Google has eliminated 35% of managers overseeing small teams in past year

This was called the TLM role at google. Technical Lead/Manager. You were expected to code and manage a couple of more junior engineers.

It’s part of an effort to have dedicated managers and dedicated engineers instead of hybrid roles.

This is being sold as an efficiency win for the sake of the stock price but it’s really just moved a few people around with the TLMs now 100% focused on programming.

GOOG has made a systemic push to eliminate the role starting ~3 years ago. At that time my M was a staff level IC TLM with 4 reports who was forcibly converted to EM.

In those last 3 years I've only seen TLMs used to assist an overloaded EM.

The pattern I've seen is something like:

    Principal EM
    |- Staff EM (7 reports, project A)
    |- Staff EM (8 reports, project B)
    |- Staff IC (projects A, B, C)
    |- Senior IC (projects A, B)
    |- Senior IC (project C)
    |- Mid level IC (project C)
    |- Mid level IC (project C)

Maybe project C was just reorged under the Principal EM or maybe it's a speculative side project. But those last three are clearly clustered, there's no good line manager fit and the principal EM feels disconnected from the 2 mid level ICs. Project C is a bit of an island and projects A and B are taking up most of the EM's time.

So the Principal EM deputizes Senior IC on project C as a TLM until things have changed enough that there can be a dedicated EM. Eventually the TLM converts to EM, a new EM is brought in, or there's a reorg, etc.

Of the two times I saw saw it happen locally, both converted back to ICs after a year or two and noted that the role felt like being 70% IC and 70% EM.

Nowadays the TLM role doesn't exist so the principal would delegate most of the technical responsibilities of the M role, giving them nearly full control of project C, but would not give them a formal role. (I've been that senior IC for project C.)

(Edit for formatting.)

Do you have a mapping to roles/levels[1], for example:

Principal EM - USD$1.3m/yr per https://www.levels.fyi/companies/google/salaries/software-en...

Staff EM - USD$664k/yr per https://www.levels.fyi/companies/google/salaries/software-en...

Staff IC - USD$557k/yr per https://www.levels.fyi/companies/google/salaries/software-en...

Senior IC - USD$410k/yr per https://www.levels.fyi/companies/google/salaries/software-en...

Mid IC - USD$290k/yr per https://www.levels.fyi/companies/google/salaries/software-en...

levels.fyi doesn't appear to use the term "Technical Lead". There is "Technical Program Manager" and "Technical Account Manager" that sound like they'd be similar (someone technical transitioning into a full-time non-technical role). And then roles such as "Product Manager" and "Program Manager" seemingly for those who are currently 100% non-technical in their work.

Does the change mean the most competent solution architect who has successfully designed and implemented many complex systems from scratch is capped in salary package because they're not doing the important job of demanding those around them fill out TPS reports all day?

[1] https://www.levels.fyi/companies/google/salaries/software-en...

Hell, I’d happily be Lundberg for $1.3M/year. Shoot, I’d probably even do it for just $1.0M — and the Bobs would be pleased!

It also sounds like the 10x developers are underpaid by a factor of 100!

It's been a few years, but from what I recall, a Principal is a Director-equivalent (L8) level.

The prior poster is missing the L7 tier, which is Senior Staff Engineering Manager for the Engineering Manager Ladder.

L8 is a Director on the Engineering Manager Ladder L8 is a Principal on the Software Engineer (SWE) Ladder.

Tech-Lead Managers (TL/M or TLMs) were on the SWE Ladder.

For reference:

Software Engineer Ladder

L8 - Principal Software Engineer

L7 - Senior Staff Software Engineer

L6 - Staff Software Engineer

L5 - Senior Software Engineer

L4 - Software Engineer II

L3 - Software Engineer (new graduates would start here)

----------------------

L2 and below exists in rare occasions.

Engineering Manager Ladder

L8 - Director

L7 - Staff Engineering Manager

L6 - Engineering Manager (M1)

L5 - Engineering Manager (M0 - normally this level does not exist for external hires and is for the rare situation when a SWE is converting to the Engineering Manager ladder)

One of the problems is that large corporations have such complicated role structures, and another problem is that they are also different from all other large corporations. A third problem is that the compensation models are again vastly different. A fourth problem is that they change over time.

All of this means as an individual you suffer from extreme information asymmetry.

Even if you got two offers from two different FAANGs, it would perhaps be hard to figure out which one is better.

Has anyone defined any mapping tables between role names across Amazon, Meta, Alphabet etc. and figured out salary ranges for them in a public spreadsheet?

BTW, has anyone got a leaked (anonymized) copy of FAANG employment contracts so one can compare the various clauses across employers, and track changes of their standard templates over time? (I haven't seen this topic discussed much on here in the systematic way that it deserves.)

Given the developer community invented open source it is surprising that corporations have so far succeeded in keeping such obvious things relatively secret (compared to, say, the emails of Sarah Palin and Ehud Barak ;-).