I switched from EM to IC twice (when joining FB and when joining Oculus) and in both cases was very grateful for having spent time in the code before eventually switching back to EM roles on the teams. In both cases I was changing 2 variables (team and role) but I also made sure I was moving back to an engineering archetype that I was comfortable with and currently underrepresented on the team (solver improving testing and tools), which I think helped a lot.
You bring up a great point I should have mentioned, which is the very strong preference in the old Facebook to hire all potential EMs as ICs, to ensure they were technical enough before letting them lead a team. This worked really well for many years, and you're right that it required changing multiple variables simultaneously. I myself went from an EM at Microsoft to an IC at Facebook, and loved the experience. Many people flamed out doing so, and left in just a few months, but this was right for Facebook at the time (i.e. it tried very hard to preserve its culture that EMs are every bit as technical as the ICs on a team).
Had a lot of overlaps with my mental framework of this topic.
"If you can't make it a part of your day job, you'll need to make time outside work to stay sharp. There is no way around this."
100% facts.
My background is robotics, and my current role is Engineering Project Management. So I've been blocking off time on evenings/weekends to keep up-to-date with the latest advancements.
Physical AI will be a new frontier. Actually in the process of researching new desktop/laptop so I can run things myself.
Didn't listen to the entire conversation yet, so curious if the topic of strengths alignment came up on IC vs. M decision making? I've been going deeper on strengths with direct reports & coaching clients for the past 9 years, and understanding the implications of which is more "shaped like you" based on what you excel at has been valuable.
Great question, Brian. I didn't address the strengths issue -- which is centrally relevant, but probably best suited for an entire post because the topic is so rich. Agreed with you 100% that the "shaped like you" is really important to being successful in the change.
I switched from EM to IC twice (when joining FB and when joining Oculus) and in both cases was very grateful for having spent time in the code before eventually switching back to EM roles on the teams. In both cases I was changing 2 variables (team and role) but I also made sure I was moving back to an engineering archetype that I was comfortable with and currently underrepresented on the team (solver improving testing and tools), which I think helped a lot.
You bring up a great point I should have mentioned, which is the very strong preference in the old Facebook to hire all potential EMs as ICs, to ensure they were technical enough before letting them lead a team. This worked really well for many years, and you're right that it required changing multiple variables simultaneously. I myself went from an EM at Microsoft to an IC at Facebook, and loved the experience. Many people flamed out doing so, and left in just a few months, but this was right for Facebook at the time (i.e. it tried very hard to preserve its culture that EMs are every bit as technical as the ICs on a team).
Very insightful!
Had a lot of overlaps with my mental framework of this topic.
"If you can't make it a part of your day job, you'll need to make time outside work to stay sharp. There is no way around this."
100% facts.
My background is robotics, and my current role is Engineering Project Management. So I've been blocking off time on evenings/weekends to keep up-to-date with the latest advancements.
Physical AI will be a new frontier. Actually in the process of researching new desktop/laptop so I can run things myself.
Have to keep the skills sharp! 🔪
Didn't listen to the entire conversation yet, so curious if the topic of strengths alignment came up on IC vs. M decision making? I've been going deeper on strengths with direct reports & coaching clients for the past 9 years, and understanding the implications of which is more "shaped like you" based on what you excel at has been valuable.
Great question, Brian. I didn't address the strengths issue -- which is centrally relevant, but probably best suited for an entire post because the topic is so rich. Agreed with you 100% that the "shaped like you" is really important to being successful in the change.