Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I find it amusing how people take this 'leveling game' at big companies so seriously. The title they get at these companies become their identity. They live by the rules the company imposes on them. Amusingly almost the opposite of independent thinking, which they are so proud of. What I found during my career is that some people blossom at these big companies, and some, with equal talent cannot really realize themselves, while they blossom at other organizations, perhaps in startups, or just at more interesting problems. What some people do not realize is that this aspect that as you level at these companies 'you get the big picture more and more' is not really true in a lot of cases. Efficiency and big picture thinking is almost orthogonal. Efficiency is context dependent, high level thinking is less so. I have seen people getting the big picture on things even at low levels or even considered a junior, while people on high levels suprisingly small minded. Higher level at these organizations means that you are more productive in the given field, given organization, for some reason, this can be because of good political skills, because you work your ass off, or because you have a very efficient brain, but it does not necessarily mean that you have better high level vision, or taste or maturity even. Sometimes it is almost laughable how these people who treat these leveling system seriously and get to a relatively high level treat young colleagues. They are almost naive about how young people think. They think that L3 juniors cannot do anything alone. While I see even young kids playing with suprising autonomy if they are thinking in the right problem space.

True role models of mine never were/are L3, L4, L5, etc... They were/are awesome engineers or scientist from the get go. (Like the Johns: The von NEumann and the Carmack.) Experience lets you get better and better, but if you are stuck at a role or organization, the problem might be that you need to find something that you are more passionate about and not necessarily that you are low level because your thinking is not 'independent enough' or you are not 'high-level enough'. At least that is my experience.



Thank you for writing this. I worry it may be lost on a lot of people on this forum: the need to accrue and gain status is a very first-half-of-life concern for many, and leveling systems are designed to leverage this instinct for the org's behalf. For those who grew up 'gifted,' or accomplished, then it can be hard to not see themselves that way, and the title is tightly coupled to identity at a subconscious level. (Note the disproportionately negative reply to the parent's post.)

I went through a period where I cared a bit too much about an org's leveling system. Not surprisingly, I wasn't promoted, even after giving up some technical work. Eventually, I became really unhappy: I had cut myself off of any work that was fulfilling. It really did feel like I was letting some important part of myself wither away in pursuit of a bullshit hierarchy. I eventually left and joined a startup. I'm slowly remembering how much I like to write programs. Needing to work towards survival is a very tangible goal that has the benefit of making politicking and made-up titles less of a focus...for now.

It's honestly a bit scary how you can lose parts of yourself in these systems. Tread carefully if you aren't 100% into them. Also semi-convinced that some tech middle managers project their own anger/grief over leaving the IC work behind onto those rising through the ranks instead of processing it and finding a sustainable equilibrium.


> I find it amusing how people take this 'leveling game' at big companies so seriously.

It has a huge payoff (think 7 figure TC/year for principal+ at big tech), with little personal risk required. It's no wonder people take it so seriously.


At higher levels or extremely specialized roles perhaps. But your typical big tech “principal” IC isn’t consistently making 7 figures.


A principal engineer makes this much money at virtually every SV company because principal is a very high level.



Can we coin a new archetype called the "performative engineer" who plays to the leveling game ?


Why, when we're all already used to calling them boss?


Job title defines your salary and size of your bonus/RSUs. Hell yeah it is your identity.


If money is your identity, you’ve already lost the game.

Especially if you’re trying to do it as an IC engineer. C suite, directors, and many more probably laugh at their salaries.


I'm not playing a game. I'm paying a mortgage as quickly as possible.


What’s the rush?


Sounds like you have some beef to pick, not sure why you feel the need to discredit this person you don’t even know.


Ok fellow kid




Consider applying for YC's Winter 2026 batch! Applications are open till Nov 10

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: