Great Engineers Must Bridge Technical Brilliance With Business Acumen For Leadership
TL;DR
- Mediocre engineers are often promoted over technically brilliant ones because they exhibit greater business acumen and are more receptive to executive direction, prioritizing outcomes over complex technical solutions.
- Great engineers must shift focus from individual technical mastery to business value and simplicity, as executive-level decision-making prioritizes well-reasoned, understandable outcomes over intricate technical details.
- The "tech ceiling" for engineers is often a self-imposed limitation stemming from arrogance and a lack of understanding of business context, hindering their progression into leadership roles.
- Effective communication with executives requires translating technical proposals into simple, outcome-oriented language, demonstrating clear business value and avoiding jargon to gain buy-in.
- Investing in employee morale through approving less compelling ideas can be a strategic decision to foster passion and engagement, even if the immediate business case is weak.
- Understanding the financial architecture and cost structures of different regions is crucial for engineers to propose solutions that are pragmatically valuable and not just technically elegant.
- Great engineers who fail to develop business understanding and communication skills risk becoming liabilities in enterprise settings, as their technical brilliance becomes isolated from organizational impact.
Deep Dive
Great engineers often face career stagnation because their technical brilliance is not aligned with business outcomes. This leads to "mediocre" engineers, who are more attuned to business needs and management expectations, being promoted faster. This dynamic hinders true innovation, as the individuals best equipped to drive impactful technological advancements may not ascend to decision-making roles, resulting in a pervasive sub-optimality within organizations.
The core issue is a misalignment between technical expertise and business acumen. While exceptional engineers excel at complex problem-solving and elegant code, they frequently lack the ability to simplify their reasoning for non-technical stakeholders or to connect their technical solutions directly to financial benefits and strategic goals. This disconnect means that even brilliant technical proposals can fail to gain traction because they are not communicated in a way that resonates with executives focused on ROI and market impact. Consequently, individuals who are adept at articulating business value and navigating organizational politics, regardless of their technical depth, are often favored for advancement, creating a hierarchy populated by those who are easier to manage rather than those who can drive the most profound technological impact. This trend is exacerbated by the rise of AI, which, while a powerful tool, can mask a lack of fundamental understanding if not wielded with critical oversight and business context, potentially amplifying the problem by creating well-articulated but superficially reasoned outputs.
Ultimately, for great engineers to ascend and lead, they must cultivate a broader understanding of financial architecture, organizational dynamics, and customer needs. This involves shifting focus from the "how" of technology to the "why" and "what" of business impact. Organizations that fail to foster this dual capability risk perpetuating a cycle where technically adept individuals become liabilities rather than assets, and where the potential for truly transformative innovation is stifled by a preference for easily managed, less technically profound leadership. The imperative is for engineers to develop an outcome-oriented mindset, bridging the gap between technical excellence and strategic business value to unlock their full leadership potential and drive meaningful organizational success.
Action Items
- Audit communication patterns: Analyze 3-5 team structures to identify how they reflect system architecture (ref: Conway's Law).
- Create executive pitch framework: Define 3 key sections for simplifying technical proposals to business value.
- Measure business value disconnect: For 3-5 projects, calculate correlation between technical complexity and delivered business outcomes.
- Draft financial literacy module: Outline 5 core financial concepts (e.g., CAPEX, OPEX) relevant to software investment decisions.
- Evaluate AI implementation risks: For 3-5 AI use cases, identify potential biases and define mitigation strategies.
Key Quotes
"we are better off with mediocre engineers at least they will listen to us who has moved up the hierarchy people who are not the best of engineers executives will still try and poke holes in that that's what they're really good at seeing if this is bullshit if this is fluff or if it's actually thought through well reasoned"
Anand Sahay explains that individuals who are not necessarily the most technically proficient but are more amenable to executive direction often advance in their careers. He notes that executives are adept at scrutinizing proposals to discern their substance and validity, suggesting that a willingness to listen and adapt is a key factor in career progression at higher levels.
"as a software engineer or an architect in this case when you pitch to them make sure your idea is sound start with the most important part and then executives will still try and poke holes in that that's what they're really good at seeing if this is bullshit if this is fluff or if it's actually thought through well reasoned"
Anand Sahay advises that when presenting ideas to executives, it is crucial to ensure the concept is well-supported and to begin with the most critical aspect. He reiterates that executives will scrutinize these pitches to assess their credibility, emphasizing the importance of thorough reasoning and a clear, well-thought-out presentation.
"keeping it simple the the lucidity of explaining why this needs to be done and how it will give you a real outcome changes the game really yeah so simple as that because complexity you can always make me go mad with complexity and which is a problem with a lot of good engineers that it almost becomes a tech talk and you don't get it that exactly what is he trying to get at right"
Anand Sahay highlights that clarity and simplicity in explaining the rationale and expected outcomes of a proposal are paramount for success. He points out that overly complex explanations, often seen in technical discussions, can obscure the core message, making it difficult for listeners to grasp the intended purpose or benefit.
"I feel like a lot of people that are early in career they do try and reason a lot from a tech level so when you're saying as you move up in as you go more senior keeping things simple and I think also tailored towards your audience even though I think your reasoning needs to be sound and well argued there is a risk nowadays that a lot of people can cut corners because you have this magical box which is large language models"
Anand Sahay observes that early-career professionals often focus on technical reasoning, whereas senior individuals need to simplify their communication for a broader audience. He also expresses concern about the potential for over-reliance on tools like large language models, which could lead to a reduction in thoroughness and critical thinking.
"great engineers those who started at 10 are absolutely the ones who you love when they are in the initial part of their thing because they are showing magic but they quickly become a bit of a difficult people when you try to see it in the context of outcomes because it's all about them it's all about what is interesting to them and business outcomes actually takes a back seat"
Anand Sahay suggests that highly skilled engineers, while initially impressive with their technical prowess, can become challenging when their focus remains solely on their own interests rather than on broader business outcomes. He notes that their passion for the technical aspects can sometimes overshadow the practical business implications.
"if you really want to make a real impact otherwise software development will continue to be called an expensive necessity where all your mind will be not on the outcome but how to retain how to keep them happy and almost a entitled it's like us versus them team and that has to end"
Anand Sahay argues that for software development to be more than just a costly necessity, the focus must shift from merely retaining and appeasing engineers to achieving tangible outcomes. He calls for an end to an "us versus them" mentality, suggesting that a more integrated approach is needed for true impact.
Resources
External Resources
People
- Anousa Hai - Global CEO over at Xevia
- Gregor Hope - Mentioned for a statement about executive time limitations
- Elon Musk - Mentioned as an example of a great engineer with an outcome-thinking mindset
Other Resources
- Conway's Law - Referenced as a concept explaining how organizational communication patterns influence system design
- Spotify Models - Mentioned as examples of organizational structures attempting to solve communication and interface issues