Individual Contributor to Leader: the Struggle is Real & Some Thoughts on How to Teach the Transition
I recently caught up with a long-time friend/engineer mentor whom I haven’t seen in person for quite some time (distance and COVID). The topic of where we’re headed in the “second phase” of our careers came up and led to a discussion on the transition from Individual Contributor to Leader and why it can be natural for some, difficult for a few, and damn near impossible for others.
Both of us were software ICs that transcended to become team/department managers and on up the chain to director level and, eventually, VP/C-suite. Additionally, we both found our motivation to be, essentially, the same in that we enjoy the challenge of the strategic problem-solving aspect — “what are we trying to solve for?” or the Job To Be Done (JTBD) — over the physical tactical execution of the end solution. It’s not to say that we don’t enjoy the creativity and sparks of joy that fly when coding awesome ways to deliver value, rather, it’s just a different feeling to work in the abstract and orchestrate overarching strategic initiatives.
Along the way, we both found that our pursuit of the JTBD realm came with managing budgets, time, and, the biggest adjustment of all, people. We both struggled and found ourselves on our own to figure it all out. Our conversation turned to how it could be better for the next generation of ICs in software development and Knowledge Work on the whole as they make the transition to leadership roles. That isn’t to say that all ICs should/must move into leadership roles but those that wish to need guidance as we wish we had during our transition (the learning never stops, nor should it).
Individual Contributor to Leading Same/Similar ICs Should Be A Slam Dunk, Right?
You would be relatively safe to assume that engineers are a good fit for overseeing development because they’ve been in the trenches and know what needs to be done. Additionally, for value delivery’s sake, speaking engineer-to-engineer is much more efficient while eliminating middle management overhead. You would not be safe, however, in assuming engineers can just slide into leadership roles and all becomes hunky dory.
Taking all of the attributes required to be a leader and the particular skills that can be acquired to effectively manage people out of the equation, the root cause of the IC-to-Leader friction is based on what I’ll refer to as “dimensions” and the ability to (or not) develop an entirely new dimension to one’s self while rectifying an internal conflict (more on that later). This dimension approach isn’t psychological academic research, mind you, just my observations based on talking with folks in similar situations over the years and comparing them to my own internal struggles and monologue.
Individual Contributor Dimensions: Yourself and Your Work
When you are an Individual Contributor, you have two primary dimensions to account for: Yourself and Your Work. Your own dimension is concerned with everything you have going on in your world; your marriage/relationships, kids, dogs, hobbies, personal goals, health, anxiety, etc. You are a person, first and foremost, and it takes a lot to keep it together. Your Work dimension is relegated to developing/maintaining your skills, project scope, deadlines, DevOps and environment aspects (for software engineers), and all other particulars required for delivering value. Of course, you are usually part of a team and have an obligation to pull your weight, but, that is part of the Your Work dimension.
Leadership Requires Three Dimensions: Yourself, Your Work, and Your People.
All of the rules apply to Yourself and Your Work, however, now an entirely new dimension must be learned in Your People. You now have to be concerned with the delivery aspects of Your People in terms of investment against value delivery by the firm, how your people are working with other departments, how they are compensated, how they are perceived, and all the aspects of managing people towards a common goal. They are Your People and you must look out for them and guide them. The problem is, it isn’t that simple. This new dimension is deep and exponential based on how many Your People you have.
Your People, in your new role, now also includes Their Self and Their Work. You must account for all of the elements you are used to being responsible for in Yourself and Your Work in Their dimensions to be an effective leader. Now, you could only focus on output and not deal with the human aspects of each of Your People, however, I don’t believe you’d be an effective leader. You may get results like Steve Jobs (doubtful) but you won’t make many followers/admirers.
How each of your team members is going about Their Self and Their Work is relative to their output. You must nurture their skills growth, enable learning, ensure they have psychological safety, are not burned out, etc., to be effective as their leader. This new dimension requires a lot of mental energy and for some, it can come naturally while others will struggle to understand why there is so much friction when making the leap.
I believe this can be and must be taught to Individual Contributors moving into management/leadership roles under this purview. Traditional management rules are not enough for ICs. Giving an IC a handbook on how to manage doesn’t take into consideration the internal dialogue trying to process how everyone on their team’s, well, everything is now their concern.
Further, traditional management training doesn’t take into account the big elephant in the room that ICs face when moving into management that appears in this internal dialogue over and over again: “I used to DO something and deliver value. Now, what am I doing? How am I helping?”
Managers and leaders that were not ICs don’t have these internal reckoning issues and itmust be recognized. Without addressing this element, ICs put into leadership roles will struggle, plain and simple. I did, for certain, and so did my colleague I mentioned at the onset of this post.
ICs can be trained to manage people but we need to also teach that understanding the new dimension in Your People also solves that internal dialogue struggle. Your People becomes Your Purpose and it is very, very valuable to the firm and, most of all, Your People.
