Seems to me, for most successful companies, it does. Can you name a few successful companies past 50, making money, that don’t have management?
There is little to no evidence, even in academic studies, typically a pro labor progressive environment, that management is not needed beyond small projects.
You can’t, because it’s an absurdly competitive market and most engineers are happy to skip it for equal or similar pay. You get what you pay for and at the same rate you typically get someone good at management or tech not both. This people go demand 300k from later companies posting more. And they’ll get paid more than the engineers because they are harder to find.
Seems to me, for most successful companies, it does. Can you name a few successful companies past 50, making money, that don’t have management?
There is little to no evidence, even in academic studies, typically a pro labor progressive environment, that management is not needed beyond small projects.
Valve. Checkmate
https://ebsedu.org/blog/boss-less-management-a-peek-into-the-flat-hierarchy-of-valve/
https://www.tomshardware.com/video-games/pc-gaming/valve-makes-almost-usd50-million-per-employee-raking-in-more-cash-per-person-than-google-amazon-or-microsoft-gaming-giants-350-employees-on-track-to-generate-usd17-billion-this-year
I didn’t say management wasn’t needed.
Okay, well you find someone competent enough to deal with the tech and get paid less than the engineers 🤣.
The rates are the rates.
I could point out that I didn’t say they should be paid less, either, but my heart isn’t in it. I hope you have a good day doing whatever that is.
Then go find them at the same rate. Do it.
You can’t, because it’s an absurdly competitive market and most engineers are happy to skip it for equal or similar pay. You get what you pay for and at the same rate you typically get someone good at management or tech not both. This people go demand 300k from later companies posting more. And they’ll get paid more than the engineers because they are harder to find.