Ask HN: Promoted, but Career Path Derailed | Hacker News Reader

Ask HN: Promoted, but Career Path Derailed

138 pointsgolly_ned138 comments

Maybe "derailed" is a strong word. But here's my situation:

There was a re-org last quarter. My team was working on a specific domain managing a stack. There was another close-by team working in that same domain managing a different stack. They hadn't been one team from the get-go due to political interpersonal reasons. My director got fired for bad performance, and the other team's product launch failed (under a different director, both under the same senior director).

The other team took over my team's stack and manages both stacks now. The other team had a senior staff engineer, and I (then a staff engineer) was displaced. I was moved to a different domain and promoted to senior staff engineer, onto a team that was historically seen as badly underperforming, and was a huge contributing factor in my director getting fired. I have experience in both domains, but my knowledge, experience, and interest prefer my old domain, in the team I was displaced out of. At first, the senior director didn't outright tell me I couldn't stay in the old domain, but made it very clear it was in my best interest to move to the new domain, where there wasn't a staff+ engineer. I've been reassured my performance is great and I feel my work on the last team was appreciated across the org and I established a good reputation, but it's upsetting that I'm not able to continue to work on my specialty.

I've been feeling lots of things. One is that I really don't like being in charge of my own destiny with this kind of thing. I've left a company due to a bad reorg before largely because I wasn't in control. I don't want my career and life to evolve by happenstance. Another is sadness at the loss of prominence in the company, since I have to re-orient myself on this new team, where two experts are already prominent as leaders. Another is just the fact that I don't enjoy this domain as much and don't find it as interesting, especially as the work in my previous team is getting into my specialization just this year after I've left. Another is that I'm bothered by the lack of continuity in the large projects I had worked on. It pains me to leave so much in a half-finished state.

A new director is starting in two weeks. I don't know how much or whether to surface these issues to him. I'm hoping I could start to report directly to him to be able to work on cross-org initiatives, including things related to my other domain, which has certain points of intersection between the domains.

I'm not willing to leave the company because its stock 6x'ed last year. I'm looking for other options and advice on either what actions to take to change the situation in ways that'll make me happier and more satisfied at work, or thoughts that'll help address the feelings about this.

Thank you.

View on HN

Every leader has their "go to" people.

You want to be one of those "go to" people! They are put on the most challenging assignments, the most exciting opportunities, more often promoted, protected from above, last to let go and frequently asked to follow that leader to new assignments at new companies usually with higher titles and better comp.

It seems to me you have been spotted by your Sr. Director and given an opportunity to prove yourself as you did in your prior team. It's a logical move to take a high performer from one team, and try to prop up an underperforming team. It's about what's good for the company.

If this fails, you won't necessarily be blamed, but you'll have lost an opportunity to really stand out amongst any other engineer at your level and earn the status of your Sr. Director's "go to" person.

Your value is in being a versatile, competent "can do anything, anywhere and happy to do it" type of resource who can be thrown into the biggest messes and come out looking good.

To weight in with what most likely is an unpopular opinion here on HN - but you also have to consider your job satisfaction and stress factors before and after the potential move - sometimes it is best to shift orgs entirely and continue doing what you like doing rather than be forced to take on new challenges (that might or might not be intractable).

Well, sounded to me like OP wanted a career. What I described leads to a career.

Sort of.

There are two basic ways to orient a career: around a set of people that you are loyal to and work well with (and then let the specific assignments float to whatever needs doing), and around a type of work that you enjoy doing (and then let the people come and go, standing out by your competence in the domain).

I've found that the former often leads to more promotions and opportunities, because people make the decisions after all. But OP's expressed desires indicate more the latter. He gets satisfaction out of the work itself, understanding the technical domain and challenges. If that's your personality type and your inclination, you can make yourself very unhappy (not to mention underperforming) by pushing yourself into types of work that don't give you satisfaction, for the sake of preserving relationships. Sometimes it's worth it to forego the attractive opportunities favored by senior leadership so that you can continue to work on the things that you find enjoyable.

They already had a satisfying career, their complaint centers around how that was derailed and now they're working on something they have no interest in.

It really depends on the type of person you are.

Not everyone is up for that (yes, it can be quite stressful). For those that can deal with it, it can be a lot of fun. I'm a good fixer, but not really into the chaos that fixers often deal with.

I know folks that are consultants, exactly so they won't be tied down to one task.

This really echoes the old “hackers, builders, maintainers” analogy and its wisdom about knowing which you are and being able to understand the other two aren’t the same as you are. Likely dips into the spectrums between as well.

> I'm not willing to leave the company

Agree with this. The big risk though is that you must continue to be seen the same way. Humans are highly prone to out-of-sight-out-of-mind, so you need to continually refresh their memory of you being that high performer. It's stupid and sucks, but unfortunately it's the way 95% of people are, and becoming a director doesn't change that underlying nature.

My advice:

1. Do try to report directly to the new director

2. Be honest and (mostly) open with them about your situation, and let them know that you are up for this challenge but that it won't be easy. Ask them for advice periodically with problems you run into (especially/mostly people problems unless they are very technical, which is rare at that level). Genuinely ask for advice though. Even if you don't take it, earnestly seek to understand what they would do and then use your own judgment about application.

3. Keep your eyes/ears open for new opportunities that might come up, but try to rate limit yourself because you don't want this to cause you to pull away from your new area or become a distraction. Also think about it as a "what could be next" not an opportunity to escape/eject early.

This is all true but even if you manage to become the "go to" person there is a potential trap. It's what I call the Promotion Ponzi. If you've been recognized as the "go to" guy you will be presented with new and bigger challenges at times. Make sure it always pays off in either money or (real) [1] responsibility, better both.

If it doesn't, run.

[1] Flashy titles and perks that cost the company next to nothing don't count. Best metric is the number of your reports.

"Sr. Director and given an opportunity to prove yourself"

from OP: "new team is known to be under-performing"

Uhh it sounds to me like the senior staff that the guy displaced OP with was the go-to guy and that OP has been given a shit sandwich. If OP wasn't specifically briefed by the sr director and TOLD "You're one of my go-to guys. I know this is a shit sandwich. Please help me fix it.", then this is basically constructive dismissal and they want you to just disappear.

On top of that, IME, go-to guys don't get sent to go fix stuff unless it's a clean sweep of the old "bad" team. They wouldn't send you in with known-low-performers, it's setting you up to fail.

Edit: Reading over other comments, I'm just in disbelief at how universally people are saying this is an opportunity. No, they cut off OP's support system, pushed them out of their top-spot, and off over to some team that leadership views as the trash pile. There's a difference between "this team is struggling and I'm bringing in support" and "damn, where do i put this guy. i'll just put them over here, with the rest of the fire."

Well even if you are right what is supposed to be done now? Other comments are telling to take it as opportunity and make most of this bad situation. Since OP does not want to leave what is your suggestion? Complain every day at work? Complain to HR? Do no accept new project and wait for next move from management?

Not every go-to guy is CEOs right hand who just goes in fires old team and put in new one in first month. Most of the time even go-to person has to make it work with existing teams.

If it were constructive dismissal then they wouldn't have promoted him.

This is "I heard you were a high performer but I don't know you directly, so I have high uncertainty. I have a team that needs guidance, but I don't care enough about that team to put the person I trust most in charge. I think you're probably good, so here's an opportunity to turn around a struggling team and impress me."

It is definitely a shit sandwich though. The senior director didn't care enough about this team to really try to help them, and didn't care enough about you to pump you up about the opportunity.

> Reading over other comments, I'm just in disbelief at how universally people are saying this is an opportunity.

I think it's called positive thinking. Or wishful thinking. Something like that.

In theory, everything is an opportunity. Even getting cancer is an opportunity to reflect on your priorities, call the people you love, make peace with your gods. It's just, some of us would prefer not to get this kind of opportunities.

> pushed them out of their top-spot,

err, "Promoted them out of their top-spot to one even higher."

If it were not for this detail I would agree with you. But if the boss is intending to constructively dismiss you, they don't give you a promotion as part of it.

> I don't want my career and life to evolve by happenstance.

and

> I'm not willing to leave the company because its stock 6x'ed last year.

Those two things, right there, are at complete odds with each other. You're artificially limiting your options because of some magic numbers you can't control look good right now. (Magic numbers which, by the way, have vesting periods and other fixed-time rules precisely to trap people into cycles where they feel they can't leave.)

It's a perfectly valid thing to stay for financial reasons, but that must come with acceptance that sometimes you'll have to roll over and take whatever they decide to dish out. It's also perfectly valid to accept that the ground shifted under your feet and the only reasonable thing is to move to greener pastures. But you can't do both.

This is fantastic advice. For senior engineers, its common for stock to be up to 1/3rd of compensatation. If the stock goes up by 6x - then you’ll be making 3x your original negotiated compensation. Being able to save multiple years worth of take-home salary every year is life changing.

After 4 years of this, you may not have your original career - but 8-15 years of pay saved provides lots of optionality.

100% - quote from parent fits perfectly: "It's a perfectly valid thing to stay for financial reasons, but that must come with acceptance that sometimes you'll have to roll over and take whatever they decide to dish out."

Not an engineer but in tech. My career has stalled out but I'm making better money then I would in a different place with more upward trajectory. It's been wild (and blessed) being able to save 1+ years worth of expenses each year (after taxes, retirement contributions, expenses, etc).

Nothing special happens at 15 years expenses in savings. It's way past what you need for security, but not nearly enough to retire on (that's more like 25x). It's way past what you need to rent, but it won't buy you a home you want in the region where you earned it, unless in combination with a PITI that commits you to earning at the same level for another 30 years. It could set you up nicely in a different region, but that would probably have to be combined with a career change, or else you're gambling that you can sustain full-remote employment.

If you're telling yourself to hang on until you reach this point... just realize that you may reach it and find you're still stuck.

This doesn't seem responsive to GP's comment. GP didn't discuss 15 years' expenses.

>but 8-15 years of pay saved provides lots of optionality.

I guess that depends how you're defining "pay" in relation to taxes and deductions.

It’s income, as opposed to expenses.

Throw 15 years of savings into the stock market and it will almost certainly double in value in 7 years.

It is most certainly transformative if you pretend you don’t have it for what amounts to a pretty short period of time.

If you're saying "I'll just hang on in this job I don't like until I'm in this 8-15 range" you may find that it's not reasonable to make any big life changes from that position either; you still need to "pretend you don't have it" and keep going for another while.

Holding on to your job you don’t like for not that long to retire easily is an amazing privilege that most don’t have.

"it will almost certainly double in value in 7 years" implies 10% is an almost certain long term return. It is not.

10 years is a common rule of thumb to double your investment, this is a good guess since after adjusting for inflation, the real return of S&P 500 is about 6.8%. Which is about 10.5 years to double your investment.

(give or take S&P 500 being one of the best returns you will find historically)

10% is almost certain but yes I wasn’t adjusting for inflation.

> For senior engineers, its common for stock to be up to 1/3rd of compensatation.

Relatively common to be significantly higher than 1/3, too.

Assuming the company stock has an upward trajectory the correct ratio to cite here depends on whether you're looking at the original grant or the value upon vesting. You could plausibly have grants that are 1/3 of your compensation at award but integer multiples of your salary upon vesting.

E.g., my signing offer was >1/3 stock at grant and with refreshers (at grant) my pay is significantly >1/3 stock, even if you model the stock price as flat. (Refreshers were 4-5x the size of salary bumps.) And I'm not especially senior.

^ This.

But to elaborate more, do you ever play a single player game like Skyrim, finish every quest, lead every guild?

Life is unfortunately not like that, you can't "win" every path. It's multiplayer, and everything comes with a tradeoff.

If you want to win at "career success", it's there, lots of people would love to be in your place. But people will sometimes tell you what to do.

If you want to win at "agency" it's also available, but you lose money and progress, take a big risk.

Yeah, the fact that they're at odds is what makes this a difficult situation.

Right now I'm leaning towards: this other domain is close enough to my old domain that given work's context in my overall life, the pay makes it worthwhile to compromise on my work goals, as long as I'm able to "leave the door open" to re-enter my old domain. That probably won't happen at this company until the other, more experienced engineer who took over my old domain leaves, and maybe not even then.

But the magnitude of the pay difference is great enough that a couple, few years of the dot product between what I'm doing and what I'd like to be doing in my career is ~0.8 rather than 1.0 is worth it in my life right now, given that I want to eventually buy a home in my high COL city.

I think having been in the situation where I felt I was basically in my dream-job and knew I was, makes it harder to have lost it, even though I am in a really good spot in my career overall.

That's not really true. It sounds like the OP is in a big public tech company. In such a company there's usually a third option that preserves your salary and equity grants but also lets you do something else: transfer.

OP should look around for other roles and other directors within the company. There's a good chance that there's something available, particularly for a high performer with a dedicated track record. It does require leaving behind some of the skills and relationships that got him to this point, though.

If it was a generic role at a generic company I'd agree, but in the original post the transfer happened without OPs having any saying in it. He also feels like his career is subject to the whims of the company (he used happenstance to describe it).

It's not unreasonable to imagine transfer not being a possibility for him in the near future, so your comment feels a bit out of place.

Which public BigTech company has increased 6x in the last few years? Maybe Nvidia?

this is literally the entire point of golden handcuffs.

But those are only as tight as he lets them be. He can choose to be happy with where he is, or make a change.

You can't do both but they feed into the same "OKR" if you like:

A. Get rich (how rich? How likely?), so I can do what I like absolutely.

B. Do what I like now, so am guaranteed to have done what I like, but still be at the mercy of corporate/academic tides.

Both are fine choices. Need to do the decisioning to find out which has more "do what I like" ness to it.

Reads like you are in a (very?) large org. Reorgs and politics are par for the course.

You got a promotion into an area where you have a chance to prove your chops by improving on things. Get this right and you'll be in line for more promotions.

Being "the expert" in a specialized domain is often a career limiting thing. Broadening your areas of success is generally better for your long term career.

Probably best to wait until the new director settles in before pitching your proposals. In the meantime, take a look at how you can further improve how the management views your contributions and the value you produce.

Similarly, I think sometimes being displaced to somewhere less comfortable is a good thing in a career. I had this a couple of times, one turned out not ideally, but the other ones (which are smaller, but still tosses me from place to place) proved to be better in the long run.

I prefer to be a T shaped person, but having a broader top doesn't harm the process of going deep. In retrospective, I found that having a broader knowledge provided the paths and fuel to dig deeper the part I care about the most.

Counterpoint, if you want to stay in the company, asses the leader's (one that displace you) personality and track record. There's some leaders that will reassign your role to a totally different one on a whim, without considering your skill and experience. Worse, you may get accounted for when failed.

The best way to stay the longest in this kind of company is to perform the minimum required.

This is basically peter principle in the working

Re: (very?) large org.

I've never been in a company with more than 15 people, so I always find these nuanced complex political company issues to be fascinating. I don't think I'd have the mental bandwidth to deal with all of these issues. :-)

"At first, the senior director didn't outright tell me I couldn't stay in the old domain, but made it very clear it was in my best interest to move to the new domain, where there wasn't a staff+ engineer."

Do you think this was good advice? You took their advice, even if it seemed a bitter pill at the time. They were most certainly part of the process for your promotion.

It feels like this senior director is in your corner. I'd schedule a 1:1 with a simple agenda of "looking for advice".

Definitely start with a compliment. "I remember that you advised me to move to X, Y time ago, and you were right that it was great for my career and promotion."

Be clear and specific about your desires - "I miss working on X technology. I was wondering if you have any visibility into any 2025 Q2, Q3, H2 projects or opportunities related to X technology that I might be able to [contribute to or transition to]." Sometimes you can be 50/50 to try something out or dip your toe in the water if you are attached to the success of something else. It's important that you be clear and specific. Maybe you could do this via email - it depends on if you are introverted or extroverted.

I once had an EM go back to Principal IC in an area that he loved. He's still working on it.

Good luck!

> One is that I really don't like being in charge of my own destiny with this kind of thing.

> I don't want my career and life to evolve by happenstance.

OP is looking for someone to benevolently direct their career path...

>Do you think this was good advice? You took their advice, even if it seemed a bitter pill at the time. They were most certainly part of the process for your promotion.

>It feels like this senior director is in your corner. I'd schedule a 1:1 with a simple agenda of "looking for advice".

And as you pointed out, they might actually have it! OP, consider these things. If you truly don't want happenstance OR yourself to direct your path, you're going to have to stick with a benevolent individual who will, so you should stick to this senior director like glue.

This is good advice. Also have similar conversations with the new director.

"I'm here to support you, and am committed to turning around this project. Long term, I would also like to return to working in X domain, so please keep me in mind when opportunities for that come up."

Yeah, I did feel fortunately supported, though the political situation was rather more complex, and things outside both of our control played a role in this promotion.

I did express my interest in transitioning back in-person to a few important people, while asserting my commitment to getting the other team up and running, and my interest in my old domain is really well known, and strong enough that I do think it'll sustain itself even if I settle into this new position.

I've been the SD in circumstances like this. And I'll say this is good advice, but there's the potential for a subtle trap in it. Sounds like you're in a fairly political org. Not my favorite environment tbh, but if it's the game you're playing, don't go forth blindly.

(Note: I don't know genders of anybody here. I'm going to call OP "he" and the SD "she," because lots of they's and titles get confusing.)

The SD probably thinks this conversation is over. From her perspective: I told OP what to do (what was in his "best interest") and he did it. End of talk. I'm in an ultra-fast growing pressure cooker with 30 things on my plate to get right, and I work for people who don't hesitate to fire leaders. Now he wants to put time on my calendar to talk about it. This can go one of two ways.

Option A: OP doesn't like the way things went because he wants to spend time in the other domain. (which is what this is about.) On net, to the SD, this is just causing friction. Maybe she helps you out and puts you back in the old domain, at least after a while, and you owe her a favor. Maybe your performance is good, but not irreplaceable-good, and she gracefully handles the conversation, but she is annoyed. When your new director gets on, she tells them to look out for that one, he's high-maintenance. New director, you can decide whether or not he's worth the effort to keep happy, but please don't let him jump onto my calendar again without vetting what he's talking about. K thanks. (And yes, this is a real conversation that happens.)

i.e., it might get you what you want, but it also might backfire.

Option B: As a mid-to-senior manager in an org like that, your SD is always on the lookout for engineers who get "the way the world works."[1] You can go in framing the ask for advice differently: "I was on team A, I had to leave because of what happened on team A, now I'm on team B. Team B is fine but I don't see the headroom given the other players there. I'm happy to keep performing here, but what advice do you have for making a real difference in this circumstance, and are there upcoming challenges I should volunteer for?"

This may seem like a subtle distinction, but the framing is really important. In one of them, you come and say, "what's important to me is working on this domain, and that was taken away from me. Solve my problem for me." (To which the SD says, _damn, this guy can't wait 2 weeks for the new director to start_ ?) In the other, you send a different series of signals:

"I had a sweet gig where I loved the domain and was making progress as an expert/leader..." Ok, he's passionate. He cares.

"Nobody loves team disruption, but what happened happened and made sense. I'm not saying I necessarily want to go back." Grudges are for amateurs, this guy is future-focused. I can work with that.

"I took your advice, and thanks for taking the time to give it." He will engage hierarchy respectfully even if he doesn't love where it has landed him at the moment.

"But in the domain where I'm working now, you already have two leaders well-developed who are definitely the right people to lead it forward." He's a team player, not trying to knife anyone in the back. But he's also hungry and ambitious. Plus he's giving me a private and unsolicited (therefore probably honest) endorsement of other in-place players, which is a gift of high-value information.

"So with a lot of changes going on, new director onboarding, etc., I wanted to set a goal to make the biggest difference I can for our shared success. But you have better visibility than I do about how to actually stack tactics against that goal. What would you advise I volunteer for / do over the next 6 months? What should I tell this new director that I want?" He gets it. His goals are my goals. There's a clear reason he came to me rather than the new director, this is not a waste of my time. He's pragmatic and ambitious and technically excellent. I might not have anything shovel-ready for him this second, but I'll keep him in mind next time I need something knocked out of the park. And I think my 3 pm meeting tomorrow is about something like that.

[1] "The way the world works" in circumstances like this is more precisely, "the way to operate in this particular organization and leadership climate that will ruffle the fewest feathers while pleasing the right people."

This sounds like great advice! Take the move in stride, be positive, and play the long game.

You’ve been given the chance to show that your previous success wasn’t just a function of the domain you were in and team you were on.

Taking a flailing org and being visibly a part of turning them around will open a lot of doors in your current company. Notably those open doors won’t really translate if you switch jobs. If you switch jobs you’ll have to rebuild the trust that senior middle-management have in you.

At the end of the day if you want to find a small niche and stay in it then senior staff+ is likely not for you unless your technical area is in demand and very complex.

I'll also share a little of my brush with management... there's "easy mode manager" and "hard mode manager".

"Easy Mode" is when you're naturally promoted from IC to Manager in a problem domain you know, and already have the respect and admiration of your peers.

"Hard Mode" is when you're transitioned to manage a team where you don't know the problem domain, and don't already have a good working relationship with the people you'll be managing.

Much depend on your personality and support structure. If you're a "technical homebody" or don't have good support/rapport with the new director? This would be signals that this new role isn't the best fit for you.

I'd guess that management is hoping that you've got some Right Stuff, to lift your new team's performance out of the basement.

But what about the "two experts are already prominent as leaders" on your new team? Were they there when that team was building its "we are crap" reputation? Are they technical experts, who aren't really capital-L leadership material? Are there personality clashes, and maybe those guys need to be separated? Or, given the fired director, might management be looking to put a fresh set of trusted eyes (you) into the situation, to let 'em know what the problems on that team are?

Assuming your leveling matches standard bigtech leveling, it's generally expected at level 7+ that you are doing lots of cross-org work anyway, and have responsibilities at quite a high level. Unless you're one of those rare engineers at this level who is a deep specialist (in which case this team move scenario sounds unlikely), the value you add above someone at level 6 is just that you have breadth of experience and can lead cross-org and/or cross-functional initiatives.

No, nobody is ever fully in charge of his or her own destiny, but the entire point of senior staff engineers is that you have the autonomy to exercise protagonism separate from your org structure, in ways that managers and directors do not. So... do the cross-org collaboration thing – and not because it's what you feel like, but because as a L7, it's literally your job to do that!

Good point -- while now, since I'm new working on this team and having to re-establish myself, I feel a big loss in scope, influence, and visibility, I think over time I'll be working on more and more cross-cutting projects. I'm starting to see the seeds of that already.

Good luck! Those were the behaviors that got you promoted to senior staff in the first place – so I would imagine that your org is actively expecting that you will continue them!

Many of your career choices are XORs between two sets of pros/cons. It's very rare you get ANDs.

You have to decide which set of pros outweighs its cons more, by your values.

This means that you have to understand who you are and what you value.

First, remember that a career is PRIMARILY about earning money, and NOT about personal satisfaction. Many people get little or no satisfaction from their jobs. If you get some, consider yourself lucky. But don't undervalue the compensation; stock can be life-changing in that financial independence removes monetary issues from future choices like this.

Second, know who you are. If you like rising to the occasion, then I would suggest stepping outside your comfort zone and embracing the new opportunity, it might unlock all sorts of new financial success and maybe even become personally fulfilling if approached positively. But you have to decide if you can adopt that outlook and find enough satisfaction to remain a good performer.

Good luck!

Don’t approach the new director as someone with an issue. Nobody likes problematic cases. Enjoy your promotion and keep good reputation.

You don’t control anything, you’re a figure in power game of directors and senior directors. They will think and you will deliver and get stocks and salary for that. Your happiness is secondary thing as I experienced first hand couple years ago. You should think how far are you ready to go for your compensation. Eventually your happiness, satisfaction and high salary can’t be combined. Which one will you choose?

Great advice -- I do have some lingering resentment, but it'll be really important not to have that surfaced to the new director.

Congrats, you are now important enough to be a piece on the board, and to therefore get jerked around like one.

You were promoted, moved to a flailing team and a new domain. This is a significant career opportunity and people are showing trust in you. I would focus on what is needed in the new area. Somebody else recommended you speak with the senior director who promoted you, to clarify expectations. That is good advice.

Yeah seconding this. If you want to think about it in terms of your resume, putting a bullet point or two to tell the story of how your presence moved that team from not performing to performing well would be very beneficial. That's true even if they're not performing because of social problems, because you might be able to provide the team some alternatives to underperforming. Going above senior engineer is not always about solving the technical challenges, and frankly if you're a staff engineer I would expect you to be willing to dig in on social issues within the team or organization where they hinder your technical initiatives.

You'll get in a failing project with fresh eyes. You'll probably spot a lot problems that people in the project can't see as fishes don't the water. Go for the low hanging fruits and the problems that are a better match for your abilities. Don't try to be a hero, just to improve the situation.

If you are in your twenties, 2 years may look like a lot of time (10% of your life), but as a gray haired software developer, let me tell you that it a very small time. Its boring to work with unsexy technologies, and bad for job satisfaction, but it is interesting to try to understand the qualities of other technologies. In software development we reinvent everything each 10 years.

...reinvent the same thing every 10 years

Am I the only one worried on the poster's behalf that their entire office is gonna know about this post, first thing in the morning?

Or are they playing some 3D chess, and that was the plan all along?

Not that they are saying inherently bad things about the company, but the various doubts they express may not be seen as a strength (not that I wholeheartedly subscribe to that view).

I would hope any post like this has the insignificant details changed enough for the situation to be unrecognisable.

I wouldn't be too upset by that. Enough people, including my Sr Director and other important people, know this, or would be able to easily infer this, and I think I'm in an org where fortunately people are mature enough to understand people have feelings about work. I don't foresee any work consequences from this, though I'd be a little embarrassed anyway.

Definitely tell the new director what you want, and firmly, without threatening to quit over it - leave that unsaid. If you are really valued, s/he will try to accomodate you. If not, then you know where you stand and then it's time to put up or shut up.

I have never found any value in merely airing my feeling. Just say what you want, that is much easier for a boss to deal with.

If the new director is an outside hire, then they won't value OP yet by definition.

However, they will be looking to figure out who they can rely on for technical expertise, so there's an opportunity there.

Join the Rands Leadership Slack ^1, where you'll find other individuals in the exact same situation as you.

Whether you want to interact now or just read through the (long) history of how others have handled these situations, you'll find the nuance and encouragement it'll be hard to find elsewhere.

[1]: https://randsinrepose.com/welcome-to-rands-leadership-slack/

Being promoted is about being given progressively more ambiguous problems.

Sounds like no one really prepped you for this.

Your job is to untwist the culture and get the group productive.

I suggest you do a lot of listening and learning before you start pushing hard.

Earn trust, and be a model collaborator, and as you earn respect, use it to understand and resolve the interpersonal dynamics.

Your job isn't about programming anymore, it's about people. Sorry.

If everybody wanted to work on the easy problems / already successful products / coolest new tech, we wouldn't be able to run any companies at all. If you are as good as you think you are, you should be able to take this unsuccessful team, turn it around and make it a winning story that will propel you even higher in your org+career.

True but a bit unfair here? Sounds like there is a speciality the OP wants to build. I assume they believe that getting more experience in that is benefitial and maybe they have a plan.

I think gift horse and mouth applies as well: Promotions like that are not easy to get especially to stay as an IC (ish) role. But there is a tactical and perhaps comfort zone aspect to wanting to stay put.

The 6x stock is another curve ball for us would be advisors! If that is RSU maybe they are on a million comp and then the question is what is least likely to get me fired so I can retire in 5.

I don't think this comment has much to do with me.

It does, in a way. In big orgs, you don't control what happens outside of you. What you can control is how you position yourself in the face of new challenges. This new re-org gives you a new challenge with new stack, new people, maybe overlapping expertise. It is now on you to rise up to that and show yourself as a corp warrior. You may as well fail and find out that you will be happier to do your own thing.

> I'm not willing to leave the company because its stock 6x'ed last year.

Are you referring to stock in a public company (RSUs) that will be deposited into your account when they vest or are you talking about illiquid “equity” (Monopoly money) in a private company?

> I'm looking for other options and advice on either what actions to take to change the situation in ways that'll make me happier and more satisfied at work, or thoughts that'll help address the feelings about this.

It seems to me that the choice is simple, assuming that you are waiting for your RSUs to vest and it is a public company, wait for it to vest and prepare to interview for another company. Don’t overindex on RSU grants. It’s just compensation (assuming it’s a public company), if you can get another company to pay you the same in cash as you think you will make this year (don’t assume anything about future returns).

And what is your priority stack? Maximizing income? Interesting work? Working at a certain level of autonomy - ie would you give up your current “staff” role to be a mid level developer at a BigTech company for more comp?

But overall the cynical take is don’t tie your happiness to your job. Do your 40 hours a week and make sure the work you do will look good for future employees and “be happy” about the money that gets deposited into your account.

But going back to your “stock”, that is real stock that gets deposited into your brokerage account isn’t it?

Remember War Games and 'winning'. This, like nearly everything, is a status game. Do you want to play?

Having been the 'go-to' person other posters mention... I suggest considerable hesitation. Inch, mile.

I’ve seen the “go-to” person get trapped in a local maximum, because even though they get opportunities, they are held to a higher standard. It’s a recipe for burnout if you don’t know what you’re doing, and can keep you from building deep expertise, since you’re constantly bouncing from fire to fire.

Absolutely! Eventually, completely losing perspective. I know from experience! Once reaching what should be a terminal position... I spent roughly 7 years chasing these fires before finding something else. My desirable skills were weakened while bad habits were developed.

After all, guess what? The other place wants a sucker too. "Career limiting" doesn't sound so bad to me, I've only seen it demand more. Much Sisyphean, wow.

You often don't get your choice here. Someone had to be the "top guy" and you lost for whatever reason. They however recognize you are good and so offer you a fallback which might even be an opportunity to prove you are great not just good.

The real question is what you do about it.

You can turn the bad project around - something they probably hope you do, but this may not be possible. There is a small chance they are trying to get you to fail or quit so they can get rid of you, but that is unlikely. Even if you don't turn the old project around, making good plans and showing leadership in a sinking ship can sometimes work out (but sometimes not), and it could be your 2 year duty in a bad spot before getting a new one.

You can tell the director you want a demotion to something in the old project. This usually looks bad, but it might be right for you. Taking this almost assuredly means you are forever giving up promotions. I'm guessing that you want the top position on the old project and so it won't be right for you.

You can find a new job elsewhere. Right now things are down but you can probably wait it out and then move.

Don't forget you can re-evaluate in 2 years! If a better opportunity comes up take it, but I would recommenced you give this new position 2 years of honest effort to see how it really is. 2 years is long enough to figure out a plan to turn it around (it won't turn it around but will have a plan). 2 years is enough to know if the stress is too high and you want a demotion never to raise to senior staff again. 2 years is enough to know if they are just putting you someplace and bringing you back or not. 2 years is enough to know if you like the new project. 2 years is enough to know how the people on the new project are. Right now you seem stuck in the early phase where the magic of a new position is lost but you don't know enough to be effective.

>> I really don't like being in charge of my own destiny with this kind of thing.

This comment hit the bullseye for how passive this felt to me. Everybody is different, and just being a focused contributor hoping people will assign you to what you like is OK. But it is career limiting.

You are getting a chance to work in a new domain, and it sounds like your company appreciates you enough to probably let you switch to even some other domain, just not what you are doing. My advice is look around for something your company really needs you can provide. Make a big noise that you want to do that thing, and do that thing.

Also, I would really ask around for some frank assessments. They could have moved you off your old project because the manager and senior engineer were close and nothing else. But there could be more going on there and you can't count on people to spell that out for you. You need to ask.

> I'm not willing to leave the company because its stock 6x'ed last year.

It sounds like vesting schedules are achieving their intended purpose by giving you incentive to stay.

You have no control over that. If you are thrown into a bad project, you will rot with them. Or turn the situation around by using your own expertise.

That's what being a leader means, you deal with the ambiguity, is paid more, but if things don't go as expected, you are axed.

The only thing that can save you is if you have built relationships with senior directors that could save you.

Just a reminder that Tomorrow the CEO can wake up and desire to cut people to increase their margins and Staff engineers working on improvements are the first to go.

There's no such thing as a career. Just focus on making money while you can.

Also, make sure you have a few doors open in case you need to get out.

This means you want to have a flexible skill set in case you need a new job, also a network of people that wants to work with you.

"I don't enjoy this domain as much and don't find it as interesting" vs. "I'm not willing to leave the company because its stock 6x'ed last year."

A lot of folks have already given you good advice.

One other thing I'd recommend is to really work on making your impact seen. When you see something that could be improved, start measuring it, even before you try to improve it. Write everything down. Document processes even when they're (or perhaps because they're) not ideal. Then try and connect these things with metrics your leaders care about. All these things will make your work visible and valuable to the business.

Possible middle ground if you can't immediately get what you're hoping for: Explain to the new Director that in the medium term you'd still like to be able to also work with the prior domain, and try to negotiate roughly "if I can fix this team to the point where it doesn't need me, then I get moved to cross-domain work."

This has obvious risks of them not coming through once you achieve the first part, but if this team is as screwed as you describe and management are confident in you being able to unfuck it - and of needing somebody at your level of competence to do so - then it might turn out to be a net positive route for you, your career, the team, and the company.

Also might be easier to sell to the new boss, and a deadline for them to actually deliver on that promise if you can get it made of "when said stock vests" would fit your being willing to leave then and their being aware you've passed the vesting deadline for a decent chunk of options will probably give you a stronger position from which to press them to deliver at that point.

(of course there's lots of details here you know and I don't and I'm still on my first pot of coffee, but hopefully the general shape of the idea provides some inspiration that fits the full situation)

I’ve got some tough news for you -

Career growth is (almost) never a completely straight line.

You will be promoted into positions, using languages, in domains, all of which isn’t “your” language or “your” domain.

If you’re being asked to do it that’s because someone recognized your innate skill and ability and is hoping you can apply it to this new team. If I were you, I would not let them down.

Lean in and do what you do. If it means re-tooling, then do it.

Just FYI. I had a friend that had a similar issue.

In his case, he was deliberately thrown at an underperforming team, because his boss knew he was (still is) a “fixer.” He can Get Stuff Done.

It worked. He got the underperforming team into shape.

He no longer works for that company, but that was because Amazon tossed a big bag of money at him, and hired him away. His old company would gladly hire him back.

Might want to consider that. May very well not be the case, here.

I just remember my friend saying almost exactly the same thing. In his case, he brought his concerns to his manager, who explained what was going on.

The reward for good work, is more work.

This can be a great opportunity, but it can also be a trap. I was labeled a "fixer" at a past job, I was the one who Got Stuff Done, and so I was hand-balled a succession of train wrecks to fix, while the people creating the train wrecks continued blissfully on, train wrecking every new project they got their hands on. They, of course, had plenty of time to advocate for themselves and got to work on every interesting new project coming through, while I was flat out attempting to remediate their previous shenanigans.

This may be true, but remember that my friend also got hired by Amazon, after a year or two of "fixing."

"Fixers" are incredibly valuable, and only a moron manager would squander them (sadly, there are a lot of terrible managers out there).

I remember watching an episode of the new American version[0] of HPI[1], and thinking that it is a SciFi story, because her manager is a smart, fair woman that believes in her, has her back, and takes personal risks on her behalf.

[0] https://www.imdb.com/title/tt26748649/

[1] https://www.imdb.com/title/tt14060708/

It's not good enough just to be the fixer, your friend has the skill to advocate for themselves even to the degree of impressing an uninitiated third party. IMO the parent comment sounds like they're not doing this yet.

It's also up to their managers.

Bad managers can destroy or hamper just about anyone's career. I've seen exactly that, many times.

There are a ton of bad managers out there. For some reason, they never seem to have to account for their terrible performance.

I suspect that bad management may just be the single biggest issue in tech (and many other industries), today. Much as everyone wants to rag on managers, good ones can make a huge difference.

What is going to benefit the customers the most? You staying in your specialty where things are already in good shape, or you improving the area where the company has been underperforming? Perhaps, if the latter is better for the customers, you can find the motivation in yourself to seize the opportunity to deliver there.

I would consider cashing in your stock if the company’s stock 6xed and is likely at a local or global maximum.

That's not how this works. The stock can't be sold due to vesting.

If you want someone to tell you to find another job, then consider this to be that.

On the other hand, so long as employment primarily defines your identity your identity will always be defined arbitrarily by the place you work.

A new director is starting in two weeks. I don't know how much or whether to surface these issues to him.

If a letter of resignation is the means of expressing yourself, then it makes sense. Otherwise, wait until asked. Being senior means adapting to moved cheese. Good luck.

Wacky question, but have taken time to mourn? I know that mourn is a strong word that we normally associate with grief from profound loss. But when a door closes, you do lose a part of yourself.

Work can be weird. This change may give you a chance to demonstrate incredible leadership while you turn the project around, or the project may not be in a position where it can be turned around. You’re unlikely to know which of those you’ll suffer until you’re already suffering.

But you can control how you are when you start. And taking a bit of time to mourn is a good way to set yourself up for a fresh start.

Thanks for addressing this. One of the things that's most discomfitting about this is that I can pretty clearly see the path ahead of me that I would've taken, and it's one where I'm very confident I would've been able to do very well. At some point I'll have to radically accept the situation but I'm not really there just yet.

Work is work, that’s why they call it work.

Going solely by the original post, the failed product launch likely triggered restructuring as a corrective measure, but it’s unclear if the real issue was truly addressed. If the reorg was more about optics and internal politics, another failure could result in the senior director needing a scapegoat again. If that happens, working on cross-org initiatives may be held against you instead of focusing all your energy on your new team. Just something to watch out for.

I would definitely bring all this up to the new director after they start, but don't frame it as "I got pulled off my other team and I'd rather be there." Instead just frame it as part of the standard 1:1 getting-to-know-the-new-guy stuff. Explain your interests, explain what you did in the past on that other team/domain, explain how you think that can help with the new team and how you can be available for the other team.

It looks like you are stuck in a corporate hell-hole where levels and blame games take higher priority than software or business development.

I personally don't enjoy environments where every management level shifts blame downwards and reorgs to find more scapegoats. I like environments where management wants to solve business problems because it helps the business, not as a CYA.

I would have coasted or quit. I find it impossible to not work a fair trade of my time and labor.

Agree. I would recommend either a) take the money and disengage from the drama, or b) gtfo.

Reading through this, the main thing I'm seeing is the opportunity for impact. They think you're doing great, they promoted you, and now they are looking for you to lead this new (to you) underperforming team, in order to get them moving in the right direction.

Devil's in the details, but you have full control in your hands; you need to realize that you have full agency in your situation and lead from wherever you are in the org chart.

IMO your first mistake was not having an out when the director got fired. As nostrademons3 says, you should have been networking and finding your “next gig” within the company if you want to stay to vest.

Moving forward, be the master of your own destiny. Network, find the good teams with good leadership and good trajectory within the company. Get interested in their work. See how you can collaborate. Plant the seeds.

1. Communicate this to your leadership? They can’t read your mind and communication is the only thing that makes an organisation work.

2. You don’t have to join the team and just observer the status quo, especially in an under performing team. I see a Sr Staff Eng as a leadership role- shatter the status quo and reform it to be a high performing team.

Take the bull by the horns.

Edit: This will do more for your career than any team or product you can produce.

> I'm not willing to leave the company because its stock 6x'ed last year.

> I don't want my career and life to evolve by happenstance.

Liar, liar, pants on fire!

This change:

  - is an opportunity to shine
  - but also it is not the work
    you want to do

That's a tough one. You don't always get to do what you want. Sometimes you get to just make shit work that you're not interested in.

Of course, if it makes you miserable then maybe you should go elsewhere. But you should try to give it a go. Who knows, you might come to like it.

Talk to your boss, make sure that you wont be fired over some simple complaints, then gather your team around and make sure to send the message that screwing around and completing one task a week is over, maybe fire the worst guy. Raise the rigor for 200%. Fridays should end at 2pm, you and your team go straight to a bar where beer is plentiful. Thank me in a month.

Cheers

If I were you I would try to look at this as an opportunity. Every team that under performs has more room for improvement and the more senior you become, the more your work becomes about how you can impact a team than a particular task.

Focus on making the team better and you will always have a home. Better yet, learn to be interested in how to make teams better.

In addition, look into Total Quality Management and other theories. This is a well studied topic.

It sounds to me like you're trusted, well liked and have an opportunity to prove yourself.

Don't get too hung up on feeling in control, or preferring a comfortable domain. Everything in life is a blend of agency and context.

It honestly sounds like your Sr Director is looking out for you and pushing you towards not getting pigeonholed.

We live very different lives, so take what I say with a grain of salt. I'm of the opinion that you don't really "control your own destiny". Most things happen by chance. Fighting for control is a losing game. If you feel strongly about something, act on it and see where it goes.

Do you need the money? If so, make hay while the sun shines. If not, let your manager know about this.

Working on your specialty or becoming more useful as an engineer is a choice you have to make. You were promoted and assigned somewhere to help. If you can help, then this will make you look great. If you can't, your attitude will make you look great, or awful, depending.

> I'm not willing to leave the company because its stock 6x'ed last year.

Then just try hard to ace your new task. Show that you repeatedly deliver value, also in more difficult situations.

It's hard to do this when this person has gone out to prove themselves in the first place. The company has to reciprocate, otherwise they're "double" asking that person. Like with any trust-based system, it should be a series of reciprocations with increasing levels of trust/reward/value. If one of them skips it, and still expects the other side to do their level of increase, then that is when an imbalance happens and feelings of resentment being to take hold.

> The company has to reciprocate

OP was promoted. Question is now whether OP makes the company regret their decision or not.

> One is that I really don't like being in charge of my own destiny with this kind of thing.

There is a bit of contradiction in this and next statement.

> because I wasn't in control.

Control is the most important factor in managing emotions. People without control are 10x more likely to suffer from trauma. (Car accidents while driving vs being a passenger)

> It pains me to leave

Do you have ADHD? This looks like Rejection Sensitive Dysphoria, talk to a specialist - I'm not one.

you dont control your destiny in orgs. you can only be passionate about engineering. you are a hero one day, a zero the next. here today, gone tomorrow.

focus on engineering excellence, you seem to be too focused on your place/status in the org hierarchy.

You have right here a very helpful hint of your internal state: “One is that I really don't like being in charge of my own destiny”

The way I see it, you already know that, hence this Freudian slip.

In my opinion, doing _only_ what we love, understand and care about is the path to depression.

You maybe anxious because you are being called to step out of your comfort zone?

> In my opinion, doing _only_ what we love, understand and care about is the path to depression.

I would argue being forced to do stuff you don't care about is a much quicker path.

Honestly I would be happy to be able to keep doing technical IC work. At my current company they keep trying to talk me into switching to the manager track and I can't think of any worse punishment and keep saying no :-)

Your bank doesn't do this for free? Mine does (USAA).

Not experienced with big companies. So, take all advice with salt.

That said, as lots are saying here, it seems you’re being given a great chance to ‘move up’. With a new director coming in, I’d say at least part of your job is removing tail risk from being in this new ‘loser’ group, and the rest is turning the group around. Also, congratulations!

I’d recommend the book “The First 90 Days” which is about taking on a new job. For the lazy, the two parts I think are salient here are that you should clarify what expectations are, ASAP, for the job. Turn around? Sustain? Grow? I bet you know the answer, but your incoming new director won’t necessarily. And, either way, you need to align with them on these goals to structure how you’ll report and perform.

Second, the first rule of the new job is: stop doing the old job. This is harder than it sounds.

Add it up, and I’d suggest you sit down with a status report for the new director when they come in, and can meet. I’d suggest that status report be as scathing as you can make it within the realms of verifiability — this is your one chance to pin anything bad on your forerunners; don’t let it go by unutilized.

Say what you think you should be doing, and what you hope the outcomes will be, and give the director space to give feedback and redirect.

I think for very high performers a conversation like “well, you and I know that this might be a hopeless case; I’m willing to work on this, but we need an agreement in case I can’t turn it around” is super, super fair.

If you come at it with this confidence and a viewpoint of partnering with your new boss, you’ll probably learn more of what they expect, and you’ll set terms down in case the group is unsaveable/doomed to mediocrity.

Side note, there’s an anecdote I like: “What’s the difference between a good therapist and a great one? The great one doesn’t take hopeless cases.” In my experience this is true of very high performers in the work world as well — very high performers don’t work on hopeless projects. Almost nobody can save a hopeless case, no matter how heroic they may be. So, if you’re certain this is hopeless, slightly different behavior might better signal your worth to management.

> Another is sadness at the loss of prominence in the company, since I have to re-orient myself on this new team, where two experts are already prominent as leaders

Nobody gives a fuck about you OP. It's all in your head. Also you work for a company. It's a legal entity which gives zero fucks to anything except its own stock price.

> I'm not willing to leave the company because its stock 6x'ed last year.

This is all the metrics that matter. Everything else is stories that you invented to have some purpose in life.

There are less horrible places than the one you apparently occupy. FYI.

Can you explain more? What exactly did I say which was incorrect?

Yet OP is the one who got a promotion, not a layoff. Good-boy points aren't transferable to other companies - but they do have value.

I was not talking specifically about OP.

I was talking about generally. Everyone runs around thinking they are of prominence and blah blah blah.

In realty nobody has time to think about someone else.

The prominence is entirely in their own head.

People just don't get it.

Promotions and layoffs are more of less random. If your company is doing bad nothing is stopping you from layoffs. If you are in Nvidia nothing is stopping your from getting your stocks go boom.

Or your company can be like Apple, with a $100B warchest, and still do layoffs!

Your view of prominence does not line up with what I've experienced for myself and seen for others.

Is that statistically significant though? You think prominence is correlated with inverse layoffs.

I say the market has more correlation on your layoff or promotions than your prominence.

Again prominence is completely subjective and not measurable. Maybe you can say people who don't get laid off are more prominent.

Or people who get promoted are more prominent. But you can't measure prominence in an objective way.

Layoffs are a frequent outcome of product launch failures regardless of overall market movements.

>But you can't measure prominence in an objective way.

Nor can you measure friendships or love or anything else that is inherently subjective yet has a marked effect on your life.

How do you know what your management consider of prominence and your version of prominence is the same? Do all managers even align in same definition of prominence?

See previous reply re: friendships, love.

I wonder, relatively speaking, how much turnover happens because of reorging

I just went through a similar thing but decided to gtfo to a different company

Here is op's post, paraphrased by chatgpt o3-min-high with a bit of humor:

Alright, listen to this: I was happily working on my team, doing my thing—until the reorg hit like a bad punchline. Suddenly, another team from next door shows up, tinkering with a different stack in the same domain—because, of course, office politics is the real art here! Next thing you know, my director gets canned for “bad performance” (yeah, right), and the other team’s product flops spectacularly. And then they steal our stack—and me! Now I'm shoved into a new domain with a shiny title: senior staff engineer, on a team known for its underachievement. My heart’s still in the old domain, where I actually cared about the work. Now, with a new director arriving in two weeks, I’m left wondering if I should unload this absurd mess of corporate lunacy. But hey, the stock’s up 6x, so I’m not jumping ship. I mean, what’s the deal with this circus? It's like being stuck in a never-ending episode of a bad sitcom!

pretty good, imo. Goes to show that comedy (like art) really is a lot about generic rules that are learnable (not only for LLMs!).

This is slop. If written in a funny way. Why not spend your o3 time asking ChatGPT for advice, and then edit it up into something you believe and that’s useful?

I'm confused as to what you consider your "career path?"

Honestly, I think the thing you should be asking is: Why didn't you get promoted to senior staff engineer and given leadership over the two stacks, but rather the other person did. If it's a team that needed help, rather they give it to the more senior and experienced person, and you get more experience in your new role whilst managing an existing team that is proven and you have domain-experience over.

To me, what this says, is that the other senior staff engineer was given a "promotion" in the form of managing "two" stacks, i.e. bigger head count. And you were essentially demoted to being moved over to another stack and team. Doubly so if that other team or stack or project is not seen as that important. The title they gave you was a way to placate you about the effective demotion.

But even that interpretation could be wrong. At the end of the day, it's the machinations of the company and based on decisions made by people in the "right room", a room you weren't a part of. No amount of rationalizations will make your feelings of the topic go away. I know this because I've been in similar situations, and those feelings never really go away, you will always feel slighted. Even if you raise it with management, at best they'll make you go away with manager-speak, at worst it'll colour every negative or hiccup that happens in your new position or project.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com