Is it possible to be Staff+ without doing "politics" ?
Posted by DAG_AIR@reddit | ExperiencedDevs | View on Reddit | 84 comments
I got promoted to staff about a year ago. I got lucky as I spent the prior couple of years on work that happened to be very visible to leadership. I have decent execution but good timing/luck more than anything.
A year in, none of what I'm actually measured on is the work that got me here.
But now I'm being evaluated with fuzzy criteria about impact and no playbook on what to do.
The core of it is cross-team impact, and it's on me to go and find where it needs to be applied. I accept that's the expectation. The problem is the company is siloed by design. Every team owns its own roadmap and priorities and has no structural reason to touch anyone else's work. So the mandate is to produce cross-team impact inside an org built to keep teams apart, and my manager is basically telling me its up to me to figure out how to make that happen.
During last review cycle, I was also told I'm not moving the needle enough, where buy-in is the issue.
It is the same thing one level down, most of what I'm supposed to drive needs sign-off from product people who sit several orgs over and a couple of levels above me in a different continent. The access just isn't there. Nothing in my day puts me in a room with these people, and the org chart doesn't route a staff IC to a director three teams over. The advice is always "go get buy-in," but I keep getting stuck a step earlier, on how you reach the people whose buy-in you need in the first place.
Mentoring is the part I actually want and like, and it's the one I can't find a use for. The team around me is already senior. Nobody's looking for an "official mentor", and I'm not going to appoint myself one to people who've been here longer than I have.
From time to time, I jump on improvised "get unstuck" sessions, but I don't know what the expectation even means when there's no junior to bring along.
I guess long stroy short: I don't know if this is a "me problem" or an "this company doesn't know what to do with staff level" problem ?
aruisdante@reddit
The short answer is no, at least not at companies that follow the “Silicon Valley style” leveling system. The entire point of staff level positions is about setting strategic direction and having organizational level impact. This inherently means you need to be good at getting buy-in from stakeholders that their problems need solving. This is all “politics.” Actually writing non-POC code and doing day to day execution becomes a significantly smaller portion of your workload the higher up in the staff positions you get.
Great-Big-3101@reddit
I take it you have never worked for a Korean company. They never speak to people they consider below their level no matter how many strings you pull.
zuilli@reddit
How do directors get their wishes across to the technical teams then? Someone on their level has to get the message across to lower levels for shit to happen or do they simply write stuff on a memo and never answer questions?
jaytan@reddit
If you work for them ofc they have meetings where they tell you what to do. OP means people at lower levels who don’t work for them.
ForeverYonge@reddit
This is also the Indian management culture. But that’s also why companies that don’t require these inefficient “up on one side and down on the other” communication patterns can solve real problems quickly and outcompete.
abofh@reddit
Just to concur with all of the above. To exceed expectations beyond IC, you have to not only have, but regularly demonstrate you're working across the org, not just in your team.
That's really hard to do without politics
Stephonovich@reddit
IME, you have to have led cross-org projects, which is where I’ve consistently failed. I have been the key person doing the actual IC work for large, multi-month projects, but because I wasn’t shepherding people, it didn’t move my career.
I am forever trying to find somewhere that actually values the Solver archetype of Staff Eng, because that’s the only one I’m interested in doing. I’ve made that abundantly clear to every manager I’ve had, and have never been told it’s not doable; they just don’t seem to value it.
tedivm@reddit
From what I've seen if you want to be the "solver" you almost always have to go through the architect layer to get there. Once you've proven yourself to be a particular adept architect in a particular area you will be called on more and more to solve problems, converting to that archetype.
abofh@reddit
+1 - yes this is probably true. I'm top of the IC org anywhere I go, but I don't want to wrangle - just follow me, there's a path isn't enough.
I think you only get that at a startup where you get promoted into it, not at a legacy company that needs you to move the quarterly
Agent_03@reddit
Agree with all of this, especially the parts about org structures and building relationships in order to "get into the room" where decisions are made.
To add to this: Bridging silos (especially between technical staff) is explicitly WHY staff+ developers exist.
Brave-Kitchen-832@reddit
It's hard to be too prescriptive without much deeper knowledge of your org's culture, and your own disposition and career goals (your post was informative and the question was fine - going into all that detail would have probably been too much for a reddit post).
With that out of the way, I'd say, and apologies if this doesn't apply: part of politics (i.e. actual, electoral politics) is rejecting the premise of a question. What better way to have cross-team impact than severing dependencies between teams so that fewer signoffs and less talking are required? Reverse-conway manoeuvres are my favored tool for this.
Radiate intent to the product org and higher-ups, listen to feedback on outcomes, sometimes tactically ignore the less-useful feedback on process/inputs (rejecting the premise!), and use any cross-team power you have to try to reform those teams around some sensible architecture that they can execute on as independently as possible. As a good servant-leader, try to smooth over the dependencies for your teams as much as possible so that the talking shops don't get too full and people get bogged down. Pair with juniors. Write code yourself - it's allowed.
Building things directly is the heart of software engineering. Hopefully the results will speak for themselves before too long, and your peers will be marvelling at how fast and effortless you and your team(s) move. And have fun!
P.S: apologies if this advice is totally non-applicable. I don't know enough about your situation to be confident in it. I figured it was worth a try, because the modern factory-floor method of "building" software really gets me down. Small sample, but I applied this advice myself within a somewhat toxic environment for a few years, I would say successfully, but eventually product wheel-spinning killed us all. No staff+ methodology will save you from that in an organisation large enough to have proper "product" job titles.
RoyDadgumWilliams@reddit
Staff yes, sort of. Depends on the company and how liberal they are with promotions/titles. Above staff definitely not, it’s all politics
netwhoo@reddit
It’s not about the tech at all? Can’t you just operate as a staff even without the title?
corny_horse@reddit
I mean, technically - you can get staff+ at a small company where your responsibilities are more senior at a larger company. I got offered a director position with no reports once. I know a lot of people who got in at the "ground floor" of a startup that's now a larger org.
But actual staff+ work involves exactly what you described. „
talldean@reddit
Politics is the job, but politics doesn't have to be bad.
Politics: the process by which groups of people make collective decisions, resolve conflicts, and distribute limited resources.
If you have an organization that doesn't do that, the organization is going to be awful. There are healthy and unhealthy politics, and it's largely possible to both find jobs with more healthy politics, and usually possible to push an org's politics to be more healthy as well.
The one I've found is that the staff+ jobs around politics are much, much shittier with everyone remote. It makes more things into pulling-teeth that could have just happened after having burritos and conversation over lunch.
TeeDotHerder@reddit
You are asking a binary of is it possible? Then yes. I've worked with and beside a few. I was one until I learned I could go higher with politics. Generally they are the uber nerds that get anything they want and BigCorp™️ has a rigid pay cap and structure for "levels" and "titles".
For example, one of my closest work friends who fits this has about a dozen patents for field changing work. Their side projects have netted the company between $100m the first year and $800m USD a few years after and spawned an entire subcategory of product from even competitors. He was the highest level "Staff Scientist". Zero reports. Zero expectations to show up to meetings. Unlimited PTO in reality plus 8 weeks plus a sabbatical legally in the USA where 5 weeks is what VPs get at the company. He had a cubicle like everyone one but was god mode.
If this is not you... Then the answer is "unlikely".
Infinite_Maximum_820@reddit
Yes I’ve seen it happen as counter offer for very senior engineer to stay because they were responsible for critical software
Then smaller company pay scale needs to give him uber title
funbike@reddit
If you want to be promoted to a high level in any profession, you'll have to play some politics. We are humans and we have to communicate and negotiate. That's politic, and that's just the way it is, always was, and always will be.
papaya_war@reddit
Yup. At face value the question asked by the post is extremely straightforward.
“Is it possible to {do job where the main point is politics} without doing politics?”
It sounds like they don’t want to be staff+. And that’s fine, I don’t really think I want to be either.
czipperz@reddit
It sounds like you need to build relationships in order to succeed. How can you drive cross team improvements or even know what other teams do without talking to them?
I recognized a while ago that my team has other teams as stakeholders and so I:
1. Go to their standup digitally and take notes. Follow up on things that are interesting and ask to be involved in code review.
2. Setup automated morning emails that inform me of all relevant commits/PRs in the prior day and read through those everyday.
3. Set up 1 on 1 lunches and calls with people I've identified as important.
4. Visit other offices and make it a point to talk to everyone I can for at least a few minutes.
5. Setup dinners or happy hours whenever someone visits my office or I visit somewhere.
6. Ask my connections who they recommend talking to.
> It is the same thing one level down, most of what I'm supposed to drive needs sign-off from product people who sit several orgs over and a couple of levels above me in a different continent. The access just isn't there. Nothing in my day puts me in a room with these people, and the org chart doesn't route a staff IC to a director three teams over.
Send these people a calendar invite for a chat. Figure out who they are, where they went to school, if they have kids. Figure out their birthday and give them a gift. Be creative. You're telling me the only thing standing in your way of success is picking up the phone with a couple people?
xmBQWugdxjaA@reddit
Staff+ is entirely politics lmao.
sqquima@reddit
Three years after I got promoted to Staff, I sought an ADHD assessment because I kept prioritizing the interesting work (to me, coding) over the important work (which involved politics), and it was detrimental to my performance review. A year later, I sought an Autism assessment because I was having a very hard time with communication, negotiation, reaching out to people, and a lot of the expectations that come from the Staff level role. So, yes, Staff is quite different than Senior, the level below.
My 2c advice: Yes, Staff and beyond is more money, but they require a different skill level, and I may even say personality, than previous levels. If you're not ok with learning those skills, then consider staying at Senior where you might be happier. That said, I don't know your age, but, for some reason, in their 40s and 50s, one is expected to be Staff+, Manager, or work on their own. Being just "senior engineer" seems to be looked down upon.
engineered_academic@reddit
Man I don't know how you can listen to people telling you that you need to change it up but what got you here isn't what is going to keep you here. And it's not for everybody. I stepped back down to a senior role because staff + roles were just too exhausting and not what I wanted to do.
gimmeslack12@reddit
Start breaking rules and start calling shots on your own.
Vinen@reddit
No. Its part of the role.
DAG_AIR@reddit (OP)
there is a bit more nuance in the post than just the question in the title
dweezil22@reddit
I read your whole post:
I hate your use of the term "politics" here (which is admittedly common). I hate it b/c it's too ambiguous. "Politics" can mean "back-stabbing zero sum bullshit", or it can mean "Getting everyone on the same page, working efficiently" or even "talking to people". They are not the same.
You should stop making excuses about your own access. Make your access. Setup 1:1's with all the stakeholders and meet them, ask about what they care about, tell them about what you care about, maybe find out what they like to do outside of work so you can chat about video games or rock climbing. If they're dicks or ignore you or are mean, then you can report back here (or to your mgr) and complain about politics. But if you've tried nothing and nothing works, try something first.
In short, don't be so transactional and rigid. Don't start with "I don't know Bob but I need his buy-in". Start with "I don't know Bob so I can't even know if the solution is right yet". If you need Bob's buy-in you should also need his input, and he should be happy to give it (unless the whole thing is a bad idea, and being Staff+ means being the person to kai-bosh big bad ideas as early as possible)
And here's the really important part: If you don't do this, some shitty bad-political manager WILL do it, and everyone will be worse off for it. You owe it to yourself and other engineers to give this sort of thing a shot.
Re: your question about whose problem it is: That's not a very helpful thing to worry about, the more helpful is that, based on your post, it looks like it's within your power to fix it.
failsafe-author@reddit
OP, this comment is what you need to read. Absolutely nails it.
hurley_chisholm@reddit
Thank you for the “make your access” point, I was going to say something similar.
OP, this means putting invites on people’s calendars, chatting folks up in the hallway before or after a meeting, asking your peers, supervisor or leadership for a warm introduction.
In a large company, you have to network. You won’t like it and it sucks, but that’s just how it is.
oVtcovOgwUP0j5sMQx2F@reddit
would love to provide input but it's too long. make it easy on the reader. this also helps at staff level
Stephonovich@reddit
I weep for the future.
I don’t know where the notion that everything has to be condensed down into a short list of bullet points came from, but it’s ridiculous. If you can’t be bothered to read more than a couple of paragraphs, you have the reading comprehension and/or attention span of a child. I will not be dissuaded on this point.
oVtcovOgwUP0j5sMQx2F@reddit
I understand you are unwilling to consider other opinions, and I am unmoved.
For others, consider that when you're asking for an opinion, you're asking people for help; you benefit from their thoughts.
Who should be putting in the work: you, who benefits? Or them, who are volunteering their wisdom and time?
Stephonovich@reddit
OP’s post is 382 words, which is less than the average for a single business page, 400 – 500 words. You seriously can’t read a 1-pager?
donny02@reddit
If you don’t do politics, the politics will do you.
You’re not just given problems to solve anymore. You coming up with the problems and strategic stuff to work on. And you’ll need to convince the org that your idea is better than the other guys.
If you don’t want that don’t move up
mamaBiskothu@reddit
Read through your poorly written post and no, youre not staff level because you think you can mentor people. You need mentoring, you dont seem to understand what the job needs, only what you think you want your job should be. What exactly are you going to mentor, how to be done deaf about what the job actually is and tell them how Rust is the best way to code everything?
DAG_AIR@reddit (OP)
I can instruct claude to re-write any service in rust ! give me the big bucks !
Choperello@reddit
It’s still true.
At nearly every company Staff is a level where you are expected to drive impact across multiple teams.
It’s also a role where you have account accountability but not necessarily authority, so you have build and exert influence across team boundaries.
Whenever you have team with multiple separate groups of people (eg teams) they will have different priorities, agendas, and goals.
All that adds up to that in your role you have to do what is sometimes called politics, or otherwise just simply figuring how to get a whole bunch of different people with different agendas and goals aligned with what you want them to do.
ItSeemedSoEasy@reddit
Bad title then!
So you should be making sure they're all generally working towards the same goals, that anything where one team is depending on another team's work is going in the right direction.
If they made this role, then often that's the problem they're trying to fix. You can even ask whoever made the role, just do it in a non-"I don't know what the hell I'm doing" way. Something like "I've got X, Y, Z plans to implement, but I wanted to double check I was prioritizing where you saw the value of this role. What do you feel the biggest impact I could have is? What were you hoping I'd improve when you made this role?"
The other things you can do is find things that are working well with one team and spread that to the others. There's so much that falls in that, technical things like frameworks, tooling like who's got a great metrics setup, process like what is the really good way team X are handling PR's, or generally spreading knowledge like Pam has an amazing AI workflow.
The only bad thing about a role like this is that when you're doing it well, it looks like you're having no impact as there are few issues. So you really have to shout out the blockers you cleared, the issues dodged, and you should write them down as you do them for your review.
I'm actually reading "Staff Engineer" by Will Larson at the moment, which specifically covers this type of role as one of the 4 archetypes he talks about. So far so good, you probably should give it a read.
elcitset@reddit
No. I don't read posts.
wuzzelputz@reddit
„experienced dev“
lgtm
chipmunksocute@reddit
Yeah you're operating at a strategic level at 'staff'level. If you CANT do the politics at even a minimal.level you're not gonna succeed in the role and will just result in other people driving your decisions instead of what you were hired into the role for - using YOUR experience and skills to drive and make decisions.
failsafe-author@reddit
I’ve only ever been a principal at this job I have now, but at least here, you have to make things happen. You see something that needs doing, and you get it done. Id there’s someone you need to talk to, you set up a 1:1. I try to do things “the right way”, but I also act when it feels like things are getting blocked on process. I think if you have a staff+ title, you have to use it. It should get respect, but if you don’t lean into it, you won’t keep that respect.
To me, none of this feels like “politics”. It’s more about taking initiative and getting stuff done.
it_happened_lol@reddit
It's a you problem. Start talking to the EMs and POs and PMs and you will find they will want to align with you if you are solving a shared problem.
Mundane-Charge-1900@reddit
“Politics” is deciding what gets built and by who.
Unless you’re in a very small company, no. Even in that case, you’re likely talking to customers in ways that affects sales.
mc-funk@reddit
It’s organization-specific. The small org run by people who (shall we say) have a predisposition to valuing building quality stuff, and not politics, hierarchies, and vague communications, is a bit of a dying breed compared to 10 years ago— but they are still out there.
Agent_03@reddit
No. To have Staff-level cross-team impact you have to at least be aware of the politics and how they drive prioritization and decision-making. You need to be able to work within the politics to implement changes. It's basically impossible to do the job without regular communications (and probably some meetings) with key technical, management, and/or product staff.
That doesn't require being explicitly "political" or "playing politics", because that's about playing power games for their own sake. But you DO need to build connections and know who owns what.
I'll give advice from here as if you were one of the Staff/Sr Staff devs I mentor (usually it's 3-6 at a time).
and
If there are silos, it is YOUR job to bridge the gap between teams for technical strategy. That's basically why Staff+ devs exist. Do you have 1:1 meetings every few weeks with a small selection of the key people?
If you don't have them, consider adding some small-to-medium cross-team dev meetings focused around technical topics/concerns. You might want a frontend/backend/DB guild, or meetings around devops/observability/architecture/tooling. Do you have something like this? Often people will want to show new things they're trying or discuss problems they're tackling and this gives an interested audience with similar concerns. Those meetings can drive alignment and buy-in organically.
How do you know? Have you asked, or are you hoping they'll approach you?
Have you discussed with mangers? Managers may have devs they want mentored, either because they are strong and the manager wants to see them blossom fruther OR because they're struggling.
At a certain point, when they see you having positive impact, devs will seek you out for mentorship.
shadytradesman@reddit
Politics is the process of how groups of people make decisions, so if you want to engage with that process, no.
kbn_@reddit
Bluntly it sounds like you were promoted early. I generally push for people to show that they have both the skill and the interest in cross-functional alignment and soft influence before getting pushed up to staff because it’s such a huge jump. This is literally the biggest inflection point in the ladder, and everything beyond it looks increasingly foreign to what came before.
You probably need to decide if you even want to do that type of work. If you don’t, you’ll honestly be happier treating lead engineer as a terminal level.
Early_Rooster7579@reddit
No. Being Staff is literally politics the job. Like 80% of your job will be politics.
lambdasintheoutfield@reddit
Staff engineers don’t wait for things to happen to them. They happen to things.
Internalize that mindset.
mhaydii@reddit
I think a lot of people discover that "staff" is less about writing code and more about reducing coordination costs.
What you're describing doesn't sound like politics to me. It sounds like an org expecting influence without providing the relationships, access, or mechanisms needed to build that influence. That's a pretty tough position to be in tbh.
RedditNotFreeSpeech@reddit
You can minimize it but in the end everyone has to choose a side.
illuminatedtiger@reddit
Yes. Move to a smaller company with lower salary and you can be Staff+ courtesy of title inflation. I have colleagues who went the other way and are now SDE 2 and Senior respectively.
hibikir_40k@reddit
There normally is a "true wizard" alternative to the normal IC promotion ladder... but it's really for people that solve things that nobody else do, and have a special eye to find things that are worth fixing that nobody else does. I've had the job, because I moved the needle with regularity, financially.
Because yes, the staff plan that requires helping people needs other people to need the help, and often ends up with 5 people arguing to be the one whose ideas should be followed... It kind of works out in a growing company, as there are always newer ICs, and the 5 people can get all get their fiefdoms. But with no staffing growth, it's a political disaster. And that's why I'll always say that the most important thing on choosing a new job is to make sure the place is growing at a quick pace, as that means the politics are just so much easier.
2thick2fly@reddit
Have you considered that the reason this role exists is because, as you said, the company is siloed by design? If it was not, your new role wouldn't exist. So your job is indeed to figure it out, because it's a problem and they need someone to fix the problem. In other words your management do not know the solution to this, there is not playbook, go figure it out.
I know this is not concrete advice, but changing how you see your role and why it exists, my help you approach it with more constructive attitude 😊
throwaway_0x90@reddit
The
***WHOLE***point of Staff SWEs is to convince people of their solutions and value of their work.philip_laureano@reddit
Negative. Being a high ranking IC means that influence is your main currency to get things done. And you can't get much influence without knowing the politics
NarWil@reddit
I'm extremely jealous that your company has official mentors
strugglingcomic@reddit
I acknowledge OP your point about organizational structures and silos impeding your ability to communicate. But impeding is not the same as blocking.
Have you genuinely never sent an unsolicited email or meeting invite, to someone outside your immediate team? Like, I understand the standard processes don't put you in the same room as those other people, but so what?
Not that there's one single right way to do this kind of cold outreach, but for me I generally think in terms of probabilities -- for any given idea or proposal (presumably I am only reaching out because I am suggesting something new), what is the probability they will actually give a shit? The probability is highest, if the thing I am suggesting actually addresses that other team's pre-existing set of priorities and problems they already have, esp. if I am offering something that they couldn't have done on their own inside their own team with their own expertise or focus areas.
And maybe that's actually the part you're stuck on, not so much the mechanisms of how to get into the right rooms together, but that you probably actually lack the foundational understanding of what those teams are doing, what their current priorities and skill/capabilities are, whether you can offer them something truly useful or not, etc.
Generally people are easy to influence, if you are speaking to their own self-interest (not just your personal self-interest). But being able to do that requires empathy and deep understanding of the world from their perspective. Do you feel like you understand those other teams well enough? If not, then that's your real first problem to solve. And if you agree with this diagnosis, then let me know and I can offer follow-up suggestions on that theme instead, if you want.
lamchakchan@reddit
Some places can’t be operated through influence if the managerial culture doesn’t support it. You would need to work on changing that. I’ve worked at places where divisions and team were so siloed that no external jnput makes an impact. These places turn pretty toxic when you try.
elusiveoso@reddit
That is what you need to get figured out. Insert yourself in conversations and do discovery to figure out where their pain points are. If there is overlap between pain points, there is your impact project.
lituk@reddit
This here is the right answer. Good staff engineers insist on being present in meetings, but are respectful of authority. The goal is to softly gain trust and understanding of each teams hurdles, and then propose cross-team solutions where appropriate. As a staff engineer you never have direct authority, but you should have respect.
SteveMacAwesome@reddit
If you don’t want to deal with politics, you’re in for a rough time. Any place you put more than about 20 people together, that’s going to happen.
I used to be the same way, where I would rather sit in the corner and build stuff than have to spend 4 hours talking to people to convince them of something I knew the company was going to do anyway, but these days I think my code writing time has decreased to about 60%. The rest is spent building relationships with other teams so that when I do need them to do something, they know me well enough to hear me out and consider what I’m saying properly.
Conversely a large part of my job is to make DX for those other teams better - I can’t do that if I’m not listening to them at the water cooler talking about what they’re struggling with.
ieatdownvotes4food@reddit
hell no. politics is front and center
Alternative-Wafer123@reddit
without politics how do you promote to staff level position? That role need to be approved by not just your team.
Twirrim@reddit
No, it's not possible to staff/staff+ without the politics. Figuring out how to get stuff done is central to the role, and that involves politics.
To your specific issue about cross org buy in, there's a few things that I would be doing as a staff engineer in your position:
1) look for other staff & staff+ engineers, and using them as my contacts or routes in to an org. They know what that org is working on, will likely have a sense of priorities, and will also have the expertise in that area to help figure out the best way to approach things. Reaching out to one is literally the first thing I do. It's way easier to do this if I already know them, so I consider developing and maintaining good relationships with staff engineers elsewhere in the business an important part of my job. For example, at my job, staff engineers can opt to lead architectural reviews. As well as being fun to do, one of the reasons I do it is it gives me broad exposure to staff engineers across a very large business.
Being able to bypass the management chain is a fundamental part of being a staff engineer, in my experience.
2) meet with relevant layers of leadership. I wouldn't go to an SVP outright, unless particularly relevant, but I do actively reach out to VPs and below, depending on what I'm looking for. Usually I try to find the most relevant manager at a lowest level that makes sense under the circumstances.
I don't know you to know if this is relevant or not, but one thing I tell new staff engineers is that the role also requires empathy, especially when dealing with various tiers of leadership: taking the time to understand how they think, and why they're making the decisions they're making. If I can understand that, I can adjust my messaging to suit, and be much more successful. My messaging changes wildly depending on who I speak to.
Smok3dSalmon@reddit
Good luck. This plagued my last role. The silos were also separated by geographical and political(MAGA) barriers and my manager was using me to get herself connected to other teams and then she boxed me out. I came to her with ideas and she said no and then did them 6 months later. I had no idea how to handle her parasitic style.
She was promo hired into the company and took 2-3 years to find her footing. She shouldn’t have made it past year 2.
I’m no longer there and she tried to promo one of my employees, he told her no.
bottle_of_goats@reddit
your org chart is telling you that staff level isn't actually staff level at your company, it's just a higher pay grade. if you can't reach the people whose buy-in you need without going through channels, that's a structural problem they need to fix, not something you should accept as the cost of the role.
ninetofivedev@reddit
If you think about what "politics" is, you will realize why the answer is no.
Staff engineers make an impact across the organization as a whole. That means providing direction that others will adopt.
Some cases, you have to be diplomatic about it. Other places, you have more control, so you can just turn the levers yourself.
It's a lot easier being a dictator. Have a team that doesn't want to migrate to your new CI platform? Just turn off their access to the old platform.
mamaBiskothu@reddit
I shat on you because everything you've done here, in the post and in the comments, suggests that youre just an okay engineer that thinks more of themselves than they should.
But in case someone smart actually reads it, I wanted to give my take that no one covered: you can "not do politics" and still be staff+ by being truly, truly exceptional and create things anf solutions that no one can ignore no matter what the politics. Use your tech abilities to break barriers.
The best analogy is Walter white in breaking bad. If you make meth thats impossibly pure no one can ignore you.
imFreakinThe_fuk_out@reddit
I drink coffee excessively which means I'm at the coffee area a ton. I also love to walk around our building aimlessly, thinking about whatever bullshit Im dealing with. Meeting and talking to people I see this way has done more for my career than any tech contribution I've ever made.
Southern_Orange3744@reddit
No.
Cross team projects and solving real business problems are inherently political
call_Back_Function@reddit
Here is the translation. Not enough people like you and think you are doing anything of value. Go schmooze and talk vaguely about arch and team support. Boom your staff. Their job is being pretty much useless. You are a show pony for the high ups to ask their tech questions to not actually do anything.
Sakura48@reddit
Any roles above tech lead require politics.
lordnacho666@reddit
No, politics is decision making. Staff is decision making.
ad_irato@reddit
If politics means: communicating across teams, building credibility, getting buyin for technical decisions. Then yes. I don’t know about the other kind but that being said I haven’t been operating at staff level for long.
Aggressive_Ad_5454@reddit
Yes, your job is now one of communication and persuasion. The company hopes you can get the silos to talk to each other , if not completely dissolve.
Change agency is a very difficult assignment. You need strong support from your manager and other managers to do this work.
If I were you I’d identify five (randomly chosen number) opportunities for cross-silo cooperation and ask your manager to help you prioritize which ones to pursue. You have expertise to imagine how cross-silo integration will make life easier for your company and your customers. Your mission, which you have already decided to accept, is to persuade others about that.
You got this.
mhsx@reddit
Politics is talking to lots of people outside of your management chain to get in sync.
Politics is being involved, presenting, communicating. And you cant really escape it.
BigHashDragon@reddit
No, you need to build personal relationships with these people, which you do by being useful to them, doing favours, unblocking without being asked, "politics". It doesn't matter if you don't have a direct org chart based comms pipeline, just book a meeting and ask what you can do for them, or talk about product vision etc.
zugzwangister@reddit
What do you mean by politics?
Look for topics around influence without authority.
That was the biggest hurdle I had.
Eisenhower: "Leadership is the art of getting someone else to do something you want done because he wants to do it."
What problems do the directors have that you can help solve? Once you get a director to understand that you are willing and able to help them from outside their direct reports, you'll develop a fan. At some point, they'll start proactively seeking you out. And then others will follow.
08148694@reddit
You have the mandate and agency to be impactful. There’s no hand holding or detailed script to follow at higher levels - it’s up to you to decide how best to use your time for maximum impact
Forget the org chart. If you need to speak to someone then book time with them. Speak to them. You don’t need an org chart path to have a conversation, and if you do then that’s actively blocking you and signals a functionally broken organisation
ThirdWaveCat@reddit
"politics" just means power relationship to me and there are many ways to approach it besides being charismatic. Being a reliable source of advice is another, negotiating is another. I liked Will Larson's archetypes in Staff Engineer.
sudosussudio@reddit
I worked in an insanely siloed company and resorted to calling people on the phone. It was occasionally successful.
Legal-Trust5837@reddit
Absolutely not poasible