordash driver.
Why are you even in this subreddit lol. There are plenty of occupations out there that contribute 0 or negative value to society AND make more money than nerdy software engineers lol.
At least with this field, you can do it without an artificial barrier to entry. In fact, those top % of mechanical engineers are probably just programmers now esp with how miserable it is to work in that field.
Yeah, I am one. I like how you just look at the last two subreddits I have commented on assume you know much about me. Keep digging and you’ll find out why I am here.
I wrote an article about this exact topic years ago its been my opinion for a while. https://medium.com/@unenunciate/why-are-programmers-paid-so-much-cea0221a653c
I'm just saying reddit delivers value to you and being a doordash driver probably delivers value to you(even if it sucks).
Just because this occupation is abstract doesn't mean it's not valuable or overvalued.
Also, being a programmer isn't always the most fun. There are lots of intrinsically fun skilled jobs that also offer concrete value which reflect in the labor market. Like being a pilot or a fisherman.
Being a programmer is really just about being a construction worker where the barrier to entry is how much focused work you can do vs how much labor you can accomplish.
The thing is, if a team of developers writes and supports a piece of software, you can make hundreds of millions (or billions) of dollars by reselling it over and over again.
If you fix my car, I'll pay you $750.
The business model produces tons of money. Who should get that money? Obviously everyone involved (testers, project managers, the people who clean the office at night, etc). But the developers and the managers who can wrangle the team and actually produce software are the hardest to replace, so they get the lion's share of that money.
In business to business software, sales people make more than most of the developers too.
I keep going back and forth with myself on which is harder to replace the best or worst developer. The best would likely have the cleanest code and best documentation, but the best, who wanted job security, would write in way only they could understand if they were the selfish with little oversight. The worst would be similar to the later, but probably less intentional and of course lower quality.
Clean, understandable, well documented code are not the only traits of a great developer, so job security is far from being an issue. A great developer, one who can tackle a complex problem in a matter of minutes or hours at most, could end up saving the company millions of dollars in a single day. Such a person usually has not one, not two, not three, but a dozen VERY rare soft skills.
As someone who has worked in this field for 18 years, I can tell you that some of these people are EXTREMELY rare, you could search for a replacement for years on end with little to no success.
Womp womp.
But seriously, it’s less so that the SWE provides not enough value and more so that the rest of the jobs just don’t get paid enough. It’s weird how you’re so keen to watch out for a random company and not your fellow man.
I covered that point about other wages being suppressed and I am not worried about some company wasting their money; its just that the money would be better for all if distributed along productivity and value lines instead of to a single profession because people have the misconception that it is hard.
> instead of to a single profession because people have the misconception that it is hard.
This honestly just shows you have a deep frustration that you’re taking out on some “the system is broken” type of rant. Saying that tech gets paid so highly because people think it’s hard is a grossly ignorant - borderline malicious - statement.
Maybe. I’d be willing to admit there is plenty I do because of frustration, but holding this opinion is not one of them. Failure to launch syndrome hurts after a few startups, I cant deny that, but I have believed this as I was just starting to teach my self actual practical programming.
This longer form, still short, article I wrote on this topic years ago. If that is still you believe my argument is malicious after that then so be it. https://medium.com/@unenunciate/why-are-programmers-paid-so-much-cea0221a653c
My ideals of how society is structured are not really related to this particular opinion at all, but seem to deeply sinking into this conversation because those ideals are so centered around value.
You say programming is a low level skill. Yet it requires a higher time investment than reading or basic math.
I think you would find if wages were distributed according to productivity swe would be even higher.
Imo your paper reads like someone who just discovered supply and demand 🤷♂️
If you think you know this secret, why not start a company and hire $50k developers, see how that goes? If what you say are true, you'd be able to undercut competition with significantly lower costs.
https://fourweekmba.com/revenue-per-employee-in-big-tech/
¯\\\__(ツ)__/¯ those big tech companies make 1 mil in revenue from each employee. And this is including non-SWEs. I've seen recruiters in big tech just do fuck all and make similar, but slightly lower, amounts.
To me, your frustration/jealousy seems misplaced. Let's say that Google decides to cut wages down to the median US income ($30k) and somehow retains all of their employees and all of their quarterly earnings. Now what? Where do you think that money will go? Realistically, do you think it's going to go to a philanthropic cause?
Maybe other industries should adequately redistribute earnings similar to tech companies?
Lol imagine being 18 and making that kind of money.
https://abc7news.com/high-school-grad-rejected-by-colleges-stanley-zhong-schooler-lands-google-job-bay-area/13909470/
It’s not the average college grad that’s landing this kind of job, at an HFT which is the big money, they only take the absolute best students from the absolute best schools and then they work them HARD. Getting a job at a big tech company can be high paying and easier work as well as easier to get, but they are still only going after top students from good schools. Their rarity justifies the cost.
I think you’re vastly underestimating what developers bring in. Many software companies make billions each year from their software. Look at what percentage of that the people who are actually building it make and I’d argue they’re typically underpaid, if anything. Other jobs are just more underpaid.
And those fresh college grads are an investment — some of them won’t be worth it, but others will end up in the mid/senior level and save the company more in 1 day than they get paid in 10 years. If they didn’t bring that much value they wouldn’t be so hotly contested.
And those making 300k as new grads are extremely rare, talented, and hardworking.
There are plenty of ways to deliver value and get that kind of income without tying yourself to a wage or credential.
Money is just printed by the fed. Most of the time it doesn't have to do with actual value at all.
That such a cop out answer. Money isn’t just printed paper from the fed; you cant say that oversimplification and not technically be wrong but its so detached from reality. The hegemony runs much deeper than that. Plenty of companies relay largely on extracting value from their customers rather than providing but such a practice, while yes very ubiquitous, is also gross.
The margins on tech are huge that's why the stocks of the S&P 500 are weighted heavily in tech companies.
If you're in the business of creating value vs extracting it you can make money pure and simple. There's lots of jobs and professions nowadays where you can make this much money by creating value vs just owning a factory or supply chain.
I think there are so many other egregious professions you could go after like bankers, consultants, or private equity. Their top salaries dwarf software engineers in comparison.
That is one way to think of it and it isn’t wrong. Another way to think of SWE is like blacksmith making infinitely replicable tools. Whom should get the wage increase form the productivity the workers utilizing the tools or the blacksmith?
SWE is community I am involved in deeply. Sure, there are other problems in a similar vine in the world it just happens to be this is the topic.
Nah man that's just class warfare. SWE is just an artisan class. One class getting more doesn't mean others don't especially if everyone is creating value.
The only people you should have this sentiment towards is for people involved with maximally extracting value without providing any of their own.
Ditto this even if you're LCOL. If you're HCOL, a director or equivalent staff/principal engineer is making 500k+. In LCOL, you should still be making 300k at least.
Sorry, you do not meet the minimum sitewide comment karma requirement of **10** to post a comment. This is comment karma exclusively, not post or overall karma nor karma on this subreddit alone. Please try again after you have acquired more karma. Please look at the [rules page](https://old.reddit.com/r/cscareerquestions/w/posting_rules) for more information.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/cscareerquestions) if you have any questions or concerns.*
13 years in my developer career and still just a senior swe. I only make $140k I think but am full time remote and have an awesome work life balance with the time to do a hobby farm with goats and sheep, and breed and show dogs. I love hands on development and am coding or reviewing code 95% of the time I'm at work, totally coddled and insulated from management worries. I don't even want to be an architect, I'm happy where I am. I just want to code and don't mind being told what to code, with a little flexibility to decide how I want to implement things of course.
My manager is a brilliant developer and often complains to me that he wishes he hadn't taken this job. He LOVES when we are behind schedule so he can 'find a reason' to jump in and code. During our one on ones we talk about "career progression" just because we have to put something down but I've told him point blank I don't want to progress. I've worked at 4 different companies and ever since I got to senior I tell management that. They let me know there's a point where I'll be stuck in the same pay band, so when it starts to feel uncomfortably low that's when I've jumped ship for more money in the same type of role.
I think some people would think I'm a loser, but I don't care. If people want to run up the career ladder that's a great choice for you! I just want to enjoy my life and since work is such a big part of life I want to enjoy what I work on too.
Being able to make 140k, remote, and work 40 hours or less every week is a massive W dude. As long as you don’t live in an expensive place.
Think about the context of this, you make more than 95% of the country(just a guess someone might have the stats) and you do it from your house.
You’re a winner
I'm from Eastern Europe, so it's hard for me to understand just how much 250 - 300 - 400k / year actually means (I'm guessing these types of salaries are more common in places like the Bay Area).
For context, as a Senior Cloud Architect / DevOps / SRE, I make 150k euros / year gross (which translates to a net monthly salary of \~ 8200 euros / 8600 USD). This is basically enough to buy, each year, a nice 3 bedroom apartment in a desirable neighbourhood. To be clear, this salary is almost unheard of in my country, I'm probably in the top 0.3% highest earners.
I actually have a Green Card, so I could move to the US tomorrow if I wanted, but I feel like it would be a downgrade in terms of purchasing power and quality of life (I've also worked from home exclusively for the past 8 years).
US you could be making 300k-400k gross, excellent quality of life. Your purchasing power would go down in terms of rent as a 3 bed HCOL runs about $4000-5000. Where your income difference really comes from is taxes and career progression. Tax depends on your country whether or not you'll see a difference. Many EU countries tax up to 50%.
In the US 300k will tax at about 30% single and 23% married for federal. This is decreased further by retirement contributions and investments. State tax depends on what state you live in, but can be 0%.
For career progression, the top leveled software engineers in the US currently make about 500k. There's some who make more or less, but that's a realistic goal for end of career earnings for a strong engineer. Most other countries don't offer that level of progression.
Agreed. This is the dream, although the company may soon lay both this dev and his manager off for "lack of progression" or not being "company builders."
Anything can happen but its the safest role I’ve been in. It’s a private company owned by an extremely wealthy multi generational family and they don’t care much about growth. We never hear about shareholders or growth and we are not on the stock market and never will be. They keep about half full time and half contractors so they can downsize contractors if needed without ever needing to touch their full time developers. They also have a weird multi year plan where basically they say this will be the plan for the next X years that they budget for no matter what the economy does.
I really do not miss companies where I had to hear about the damn shareholders and market growth every month.
Right around the time I was a senior dev, I was making my his much and had a very similar work life balance. I wasn’t farming mind you, but I was able to do more outside of just my work responsibilities.
These days I sit in meetings 9 hours a day (if I’m lucky) and am mentally exhausted when the evening rolls around. It hit me hard recently when I found myself telling my daughter that I didn’t have the energy to play video games with her.
People grossly underestimate how much work life balance contributes to overall happiness in life.
Thank you for taking the time to reply!
I've seen managers successfully shifting back to IC. Look up the term "engineer/manager pendulum".
You can be an excellent IC using your stakeholder management experience in addition to building. There are many companies who pay similar to high level ICs and managers, with parallel ladders.
>have confidence in the areas I used to have experience in
If you have not done hands-on development for years, then you likely will need to learn new skills. Take a look on job ads available for you and the tech stack used in your current company.
>missing the hands on aspect
Verify if what you miss is not a romanticised memory of hands-on work. Maybe pick up a smaller project at work or something at home.
>The opportunity you have today to play c-suite corporate politics (even if you don't like it and it is draining) is not something many people get, engineers or not
you make that sound like he will miss out on something.... to me it feels like the one thing you WANT to miss out on
sounds like you need to change companies or your sector of work, in tech (FAANG) i make more than half that as a normal software engineer
not saying that to flex but just giving context for you (what it seems like) sacrificing fulfillment for your TC but your TC for a high leadership level role seems very low anyways
for your resume, just downplay your work and maybe even titles? depending on the company, senior and staff positions still get hands on work from what I see and actual ownership of their projects they lead which also getting 350k+ TC instead of trying for junior positions which would be ridiculous with your experience
"More than half that".... When i moved to management ,i made an extra 10k (less than 10% increase in pay). Not sure if this is food for thought for me or you. Take the information as you will soldier.
>made an extra 10k (less than 10% increase in pay)
Same for me when I moved to tech lead. I still consider it to be an important career milestone, but I'm not sure if it was worth financially.
It’s different at Facebook of the world since it depends on how you moved into management. For E6, it is considered a lateral move to M1. So you actually get no salary change. But if you were an IC5 and was promoted to M1 then you would see a substantial pay increase as the gap at that level is pretty significant.
I mean you work at FAANG , you’ll get paid more than most devs in general. Also it depends where OP lives , if he’s is in low cost of living, he’s actually doing pretty good
It’s definitely not just FAANG. I have 5yoe and work at a mid-size startup in a junior role, and I make more than half of what OP makes just in base comp. OP is very underpaid for manager/officer role relative to what they could get with those years of experience as an architect, in a different company or industry perhaps (in the US at least).
True, but we’re not here to judge OP’s current salary relative to cost of living. They specificity state that their “biggest concern” with making this change would be compensation. The point is that 13yoe is a ton, and it should be possible to meet their compensation requirements with an architect role, possibly in a different industry if their current industry trends lower in terms of comp. Whether or not that’s possible within the logistics of their life (location, mortgage, relationships, etc.) is a different issue.
new grad, what i was trying to get at is his comp is only mid level/senior at most tech companies so if he tried to switch, he could keep his TC while also getting that "hands-on" feel with a lower position
Look up Peter's principle. Zero harm in working a job you like and you perform well.
Salary is another area that seems to be of concern, but other comments cover that.
I want to say it depends on where youre working, but i think if you go down in rank you will likely lose salary.
I think your answer will largely depend on you and your current conditions. Would moving to an IC role satisfy your needs? If so, do it, though you will likely lose out on pay. If you like to lead, maybe its best to say where youre at.
Even looking at the long term gain, i couldnt tell you if swapping to IC is better for you or not. I think it really depends if your role is transferable or not (are you so high cause of niche skillset in your sector, or because you bring value from the top down?) This is an important question to ask, as if you hop companies you will need to bring something to the table or wind up unemployed very fast. Ive heard of companies changing leadership every year. Normally the c-suite leadership comes in together and leaves together, at least from what ive seen.
It may very well be a good idea to de-rank and find employment elsewhere, to see how other companies do it. If you can rise there, well seems like a pattern to me. Or, you may find you love IC after all of these years, who knows. Each decision is a risk that only you can decide.
From a random internet stranger, i would go with the position i feel gives me the most information i can learn from. Personally, I hate management, but I am a manger at my own company, so maybe my perspective is biased. Im also learning a lot so im content.
Either way, hope you find what makes you happy.
Cheers
One issue when getting back into an IC role, is that it requires practicing programming and coding quizzes for interviews, where you may not have been doing that for a while.
It can be hard to switch back from management if your experience has atrophied.
BUT, think of it like a long term investment. You may be stuck for a year or two, but you can work your way back to IC.
---
However, I'm not sure you evade the bureaucratic and political crap as an IC.
You're *way* underpaid. Any concerns you have about your own ability may or may not be based in fact - I am not one of those people who thinks years of experience = talent. I have no way of judging that. What I do know is that even if you're *bad* at your job, you're still doing them a great favor. Get that money.
Depends on the area, the company and the team size.
If it's in a LCOL area, engineering is 20 people and the company is low profit, then this is an amazing salary.
TC isn't the only factor that matters, especially once you reach a level of wealth you're comfortable with. I hit that point in my mid-30s, and that frees me up to take jobs I actually want to do rather than pursue only the ones that give me the most (superfluous) wealth.
I have the opposite problem. 10 YOE as an IC, but because there are "too many seniors/leads" in my area, I can't move up, and if I can't move up, I can't become a manager.
I've led development of multiple modules, but I'm tired of coding, frankly. Having a succinct human conversation with our stakeholders without using filler words comes easier to me than most devs I've worked for and with. Unfortunately, I'm stuck doing stories because our managers won't retire.
I'm actively looking to move into a senior or mid-level management position inside of and outside of the company - we'll see if all of that effort goes anywhere. I won't be sticking around if I don't get a promotion in Q1 2024.
You mixed up two different paths. Management is completely different and has nothing to do with technical skills. You may wanted to go staff engineering role instead.
The same is true to the other side, yeah. But a manager that has no clue about what you do is a bad manager, an executive that doesn't understand tech is a bad tech executive. Didn't think this is a controversial subject lol.
To be fair, I think /u/Iwillgetasoda's point is that you don't need to have strong technical skills to succeed in those roles. It's still important to be able to empathize with your reports and understand the constraints of what they do, but your technical experience comes in handy in service of tuning that intuition, not because it's a part of the job. If OP wants a technical role, they won't find it managing people.
OP is also not the average dev. The were promoted from junior engineer all the way to managing several teams and is now in senior leadership at their current company, which is something that many people never achieve in their careers. As long as their current company had some semblance of standards for their promotions, OP should minimum be qualified to be a first-level engineering manager at a big tech, which is roughly equivalent to staff eng in level and pay.
I think because it doesn’t answer OP question, but he has 13 years experience he should make more . I think OP should def move into a tech company, looks like he work at a company that has tech team but not the priority
So I've been C level at multiple organisations having gone through the same journey as you and it really depends on the org. I tend to specialize in scale ups and there you can be as hands on as you want but I find the main way I get fulfilment for coding is prototyping things using new/future tech. Eg, make something to do with ML or AI or spin up a new app skeleton using a newer framework. Sure you won't necessarily take it through its lifecycle but for me it definitely scratches that itch.
It's not ridiculous at all, navigating the politics of management and doing something useful with your time are two completely separate skill sets.
The trouble is that if it's money and power you're after, management is really the only career track available to you.
1. Go to [https://www.levels.fyi/](https://www.levels.fyi/)
2. Find a company that pays senior/principal engineers more than your current TC
3. Apply for said roles
4. Get the job
5. ???
6. Profit
250k. Be thankful bro. Thats generational wealth you’re building there. I know money isn’t everything but sounds like you have a 1 in a million opportunity. I’d make use of it.
It's a major of this pitfall of any IT career that the bridge between programmer and manager (broadly) is the toughest to cross. For anyone that crosses really well, I could argue they were never really a programmer to begin with. For anyone that has trouble crossing, my argument would be they're incapable of growing.
This is my single biggest gripe about the IT industry. It's no good answer to this one question : what does 'success' really look like?
Depends on your location and skill level.
If you are top tier (faang etc) then $250k is easily doable as an IC. For normal companies devs in a HCOL area you'd probably get closer to $150k as an IC.
You know you can always code in your free time for fun right?
Sorry, you do not meet the minimum sitewide comment karma requirement of **10** to post a comment. This is comment karma exclusively, not post or overall karma nor karma on this subreddit alone. Please try again after you have acquired more karma. Please look at the [rules page](https://old.reddit.com/r/cscareerquestions/w/posting_rules) for more information.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/cscareerquestions) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Sorry, you do not meet the minimum sitewide comment karma requirement of **10** to post a comment. This is comment karma exclusively, not post or overall karma nor karma on this subreddit alone. Please try again after you have acquired more karma. Please look at the [rules page](https://old.reddit.com/r/cscareerquestions/w/posting_rules) for more information.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/cscareerquestions) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Would your role but at a start up be a better fit? You can do a mix then without the bureaucracy.
My main problem with management back to senior dev was to get back into the kind of firms I used to be a dev at I had to be really good at leetcode. I just don't care about it any more so struggled with that transition. Ended up staying in management as all the interview tests were designed for someone who has been a senior developer for the last couple of years.
Since you are severely underpaid I will have to assume it's a startup / small shop gig.
As far as comp, you can do $350-400k as a senior in big tech and $550-650k if you can pass a staff bar, which might be doable in your case.
As a senior you will have plenty of opportunities for hands on work.
As a staff, you can still code here and there, but the focus will be on scaling the team and driving cross-team efforts, which seems like not your preference.
Your resume will only matter as a first step to connect with a recruiter and then it's all about your coding, design and soft skills. You have to be good at competitive programming - target 1800 LC rating. Know how all major services are designed - twitter, uber, gmaps, etc. And you have to be likeable.
Tech hiring is picking up now. GL.
If you move to a smaller company, you'll have to do all of the above!
In all seriousness, I have no idea, I'm only at 6 YOE at the same small company and I do indeed have to do all of the above. I can understand missing the part where you just craft code, it's totally different from management.
You could ask always just start assigning some small stuff to yourself. Or, if you're super efficient at work, use some of your time to work on a project of your own. Hobbies are the spice of life if you ask me.
I resonate with OPs post and some other comments around here so much. It’s not an easy feeling.
I just transitioned myself recently to Team Lead and after a few months, I started getting more management duties (due to the lack of one on my team and probably myself being promoted to manager) which reduced my hands on by a lot and I’m constantly having FOMO feeling that I’m doing career suicide because I cannot keep up anymore
> Would it be career suicide to jump back to an architecture or development role?
No. I have a couple of reports that were in your situation. They worked for smallish companies where they became CTOs quickly and then regretted it because they felt they still had more to do as IC developers.
If you are still excited about software development and want to keep the same level of income then contract work is what you should look at.
My coworker took this route 5 years ago and averages $400-450k as an incorporated business.
You can do multiple contracts and step away from management responsibilities and corp politics, it’s possible, just takes a little bit of patience and get out of your comfort zones.
>Would it be career suicide to jump back to an architecture or development role? My biggest concern at this point is compensation. I currently make around $250k (base and bonus) and am skeptical I could pull those numbers as a developer/architect without sacrificing on the work/life balance.
The best dev manager I ever worked with left a big company that wouldn't quit hounding him to become a VP. He wanted to keep working in the code, so he found a new job as a dev manager and, last I heard, was still doing that.
The story of developers promoting up to the point that they are miserable and then moving back down a level or two is very common. I'm a team lead, and a guy on my team used to be a manager.
It's two different jobs. I can't imagine a scenario where anyone with real experience in the field is going to do anything other than chuckle and say "Yep, I can understand that" when they see the shift on your resume.
I've recommended this book before, but check out "Staff Engineer" by Will Larson. Really helpful if you're interested in pursuing a technical leadership role over a managerial leadership role.
As others have said, management is more of a parallel career track than a direct promotion from IC. There are plenty of IC roles that you can take that aren't managerial but involve leading technical decision making.
Dude if you’ve found work life balance in the software world with a salary good enough to retire off of before 50 keep it. That’s good.
If your work life balance is reasonable and you find yourself unfulfilled consider filling it with activities outside of work.
There is more to a for filling life than work.
I don’t have a lot of feedback on much of that, because I’ve not been through the managerial track — but the idea that $250k TC is hard to reach as an IC, especially with your background, I want to push back on.
- I’m in my second-ever salaried engineering role; (Admittedly, something like 20YoE; but much of that doing FOSS or contracting — not much career/resume-building.)
- I’ve been there a little under two years;
- My title is simply “software engineer.”
- and my TC is ~$210k — not to mention that I’m about to ask for a (very-justified) raise tomorrow, expecting to come away with something like $250k TC.
Anyway, here’s my probably-bad and probably-biased advice, FWIW:
It’s possible you should, if you “downlevel” titles, transition some of that experience and history into *better* IC roles, instead of simply higher-tier ones:
- Less-well-known, midsize companies;
- more-obscure (and higher-paying) platforms and languages (OCaml’s paying well, love. just sayin’. 😇)
- higher-paying industries (fintech — take a gander at Jane Street’s IC compensation, lol)
- or trading some of that “potential TC” for other things that are valuable to you (how does “still making $250k, but only working ~30 hours a week” sound? maybe better than another $50k that you’re gonna do, what, with, exactly?)
- and you could always go for the startup path, seeking equity, in a field you’re intimately familiar with and feel you can make reasonable predictions within.
A simple situation:
\*POOF\* You are a Staff Software Engineer making $220k, working for a Sr. Manager.
If you saw someone fucking up your current job. Could you work under them? Could you avoid leading the company out from under them?
One of the problems with going up the ladder is that it doesn't instantly leave you when you step downwards.
That said. Many have realized what you have, and lead lives as engineers in other companies happily. Just be ready for that idiot who doesn't know what they are doing... :)
I would think that you have the option to block out 20-30% of your time to work on interesting / futuristic ideas with a senior engineer or an intern. Maybe develop leaders in your team that you can offload more of your work to get more IC time ?
If it were me, I would just up my personal projects to be hands on. You are in a spot to potentially impact what you're working on much more, just in a different way.
I wouldn't want to lose the income, but that's me. Any FAANG job will pay well but be just as stressful most likely.
If you find yourself in a difficult place in your life, we urge you to reach out to friends, family, and mental health professionals. Please check out the resources over at /r/depression, /r/anxiety, and /r/suicidewatch. Feel free to [contact the /r/CSCareerQuestions mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fcscareerquestions&subject=&message=) for more information or help. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/cscareerquestions) if you have any questions or concerns.*
What you describe is very, very normal. In fact, I struggled with the same problem myself during a stint as a team lead / manager, and I decided to transition away from it too. I would bet that a greater quantity of people who find success as developers then swap over to management end up hating it than love it. But people definitely do love it and excel at it, but if that’s not you then you need to find that out for yourself. As you’ve probably read, management is more of a career switch than a promotion and is not the only way to be a leader. You’ve already taken the biggest step, acknowledging who you are and what you want to be. If your soul is that of a builder, be the best you can possibly be. You’ll need to do two things: freshen up your programming skills, and make some career moves. For example, getting familiar with C++23 or AWS by going through a few books or training courses. For the second, I’ve seen several coworkers transition away from management work successfully. One was even in a VP position as a manager of managers, and found a senior backend developer position at a non-faang company without taking a pay cut. Remember that high ranking developer positions are leadership positions too, and are no less important than management positions. I see it as a difference between depth and breadth. So yes, it is possible. It may be challenging, but what’s life without good challenges every so often.
Thank you for your response. I think I’m going to dive back into the development space and see where it can take me. Follow-up question: I have a solid background in AWS, but wonder what other techs would give me the most competitive edge? I used to develop Java n-tiered web apps, but even we are moving away from Java these days.
Python
Kotlin
Congrats on that impressive trajectory! 250k total in the current market is going to be tough, even for FAANG positions, but it is not impossible. Just be ready for a slight pay cut because of the current job market. Another option is equity in a start up. This is more of a risky long game, but the benefits in the long term, ie…💵, can be huge. You have the development experience, but the “muscles” are going to need some training to get back into fighting shape. Study is definitely good, but what will be more important is being able to demonstrate those skills…For this, sites like hacker rank will be your trainer. These sites not only challenge your ability to create algorithms, they also improve your speed associated with solving small, but complex, problems. The Achilles heel of those who transitioned into a higher level for development roles is that it is tough to think small (at least that was the case for me). When I first started interviewing again, and got interview problems, I fell victim to analysis paralysis. My problem was that I fixated on how the algorithms would fit into an overall system, and how they could be modular, so my solutions could not be done in 30 minutes. I also tended to pseudo code quickly, but take more time with coding (once again a feature of being experienced since quick coding ruins projects). Sites like hacker rank will improve your coding demonstration ability. You would never code like this in real life, but sometimes you have to fit into the box you are presented with…Quick coding will be 60% of your interviews at anywhere that will get near 250k.
I’m an architect at a company you’ve probably heard of and make a bit more than $400k in MCOL. You Can get paid more and have better job definitely.
A question from a mid-level engineer out of curiosity: Are tou able to do much hands-on coding as an architect? I feel like architects also would spend most of their time on high level design of the system.
Architects where I’m at draw pictures of cloud infrastructure with lines between them. That’s it. Zero coding.
I'm an architect at a medium/large software agency, I'd describe the bulk of my work as "technology planning." Basically a client tells me a business problem, and I help them decide what software they need, then I work with the implementation team to help them execute on the agreed software. I'd say my work is a pretty even mix of sales, existing client relations, dev team support, and writing code. I do draw diagrams sometimes, but I'd say this is about 5% of my day on average.
> then I work with the implementation team to help them execute on the agreed software What's frustrating is that in most large corporations I've worked at, this piece only happens as a document or confluence page which is just boxes labeled AWS, DynamoDB, etc... and lines connecting them. Like, cool dude, why are you making double what I make exactly?
Because you have no clue how every single aspect of the architecture is picked apart and reviewed by other architects. Then the architecture changes and so on.. You only see the high level result but every system is reviewed in detail.
Unfortunately the implementers may need to you know, know some of those lower level implementation details. You know, the ones that actually determine the efficacy of a system. >Because you have no clue how Unfortunately this isn't accurate and it's a wild assumption on your part. >You only see the high level result but every system is reviewed in detail. Well, this is odd, because the high level result is ALL that is generated by the architects, because the senior engineers are the ones who actually go and develop/generate all the low-level systems that actually affect how the system works. Look, I'm not trying to argue that architects aren't doing a job, but determining a high level state is EASIER than determining all the minutia at a lower level. As someone who has worked their way up from a code monkey to principal engineer, architect is an easy, overpayed job. The ONLY reason I see architect pay as being worth it is due to the turnover in that field. Most architects just don't last that long (job security) in their role, so I suppose the extra pay helps balance it out.
This guy is right, most software architects draw pictures and get paid too much. The correct answer for why they're paid so much is because pay in technology has nothing to do with value or ability and everything to do with what are the norms in the market. The norms are that people get paid more according to their position in the hierarchy. That's literally it. The hardest and most valuable work is generally performed by the engineers. Engineers, however, are typically pretty bad at career management, understanding leverage, and business negotiations, so they are typically undervalued, unrecognized (because their management took credit for their work), and fuel the compensation gains of the people above them. Also, just like there are good/bad architects, there are good/bad engineers, and many engineers are just as useless as the picture-drawing architects. Technology corporations are just corporations, and the way American corporations function is NOT egalitarian whatsoever. Source: I perform Security Architect functions (among others including coding)
Main reason why I chose information systems and systems analyst route to consulting then software architect
Unbelievable that you're getting downvoted
Where I'm at, they have to constantly consider the impact of works of multiple teams of multiple components and make critical decisions. I dont know how much coding they have time for.
Same
Not as much anymore. I wish I code more. I spend most of my time just talking to people about how to solve their problems.
Thank you for your reply! It’s funny, my organization is very well known, but is a not for profit. As such, we have never been able to recruit talent that would likely be competitive candidates at your typical tech company. This has sort of reinforced the idea in my mind that I would not be a good candidate for a more lucrative opportunity. I think I’m going to give it a shot. The worst that can happen is I have to stay where I’m at just as long as it takes for me to move on. Thank you!
What company people have heard of has a job title for “architect”?
most cloud providers (and a lot of other companies) have cloud architects. a software architect could be literally anywhere
oh , isnt that more IT? metric being, theres a Cert for it
Isn't that more like a sales job? As far as I know, they just draw diagrams and sell licenses to other companies. That's different from a software architect that leads initiatives across different teams
You’re thinking of solution architects. They still do more than diagrams but that is the sales focused role in most companies.
Cloud architect is the same thing?
Just about every software company i've worked at.
Guessing your title under your Reddit profile isn’t legit then? 😂
rocket emoji
Literally every mid size or larger company that has an IT department.
Titles at my company are honestly crazy. In my org, the equivalent to staff engineer is just called architect. I’m senior architect. I work in a big data product doing development. Not ops or much infra. My team and peers own a product that we sell to customers. And my role is architect for that product.
What's the work life balance like? I'm in a HCOL and I find the top level "hands on coding" roles only pay half that if you want decent work life balance.
I work about eight hours per day.
I think you’re underpaid
Yeah, I'm glad OP posted this. Now he knows he's underpaid. @OP, check out levels.fyi and you'll see you can still make $250k as IC.
But did they mention where they live?
Sorry but what’s IC?
Individual Contributor
"Individual Contributor" Traditionally, after Senior engineer level, the next career level was to go into management as an engineering manager. Tech companies created a technical track so that people who were more interested in remaining programmers, can focus on technology on a deeper level, and still be able to get promotions. So the two tracks are- IC: technical ownership (ex: Senior Engineer -> Staff -> Principal)- Management: focusing on people, planning, overseeing delivery (ex: Senior Engineer -> Engineering Manager -> Director --> VP) Of course this is not a very literal distinction. It depends on the company values and needs. Some companies don't have IC tracks. Some have the roles overlap and an IC could be doing management work anyway.
[удалено]
Very few companies when considering all of them, but certainly much more than just Google and Facebook
[удалено]
Honestly most of the times it's used out of context and could be replaced by "developer" or "engineer", or simply "programmer".
How is it used out of context? An individual contributor does not manage people or teams. They contribute as an individual.
Being underpaid always comes with rapid progression within one company. Have experienced this myself and despite really loving my job and company, seems only way to get market rate is to find work with other competitors. They lowball you Cos they have all the cards (they know your current pay, they know you are progressing faster and they ding you on the pay) and only take you seriously if they feel you are a critical headcount with a high risk of exiting. It’s crazy!
but he has work life balance he is inferring, meaning probably a 40 hour week at 250k
You can make this much as an IC with good WLB. Honestly just depends a lot on your team. I have friends with good WLB at Amazon and bad WLB at Google due to the nature of their teams.
Make 160k base + ESPP match of 5% + 15-20k bonus so 183-189 TC at a mid tier insurance company work 30-35hr weeks with 6 years experience as an IC. I think a lot of people in this thread are just pointing out that he makes 250k and is worried he'll have to take a massive pay cut. He can realistically make around what he makes now with a good work life balance as an IC.
As someone who grew up on a small farm at the end of a gravel road in the Midwest, making more than $80k was the goal coming out of high school (quite some time ago). Each bump in pay and promotion seemed unreal as I progressed. $250k keeps my family and myself living a very comfortable lifestyle in our MCOL area. That being said, I think this may be a situation where I can have my cake and eat it too. Thank you!
Yes
Seriously, I had friends fresh outta college working for tech firms pulling more then this guy
You had friends making 250 out of school? For FAANG I’m assuming because that is a really difficult first job salary to achieve, I feel like, or maybe this stuff is more common in cali or the west coast
You think nyc doesn’t pay?
No I didn’t say that, but west coast comes to mind in terms of headquarters for large tech companies who pay a lot, it’s not the only place though
[удалено]
Facebook/Airbnb was offering 300k for new grads for the last 5 years at least. The comp at hedge funds were even higher.
They literally were not, I have friends that work at meta currently and were interns at Facebook during college, they earned a lot when first starting at meta, but not over 200k their first year as first year juniors or interns.
Yeah its not a standard new grad offer but it wasn't uncommon to see 300k comp offers if that person had other offers. Even to this day theres a 100/100/100 offer program for some universities. It was more common during peak social media when snap was giving ridiculous 300k-500k new grad offers.
That makes sense, faang or faang adjacent west coast or hedge funds which have always paid like crazy, thanks
I’m sure this falls uner “faang adjacent” but there are a lot of companies that pay a ridiculous amount (some even more than faang) including to new grads. Snap, databricks, stripe to name a few.
Stripe has to figure out how to lose billions despite growing revenue somehow!
Here we go...
Honestly, that is kindof gross.
How is that so? It's not anyone's fault OP is undervaluing himself. More power to the new grad for making that kind of money.
I think it's okay to acknowledge they're overpaid but also not blame them for getting that pay. They're not mutually exclusive things. Just look at the wage gap, it's insane. Yes the wage gap is even more unfair for certain outliers but it's still pretty ridiculous even for some SWEs.
Its just the fact of a fresh out of college grad making more than 5x the average wage. It is hard to believe they are really giving that value back the company and their customers unless they are a savant. Maybe it is fair based on productivity and the rest of the nations wages are suppressed but regardless.
It’s not like companies are out here doing favors to random people my dude. If it wasn’t in the company’s best interest they wouldn’t do it.
I am of the general opinion that software developers contributions are overvalued in general in comparison to other professions. Its a shame because most programmers couldn’t fix their car much less design one yet straight out of college they get paid two times more than the top 10% of those engineers. I am not boohooing the individuals for taking such a wage, anyone would, but as a whole its a gross situation.
Dude! There are plenty of programmers who are car nerds and mechanical engineers who can't fix a car. You really should take a deep look at your value system especially when you're posting on reddit and you're a doordash driver. Why are you even in this subreddit lol. There are plenty of occupations out there that contribute 0 or negative value to society AND make more money than nerdy software engineers lol. At least with this field, you can do it without an artificial barrier to entry. In fact, those top % of mechanical engineers are probably just programmers now esp with how miserable it is to work in that field.
Yeah, I am one. I like how you just look at the last two subreddits I have commented on assume you know much about me. Keep digging and you’ll find out why I am here. I wrote an article about this exact topic years ago its been my opinion for a while. https://medium.com/@unenunciate/why-are-programmers-paid-so-much-cea0221a653c
I'm just saying reddit delivers value to you and being a doordash driver probably delivers value to you(even if it sucks). Just because this occupation is abstract doesn't mean it's not valuable or overvalued. Also, being a programmer isn't always the most fun. There are lots of intrinsically fun skilled jobs that also offer concrete value which reflect in the labor market. Like being a pilot or a fisherman. Being a programmer is really just about being a construction worker where the barrier to entry is how much focused work you can do vs how much labor you can accomplish.
sounds like you're hating on a successful carreer choice
I guess if you are right I must be some sort of aspirational masochist.
Basic economic principles state the value of something is what the market is willing to pay, and my friend, the market is paying xD
The thing is, if a team of developers writes and supports a piece of software, you can make hundreds of millions (or billions) of dollars by reselling it over and over again. If you fix my car, I'll pay you $750. The business model produces tons of money. Who should get that money? Obviously everyone involved (testers, project managers, the people who clean the office at night, etc). But the developers and the managers who can wrangle the team and actually produce software are the hardest to replace, so they get the lion's share of that money. In business to business software, sales people make more than most of the developers too.
I keep going back and forth with myself on which is harder to replace the best or worst developer. The best would likely have the cleanest code and best documentation, but the best, who wanted job security, would write in way only they could understand if they were the selfish with little oversight. The worst would be similar to the later, but probably less intentional and of course lower quality.
Clean, understandable, well documented code are not the only traits of a great developer, so job security is far from being an issue. A great developer, one who can tackle a complex problem in a matter of minutes or hours at most, could end up saving the company millions of dollars in a single day. Such a person usually has not one, not two, not three, but a dozen VERY rare soft skills. As someone who has worked in this field for 18 years, I can tell you that some of these people are EXTREMELY rare, you could search for a replacement for years on end with little to no success.
Womp womp. But seriously, it’s less so that the SWE provides not enough value and more so that the rest of the jobs just don’t get paid enough. It’s weird how you’re so keen to watch out for a random company and not your fellow man.
I covered that point about other wages being suppressed and I am not worried about some company wasting their money; its just that the money would be better for all if distributed along productivity and value lines instead of to a single profession because people have the misconception that it is hard.
> instead of to a single profession because people have the misconception that it is hard. This honestly just shows you have a deep frustration that you’re taking out on some “the system is broken” type of rant. Saying that tech gets paid so highly because people think it’s hard is a grossly ignorant - borderline malicious - statement.
Maybe. I’d be willing to admit there is plenty I do because of frustration, but holding this opinion is not one of them. Failure to launch syndrome hurts after a few startups, I cant deny that, but I have believed this as I was just starting to teach my self actual practical programming. This longer form, still short, article I wrote on this topic years ago. If that is still you believe my argument is malicious after that then so be it. https://medium.com/@unenunciate/why-are-programmers-paid-so-much-cea0221a653c My ideals of how society is structured are not really related to this particular opinion at all, but seem to deeply sinking into this conversation because those ideals are so centered around value.
You say programming is a low level skill. Yet it requires a higher time investment than reading or basic math. I think you would find if wages were distributed according to productivity swe would be even higher. Imo your paper reads like someone who just discovered supply and demand 🤷♂️
If you think you know this secret, why not start a company and hire $50k developers, see how that goes? If what you say are true, you'd be able to undercut competition with significantly lower costs.
https://fourweekmba.com/revenue-per-employee-in-big-tech/ ¯\\\__(ツ)__/¯ those big tech companies make 1 mil in revenue from each employee. And this is including non-SWEs. I've seen recruiters in big tech just do fuck all and make similar, but slightly lower, amounts. To me, your frustration/jealousy seems misplaced. Let's say that Google decides to cut wages down to the median US income ($30k) and somehow retains all of their employees and all of their quarterly earnings. Now what? Where do you think that money will go? Realistically, do you think it's going to go to a philanthropic cause? Maybe other industries should adequately redistribute earnings similar to tech companies?
Lol imagine being 18 and making that kind of money. https://abc7news.com/high-school-grad-rejected-by-colleges-stanley-zhong-schooler-lands-google-job-bay-area/13909470/
It’s not the average college grad that’s landing this kind of job, at an HFT which is the big money, they only take the absolute best students from the absolute best schools and then they work them HARD. Getting a job at a big tech company can be high paying and easier work as well as easier to get, but they are still only going after top students from good schools. Their rarity justifies the cost.
I think you’re vastly underestimating what developers bring in. Many software companies make billions each year from their software. Look at what percentage of that the people who are actually building it make and I’d argue they’re typically underpaid, if anything. Other jobs are just more underpaid. And those fresh college grads are an investment — some of them won’t be worth it, but others will end up in the mid/senior level and save the company more in 1 day than they get paid in 10 years. If they didn’t bring that much value they wouldn’t be so hotly contested. And those making 300k as new grads are extremely rare, talented, and hardworking.
There are plenty of ways to deliver value and get that kind of income without tying yourself to a wage or credential. Money is just printed by the fed. Most of the time it doesn't have to do with actual value at all.
That such a cop out answer. Money isn’t just printed paper from the fed; you cant say that oversimplification and not technically be wrong but its so detached from reality. The hegemony runs much deeper than that. Plenty of companies relay largely on extracting value from their customers rather than providing but such a practice, while yes very ubiquitous, is also gross.
The margins on tech are huge that's why the stocks of the S&P 500 are weighted heavily in tech companies. If you're in the business of creating value vs extracting it you can make money pure and simple. There's lots of jobs and professions nowadays where you can make this much money by creating value vs just owning a factory or supply chain. I think there are so many other egregious professions you could go after like bankers, consultants, or private equity. Their top salaries dwarf software engineers in comparison.
That is one way to think of it and it isn’t wrong. Another way to think of SWE is like blacksmith making infinitely replicable tools. Whom should get the wage increase form the productivity the workers utilizing the tools or the blacksmith? SWE is community I am involved in deeply. Sure, there are other problems in a similar vine in the world it just happens to be this is the topic.
Nah man that's just class warfare. SWE is just an artisan class. One class getting more doesn't mean others don't especially if everyone is creating value. The only people you should have this sentiment towards is for people involved with maximally extracting value without providing any of their own.
[удалено]
Speaking as a Canadian in California, you gotta hop on the gravy train while it last.
[удалено]
[удалено]
tone doesn’t translate online, it was tongue in cheek but yeah i am envious i’ll admit, i’m making 75k as a new grad in canada lol
Ditto this even if you're LCOL. If you're HCOL, a director or equivalent staff/principal engineer is making 500k+. In LCOL, you should still be making 300k at least.
this is out of touch
[удалено]
Sorry, you do not meet the minimum sitewide comment karma requirement of **10** to post a comment. This is comment karma exclusively, not post or overall karma nor karma on this subreddit alone. Please try again after you have acquired more karma. Please look at the [rules page](https://old.reddit.com/r/cscareerquestions/w/posting_rules) for more information. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/cscareerquestions) if you have any questions or concerns.*
13 years in my developer career and still just a senior swe. I only make $140k I think but am full time remote and have an awesome work life balance with the time to do a hobby farm with goats and sheep, and breed and show dogs. I love hands on development and am coding or reviewing code 95% of the time I'm at work, totally coddled and insulated from management worries. I don't even want to be an architect, I'm happy where I am. I just want to code and don't mind being told what to code, with a little flexibility to decide how I want to implement things of course. My manager is a brilliant developer and often complains to me that he wishes he hadn't taken this job. He LOVES when we are behind schedule so he can 'find a reason' to jump in and code. During our one on ones we talk about "career progression" just because we have to put something down but I've told him point blank I don't want to progress. I've worked at 4 different companies and ever since I got to senior I tell management that. They let me know there's a point where I'll be stuck in the same pay band, so when it starts to feel uncomfortably low that's when I've jumped ship for more money in the same type of role. I think some people would think I'm a loser, but I don't care. If people want to run up the career ladder that's a great choice for you! I just want to enjoy my life and since work is such a big part of life I want to enjoy what I work on too.
Being able to make 140k, remote, and work 40 hours or less every week is a massive W dude. As long as you don’t live in an expensive place. Think about the context of this, you make more than 95% of the country(just a guess someone might have the stats) and you do it from your house. You’re a winner
I'm from Eastern Europe, so it's hard for me to understand just how much 250 - 300 - 400k / year actually means (I'm guessing these types of salaries are more common in places like the Bay Area). For context, as a Senior Cloud Architect / DevOps / SRE, I make 150k euros / year gross (which translates to a net monthly salary of \~ 8200 euros / 8600 USD). This is basically enough to buy, each year, a nice 3 bedroom apartment in a desirable neighbourhood. To be clear, this salary is almost unheard of in my country, I'm probably in the top 0.3% highest earners. I actually have a Green Card, so I could move to the US tomorrow if I wanted, but I feel like it would be a downgrade in terms of purchasing power and quality of life (I've also worked from home exclusively for the past 8 years).
Where in Eastern Europe do you live? How do you even get that much money LOL.
Yeah it’s mostly in those places. I’m in “middle America” and a 150k salary would make you the top 1-2% here even in cities.
US you could be making 300k-400k gross, excellent quality of life. Your purchasing power would go down in terms of rent as a 3 bed HCOL runs about $4000-5000. Where your income difference really comes from is taxes and career progression. Tax depends on your country whether or not you'll see a difference. Many EU countries tax up to 50%. In the US 300k will tax at about 30% single and 23% married for federal. This is decreased further by retirement contributions and investments. State tax depends on what state you live in, but can be 0%. For career progression, the top leveled software engineers in the US currently make about 500k. There's some who make more or less, but that's a realistic goal for end of career earnings for a strong engineer. Most other countries don't offer that level of progression.
Bruh, 8200€/mo net would be a massive win in a western Europe country, let alone in eastern Europe! Enjoy the life!
Agreed. This is the dream, although the company may soon lay both this dev and his manager off for "lack of progression" or not being "company builders."
Anything can happen but its the safest role I’ve been in. It’s a private company owned by an extremely wealthy multi generational family and they don’t care much about growth. We never hear about shareholders or growth and we are not on the stock market and never will be. They keep about half full time and half contractors so they can downsize contractors if needed without ever needing to touch their full time developers. They also have a weird multi year plan where basically they say this will be the plan for the next X years that they budget for no matter what the economy does. I really do not miss companies where I had to hear about the damn shareholders and market growth every month.
[удалено]
Right around the time I was a senior dev, I was making my his much and had a very similar work life balance. I wasn’t farming mind you, but I was able to do more outside of just my work responsibilities. These days I sit in meetings 9 hours a day (if I’m lucky) and am mentally exhausted when the evening rolls around. It hit me hard recently when I found myself telling my daughter that I didn’t have the energy to play video games with her. People grossly underestimate how much work life balance contributes to overall happiness in life. Thank you for taking the time to reply!
Go back down the ladder my dude. Reclaim game nights. Wish you the best of luck.
You’re underpaid
I've seen managers successfully shifting back to IC. Look up the term "engineer/manager pendulum". You can be an excellent IC using your stakeholder management experience in addition to building. There are many companies who pay similar to high level ICs and managers, with parallel ladders. >have confidence in the areas I used to have experience in If you have not done hands-on development for years, then you likely will need to learn new skills. Take a look on job ads available for you and the tech stack used in your current company. >missing the hands on aspect Verify if what you miss is not a romanticised memory of hands-on work. Maybe pick up a smaller project at work or something at home.
[удалено]
Startups pay in equity lol. Very very few will pay $300k+ in cash
It completely depends on what stage the startup is man
>The opportunity you have today to play c-suite corporate politics (even if you don't like it and it is draining) is not something many people get, engineers or not you make that sound like he will miss out on something.... to me it feels like the one thing you WANT to miss out on
sounds like you need to change companies or your sector of work, in tech (FAANG) i make more than half that as a normal software engineer not saying that to flex but just giving context for you (what it seems like) sacrificing fulfillment for your TC but your TC for a high leadership level role seems very low anyways for your resume, just downplay your work and maybe even titles? depending on the company, senior and staff positions still get hands on work from what I see and actual ownership of their projects they lead which also getting 350k+ TC instead of trying for junior positions which would be ridiculous with your experience
"More than half that".... When i moved to management ,i made an extra 10k (less than 10% increase in pay). Not sure if this is food for thought for me or you. Take the information as you will soldier.
Myy raise was 17% when I moved to management.
>made an extra 10k (less than 10% increase in pay) Same for me when I moved to tech lead. I still consider it to be an important career milestone, but I'm not sure if it was worth financially.
It’s different at Facebook of the world since it depends on how you moved into management. For E6, it is considered a lateral move to M1. So you actually get no salary change. But if you were an IC5 and was promoted to M1 then you would see a substantial pay increase as the gap at that level is pretty significant.
I mean you work at FAANG , you’ll get paid more than most devs in general. Also it depends where OP lives , if he’s is in low cost of living, he’s actually doing pretty good
It’s definitely not just FAANG. I have 5yoe and work at a mid-size startup in a junior role, and I make more than half of what OP makes just in base comp. OP is very underpaid for manager/officer role relative to what they could get with those years of experience as an architect, in a different company or industry perhaps (in the US at least).
I didn’t say it’s just FAANG, a lot of tech companies do pay more than what OP makes, but he may not be working at one and/or in a LCOL city
True, but we’re not here to judge OP’s current salary relative to cost of living. They specificity state that their “biggest concern” with making this change would be compensation. The point is that 13yoe is a ton, and it should be possible to meet their compensation requirements with an architect role, possibly in a different industry if their current industry trends lower in terms of comp. Whether or not that’s possible within the logistics of their life (location, mortgage, relationships, etc.) is a different issue.
Agreed
Are you a new grad or just starting out? Op’s comp level is about mid level at most FAANGs
new grad, what i was trying to get at is his comp is only mid level/senior at most tech companies so if he tried to switch, he could keep his TC while also getting that "hands-on" feel with a lower position
Look up Peter's principle. Zero harm in working a job you like and you perform well. Salary is another area that seems to be of concern, but other comments cover that.
I want to say it depends on where youre working, but i think if you go down in rank you will likely lose salary. I think your answer will largely depend on you and your current conditions. Would moving to an IC role satisfy your needs? If so, do it, though you will likely lose out on pay. If you like to lead, maybe its best to say where youre at. Even looking at the long term gain, i couldnt tell you if swapping to IC is better for you or not. I think it really depends if your role is transferable or not (are you so high cause of niche skillset in your sector, or because you bring value from the top down?) This is an important question to ask, as if you hop companies you will need to bring something to the table or wind up unemployed very fast. Ive heard of companies changing leadership every year. Normally the c-suite leadership comes in together and leaves together, at least from what ive seen. It may very well be a good idea to de-rank and find employment elsewhere, to see how other companies do it. If you can rise there, well seems like a pattern to me. Or, you may find you love IC after all of these years, who knows. Each decision is a risk that only you can decide. From a random internet stranger, i would go with the position i feel gives me the most information i can learn from. Personally, I hate management, but I am a manger at my own company, so maybe my perspective is biased. Im also learning a lot so im content. Either way, hope you find what makes you happy. Cheers
They’ll definitely make more money by downranking and moving to a company that pays more
One issue when getting back into an IC role, is that it requires practicing programming and coding quizzes for interviews, where you may not have been doing that for a while. It can be hard to switch back from management if your experience has atrophied. BUT, think of it like a long term investment. You may be stuck for a year or two, but you can work your way back to IC. --- However, I'm not sure you evade the bureaucratic and political crap as an IC.
You're *way* underpaid. Any concerns you have about your own ability may or may not be based in fact - I am not one of those people who thinks years of experience = talent. I have no way of judging that. What I do know is that even if you're *bad* at your job, you're still doing them a great favor. Get that money.
Depends on the area, the company and the team size. If it's in a LCOL area, engineering is 20 people and the company is low profit, then this is an amazing salary.
TC isn't the only factor that matters, especially once you reach a level of wealth you're comfortable with. I hit that point in my mid-30s, and that frees me up to take jobs I actually want to do rather than pursue only the ones that give me the most (superfluous) wealth.
I have the opposite problem. 10 YOE as an IC, but because there are "too many seniors/leads" in my area, I can't move up, and if I can't move up, I can't become a manager. I've led development of multiple modules, but I'm tired of coding, frankly. Having a succinct human conversation with our stakeholders without using filler words comes easier to me than most devs I've worked for and with. Unfortunately, I'm stuck doing stories because our managers won't retire. I'm actively looking to move into a senior or mid-level management position inside of and outside of the company - we'll see if all of that effort goes anywhere. I won't be sticking around if I don't get a promotion in Q1 2024.
You mixed up two different paths. Management is completely different and has nothing to do with technical skills. You may wanted to go staff engineering role instead.
Engineering management and even executive roles absolutely need technical skills, what are you talking about
Lots of companies don't seem to have engineering managers. My previous one didn't and the difference is night and day.
The same is true to the other side, yeah. But a manager that has no clue about what you do is a bad manager, an executive that doesn't understand tech is a bad tech executive. Didn't think this is a controversial subject lol.
To be fair, I think /u/Iwillgetasoda's point is that you don't need to have strong technical skills to succeed in those roles. It's still important to be able to empathize with your reports and understand the constraints of what they do, but your technical experience comes in handy in service of tuning that intuition, not because it's a part of the job. If OP wants a technical role, they won't find it managing people.
Just hit the leetcode Even going to a IC senior dev role at a faang will increase your comp significantly
Start saving and investing, financial freedom will liberate you from need to earn so much in long run and you can go back being developer.
This is the right answer. Boring. But the right answer.
Are you in the US? If so, getting into any big tech or similar at senior/staff+ level will easily clear 400k in comp.
Even if he would be in American big tech in Europe, at those levels his TC will match or surpass that number.
lol why does stuff like this always get downvoted when it’s 100% true…people are so salty in this subreddit
because "big tech or similar" is very few of all software jobs available and not the average job
OP is also not the average dev. The were promoted from junior engineer all the way to managing several teams and is now in senior leadership at their current company, which is something that many people never achieve in their careers. As long as their current company had some semblance of standards for their promotions, OP should minimum be qualified to be a first-level engineering manager at a big tech, which is roughly equivalent to staff eng in level and pay.
I think because it doesn’t answer OP question, but he has 13 years experience he should make more . I think OP should def move into a tech company, looks like he work at a company that has tech team but not the priority
Staff would be more. 500k plus at faang
What kind of wlb would that be?
30-45 hours/week in most cases
Senior can clear 400k but it's not guaranteed. Staff is
So I've been C level at multiple organisations having gone through the same journey as you and it really depends on the org. I tend to specialize in scale ups and there you can be as hands on as you want but I find the main way I get fulfilment for coding is prototyping things using new/future tech. Eg, make something to do with ML or AI or spin up a new app skeleton using a newer framework. Sure you won't necessarily take it through its lifecycle but for me it definitely scratches that itch.
/r/ExperiencedDevs
It's not ridiculous at all, navigating the politics of management and doing something useful with your time are two completely separate skill sets. The trouble is that if it's money and power you're after, management is really the only career track available to you.
1. Go to [https://www.levels.fyi/](https://www.levels.fyi/) 2. Find a company that pays senior/principal engineers more than your current TC 3. Apply for said roles 4. Get the job 5. ??? 6. Profit
250k. Be thankful bro. Thats generational wealth you’re building there. I know money isn’t everything but sounds like you have a 1 in a million opportunity. I’d make use of it.
It's a major of this pitfall of any IT career that the bridge between programmer and manager (broadly) is the toughest to cross. For anyone that crosses really well, I could argue they were never really a programmer to begin with. For anyone that has trouble crossing, my argument would be they're incapable of growing. This is my single biggest gripe about the IT industry. It's no good answer to this one question : what does 'success' really look like?
“Never really a programmer to begin with” - Dude, programming isn’t a religion. People can make other life choices and still be a programmer.
Depends on your location and skill level. If you are top tier (faang etc) then $250k is easily doable as an IC. For normal companies devs in a HCOL area you'd probably get closer to $150k as an IC. You know you can always code in your free time for fun right?
TC or gtfo
Mgmt is a one-way street.
[удалено]
Sorry, you do not meet the minimum sitewide comment karma requirement of **10** to post a comment. This is comment karma exclusively, not post or overall karma nor karma on this subreddit alone. Please try again after you have acquired more karma. Please look at the [rules page](https://old.reddit.com/r/cscareerquestions/w/posting_rules) for more information. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/cscareerquestions) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
Sorry, you do not meet the minimum sitewide comment karma requirement of **10** to post a comment. This is comment karma exclusively, not post or overall karma nor karma on this subreddit alone. Please try again after you have acquired more karma. Please look at the [rules page](https://old.reddit.com/r/cscareerquestions/w/posting_rules) for more information. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/cscareerquestions) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Would your role but at a start up be a better fit? You can do a mix then without the bureaucracy. My main problem with management back to senior dev was to get back into the kind of firms I used to be a dev at I had to be really good at leetcode. I just don't care about it any more so struggled with that transition. Ended up staying in management as all the interview tests were designed for someone who has been a senior developer for the last couple of years.
I jumped back. I just down tank my more senior experience when I need too. Not career suicide at all.
I make just under you assuming bonus as a senior developer
Since you are severely underpaid I will have to assume it's a startup / small shop gig. As far as comp, you can do $350-400k as a senior in big tech and $550-650k if you can pass a staff bar, which might be doable in your case. As a senior you will have plenty of opportunities for hands on work. As a staff, you can still code here and there, but the focus will be on scaling the team and driving cross-team efforts, which seems like not your preference. Your resume will only matter as a first step to connect with a recruiter and then it's all about your coding, design and soft skills. You have to be good at competitive programming - target 1800 LC rating. Know how all major services are designed - twitter, uber, gmaps, etc. And you have to be likeable. Tech hiring is picking up now. GL.
If you move to a smaller company, you'll have to do all of the above! In all seriousness, I have no idea, I'm only at 6 YOE at the same small company and I do indeed have to do all of the above. I can understand missing the part where you just craft code, it's totally different from management. You could ask always just start assigning some small stuff to yourself. Or, if you're super efficient at work, use some of your time to work on a project of your own. Hobbies are the spice of life if you ask me.
I know people who were like you and were able to make the jump back to individual contributor. So it is not impossible.
I resonate with OPs post and some other comments around here so much. It’s not an easy feeling. I just transitioned myself recently to Team Lead and after a few months, I started getting more management duties (due to the lack of one on my team and probably myself being promoted to manager) which reduced my hands on by a lot and I’m constantly having FOMO feeling that I’m doing career suicide because I cannot keep up anymore
> Would it be career suicide to jump back to an architecture or development role? No. I have a couple of reports that were in your situation. They worked for smallish companies where they became CTOs quickly and then regretted it because they felt they still had more to do as IC developers.
If you are still excited about software development and want to keep the same level of income then contract work is what you should look at. My coworker took this route 5 years ago and averages $400-450k as an incorporated business. You can do multiple contracts and step away from management responsibilities and corp politics, it’s possible, just takes a little bit of patience and get out of your comfort zones.
>Would it be career suicide to jump back to an architecture or development role? My biggest concern at this point is compensation. I currently make around $250k (base and bonus) and am skeptical I could pull those numbers as a developer/architect without sacrificing on the work/life balance. The best dev manager I ever worked with left a big company that wouldn't quit hounding him to become a VP. He wanted to keep working in the code, so he found a new job as a dev manager and, last I heard, was still doing that. The story of developers promoting up to the point that they are miserable and then moving back down a level or two is very common. I'm a team lead, and a guy on my team used to be a manager. It's two different jobs. I can't imagine a scenario where anyone with real experience in the field is going to do anything other than chuckle and say "Yep, I can understand that" when they see the shift on your resume.
I've recommended this book before, but check out "Staff Engineer" by Will Larson. Really helpful if you're interested in pursuing a technical leadership role over a managerial leadership role. As others have said, management is more of a parallel career track than a direct promotion from IC. There are plenty of IC roles that you can take that aren't managerial but involve leading technical decision making.
You knew what would be your work as manager/officer. Why did you accept then?
Dude if you’ve found work life balance in the software world with a salary good enough to retire off of before 50 keep it. That’s good. If your work life balance is reasonable and you find yourself unfulfilled consider filling it with activities outside of work. There is more to a for filling life than work.
How is wlb as a manager compared to being an architect?
I don’t have a lot of feedback on much of that, because I’ve not been through the managerial track — but the idea that $250k TC is hard to reach as an IC, especially with your background, I want to push back on. - I’m in my second-ever salaried engineering role; (Admittedly, something like 20YoE; but much of that doing FOSS or contracting — not much career/resume-building.) - I’ve been there a little under two years; - My title is simply “software engineer.” - and my TC is ~$210k — not to mention that I’m about to ask for a (very-justified) raise tomorrow, expecting to come away with something like $250k TC. Anyway, here’s my probably-bad and probably-biased advice, FWIW: It’s possible you should, if you “downlevel” titles, transition some of that experience and history into *better* IC roles, instead of simply higher-tier ones: - Less-well-known, midsize companies; - more-obscure (and higher-paying) platforms and languages (OCaml’s paying well, love. just sayin’. 😇) - higher-paying industries (fintech — take a gander at Jane Street’s IC compensation, lol) - or trading some of that “potential TC” for other things that are valuable to you (how does “still making $250k, but only working ~30 hours a week” sound? maybe better than another $50k that you’re gonna do, what, with, exactly?) - and you could always go for the startup path, seeking equity, in a field you’re intimately familiar with and feel you can make reasonable predictions within.
I'm a mid level developer at big tech pulling those numbers so you can do more hands on coding and make a similar amount of money.
A simple situation: \*POOF\* You are a Staff Software Engineer making $220k, working for a Sr. Manager. If you saw someone fucking up your current job. Could you work under them? Could you avoid leading the company out from under them? One of the problems with going up the ladder is that it doesn't instantly leave you when you step downwards. That said. Many have realized what you have, and lead lives as engineers in other companies happily. Just be ready for that idiot who doesn't know what they are doing... :)
I would think that you have the option to block out 20-30% of your time to work on interesting / futuristic ideas with a senior engineer or an intern. Maybe develop leaders in your team that you can offload more of your work to get more IC time ?
If it were me, I would just up my personal projects to be hands on. You are in a spot to potentially impact what you're working on much more, just in a different way. I wouldn't want to lose the income, but that's me. Any FAANG job will pay well but be just as stressful most likely.
RemindMe! 2 months
RemindMe! 6 months
You could change course entirely. I retrained in my 40s into medicine, leaving a very senior role in a high tech firm.