Comment by gwbas1c
2 years ago
There are some other titles that generally aren't BS: Lead, Architect, and Manager. They all convey generally accepted roles, and if your work doesn't align with your title, there's a problem.
Titles also matter when working in distributed teams, where a lot of the subtle signaling that happens in face-to-face situations is muted. I once pushed for a title change when I was going to lead people overseas, because it was very important that, if my team looked me up in the company directory, "on paper" I outranked them.
> I've worked with engineers who've been hired at a higher level than I believe they are due to negotiating their compensating package higher, which is frustrating too, as you can then expect more of them, when they don't necessarily have all the skills.
That's a real important factor, especially when playing "large company politics." In some cases, hiring quotas need to be met, and market conditions need to be met too.
But, when it comes to experienced employees who a company wants to hold on to, meeting their salary expectations needs to come in line with the title.
This is also the difference between functional title and corporate title that you'll find at larger companies.
Your corporate title is your level on HR's ladder, and it'll be based on whatever HR comes up with - senior, VP, director, etc.
Then more often functional titles are determined by individual departments or groups, and reflect what someone is actually doing. This is architect, PM, lead, manager, whatever. Sometimes these could conflict with corp titles, but often end up being role specific.
It's all dependent on how companies set things up.