Ask HN: Is it wrong not wanting career progression beyond senior? | Hacker News Reader

Ask HN: Is it wrong not wanting career progression beyond senior?

I pursued computer science because of the career prospect, the fact that the salary is not capped by regulators and I had the grades to get accepted in a program. I am not a senior developer, but am never out of work for more than 2 months in my entire 15+ years career with the up and down in tech. I live comfortably in a low-cost-of-living area. I am not looking for FIRE. I switched roles every few years so that I could learn new tech stacks and get perspective from different teams.

The increased responsibilities of senior+roles are daunting. I once had the energy in my younger days to jump into the challenges, but ended up jaded after not getting the results. People have been just looking out for themselves. (Not wrong!)

View on HN

My take might be a controversial take overall. Also note that I'm speaking as an American, in the "land of the free", which actually does apply in this case, I think:

First, if it's OK with you, then it's not wrong. Ignore the things society/advertisers tell you: "You need a boat! You need a nice car! You need a pool!" Do you want a boat? Do you want a nice car? Do you want a pool? You actually have complete control over these optional financial burdens.

OK, so if you've taken a step back and established what you actually want, (and this may change throughout your life), then you can set some goals around how to achieve that. People may judge you (fuck em, imo). You will get asked questions about what you do for a living all the time (probably), and maybe the status of a more prestigious role is important to you. It's all up to you (possibly with some input from loved ones if you value their opinions).

Personally, I'm kind of a minimalist. I have pretty much all the stuff that I want already. I actively fight against acquiring more stuff. If I had enough capital for my family to live off 10% per year, I would quit my job today, and offer my services for free to causes that I actually care about. Come to think of it, I guess that's one of my goals.

One thing I’ve learned is that you can never win status games. Not playing them is good for you ego and your savings rate

“Even if you win the rat race, you’re still a rat”.

I’m in this field because I like writing code. So many of my managers tried to push me to advance my career, and generally speaking, there is peer pressure. Don’t give in, if you’re having fun, and make enough for a dignified living, that’s what really matters, not the title.

I am in the same boat. It also feels like the more time I spend at one company in one role the more I gain crazy amounts of context over every aspect of our software, so the less effort it takes to do the same amount of work. I can do many tasks in < 30m that would take anyone else an entire day.

The old guys who have total ownership over some esoteric but irreplaceable part of the code really have it made. Especially if they are working remotely. At that point you almost are like a piece of B2B SaaS software. As long as you do your task tolerably well no one wants to go through the hassle of replacing you.

I was a business developer for 20 years, and it was awesome. Mostly worked 40 hour days, my work load was predictable, I had time to constantly hone my skills, and the best of all, I was doing what I loved.

Five years ago I transitioned by accident to an executive position in cybersecurity, mostly because of my emphasis in secure development, and the recent creation of the area. IT security always has been my second love, but becoming a manager took a lot of the innocence that let me sleep like a baby every night.

I'm not complaining, I had to learn many skills, took very different challenges, and while I barely code anymore, I've both suffered and enjoyed the journey and the personal growth. Nevertheless, some days I still miss having way less responsibilities, and a more peaceful life.

I guess my point is, OP should do what he thinks is better for him while he can get away with it. If OP honestly believes his happiness is staying a senior forever, more power to him. In my case I wanted the challenge before the opportunity passed me.

I keep getting pushed to move into a role that I know I will fail in. I don't get it. I'm happy where I am. Isn't that enough?

The managers above you are judged by them climbing higher. So if they can coach you into a larger role, they'll look better. There's no incentive from the manager side to leave you alone, unless you've made enemies.

As long as you work somewhere with ladder mobility and some churn, the opportunists will rise, and they'll want/need you to rise too.

For me, I have two competing worries in deciding what’s next after senior. I like to spend my days in code. I don’t enjoy time spent in meetings like some people seem to. I don’t enjoy managing other people. But I also don’t enjoy poorly planned work, which is problematic as I’m become more opinionated about over time.

Ultimately, I think you should feel ok rejecting a promotion if it forces you into responsibilities you don’t want to have. But you’re probably going to have to accept the consequences of that either way. And you might even be forced into doing some of those responsibilities and not get paid for it.

I work for a smaller company (~100 people) and took ownership of a new greenfield project. I have to wear all hats: hiring people, firing people, managing people (ensuring they're happy, salary adjustments), mentoring, project manager, architect, database design, mentoring other teams as SME (stayed at company too long), meeting with domain experts and creating requirements, UX design (amazing how few seem capable of this), reporting to leadership, meeting with clients, meeting with partners and their dev team, etc.

As you can imagine, some of these responsibilities can drive you mad. The domain experts may expect the product to do X, but they want it to work the same as their product made in the 90's and they start dictating how the UI should function. Since ultimately the success of the product is in my hands, communication ultimately is the most important thing. You have to push back against nonsense and suggest other ways of doing things to people who may be set in their ways (lots of yelling and you need to keep your calm). The endless meetings are another issue. And we don't have a strong company culture to set policies on meetings (like Amazon enforcing meetings must have a small 1 page writeup that everyone has to read). When you're hyper-focused on not wasting time and you join these meetings where half the time is spent talking about weekend plans it can drive you insane.

I got into software development because I enjoyed coding, problem solving, etc. I never signed up for this! I think after this, my next move will be able to step down into a role at another company with less responsibility. This is just too much pressure, especially with two young kids at home.

Was the pay rise commensurate? Or have you been tricked?

A little bit of both.

I know people in their 60s who are senior engineers and are quite content with their career and where they are. I know people in their 30s who are directors. It really depends on the person and where your talents and strengths lie.

The key, though it's admittedly easier said than done, is for you to do you and not worry about what everyone else is doing.

It's fun until your boss makes you hire and lead a team, as well as be product manager, and head of QA (you are the QA), and basically become the director of a department, while still holding the title of "Sr. Engineer". I didn't really ask for any of this, and I'd be happy if I were still just doing "Sr. Engineer" work, but there's a lot on my shoulders. While this sounds shitty, I also have autonomy and job security.

You might consider hiring yourself out as a contractor. This is especially interesting if you're specialized in some vertical where you can bring consultancy skills to the table. Be the guy who's brought in when there's a problem, replace some proverbial screw, and then charge a week's salary for it. Because nobody else knew exactly which screw to replace.

Also, this path allows you to delegate work to other contractors that you have vetted. After all, your clients care about the results, not who does the actual job.

The thing I can't figure out is how to get a good pipeline of screws that need replacing. All of my previous roles have been full-time salaried staff, and my network is all people like that. Getting a new job of that type is the infamous hurdle of interview panels, which would mean getting the contract takes more time than executing it, if the model I knew applied.

So what model does apply? How do you find enough work efficiently enough with that kind of model? How do you make it sustainable and not run out of the screws that your professional network needs replacing?

Multi-decade permanent contractor here (software developer). Some of it is luck. Some of it depends on the nature of your industry. Also, OP seems to enjoy learning new tech stacks, which makes them attractive to more owners of screws that need replacing, thus increasing their marketability.

It doesn't hurt to occasionally beat the bushes and ask your friends if they need screws replaced, or if they know anybody who does.

Short answer: if you replace screws efficiently and communicate well, you will become the go-to person for replacing screws.

I can't speak for SWE, but in other industries a consultant is brought in with little formal process, as a one-time expense usually approved by somebody they knew already.

There are also brokers/agencies that match contractors with projects/jobs and take a percentage cut. Not ideal but better than nothing if you’re hopeless at networking like me

That's fine. Most people never advance beyond "Senior" (by title or objective scope).

Let's say a Senior is someone who's shown they can work effectively as part of a team, reliably and with little/no direction. You need part X of a system done, X is reasonable enough goal, and they will make X happen, including collaborating with interdependencies in a wise way. And they can go home at the end of the day, and have a life.

I'm "Principal" (and aspiring startup-CTO), and in my version of that, I live for this, I invest in the big and small pictures of whatever I'm working on, I believe in the mission for real, I have earned battle scars that help me solve system/org problems, and avert many bigger problems.

If a process isn't working well, or a product isn't on the right track, or team members aren't happy, or the hiring or culture are going sour, or things that should be happening aren't happening, or things that shouldn't be happening are, anywhere in the company... hopefully I'll notice, or someone will trust they can tell me about it, and I'll help figure who and how to tackle it with, and apply all the energy required. It would bother me not to.

I'd implicitly take on that scope of responsibility, even if I didn't officially have that role. Most people don't want that much responsibility, and most shouldn't have to.

Senior is a perfectly respectable role to serve until retirement, and a key part of what most orgs need to execute successfully. (Don't believe the bro myths popularized in some companies, like up-or-out.)

In general no, but as you age (and gain years of work experience), being "Senior" for e.g. 15 years will make some hiring people look down on you and try to skip you from someone "that can grow". So in combination with ageism in this industry, it might become a problem in the future, especially if the market doesn't recover and everyone else title inflates to Staff and other fancy titles.

That's when you become a contractor and work with recruiters or go into consulting.

No, there's nothing intrinsically wrong about not progressing past senior. Most companies see that as a terminal level because staff+ is such a shift in skillset.

It's fascinating to me that you've not attained the senior level after a 15+ year career, though. That's a lot of time to spend as a mid-level engineer. Out of curiosity, why aren't you a senior engineer?

OP here. I started out in a very niche small local software industry thinking they didn't do evil like the big corps did. The old guys who started the company were in great control. They just wanted to do the same stuff when they were new college grads (just minus the punch cards). Business growth was dead. Salary didn't even keep up with the inflation.

Then I took a QA position in a big corp after spending my 20s not saving any money. Even this manual/automated testing role qualified me for a 50% pay increase from the old job without salary negotiation. No dev shop took me after seeing I was clueless in recent tech stacks. After a few years, I was tired of the manual testing part and looked for a new job.

Then I had automation roles in a few local companies with increasing DevOps components. The companies are progressively less rigid so they are good in letting us exploring and using new tech stacks.

My belief in not doing "evil" in my 20s has hurt me financially and career-wise in the long term. I didn't read industry news before I turned 30. The QA job, even if the company had some controversies, was a savior to stop beating a dead horse.

That's pretty much why many places consider senior a terminal position. You're expected to progress from junior to midweight to senior, but after that it's fine to plateau.

There’s nothing wrong with that at all. I’ve often thought it’s insane that our industry says “ok you’re really good at writing code, now let’s see if you can manage people.” They’re extremely different, almost mutually antagonistic skill sets. A whole lot of people are good at writing code because they don’t want to deal with other people.

You’re making plenty good money I assume. You can take that money and invest it and make more that way. Your income is not capped even if your salary is.

If you make good money, have a good quality of life, and like what you do you don’t really have to think beyond that at all. But if you want to think beyond that, there are other options.

Senior just means you've worked for awhile. You're automatically a senior based on your work history. If you apply to junior roles companies will be confused, or they will just rerank you as senior anyway. Senior does not automatically mean more responsibilities, but leadership does.

Sometimes the bump in pay for leadership does not correspond to the amount of burden you experience, meaning your life might be worse for it and for not enough money. If you pursue leadership absolutely make sure that the pay is truly worth it because owning responsibility sometimes means late nights fighting fires.

Sounds like you're doing totally solid in your career.

I personally experimented the dread of high responsibilities, and decided "never again".

Since then, I have technical only positions.

There is much to do technically, and I'm better paid than my chief.

I enjoy each day of work, swimming in my lack of responsibilities

Same for me. Was Staff and Lead (with reports) for a couple years and was constantly stressed and responsible for so many things. Dread is a good word for many of those days. My next position is back to Senior and a contractor so I’m very much looking forward to just caring about my project.

I had a conversation with the VP of my department once about this.

He said that he is never going to try to advance beyond his role, and that he made that decision a long time ago. He decided what level he wanted to be at, fought to get there, and plans to be there for the rest of his career.

I also know a software engineer who has made the same decision. He wanted to hit the highest he could go in his role that didn't pivot to management (lead, director, etc) and he achieved it and has been happy there.

They're both very chill people, and they do well for themselves. Both also advised me (as I share your sentiments) to figure out where you want to end up, work hard to get there, make connections, and then do the best in that role for as long as you have it.

The VP said that even if you are dead set on being the president of the company, the truth is that the further you go up the pyramid, the fewer opportunities there are, and the more people competing for those opportunities. Unless you are willing to sacrifice everything else in your life for the chance to land that seat, it's not worth it.

I'm still relatively early on my career, so I'm fighting to get further up, but I know whereabouts I want to end up, and it's way below where my peers want to be. And I'm fine with that.

You’ve had a stable career, but it sounds like you’ve been reacting to opportunities rather than defining your own path. Switching roles and learning new tech stacks kept things interesting, but maybe now the move isn’t adding more tools—it’s finding clarity on what excites you.

Senior roles can feel daunting, but don’t think of it as just taking on more. Imagine leading a smaller, cross-functional team where you have ownership—driving one project from start to finish, making the calls, and staying hands-on. Or maybe you carve out a role where you mentor others while still tackling technical challenges that energize you.

You haven’t faced ageism, but here’s the truth: that 25-year-old will eventually come for your job. The edge? Mastering the "adult" skills they haven’t. Those deeper, strategic moves that come with experience—handling complex projects, leading without a title, and seeing the bigger picture.

You’ve proven you can thrive—now it’s time to design your career with more autonomy and impact. Forget chasing titles. Focus on creating the career that offers fulfillment, freedom, and depth in your work.

Your energy isn’t gone—it’s just waiting for a clear direction.

You are not wrong. Career isn't everything. A job is there to earn money first, fun second. Perpetual promotions aren't in that list at all.

I was messing around on LinkedIn and I noticed that someone I hired into a senior position two jobs ago is still a senior engineer 14 years later.

I've had the discussion with various people reporting to me over time that they were perfectly happy right where they were and had no desire to progress.

Go with what makes you happy and try to find a place that lets you be.

Hell, sometimes I wish that I'd never been promoted.

This is your life in the EU as a developer. Most companies only have junior/senior titles, just to tell beginners apart from "3+ years of experience". Very few companies have staff engineer level. You can either go on to be a manager, or land in a company which suits your vision of being a senior developer.

Get in touch with hackremotespy@gmail.com for all your hack related such as; Cloning, Tracking, Spying, Retrieving of deleted text messages, Upgrading of results, Hack social media accounts, Erase criminal record. His service is safe and secure. Get in touch with him via his email hackremotespy@gmail.com

I have a very senior position and build get into the exclusive club and the ivory tower. And make much more money.

I decided not to for a bunch of reasons - the most important ones being that I am at my limit of corporate bullshit, that I am an expert in what I do and wild be average in a new position.

There is also this sweet freedom edge when I can still criticize, but not be perceived as shitting my bed.

My son who is doing (elite) studies in finance cannot comprehend that. To him, an opportunity is something you ought to catch. I envy him his 20 years old :)

I've been very explicit with my manager about not wanting to be promoted. There's nothing wrong with saying "this is enough."

Also--your decision is a "for now" decision, not a "forever" decision.

I don't think it's wrong. I'm myself a fresh senior engineer and I'm probably going to keep that title for quite a few years.

However, the thing about working as a lead engineer (IC) is, you can pick what you want to work on. You don't have to write boilerplate code. You can still write a lot of code if you want (David Cutler said he has always been a hands-on manager who writes a lot of code). And the pay is definitely a lot better, so I think that definitely holds some weight.

Tech is a moving target, but it can endure as it fades and is superseded, as long as you float along jumping to a new log as the other one gets water logged and sinks below you - the new stacks you speak of. As long as you are content with the progression and are happy with what you earn(assuming it inflates accordingly), you are a success in what you do! Though I have seen too many people choose the wrong log = sinks with all hands, so survey your field and stay afloat.

Java is the log that can never sink lol

A lot of the discussion here is taking it for granted that staff+ comes with additional "responsibilities" that will differentiate your day-to-day from senior level engineers. That's often true, especially at larger companies, but don't forget that levels above senior exist at smaller companies too. In some cases it really just means you get paid more and have a more senior title. So, maybe not something to avoid?

Once you plateau in your career, after a bit you realize this is it for the duration and you may want to do something radical/crazy - the famous mid-life crisis. After some wild and crazy times you may come back to earth and return to your tech career if you can reconnect to the current tech stack and then plodding on to retirement may seem like a blessing.

If you are ok with money and you do at your job things you want to do - stay that way. Overengineering roles currently kills people that go higher on the ladder. Sometimes there is space to go back, sometimes they are burned out too much.

If you have safe procedure to change teams and environment in case of stagnation in current project - use it and be happy.

Of course not! The main reason why people progress is to earn more money. Software is extremely unique in that you can make a lot of money on skill alone without needing to go into sales or management.

If you don't spend a lot and are saving, who cares what you do for a living?

Senior Engineer tends to be a catch-all phrase for people who have 3+ years of experience but, for whatever reason, are getting into the next level of promotions (Staff for IC/TLs, manager for EMs). Most people are in this group, and there's nothing wrong with being here.

>I am not looking for FIRE.

If you hate the idea of making more money, as the meme goes, perhaps consider that is because you are actually Financially Independent and Retired Early without realizing it.

Being able to say "I don't want more money." is a luxury only few people can truly afford.

I'm in the same boat. I want to have a stake in what I'm working, on but the politics/meetings seem overwhelming. I want to do interesting work without the pressure of unrealistic management expectations hanging over my head

Try contracting, then people won't care about your career progression.

Doing what you enjoy and getting paid well for it is the American Dream, or at least one of them. To a lot of people, you probably won the lottery.

I got talked into management twice and I hated it both times.

Tell your confidantes, particularly technical friends, you don't want to be promoted beyond senior.

Hopefully they ask you why.

Then you can learn what it is you are really thinking (but you have started here, so yay!)

I remember working as a student at a narrow magazine in Copenhagen when I started developing. Many of the old journalists there deliberately choose to continue writing articles and in depth stories as opposed to becoming editor or manager. They loved their craft and it fulfilled their aspirations. I find it admirable to follow your passion.

Additionally, you can continuously learn new skills independent of formal role.

It's perfectly fine.

I've mentored and hired a lot of people that just want to sling code and get their 3% inflation raise every year. Good on them, love those folks.

No, it should be fine. Many sw engineering organizations have the concept of a “terminal level”, beyond which growth/promotion is optional.

I tried being a director. It wasn't great for me for the time. I'm back to coding, which I do for fun anyway.

Has one been offered to you or that's a theoretical question? Why? I have friends who do want to go to management and ones who do not. None of us has ever have such offer.

Also, judging from HN/reddit people more often than not regret not advancing to management.

In uk you’re automatically senior after roughly 3 years.

From company pov, yes. Because they want people who are driven to get to next stage.

From individual pov, no. Because everyone a different priorities in life.

Goal is to find the company where their expectation meets your priorities.

Even for the company, having some team members that you know are happy to just sit where they are and get work done is a good thing. If everyone is gunning for promotions, some people are going to be disappointed, and retaining your team is a challenge.

I agree that there is nothing wrong with choosing to stay away from senior positions, and in fact there are many benefits to what you're doing. I'm not sure if you're familiar with the "Gervais Principle", but it's a fun theory to think about related to this. I'm sure HN has brought it up before, but it's relevant here. https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/10/07/the-gervais-principle-...

The idea is that the mid-level "clueless" are the ones who choose to climb a corporate hierarchy, while the non-senior "losers" (not social losers, but the people who struck bad financial bargains) are able to give up capitalist striving for a stable life. As a "loser" you can move between different jobs more easily, stay happy, and avoid politics and unnecessary responsibility. Here's an excerpt from that article that resonates with me:

"The Losers like to feel good about their lives. They are the happiness seekers, rather than will-to-power players, and enter and exit reactively, in response to the meta-Darwinian trends in the economy. But they have no more loyalty to the firm than the Sociopaths. They do have a loyalty to individual people, and a commitment to finding fulfillment through work when they can, and coasting when they cannot."

I actually find the "loser" to be the most interesting and useful person at most companies.

Anyway, that's my two cents.

No, you do whatever's best for you.

I know people who have stepped down from principal. I just got the bump to principal myself after (allegedly) performing at Principal level for years.

The fun satisfying stuff is the generally lower impact work. The boring and frustrating stuff is higher impact work. If you do not need the Principal money, and Senior money is good enough to retire on, I can understand how you might be tempted to stay at senior, or even take a pay cut.

TL;DR: nothing wrong at all with staying at Senior.

nothing wrong, you do you and stick to what makes you happy :)

Of course, it's not wrong. You do you man!

But if you are looking for general advice, I think it's important to want career progression. Generally speaking, for most people, bills go up as they age (kids, health, yada-yada). Unless you are sitting on inheritance money, you'll want to have a bigger pay-check to meet life's challenges.

> Generally speaking, for most people, bills go up as they age (kids, health, yada-yada).

To a point yes. There was a time when you could realistically pay off your mortgage before you were fifty, and for some people maybe this is still the case. College expenses are another consideration, just depends on how much you as a parent are going to shoulder those costs compared to grants/military/self earn.

For myself, costs have lowered and I'm able to donate more money to charity. So if you can swing a bigger paycheck and you're motivated help others I think it's worth doing so.

Yes it's wrong, you will be harshly judged in the afterlife

why do you seek permission from strangers on hackernews, is the real question. of course it is okay ...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com