As a manager - I would love it if someone tells me that! This makes my life so much easier!

It means, that I will not have to worry about figuring out a good place for you to grow into. It also means that I will not have to worry about finding a replacement for you after you get promoted.

Hell, if you tell me that I'll do everything I can to give you a raise asap.

Tip: Your manager really, really wants to hear what you really honestly think. Even if it's not a positive thing (and just wanting to continue doing what you're doing is very positive!). It's super hard to guess what people are trying to say because most people don't just tell you straight. Of course there are exceptions - that's probably a sign of a crappy manager. If that's the case, sorry, you can probably find a better job.

> Tip: Your manager really, really wants to hear what you really honestly think.

As the original commenter noted, the person who was honest about what they really thought was the one laid off when the time came. I won't say it's true for you, but at many organizations "I really want to hear what you honestly think..." has a second clause: "... so that I know who my most valuable 'resources' are."

I'm unconvinced that (from the employee's perspective) the best way to engage with management or HR is radical transparency.

> As the original commenter noted, the person who was honest about what they really thought was the one laid off when the time came

It could have been for any of 100 other reasons.

It really boils down to whether your manager is bullshit or not. If they are, switch teams or switch jobs. If you can't be honest with your manager, it's not going to work out.

Humans, in their majority, are natural liars and dislike the truth (even when they say the opposite)

Treat managers as you will most tech companies: the information you share will most likely be used against you.

Being honest is not in your best interest, nether is lying, not divulging information (privacy) is your best approach.

Unless necessary, be very careful what you share; your manager represents the company, and their interests are not often aligned with yours.

Indeed you bring up a good point. There is risk. However, you never know what is the complete reason for someone getting fired, unless you are the one doing the firing. There are lots of things that do not get disclosed. It's also very easy to assume reasons if you're a bystander and be 100% wrong. I've certainly done that a lot.

It could easily have been that the other person got fired for completely unrelated reasons. It of course could also have been that he did in fact get fired for the reason suspected. In this case the question is again - what does the parent commenter want to optimize for? Is it peace of mind or job stability?

If the situation of having to lie is really bothering them, then perhaps the risk of things going wrong is worth taking? The original commenter is the only person that can decide that.

Also, if they keep lying, what's going to guarantee that they will not get promoted because they accidentally did well enough? Or if, indeed they keep getting not promoted, then will that look bad? Are they in an "up or out" level?

I think it depends on what kind of unambitious it is. I have one guy who I don't connect with much who I estimate is pretty much like the OP. Has a kid, doesn't want a lot of stress, doesn't really want to proceed further, but is happy to do his current job and has a lot of experience as a senior.

But at the same time, this guy just jumps in whatever you ask him to do, and figures it out pretty quickly, doesn't need hand holding and is fairly independent and gets stuff done. He does his job and is a very low maintenance employee overall. He also updates his tickets / status as you ask him. He's an adult.

Since I know I don't have to be responsible for coaching him or moving his career forward or fixing issues or reminding him to do his job or figure out what to do, he's pretty good! He gets the job done and I don't have to do a lot of work for and is a reliable guy. If layoffs come, he would not be on the bottom of the list.

Other employees that don't want to be ambitious, or are picky about their workloads, that I have to remind constantly to do stuff, create conflicts I have to resolve and so on are significantly more work for the manager. If they are also not performing then yes, they would be the people on the bottom of the list.

So overall, if you want to be unambitious to advance after the terminal level of 'sr engineer', be a low stress easy employee to manage who is overall productive and have a good or neutral personal relationship with and it's really doubtful you'll be on the layoff list anytime soon. It lets managers be more effective and bigger with their team, because one high maintenance employee has the workload of 5 low maintenance ones.

Also only %10 of engineers ever advance into management or staff engineering leadership positions, so it's somewhat expected there will be a lot of people who are not going to go further anyway.

You could couch you being unambitious in asking your manager, how can I become a low maintenance employee for you? What would make your job easier in respect to managing me? How could I reduce your stress load? Tell him you don't want to be a manager (super common in engineering) but you do want to make life good for you, him and the team.

> I'm unconvinced that (from the employee's perspective) the best way to engage with management or HR is radical transparency.

I totally get that, and I was like that before being a manager. But once you become a manager, you realize there are a bunch of things that are actually very helpful to be transparent about, and other things that are not and it can be hard to communicate what those are unless you have a buddy who's a manager elsewhere and likes talking about the good and bad of their job outside of work. I really recommend that people do the "tour of duty" for 2 years into management to understand what it is. It will make your future career way less stressful and everything makes way more sense. https://twitter.com/mipsytipsy/status/1345574901818609664

> Your manager really, really wants to hear what you really honestly think

I mean, yes, this is almost always true, but that does not mean that it's always in your best interests to tell your manager what you honestly think.

Absolutely. But it's also a question of what you want to optimize. Is it more about making sure you keep your current job, is it about maximizing income or is it about having peace of mind?

First, figure out what is the probability of you being able to find a new job. For most developers that are reasonably good, in the current market, finding a new job of at least the same compensation (probably more!) is possible, if not easy.

Assuming the calculation from the previous item goes well and if you want to optimize for peace of mind, say what you feel. If it turns out you have a bad manager, start looking for a new job. Getting fired immediately in the situation described in the original comment is extremely unlikely. If you get the impression that things are not going as expected, start looking for a new job.

If you want to optimize for keeping the current job and not for peace of mind, yes, technically the safest way for now is keep doing what the original poster said. However, how long can you keep that up? How bad will it make you feel to keep faking?

Also, it's very common to over-estimate the likelyhood of extreme edge cases happening. They are possible, but need to be weighted with the likelyhood and the risk. Again, if you are fairly certain that you can get a new job if needed, then the risk is small and the likelyhood (as you mentioned) is low. However, the peace of mind change can be substantial. To me it seems worth it. Maybe to you it wouldn't be. Then yes, don't do it. But it's important to think of all the factors and not just focus on not rocking the boat. Sometimes risks are worth taking. Sometimes not. Life's complicated and you only get one go at it :)

It’s always in my best interest to tell my manager that I don’t want to get promoted.

If I don’t tell him and they surprise me with a promotion, that’s not a great outcome. I know I’m a horrible people manager (did that for one horrible year). But I’m pretty good with managing projects.

If I do tell him and he forces it on me anyway or I can tell that’s not what he wants to hear, I need to know that and be prepared to change jobs.

But then again, I enjoy coming in fixing a problem, training, and “putting myself out of a job”. That isn’t exactly the model of someone who is interested in career progression at one job…

I will add that these types tend to amass deep expertise in what they do as well, because they're not just "passing through" the responsibilities - it's their craft.

They are incredible teammates and, in my experience, contribute more than "their share" to the mission.

Absolutely! There is always a risk of stagnation and turning into a cynical downer, but if it goes well, then it goes really well.

> Hell, if you tell me that I'll do everything I can to give you a raise asap.

This is not how salary raises work IMHO.

In my experience as a new (~2 years) manager, you get many questions when proposing salary raises to people perceived as happy, satisfied and agreeable.

I always feel like I need to put more effort on behalf of my reports and kind of repeat many times the obvious fact that it is better if we don't wait for people to find another job so that we - as a company - come back begging for them to accept a counter-offer raise.

The problem I've always had in asking for a raise is that it seems to me in a downturn situation, dissatisfied over-performers are probably second in line for layoffs after under-performers. If you can't give them a raise, and they're likely to jump ship soon, and will likely land another job shortly. (I'm not sure how unemployment time of recent layoffs feed back into employer's unemployment insurance rates.)

So, my career has been a big raise my first year out of college, followed shortly by a 2x lateral move to another company, followed by a bunch of single-digit percentage annual increases, followed by another doubling of my salary. A couple of times managers have also pro-actively scheduled meetings with senior management when they feel they've screwed me over on bonus/salary adjustment, and I got assurances they knew they owed me once there was more budget available.

I know I'm too agreeable, but I don't ask for a raise unless I have a written offer in-hand. I've seen varying advice on how to handle counter-offers, but it's also risky to accept a counter-offer if there's a company down-turn, as you're now more expensive and recently have shown a willingness to leave the company.

I guess the solution is just to be confident in your ability to quickly find a new job if you're laid off. I've given plenty of interviews (somewhere between 200 and 500 in my career) and am very confident in my ability to both leet-code and pass technical interview questions. Yet, I'm very hesitant to risk being in the position of interviewing when I don't currently have a job.

Sure - it does depend on the company quite a bit, but still justifying a raise is always difficult. That's intentional. Doiing this is a big part of your job - figuring out who you should fight for and then fight for that person.

> Tip: Your manager really, really wants to hear what you really honestly think.

Ofcourse. I too want the same. But neither do. As an IC I want hard to be replace me and get top pay for my ability. Exact opposite is my managers incentive.

okay I will try this thank you for the suggestion!

Good luck! Hope it works out for you. There are always risks of course, but in the current market, keep in mind that it's highly likely that they need you more than you need them.

No, please don't !

Without thinking through all possible consequences do not take any action which will jeopardize your status-quo. There is nothing wrong with your current strategy for your 1:1s. You should know your Manager very well before following "terryf"s suggestion; most Managers will not respond positively to somebody on their team who they think is "stagnating" (slacker, bad for team morale and growth etc. etc.). The worst-case scenario is, you get laid off while the best-case scenario is you never get a raise again.

Couch it in how you want to contribute to your team.

Instead of "I don't want interesting work", say you want to help support members of the team who are looking for new opportunities, or something like that. There's X work maintaining the codebase and Y work on new and shiny projects and Z employees. Suggest perhaps cross-training in other people's less-stressful work (if there is any).

If you say that, then your manager (in their head), can be thinking, "Okay so we have this new project, and songzme doesn't want it, but her coworker does, so if songzme can pick up some of the maintenance work, the coworker will have time for new project." Obviously, keep your total workload under control, but a manager's job is to get a team to do something. It's fine to play support, just be open to it.

It doesn't have to be permanent. I've had time periods when I've volunteered for projects and others when I'm not interested due to external factors. During those times, I just did more of the team's work that required the least 'brain'. Which is great for the team members who are feeling bored and want to try something new.

I would be totally fine with someone telling me in a one on one that they are comfortable with their current position and would like to stay there. My expectation at that point would be that we would work on growth within that position. How can we (you and I) do the best job we can maximizing your impact and output where you currently are and make you the best version of what you want to be.

Honestly, any manager who is against that isn't a good manager.

I like growing employees, but I'd be lying if it said I didn't put immense value on the great employees that are content where they are with what they're doing. They're dependable and they mean I have some form of "old guard" that really knows a system inside out without going through documentation or experimenting. That is very valuable.

That is very valuable until that employee needs to find another job and find their skills aren’t marketable.

Its up to the employee to continue to build marketable skills, not the employer. If the employee is content in their position, then that's that.

This is not how good managers think. They're not building good employees, they're helping build incredible team members. This isn't some altruistics BS, it's because the attributes of a great employee are symptoms of the indvidual. If your manager only cares about your bottom-line impact towards your job, start looking for a better situation.

I will absolute do what I can to grow employees. But they have to want to do that. Not all employees want to climb the ladder. They do not want to become a manager, they do not want the responsibility that comes with lead or architect roles. That does not mean they cannot grow in their position. You can always improve your coding, automated testing, devops, not to say soft skills, learn a new framework etc.

Manager: “What happens if I train my employees and they leave?”

What happens if you don’t train your employees and they stay?

Why would anyone want a team who hasn’t updated their skillset since 2006? That’s the epitome of the “Dead Sea Effect”

Exactly and while the employee may appear from the untrained eye, to be "going nowhere" they may well be quietly gaining skills of highly marketable long term value, in fact having time to learn stuff properly due to lower pressure. So everyone wins...

I have seen the thought "employers are responsible for skills growth of their employees" and I am with you on this.

Employees need to take responsibility for their career and growth. I am responsible for continuing my learning and maintaining my skill set. To that end though, I choose to work places that encourage and support that since it's in their own interest.

Agreed, I think companies that foster an environment of growth and learning ultimately become more competitive in the market and have an easier time innovating, so its a big plus from the shareholder equity side, but certainly not their responsibility to elevate each and every employee.

As an engineering manager, I would absolutely love to hear this from a report. It provides immediate clarity to me on how to provide great projects and work options for you.

However, there are a few points in your post that may be conflating topics.

First, 'maintaining the current codebase' and providing work that is valuable to the team/org are not the same thing. Some engineers will endlessly poke around the internals of a code base, refactoring, tuning, renaming for clarity, but never provide anything of real value. This is a pitfall.

Second, I would separate 'career growth' from promotion. Companies orient promotion ladders around particular dimensions that you may or may not care about, but that doesn't mean you can't be growing. Consider if there are ways you want to grow that are outside of what your company is asking for as a promotable step. I don't mind if engineers don't want to be promoted but I'm concerned if they have no desire to grow.

Finally, your post makes it sound like you believe an engineer's lack of ambition led to their being laid off, however this may conflate ambition for output. Are you sure a lack of ambition was the reason or were they not producing anything of value (as in point 1 above)?

For bonus courage points, consider having a candid discussion with your manager about each of these topics. I would wager that you will be much better aligned afterwards.

You have two options, If you have a good manager just say that you just want to keep the same volume of work to be done and that will be all.

If you have a bad manager just lie, say that the work is hard enough, that its challenging maintaining a codebase up to date, that you are interested in this kind of work, that there is lots of work to be done, documenting, making tests, replacing old parts with newer parts and that you see your future being an expert in that kind of tasks.

Usually there is a kind of trade off between being responsible for a piece of software and the amount of work to be done on that project.

As a manager I would be fine with this explanation. If you are valuable in the area you are and you don't want to move on that's fine with me. We need someone in that role and you fill it nicely so by all means stay in that role. There should still be plenty of growth opportunity for you if you want it... it doesn't have to come with a title change. Having 100 people that all want promotions that cycle and only 20 slots to promote into is stressful to handle so you not being part of that but still contributing is kind of great.

Hiring engineers is hard. Unless you’re in a very large company with complex internal politics, you can tell your manager literally anything and they’ll be fine with it. Most managers have been taught that engineers need excitement and growth and so they’re offering it because trying to retain you, they’re trying to avoid you being excited by something new and shiny. “I am happy and want to stay exactly where I am” is music to their ears, shout it from the roof tops. I wouldn’t take any lessons from layoffs.

>which manager wants an unambitious engineer?

If you are doing good work, that sounds like any managers dream: reliability!

I certainly want to help every member of my team to reach their personal goals but all of that means work for me, and work for finding who will replace them at their current position.

Actually that sounds amazing: you seem to want to do what you do and do that right, nothing more, nothing less.

There are only so many L+1 spots, someone who wants to do actual work in the team rather than invest a lot of time getting such a spot and potentially do things that may be risky or end up leaving the firm could be a very valuable part of the team.

Have you considered contracting / consultancy engagements?

I find things like 1:1's infantile / patronising / condescending, I'm sure some employees are convinced about their benefit, however I'm unable to come to that conclusion myself when thinking about it.

For me contracting is a more honest exchange of my time and expertise, for money.

I thought about it, and I decided not to. TBH, I like vesting stocks and the stock growth helps me work alot less than I need to ( get to quit, take a year off and live off selling the stock, then go back to work).

With contracting I would have to save and every hour I don't work is an hour I'm not getting money its a bit stressful to think about.

This is asking a lot from you, but in your situation, I think your goal should be to build up enough of a relationship with your manager that you feel comfortable telling them that, or realize that that's never going to happen at your current company and find a new job.

I have reports who have told me that they're happy doing what they're doing. I don't see it as a negative at all - they're employees who are quietly getting their job done and I don't have to worry about them leaving for career growth or Peter Principle-ing them into incompetence. It's important that we continue to have 1:1s though. People aren't static, they can change their mind, and I also want to make sure I keep an ear out for little things that are annoying them, and do what I can to make them go away.

That’s good for you. But how good is it for them for you not to inform them of the existential risks of them not getting better at their job and staying marketable? Even if they don’t want a raise? Every industry goes through changes and you should encourage them to stay up to date on those changes instead of just chugging along on the legacy products.

I met two developers in 2016 who had been with the same company for 10 and 17 years respectively maintaining a PowerBuilder app from 1999 running on Sql server 2003.

The company was happy to let them keep chugging along until the company got acquired by venture capital and they said they “no longer wanted to be a software company”. How do you think that worked out for them?

Sounds like you're working somewhere with an "up or out" culture? I've been there, done that, then moved on to a much nicer job. IMHO its a ridiculous way for a company to run. There are loads of people, like you or I or other commenters here, who will do a hard day's work, but don't want the extra stress and instead want enough time with our spouse and kid(s). We are nevertheless super useful to our employers. In fact, we're excellent value, because we don't chase the big bucks and we stick around gaining knowledge. My advice is GTFO from there. ;)

Do you trust your manager? You should just tell him/her that. I don't think I'd worry about layoffs in this market. Big difference between unambitious and lazy/not competent. I'm a PM and devs like you are worth their weight in gold. You could work on the framing a bit. Something like "I'm quite happy with my current scope and responsibilities. I enjoy working to make our current codebase more stable and maintainable and adding scope would either take away from what I enjoy or my family time at home, which isn't worth the tradeoff to me"

>> 2. Do you want more interesting work?

>> Also no, I'm perfectly happy maintaining our current codebase, not interested in new and shiny projects because my most interesting time is spent at home with my kiddo.

So as a manager my concern here is you're communicating I don't want to grow or add more value. I'm not sure if that's your intent. There are actually very few roles where I've needed someone to "just keep doing exactly what you're doing right now", and they are typically short-term bridges to more important projects or quickly devolve into lowest-cost commodity solutions.

You don't have to get promoted or work on bleeding-edge tech, but you definitely need to grow. If you're not growing, your stagnating, and your time is limited.

The follow-on comments from other managers about how you're a dream IC really scare me; they present a mindset that developers are a problem that needs to be solved as easily as possible. Give me a demanding, passionate and yes, needy, developer over someone who's stopped progressing every time.

>> Any tips on how I can handle my 1:1s?

Don't share that you're perfectly content with the current status-quo and that you don't want any further growth or responsibility.

I agree with not wanting a promotion, I’m perfectly fine with where I am compensation wise and job wise.

But yes, I keep up with the new shiny projects and keep my resume current. The tides are always shifting in tech. Managers change, companies get acquired, go under etc. It’s my responsibility to myself and my family to keep myself competitive in the market.

I’m not going to do that by not staying in sync with the market.

> I'm afraid to tell my manager that, because which manager wants an unambitious engineer?

the laying someone off for that is silly. But when I was managing a team for the first time I would have found it really helpful if one of them told me that! It was so far from my imagination that there would be an _unambitious engineer_ the thought never occurred to me. I wasn't a lot of my time and theirs working on this erroneous world-view.

There’s no problem with that as long as you don’t express it in a negative way.

At least, I manage people who say this and it is perfectly fine.

Also, this level of ambition has a tendency to change with people’s life circumstances.

The most important thing for me is making sure the work someone is doing is aligned with their goals, whether that is work life balance or expanding their role as fast as is feasible or something in between.

I sympathize, before becoming a manager I was exactly you. Eventually, I realized I just don't want to be coding all day. I hate the endless chase to become good with some new technology. Being a manager has its own challenges but overall I can say I am much happier than in my prior job where I was an individual contributor.

One thing to keep in mind is that "expert on team's codebase" is a form of career growth. Not always the best or most prestigious kind but it's enough that the company finds you valuable and worth paying more.

Agreed with the other comments here. I would love to hear this as an engineering manager. I fear the work becoming stale for my team and push growth opportunities to keep things interesting.

You’re a SWE. Point out how your growth is $$$ for the business. Once you’re through the first chunk of your career, it’s enough, and it’s what they really want.