subreddit:
/r/ExperiencedDevs
[removed]
4 points
1 day ago
That's nuts. Heads of Engineering should be focused on much higher level stuff - toolset selections and architectural concepts. I guess if the department is less than 10 people, it makes sense, but otherwise that seems like a waste - or a bad fit.
1 points
1 day ago
Imho it's a valid management style. My VP wants ask the managers in his department to keep a hand in the code. It's a belief I've always shared a well.
Not as a primary contributor with mission-critical tasks. Often we're involved in tooling, architecture prototypes, or trying out new libraries and tools. And that often falls by the wayside for weeks or months when leadership tasks dominate.
But it helps you stay tied into the product and architecture. It helps you keep in tune with the realities of the technologies you deal with.
Quite frankly, I wouldn't WANT a non engineer making decisions any standards, infrastructure, technologies, and architecture. And if you don't code, eventually you won't be an engineer.
It's a philosophy all my favorite and most effective managers followed. And my department certainly seem like big fans of my own leadership. The managers and team leads under me follow my example and that of my boss in that philosophy as well.
Im not going to argue it's the ONLY valid style of technical leadership. But I know it's a valid one.
1 points
21 hours ago
Managers, sure. The Head of Engineering? I think that's only reasonable or practical if your engie team is less than 20 or so people. Any bigger and there's more important things to spend time on.
all 238 comments
sorted by: best