In my last post, I ranted a little bit about this madness we call “job titles” or “career laddering”. It’s one of my favorite topics when talking to people in the software industry. And this is one of the posts on my blog that generated a little bit of interest. I had the chance to speak to all the regular readers of my blog, and a stimulating discussion developed with both of them. During these discussions, I realized that the last post was somehow incomplete. It seems that I haven’t described some of the reasons in enough detail. Some people also missed recommended “next steps” or “actions to take”. So, I decided to create this follow-up post.
“But how do you motivate your employees?”
That’s maybe the question that comes up the most in these discussions. Even though I touched on that point in the last post, let me pick that up again.
When it comes to motivation, I’m very much aligned with the leadership coach we had in our company. (Greetings to the fabulous Eugen Unger.) I honestly believe that everyone is intrinsically motivated. As long as they are working in their field of choice, everyone is initially motivated to do their best! And yes, during my career I have worked with people for whom the word “unmotivated” is an understatement. But there is a simple explanation for that behavior. According to our leadership coach, our job is not to motivate people. Our job is not to demotivate them. I see a lot of truth in there. Many of us have worked in environments where every innovation (or even the simplest change) is met with skepticism. We came to a team meeting with a great idea to improve a cumbersome process. The answer: “Forget it. We tried that 10 years ago. That won’t work here.” And even if you can take this response with a smile the first and maybe even the second time, it will have an impact if you hear the same bullshit over and over. If your ideas are belittled, you will eventually become demotivated.
But if you disagree, let’s assume that employees are motivated by the prospect of a better title. So the theory is, that people will “go the extra mile” if there is a title to be earned. The logical conclusion is, that they will lose this motivation as soon as they reach the end of the IC career path in your company. Let’s think that through. That would mean, that the highest-paid engineers in your department are the ones losing motivation, while the juniors and mid-level devs still go “the extra mile”. And we all know that every employee “looks up” to their colleagues on the next level. To me, that sounds horrible. That’s basically the opposite of “leading by example”. It’s more of a “I don’t have to work hard anymore. I earned it.”
You’re gonna need a bigger boat more titles
Maybe that’s the reason why some famous tech giants introduced dozens of titles (sometimes called levels) for their IC (individual contributor) path. They just want their employees to stay motivated. Let’s look at an example. Here are the top four titles in the IC path at Microsoft. I scrambled the order. If you like, try to sort them by yourself. You can find the answer on Quora:
- Partner Software Development Engineer
- Technical Fellow
- Principal Software Development Engineer
- Distinguished Engineer
I wouldn’t be able to guess the correct order even if my life depended on it. 🤷
Let’s compare that to a career laddering system that ChatGPT gave me when I asked it for a “somehow serious, but still confusing” system.
- Software Associate
- Engineering Analyst
- Systems Developer
- Advanced Software Engineer
- Solution Architect
- Principal Systems Engineer
- Technology Strategist
- Distinguished Engineering Advisor
- Chief Architect of Engineering Practices
- Executive Director of Software Evolution
To be honest, I wouldn’t be surprised if this system is used in some big corporations. To use the wording from my last post: Who wouldn’t want to be “Chief Architect of Engineering Practices”?
When titles are a source of demotivation
From my experience, titles can even be a source of demotivation. This goes hand in hand with the “Too many promotions are random” point I made in the last post. Everyone has either worked with a colleague who was promoted for no obvious reasons or worked with a colleague who was promoted long ago and nobody remembers why. “Our previous boss decided to make him a senior engineer” might sound familiar.
Don’t get me wrong. I don’t judge people who look at their coworkers and think, “If he is a senior, I should be a senior as well.”
I’ve been (and sometimes am) that guy, who judges people’s titles based on their performance. I think it’s natural. Maybe it’s even unavoidable. Titles are a very obvious form of hierarchy and as long as I use the tool from one side of the table, my counterpart uses it from the other.
And of course, there is the possibility that I’m seeing this too “black and white”. Maybe there is a great system out there that doesn’t have the typical flaws. But I haven’t seen such a system in action, yet.
Promotions keep your managers busy
At least in most of the systems I have worked in, employees approach their managers about once a year to ask for the next promotion. Frequently asked questions are
- What do I need to do to lose my Junior title?
- John was promoted in the spring. I’m doing the same job. When do I get promoted?
- I ticked the most boxes on the “requirements for the senior title” list. I do need the opportunity to tick the rest. I think you’re holding me back!
- Look at all my achievements. I should be “Principal Software Development Engineer”.
- I can see that Jeff is a brilliant engineer. But at least I’m not an idiot on an interpersonal level, like him. I should be the senior, not Jeff!
I know that there are career laddering systems out there that (try to) tackle most of the problems “hidden” in these statements. But I’m almost certain, that these discussions will still occur. Depending on the number of direct reports, you might have these discussions every 8 weeks. 🙄 Time you and your managers could spend on real coaching, sparring, professional growth, personal growth, budget planning, and whatever might be important.
What about professional growth?
I’m aware that you might not agree with my “Titles won’t motivate employees” part at the beginning of this post, but this is my blog and my post. That’s why I can declare: Motivation is not a valid reason to keep titles.
Let’s talk about the “having a clear path for professional growth” argument. That’s another thing I hear a lot during these discussions. But every time this comes up, I’m a little puzzled. What is “professional growth” or “professional development”? Let’s ask ChatGPT again:
Professional growth refers to the continuous process of developing skills, knowledge, and expertise in one’s career. It involves activities such as acquiring new qualifications, improving job performance, learning industry trends, enhancing leadership abilities, and expanding professional networks. Professional growth can occur through formal education, on-the-job training, mentorship, certifications, and self-directed learning.
And that’s pretty much my understanding of professional growth as well. Nice. But did you notice something? Professional growth does not depend on titles, hierarchies, or anything like that. It’s all about you getting better at your job. You don’t need titles to improve your skills. You should be (continuously) learning because you’re intrinsically motivated to get better and not because you’re chasing the next title.
But that’s not the problem I have with this. When people talk about titles in connection with professional growth, they expect some kind of pre-defined checklist. “Master all new Java 21 features”, “Be capable of doing performance optimizations in Spring Boot applications”, etc.
But what is the result of such checklists? Streamlined senior developers having the same skills. Does not sound very useful to me. I trust my employees to know what they should learn. We are all grown-ups and I trust these grown-ups. They are the ones doing the actual work, and they know what they should learn to use the current tech stack effectively and what they should learn to innovate!
Another bad reason to have titles…
… is also pretty common. Some people want titles to set themselves apart from their colleagues. They want titles to show that they are better than others in the department/industry. I will keep this paragraph short. For me, it’s the wrong mindset. I don’t want that in my department.
Next Steps
As mentioned in the introduction, some people missed some “next steps” or at least some recommendations on how to move to a “title-free” environment. So let’s look at that. But to be clear, nothing is enlightening or surprising in the following steps.
Step 1: Stop promoting
As I said, not surprising. If you don’t want hierarchies in the titles, stop promoting people. And yes, it sounds like a simple step, but it’s the hardest of all. Mainly because you can’t “just” stop promoting people. You have to have good communication around it. Make it a big announcement and explain why you think this is the better model and why it’s supporting a healthier culture. Another thing that needs to be in your announcement is the fact, that this won’t affect the salary development of your employees. Surprised? I hope not. Removing titles doesn’t mean everyone receives a “mid-level salary” forever. If you have great people doing great work, they deserve an appropriate salary.
But even with the best communication, there will be tears. Well, maybe not actual tears, but frustration. There are people about to be promoted who won’t get that shiny title now. And that is frustrating. But it is a step you have to take if you want to get rid of the “Fancy Job Title Madness”.
Step 2: Thank the engineers that are leaving after the announcement
Yes, some people will quit after that announcement. Don’t judge them. Remember, you hired them with the prospect of this career path, and now you remove it.
And “don’t judge them” isn’t enough. Thank them for their work and everything they put in over the last months and years. I mean it. The people leaving you aren’t disloyal or bad in any way. But they are not aligned with your new policy and the consequences that brings.
Again: Thank them. They made an impact. They brought you here.
Step 3: Adapt your recruiting
This is another logical implication. You have to adapt your recruiting accordingly. Remove the word “Senior” (or “Principal”, or “Distinguished”…) from your job ads. If you are looking for an experienced engineer, “experienced” is the word you could use. Or maybe you come up with another smart term to make sure you get experienced applicants.
Also, be very open about your (new) culture in the interview process. Tell them that there are no titles to be earned and why you think this is a good thing. Yes, the recruiting might take a little longer, but you will attract the right talent eventually.
Closing words
That’s it. Just another rant about these fancy job titles and the problems they bring.
As usual: Feel free to reach out to me and change my mind about that. Maybe there is a “career laddering” system that is a good solution and I just don’t see/understand it. 🤷