A director is there to get shit from VPs about EMs and get shit from EMs about VPs. FTEs think you're not an engineer anymore and forgot everything once your title
changed and "business people" think you're too much of an engineer and don't understand the rest of the business.
Also most of your contribution to the business is ignored if you can't hire.
This is a fantastically accurate description. I'm tempted to send it as a card to my director along with a sympathy bouquet and a box of chocolates. Well done.
The Manager’s Path by Camille Fournier has a chapter or two in senior engineering management, and regardless of that is just a great book about being an effective manager in technical organisations.
A director is the interface between the higher ups and the lower levels of the org. Basically taking strategy and vision by articulating it to product deliverables. They’re also the first to fall on their sword when things don’t work out and heads need to roll.
Exactly. VP is the level that spends most of their time concerned with how their function strategically fits with other functions. It's the entry-level position for C-level corporate politics.
If Director is the most senior you can be without being that, you're generally the highest execution-focused role that lets your VP do their thing. Somewhat equivalent to an XO in the military. At the same time, you're usually the one who has to translate the relevant parts of the strategy into something relevant and tactical for everyone below.
