> I had become the go-to person for making things run smoothly, for fixing urgent problems, for delivering. But every time I pushed toward more strategic and ambitious directions, there was a lot of can-kicking and “let’s think about it” that went nowhere.
If you are effective where you are, why would the organization want to promote you and lose the work you are doing now? Maybe the higher-ups were aware of the Peter Principle.
More deeply, this hints at something we probably all need to internalize. Engineering and "management" should be separate tracks. Right now, management is mostly synonymous with people manage, lording it over people. Good engineers might aspire to rise higher into "management", which might be a poor fit for their skills, interests, and temperament. Engineers should be able to rise to the top as engineers.
If you see management as your ideal destination, then go into that from the start. Become a management trainee, not an engineer. But overall I think (people) management should lose it's aura of prestige. It's just a skill like any other, and people in those positions are frequently ill suited to it.
If you are effective where you are, why would the organization want to promote you and lose the work you are doing now? Maybe the higher-ups were aware of the Peter Principle.
More deeply, this hints at something we probably all need to internalize. Engineering and "management" should be separate tracks. Right now, management is mostly synonymous with people manage, lording it over people. Good engineers might aspire to rise higher into "management", which might be a poor fit for their skills, interests, and temperament. Engineers should be able to rise to the top as engineers.
If you see management as your ideal destination, then go into that from the start. Become a management trainee, not an engineer. But overall I think (people) management should lose it's aura of prestige. It's just a skill like any other, and people in those positions are frequently ill suited to it.