For most people, salary correlates with measurable influence, and there’s nothing more measurable than head count. So maybe you’re right about certain orgs, but I wouldn’t advise any young turks to bet on it.
Basically, every nerd thinks they’re gonna be Jeff Dean...but there’s only one Jeff Dean, and his job is taken.
absolutely this
Just as in how sales people can be on commission but no one puts fifty developers on commission the ability to measure is as important as the metric itself
Most managers don't set their own salary, and are dependent on someone else noticing and respecting their "contribution" (like "headcount" metrics) for their compensation consideration. It is entirely possible to be sidelined as a manager, just as it is anywhere else.
Everyone should have clear, communicated, consistent, meaningful, deliverable, pragmatic metrics that they are subject to in their evaluations.
Jeff was an IC. He no longer is. Under the naive assumptions that many people in this thread are making, that means the IC position he was in should be available.
It's not. I leave why as an exercise to the reader.
This depends on your org. Also there are individual contributors literally and individual contributors who function like a force multiplier and, although not managing, provide a lot of value beyond just their commits. I’ve seen this with wizard architects and sysadmins who just a percentage of their time is great on a project.