
Ask HN: What's left for early startup engineers as the company grows? - tootall
Howdy<p>I joined a startup ~2 years ago as employee #2 (software engineer), and thus I&#x27;ve had the responsibility of essentially building every technical aspect of the company from the ground up, which I loved. Now, the company scaled up (about 45 people) but, instead of being happy, I feel like everything&#x27;s been taken away from me:<p>- Technical strategy: I strongly shaped the technical direction of the company defining a lot of critical points, and now they brought in a VP of engineering<p>- Management: I managed an entire team of 10 people without ever missing a deadline of the whole team, and now they brought in an engineering manager<p>- Customer facing roles: I was having a lot of customer interaction and support, now they brought in a support engineer and I don&#x27;t even know who our users are anymore<p>- Infrastructure management: I took care of building a state-of-the-art scalable and fully automated infrastructure in the public cloud, and now they brought in an operation guy<p>- Developer: This is the only thing I still do, full time<p>Essentially, and I understand it&#x27;s just my ego speaking, I feel like there has not been any career advancement for me. The only benefit has been the gazillion things I learned in this ~2 years journey by doing the above roles.<p>I&#x27;ve been told that now, since I don&#x27;t have to worry about the other things, I can focus on what I&#x27;m able to do best, <i>just</i> writing code (which I agree, all the tasks I did were less challenging than some critical parts of the code base I wrote from scratch), but still in the &quot;about us&quot; web page of startups just the management is going to be listed and take the credits. Where did I fail to claim my part when the company was growing?<p>I understand this is a first world rant and and I should just &quot;be happy&quot; it has been a success so far, but still I find it hard and I would very much appreciate the opinion of other people who went through something similar.<p>Thank you
======
deangiberson
I'd focus on a repeating theme in your post, "and now they". This suggests
that you already see a division between the management of the company and
yourself. You haven't been part of the decision making process and feel that
all possible angles have been locked out by an outside agency. How much
feedback have you given to the company management that you would be interested
in those positions before they where "taken" from you? Have you done a gap
analysis between your current operating skill set and the expectations for
those position? What skills have you tried to improve outside of "developer"
recently that would show you are trying to expand your role?

You need to get past the "been told", and start communicating what you want to
achieve. It might be too late at this company, but I would bet not, just
because these roles are already filled doesn't mean they will stay filled, or
that tasks won't outgrow the current holder. Think ahead, and aim for a goal,
communicate with every means you have that your ready for that goal.

"Fortune favors the prepared mind." \- Louis Pasteur

~~~
0xdeadbeefbabe
That sounds good too, but aren't you presupposing that this course of things
is normal. The OP is saying things turned out differently than expected, and
such dissonance really bugs him. Why would he work harder to communicate when
working hard has failed so poorly in the past?

Second and third world people probably have similar problems too.

~~~
mlakewood
In my experience, what other people thought you communicated and what you
thought communicated are often very far apart. Its an amazing thing, Humans
are so good at communication but also so bad. I know with my significant other
multiple times we have both got upset with each other for actions/inaction
that we thought we had communicated with the other, when either we hadnt or
hadnt clearly. We have been together for 10 years, and it still happens.

Communication is possibly the hardest thing to get right between two people,
because it seems so effortless.

~~~
nostrademons
Relevant:

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiio%27s_laws](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiio%27s_laws)

------
arielm
As a technical founder I actually face the issue on the other side, which is
how to keep those that have been around for 5+ years challenged and motivated.
Here are a few things I've learned that might help with perspective:

1\. You shouldn't be afraid to ask for what you want. As a founder, it's tough
to always know what goes on in everyone's mind. I try as much as I can but
when I'm a part of the conversation I will be able to help much more than just
being looped in after a conclusion is reached.

Every good developer wants to be challenged. Some want to stay on the
technical side, others grow into managers, and some like to blend the two.
Talk to the ceo/founders and let them know how you feel. I'm sure they
appreciate what you've done so far and will be happy to figure out the future.

2\. You're at a very unique position where not only do you know how the entire
system works but you also know how it's supposed to work. This gives you the
ability to contribute to any of the different roles you mentioned in a really
meaningful capacity.

One of the comments said something about not being good at those. I mostly
disagree with that on principle. Just because you don't have the training
doesn't mean you won't be an awesome manager. Some companies actually don't
hire managers but rather promote. I believe LinkedIn is one of those
companies, and they do it because they want those the manager will oversee to
really trust the manager. That's something that, as a developer, you can do
when you've seen the person's work.

3\. The skills needed to get something off the ground are somewhat different
from those needed to take it to "the next level". It doesn't mean you can't
have both, but it is a question you should ask yourself. Do you like the rush
and the excitement of creating something new? Or do you like the joy of seeing
a large system run smoothly at super scale with time to sleep? Or both.

~~~
vinceguidry
It took me awhile to realize that management is, generally, not a skilled
profession. Not saying that certain skills can make you better or worse at it,
but that you don't need them to be effective.

In a skilled profession, not having them means all the difference. You can't
wire up a house without the skills. You can't build a web app without knowing
a whole lot of stuff, at least not within any time frame someone would pay you
to make one in.

It doesn't mean that management is stupid or boring. It means that you can
bring more of yourself to it because there's not this huge body of best
practices that you have to adhere to in order to succeed in it. There's lots
of room for eccentric practices, _The Office_ showed that exquisitely.

You can carve out a place for yourself. If your days are taken up by meetings,
take your laptop to those meetings, listen with half an ear so you can still
contribute, and code whenever you can't. Don't ask for permission, you're a
manager, you're busy. You're always busy, you decide what you're busy with.

There's this hierarchy I've noticed of office workers. You can be paid to do
stuff other people tell you to do, I call these drones.

You can have responsibilities, in which case you can justify doing anything so
long as it fits into the responsibility and you can make your bosses believe
that. I justify posting on HN this way.

If one of your responsibilities is someone else in the company, then you're in
management, and you have a lot more latitude to order your day, if only
because you can simply order your subordinate to take care of your
responsibilities. You generally use this power to think and strategize about
how to improve your department's role in and contribution towards the company.

Once you get promoted into management, this is how you're expected to spend
your days, but you don't have to. You can still code if you want to, so long
as you're meeting the additional responsibilities that are thrust upon you by
managing others. They're your responsibilities, you can meet them however you
see fit. That's what management means.

If you don't know how to do this, you might get stuck attending pointless
meetings. If you do, then you can avoid most any meeting that you weren't
personally asked to attend by someone you report to. If you're at a meeting,
your job is to contribute to the shared understanding of whatever business
situation they're having the meeting about. If you can do that while coding,
so much the better, you're multi-tasking.

Even if you don't have any direct reports, even if you don't have any
responsibilities, you can create them. You can't make people report to you,
but you can sort of take responsibility for them if you notice they're
slacking or whatever.

You can also take some role the company needs filled and start taking it
seriously. There was this great segment in _The Office_ where Pam, as part of
the sales staff, starts taking on "Office Manager" roles, and eventually
leverages it into a newly defined role and salary, in hilarious fashion.

You don't have to use subterfuge to gain responsibilities, you can simply ask
your boss for one or notice something that needs attention and tell your boss
you're taking care of that from here on out. If your boss notices you taking
responsibilities, then they'll start to re-categorize you from a drone to
someone who can take charge of something. Managers call this "initiative".

~~~
genericresponse
I quibble with your stating that you can be a manager without some critical
skills. I think the skills defined under the (now defunct) concept of
emotional intelligence are vital to being a successful manger. Without
empathic skills you can't get anyone, but the most committed employees to
perform well. It seems self-evident, but many people I've met including very
poor supervisors lack the ability to really put themselves in others' shoes.

~~~
tfigueroa
I'll quibble with this. There are plenty of managers that wield
authoritarianism and plenty of subordinates that yield to it.

I'd agree that managers with soft skills perform better, but even the old-
school ass-kicking types can still eek out a performance. And even be rewarded
by the higher-ups for that attitude.

------
steven2012
One thing you need to come to grips is that regardless of how smart you are,
the VP of engineering is probably someone that has a lot more experience and
clout than you do. If they aren't, then the senior management of the company
is terrible. If your company has grown to the size of 40-50 people, that's the
time when they need real experience to help drive them forward. They can't
take a chance on a great programmer who has never managed an organization
before or grown it from 40 to 200 people. So you need to accept that.

But you should stick by the VP of Engineering and learn whatever you can from
them. Be their right-hand person, and try to become someone that the entire
company goes to for technical issues. It's not hard to be the de facto CTO,
just make sure you are a part of all the technical decisions, and a positive
guiding force for the company. As you become more and more the face of
technical decisions, eventually you'll be recognized for it, or you can go to
another company in that higher role.

~~~
rubiquity
Why is it acceptable for the Founder/CEO to continue leading the company at
40+ employees but not acceptable for the engineer to lead an engineering team
at 40+ employees? Seems like a double standard.

~~~
balls187
> Why is it acceptable for the Founder/CEO to continue leading the company at
> 40+ employees but not acceptable for the engineer to lead an engineering
> team at 40+ employees? Seems like a double standard.

It is a double standard, but however it's hardly that cut and dry.

Post Series B, if the board does not believe the current Founder/CEO can take
the company to the next milestones of growth, they will replace them.

Typically engineering teams need to scale sooner, so you you see a more
experienced manager be brought in before the CEO is considered for replacing.

The CEO may also has the additional benefit of having the investors and board
help him or her in their decisions.

~~~
angersock
The board is just a bunch of old white dudes with money. The fuck do they
know?

EDIT:

balls187 suggests they know how to make money--which is perhaps true, but not
necessarily in your field of endeavor or business, unless you've picked them.

kelnos is closer to it, which is that the board tells you what to do because
they're the board and that's the power you've granted them.

Again, in neither case, do we actually need to assume they are making the best
or even informed decisions. There are some great stories of boards I've known
locally suggesting really dumb things that hurt and even killed companies.

~~~
kelnos
Assuming you're correct (very debatable), it doesn't matter: they're the ones
funding the company, so they get to make the decisions. This doesn't always
work out well, but it's not unreasonable.

~~~
wpietri
One could make the same argument for hereditary monarchy. Which I would take
as a sign that maybe it is unreasonable.

~~~
infinite8s
Except that taking funding is a voluntary action. Living under a hereditary
monarchy is not.

------
fotoblur
I see a number of posts saying that you're probably not experienced or
qualified enough to hold these other positions. However, I don't think the VP
of Eng, Dev Mgr, or OPS Mgr could do what you do...essentially help start and
build a company from day one.

Those skills you've developed don't have much value at your current company
any longer. They are most likely keeping you around for historical value and
once the systems you built get replaced its over pretty quick. Take those
skills elsewhere and brand yourself as someone who takes a company from 2 to n
employees.

Not everyone has your skill set so learn how to market them. I'm on my second
company where I was an early hire. I learned that you're way more valuable in
the beginning then you are at the end. Eventually I got pushed out by
management types because I held on to the notion that I helped build this
company and deserved something for it. Don't wait too long to realize it.

~~~
nwatson
The rub is:

* the OP will need to pay a lot to buy their vested options when they leave each company

* the fair market value of common stock will have probably increased so they'll also need to pay immediate income tax on every gain

* they likely won't have a market for their shares until acquisition or IPO (five to ten to never years)

* the shares they do have will be diluted 10x or more through Series A/B through F, and they won't benefit from readjusted new 4-year-vesting grants

* they'll learn a lot and profit little from serial startup monogamy

~~~
walterbell
Try to join when stock has low paper value, exercise the options immediately
so there is no gain and no tax. Then you vest shares, rather than options, and
can take them with you.

~~~
scurvy
Not that many startups allow 83-b elections early on. It costs them a few $k
when someone does this. It doesn't necessarily have to (it's just paper filed
with the IRS by the employee), but that's what they're told and that's what
they went through when they did their own 83-b paperwork. So that's what they
think everyone needs to do. Honestly, there really aren't any legally required
paperwork involved with 83-b, but the entire ycombinator crowd is convinced
that there is. Perhaps it's bad knowledge by the YC figureheads?

~~~
walterbell
Since this affects 100% of startups and can have a huge financial impact on
early employees, one would expect it to receive more attention. Since some
startups allow the election, it is clearly possible. It needs to be a standard
part of compensation negotiations. Early employees can obtain independent,
professional advice on the topic, rather than burdening their friendly
neighborhood VC.

[http://www.stockoptionadvisors.com/isofaq/#83b](http://www.stockoptionadvisors.com/isofaq/#83b)

[http://www.stockoptionadvisors.com/nqsofaq/vesting.shtml](http://www.stockoptionadvisors.com/nqsofaq/vesting.shtml)

------
ChuckMcM
Interesting question you might ask yourself, do you want to be in management
or not? Do you want to be customer facing? Or not?

When companies are small the jobs are all blends because they have to be, you
just don't have the resources to do more. But as the company gets bigger
(presumably through growth and not just a funding bump :-) you can allow folks
to focus full time on specific roles which, in theory, gets you better
execution of those roles.

A friend of mine once said you often could figure out what role you liked
"best" by the first thing you did when you got in, did you check the build?
(developer) did you check email? (manager) did you check the web? (marketer) A
bit simplistic but it does make for interesting introspection.

As employee #2 you're well connected with the CEO and the other founders, and
you can talk about what you want in your future. You should sit down and have
that talk with them.

~~~
rifung
What if you check HN first thing you get in?

~~~
rnernento
Time to cash out.

------
balls187
The rub with startups is that leadership may not have experience with
developing careers.

From what you've written, it seems like you really don't have a lot of
experience developing careers either, which is one reason to bring in an
experienced engineering manager. It's not a knock on your skillset managing a
10 person team and delivering. Just a realization that management isn't
something you can just quickly learn on the job.

My advice: have a discussion with whomever the new engineering manager is, and
explain your career aspirations and the current dilemma you have.

~~~
itsbonczek
Agree with this advice. You should talk to your manager and work out a plan to
achieve your career goals within the company. This is a significant part of
your manager's job responsibilities, and assuming they are good a good
manager, then they will be more than happy to work with you on this. You are
obviously an important part of the organization and if they have any common
sense, they will want to retain you. And if, for some reason, it turns out
there is no good way to grow within the organization, then start weighing the
pros and cons of leaving.

Also, remember that transitioning into a management role is an advancement
only if you want to be a manager. It's a career change, and is not suited for
everyone. This is why many tech companies have pure developer track
advancement opportunities.

~~~
voidlogic
As employee #2 he should be talking to (presumably, his friend), the CEO,
regardless of who his manager technically is.

~~~
briandear
Exactly. If he doesn't have an open line with the CEO, then I would leave,
assuming I have some percentage of options that had vested. I would stick
around long enough to vest, then go start your own thing or be a cofounder of
something.

I know this situation well. I am employee #1 in a 55 person company and I feel
like I might as well be employee 55. But, since I'm remote, I can do my thing,
write code, and generally be left alone while getting paid regularly. So being
cut out of the loop does have some advantages, especially if you're remote.

~~~
balls187
> I'm remote, I can do my thing, write code, and generally be left alone while
> getting paid regularly. So being cut out of the loop does have some
> advantages, especially if you're remote.

There is the opposite end too. I joined a 100 person company, and some early
founding employees were clearly resting and vesting, while I was working
nights and weekends to iterate and replace prototype software written by early
team members. I was grateful for the company they built, but was curious why
they had an entitled approach to their positions.

Software is meritocracy based, not loyalty and tenure.

As employee #1, in what ways do you think you should be treated differently
than the other employees?

~~~
_3u10
Software might be about meritocracy but power is not.

It's not entitlement so much as ownership, they don't feel they are entitled
to 5% of the company, they own 5% of the company.

Depending on how much equity they have collectively they might be able to fire
the CEO if push comes to shove.

------
scosman
At a company with 45 people, all of the roles you mention probably should be
dedicated roles/teams. You didn't do anything wrong, you were just successful
at growing a company.

If you want to wear a lot of hats, go join another early stage company (the
items you mention make an awesome resume). If you want to grow at the current
company, pick an area or two (development+strategy or management) and let the
ceo know what you are interested in.

------
n72
This exact situation happened to me. If you are at such a distance from the
founder that he doesn't care about your place in the company — namely you're
not considered one of the "important people" — your problem is two-fold:

1\. Your immediate job won't be as gratifying.

2\. (And this is a bigger deal) You won't be in the room during the exit when
the money is being handed out.

Re 1, as I saw it, given my equity stake, I should just put my head down and
wait for the liquidity event. This worked well, though was a large blow to the
ego. Given personalities and priorities of the founder, agitating would have
put my equity stake at risk.

Re 2, despite the fact that you may have an iron clad equity stake, there is
often money that is handed out in an exit which goes beyond equity. In my case
it was about $90mil in retention money. If you're seen as one of the
"important people", you'll be in the room when that is being divvied up and
can get your hands in the cookie jar (at that point it's just a land grab.) If
not, you're shit out of luck, since no one at that point will be looking out
for your interests.

So, I would say I would take the long view and not worry too much about the
ego/job satisfaction. If you end up set for life, the resentment will fade.
(I'm 3 years post liquidity event and the resentment is for the most part
gone. Both for the name on letterhead issue and being left out during
retention.) I would, however, do all I could at this point to re-establish
myself as one of the 'important people' so you can be in the room when the
cookie jar is open. In my case, it was impossible since in my obviously biased
view the founder was an ass and an idiot, but perhaps your situation is still
salvageable.

------
vessenes
You've got a bunch of options, depending on your interests and skills.

You could be a repository-of-lore brilliant coder / guru. Sounds like this is
roughly what the CEO has carved out for you right now.

You could be CTO/Head of Engineering. You may or may not want this job or be
suited to it, based on what you've said so far.

You could sink down into the organization as a (hopefully) really rich mid-
level engineer and enjoy the ride.

You could do it again as a founder rather than early employee somewhere else.

I think you should figure out what would be best for you, what you want, and
then see if the CEO agrees and will make it happen. At some level, if you're a
few years into vesting, and the company is successful, it may not
significantly change your financial outcome to stay -- you have early stage
stock in a successful startup. More could be nice, but it won't change your
outcome 10 or 100x, like moving to a founder role would.

Lots of good options; just don't do the west coast thing and stew on it while
you write increasingly bitter tweets and blog posts. :) Today is a great day
to get some clarity!

~~~
trhway
> At some level, if you're a few years into vesting, and the company is
> successful, it may not significantly change your financial outcome to stay
> -- you have early stage stock in a successful startup.

somewhat related question - doesn't the huge taxes on the options exercise
upon leaving make that huge difference between leaving and staying? How does
people manage it? Doesn't it forces you to stay until the exit?

~~~
vessenes
I'm sure you're right there are some tax consequences; I'm definitely not an
accountant, though.

In a friendly situation if the company is in good shape, there are probably
lots of options, including some sort of buyback to get enough cash for the
taxes, or finding an investor who'd like the shares. If the company isn't
doing as well as advertised, those possiblities are probably harder to get
sorted.

------
mtmail
I've heard that before. You were very productive coding, almost too busy and
if they promoted you then they would be one good coder short. It was easier to
hire somebody fresh with an outside look to think long-term. I expect you will
soon be heading a 'special projects' group as a perk to keep you motivated
(that group might build a second website or launch in another country or
create prototypes so that could be great). The only thing you could have done
would be to insist on becoming a/the CTO from the beginning and not let them
hire anybody on top. Were you cut for that from day 1? Often investors add
pressure to replace parts of the team with 'more experienced' experts, that
can also affect founders (being stripped of CEO and president titles).

------
lurchpop
I went through the same thing at a start-up I founded (with others). It ran
for 10 years and I never jockeyed for a management position. I just stayed a
developer. In the end the fact that I was a founder who played a giant role in
building the company meant nothing. I got sucked into one of many layoffs. No
severance. Just back vacation pay and a fake tone of regret from the new
engineering manager who made the call. The other founders had already left
years before me and went on to even bigger and better things. I stayed because
it was comfortable, but I regret not leaving years sooner.

I would guess most people there don't even know who you are, right? They might
even know, but they probably don't get it because what you did in the past
doesn't matter. Your company is becoming more corporatized and in that
environment all that matters is your title. Since now it's likely just
"developer" or "senior dev" or something, you're just another scrub with a
good backstory.

If I were you I'd update my CV to reflect the contributions you made then
start working your network to find the next thing.

------
dlandis
> _Where did I fail to claim my part when the company was growing?_

Seems like it is not too late; just talk to the CEO and VP of Engineering and
say you want a new role created called Chief Architect or Principal Engineer.
As employee #2, it seems perfectly fair that you should get some additional
recognition above and beyond simply "developer". If they like you and want to
keep you, then I think definitely they would not object.

~~~
bazookajoes
This is the right move. If they say no, or don't come back with a compelling
alternative this means that you don't have a strong enough relationship to be
recognized for your potential future contributions. It is important that you
are likely to only be recognized for your potential, not your past
contributions.

------
ww520
Early employees of a startup are in a rotten deal. They took slightly less
risk than the founders, similar pay cut, but with order of magnitude less
equity, and with more work in designing and building the product, running
operation, doing marketing, and selling to customers. When the company goes
under, their loss is the same as the founders. When the company does well and
scales up, their positions and roles will be diminished substantially, and
their equity would be diluted again and again with each round (later grant is
often not at the same scale as the initial option grant).

Early employees are basically jack-of-all-trade doing essentially the same job
as the founders (minus the fund raising) in building up the company but with
much less of the upside. If you could, be the founder. Don't be the early
employee.

~~~
twostorytower
I have to respectfully disagree with you. You may be spot on in some
scenarios, but you couldn't be further away in others.

As a co-founder, I didn't take a salary until a year into the startup (same
with my other two co-founders). Even when we received our accelerator funding,
all of it went towards our first hire's (an engineer) salary and operating
expenses. At this point, our risk was significantly higher, not slightly. If
the company didn't succeed, I can tell you our first hire was next in line for
a cushy market job, and he was being actively poached, not us.

After we graduated the accelerator we raised a ~$1M seed round. We hired more
two early team members at market salaries. Each of the co-founders were taking
$33K salaries. Why? We wanted the budget to hire great people. So no,
definitely not a similar pay cut. In fact, it's increasingly hard for early
stage startups to hire good talent at less than market rates because there are
plenty of amazing startups hiring above market. Our risk at this stage was
even higher, because failing would burn most of our bridges with our new
investors (maybe a couple wouldn't hold it against us), where as if our
engineers went on to start something, no investor would think twice about
their history working at a failed VC-funded startup.

We didn't increase our salaries again until we were generating revenue. Even
now, three years in, I'm taking $20K less than the starting salary for a
junior person in the role I have. While I want to increase that a little more
as our revenue grows, I don't think it's fair to take a market salary at our
stage.

And I won't even begin to dignify early employees do "more work in designing
and building the product, running operation, doing marketing, and selling to
customers" with an answer.

I'm not complaining, but to say being an early employee is a rotten deal is
unfair. If our startup goes under, I definitely have the more rotten deal. It
only looks like I had the better deal if we succeed.

And if you want to start a startup, you should, that's the only way you'll
know how truly hard it is.

~~~
UK-AL
How hard it is based on the situation you are in. You could have investor
contacts, alumni of a fancy university for credibility, developer friends
willing to work with you etc, etc

It ranges from fairly hard but doable to impossible.

------
legohead
Make demands if you still have power/clout left. My story was pretty much just
like yours -- I was engineer #2 (after the CTO), I pretty much built the
company along with the CTO. I have patents with me as the inventor on them
through the company.

Early on I was promised equity in the company, but never got anything in
writing (I knew nothing about startups when taking this job).

I was actually treated pretty well as an employee, given good raises, position
upgraded to Director level.. but that equity thing was always out of reach,
and they kept pushing it off with various excuses. I trusted the CTO, but the
CEO was a greedy type.

By the time I put my foot down, it was too late, and they had no problem
letting me go. If I had made demands about 6 months earlier they would have
been forced to do something or end up REALLY hurting. But I had knew that I
had waited too long, so I secured a job before I tried anything. I learned a
lot at the company, so I'm grateful for that, and I'm working at a much better
and more interesting place now :)

------
wpietri
> Where did I fail to claim my part when the company was growing?

One problem I had in my youth was that I really wanted to be recognized for
what I did without a lot of blowing my own horn. If I self-promoted, my
victories felt hollow: was I getting kudos for my work, or for my self
promotion? So I energetically avoided calling attention to my accomplishments.

Eventually I came to realize that this was a little crazy. I can't expect
managers and clients and investors to automatically appreciate all the stuff
that it has taken me years to learn to do well. I've discovered that there is
a reasonable level of taking credit that is neither sleazy nor slighting of my
colleagues. Being modest and self-effacing is good, but it can be taken too
far.

So let me answer your question with some more questions: Do the executives
know that you did these things well? Have you told them you wanted a position
other than as a line developer? Do they know that you're unhappy? Are you
regularly discussing your career plans with them?

If you, like I once did, find that stuff revolting, then I'd encourage you to
find someone to help you practice those conversations. You shouldn't let your
ego speak all the time, but it is ok to let it out of the cage once in a
while.

------
jonpress
You have to ask for equity at the beginning otherwise you have no leverage
down the line. They don't want dead equity on their books so they are more
likely to give you the position you want if you already hold vested equity.

If a company refuses to give you equity, you shouldn't join that company -
People don't change like that; if the employer has an exploitative attitude at
the start, it's not going to change.

Also, you have to be assertive when you talk to them or they won't respect you
and will just use you and put someone less qualified (but more assertive) in
your place.

It really sucks, but this is life. You have to lock-in the value of everything
you produce before you even start! You can't give other people options because
they will screw you.

Not all managers are like this, but most of them (by far) are! I think Silicon
Valley might be an exception - Mostly because CEOs there are younger and more
optimistic.

------
SandersAK
If they haven't elevated you into a senior management role after doing all
those things successfully then they're probably fucking up.

if you believe in the company, and the founders, go to them and fight for what
you've created and your position. If they don't listen and help come up with a
solution to retain you, it's probably time to move on.

------
spullara
I would focus on technical strategy. It is by far the most high-level,
important thing you can do on the engineering side and your point of view
should be critical. Is there a CTO? Nothing beats a system wide view to really
know where to focus.

I was in your position in 1996 when I worked at WebLogic — I was the first
server engineer after the founders. To give you an idea of what a crazy career
path that can lead to, see my LinkedIn:

[https://linkedin.com/in/spullara](https://linkedin.com/in/spullara)

I'm still an engineer and code everyday. Just have a lot of other jobs :)

------
ScottBurson
It's time for you to start your own startup. I'm dead serious. You have
demonstrated a lot of necessary skills. All you need is a cofounder and an
idea. Take your time and be selective. As an experienced technical person you
will be much in demand as a cofounder; you have the upper hand and can pick
whom you want to work with. Or even do it solo if no one shows up that you
feel good about.

Your career path is your responsibility. Don't expect anyone else to care
about it, though occasionally someone might.

~~~
nhayden
Maybe not even the cofounder.

------
seeingfurther
Congratulations! You literally built a company and now have what it takes to
found your own.

I would vest in peace, learn from senior management (seems like your company
hired good senior folks) cultivate relationships both in and out of the
company (VC + advisors)... then start tinkering in your free time. Once your
options vest you should be ready with an MVP and solid contacts to hit the
ground running.

------
wwweston
> Where did I fail to claim my part when the company was growing?

One thing that might have been better if you cared about not being hired over:
ask for the title of CTO or VP of Engineering when you were hired. If they
give it to you, you know you're on the same page. And if they won't give it
out to you when they're least proven, you can bet that it's unlikely they'll
consider giving it to you later when they have more options (and can bring in
a new shiny person whose only limitations are those they can discover before
hiring).

That's in the past, though. The good news is that you've got a good story here
that counters any claim that what you do best is "just writing code." Sit down
with the management that's trying to define you that way. Remind them
_everything_ you've delivered, just like you told us. After that recap, tell
them something like "I've enjoyed contributing to the company's success in all
these ways that go beyond writing code, I see continuing to contribute and
grow in this way as an important part of my career development." _Don 't_ make
this about competition with the new VP and ops guy -- let management know you
intend to do everything you can to help the new hires make _their_ big
contributions too. Just let them know you need a continued technical
vision/management role, a title that reflects it (though it's probably not
going to be VP), and a path for the future. If possible, come up with some new
ideas/initiatives of your own before this conversation, and maybe even a title
to suggest. Sell them on a vision of how letting you contribute in this way is
going to make everybody more successful, just as it's gotten them to the point
where they're at.

And if they don't respond to that... if everything you've written here is
true, I suspect there's no shortage of other startups/businesses that might be
pretty interested in having you help them succeed.

------
dougmccune
I have a similar story in some ways. Employee #1 at a startup, wrote much of
the initial codebase, been with the company now for a bit over 7 years. We’re
20 people now, and have dedicated people for support, UX, QA, product
management, etc etc all of which I used to have a hand in in the early days. I
manage a small team of developers (not all the dev, just the clientside team),
I still code a good bit (obviously less than before) and I’m involved in a lot
of product discussions to figure out what we’re going to build. We’ve
struggled a lot with figuring out the right title for me, and as long as the
actual work is the right mix for what I like then I don’t really care all that
much. But I’ve been recently brainstorming appropriate titles that better
reflect what I do, beyond just being a developer (which has been my title
since day 1), and I’ve come to settle on “Technical Director of Product”,
which I don’t think is a real job title in any normal world. I make sure that
I’m heavily involved in product decisions, because the thing I’ve found the
most satisfaction in is defining and building product, and shaping the
direction of the company through influencing the product development path. And
I’m grounded in the technical side of that, which is an important distinction
to me, since too often “product people” have no technical background and just
lob things over the fence to engineering without understanding the tech side
of the house.

So for me the important thing was trying to understand what parts of the job I
really want to prioritize (in my case active coding and product definition)
and regardless of title making sure I inject myself appropriately. So that
means if there’s a conversation about a new product we’re thinking about
building I make sure I’m in those conversations from the beginning.

If you’ve been with the company from essentially day 1 you likely have a
decent amount of political sway, even if you don’t know it. I’d start by
figuring out which parts of the things that you listed you actually want to
stay involved in. As another commenter mentioned, if you really want to wear
all those hats then maybe finding another brand new startup is the only real
choice. But if there’s one or two areas that are dearer to your heart then I’d
try to figure out how to make that your day to day activity. And I’d hope
given your history with the team that you can have a dialogue with the
founder(s) about how to make that happen. At the end of the day the title
doesn’t really mean shit, but if you’re not loving the work then you owe it to
yourself (and they owe it to you) to figure out how to make that right.

------
lmg643
The main question I have, which I don't see addressed in your description: do
you have a meaningful equity stake commensurate with the contributions you
perceive you made?

You might need to adopt the "owner's" mentality - which is that as long as
these people are growing the value of the company, you are free to focus on
what you enjoy the most, while they work to make your equity more valuable.

That said - if your contributions in all these areas are truly valuable, at a
small company, there's always a case to be made for someone to be spanning
functional areas, if they have the expertise and chops to add value. Probably
worth a conversation internally. As others have said, assert yourself a bit.

------
gitdude
Let me tell you the blatant truth which no founder will tell you: You are just
a worker bee for them. They will do whatever it takes for the startup to be
successful. So even if you gave your blood and sweat, and single-handedly
built the product in the last 2 years, if they think (I should underline they
think) that a vp of engineering will do a better job than you - then they will
go out, hire that person and probably give them more equity than you.

You should think about what's best for you next. If you think you are not
going anywhere, you should cash out and leave.

------
flagZ
Interesting thread, and I feel it applies to me too... I just recently left my
role as a VP Engineering in a 20 people startup. I think there is some
disparity here as I am UK based and titles here are a bit different...

When I started, there were already a few people working on it, but because of
an office move, nobody stayed. In a way, I am engineer #1, just with some code
to maintain already. I had experience as a lead engineer already, but my job
here was much tougher, I had to change my role every 6 months, from only
coding to only devops, hiring, managing, doing all tech strategy choices,
doing resource allocation, doing management meetings, etc...

I was eager to improve as a manager, but I still loved coding. It was very
hard to hear that the company was hiring a CTO and leave me no authority. Now
that person is full-time.

I tried to be very clear about it, I am aware of my strengths and weaknesses.
I also fully understand that a founder needs to think about what's best for
the business and not just people's carreers. I also made it clear I was there
to learn, but the reality is that I never felt I was given a chance.

I stayed there a few months to get some learning from the new CTO, vest some
more options and then I left. I left because the situation was toxic for me,
with a mixture of resentment and miscommunication from their side. I
personally think there's not much you can do in those cases... just start
again.

Now onto the next adventure...

------
andrewtbham
When they were hiring all these people... how did you react? did you express
interest in these roles?

------
abannin
There are tough questions to ask yourself, and I applaud your introspection.
One of the challenges of a rapidly growing company is keeping up with it.
Hiring is about finding the right person for the right time. When a company
changes drastically through growth, expectations and functions change. The
person who did x may be unqualified to do y. In short, the company grows
faster than the individual. Another dynamic is that as the organization grows,
the need for generalists gives way to specialized employees.

I think this is a very powerful statement you made: "all the tasks I did were
less challenging than some critical parts of the code base I wrote from
scratch". This tells me that the problems that interest you the most are
coding and architecture problems, and that you are happiest when solving those
problems. Employees will have the greatest positive impact when they are
focused on tasks that they enjoy. But it seems that you desire something more.
What is dissatisfying about the current situation? Are you bored with the
coding? Are you jealous of others getting recognition? Are you frustrated with
the direction of the organization? Are you frustrated that you are no longer
"that guy" whom everyone depends on? All of these circle around the same
question: where do you want to be?

Leadership comes in many shapes and sizes. It's not just about how many direct
reports you have. Fundamentally, great leaders shape the direction of an
organization. Employees look to that person for advice, encouragement, and
approval. It sounds like the company decided to hire others for formal
leadership roles. A very difficult and powerful question is to ask yourself
"what is the VP doing that I wasn't able to do?" There is a tactical reason
that the CEO hired the VP, and it isn't because of credentials. Perhaps it's
his/her ability to communicate across teams, or gain the confidence of
management? Don't let your ego tell you "nothing, I'm better than them"; there
is a reason they are VP. Different jobs require different skill sets, and
understanding where you are strong and weak is critical your success. Being an
engineer who kicks out mission critical code is fundamental to the success of
the business, but it is extremely different than developing and managing a
team. With a humble attitude that is always looking to improve, there is no
stopping your career growth.

------
drawkbox
Take all those awesome skills you have learned and do those for yourself on
the side.

You have learned why every good developer has side projects, gotta keep the
dream alive. Two of my engineering heroes did just that, Scott Adams and Mike
Judge. They can also be technical related in games, apps, etc on your own. It
is much better that way in the end if you like products to launch with any
amount of control.

> Scott Adams has always had several side projects because they gave him
> energy to endure his boring job. One of these projects became the sketches
> for Dilbert.

[http://blog.habrador.com/2014/01/how-scott-adams-growth-
hack...](http://blog.habrador.com/2014/01/how-scott-adams-growth-hacked-
dilbert.html)

Harness the energy of that boring job into something great, it is the American
Dream of Engineers across the land subjugated to the power structures of now.

When you have your own things on the side you are also a little less ego
driven at work as you have controllable areas on your own products and it
lends to smoother teams somehow. Encourage others at work to have side
projects, watch how it makes them relax and work better at work.

Most of all, always do quality work, even if it isn't fun make it fun or
gamify it. If you are in a situation that prevents you from doing quality
work, then you should move on.

------
Joeri
What is your title? I'm guessing it's developer or engineer. If you view
yourself as such, others also view you as such, and you won't be considered
for management roles, because you're not a manager. I've chosen this for
myself deliberately, and i accept that the cost is that i have to define my
role more narrowly. I don't think how long you are at a company matters that
much, or even should matter much. As the old saying goes: what have you done
for me lately?

I've seen this transition happen myself, where the company grew, got cut up
into a bunch of departments, all of which got a manager, mostly external
hires. I feel like this way of organizing companies (departments,
hierarchical, middle management, etc) is an anti-pattern. Everybody does it
because everybody does it, but every dividing line you add reduces efficiency,
and I've seen firsthand how damaging middle management is to the agility at
the individual level. I don't know what the antidote to this anti-pattern is,
but i feel like company structure is a territory ripe for innovation.

------
slantedview
Is there a certain role you feel you were overlooked for - VP of engineering?
Manager? Or did you want to continue being an engineer? If it was the former,
the time to voice your desire has probably passed. If it's the latter - and
you really do just like writing code but want some sort of recognition - well,
take the money I assume you'll earn and think of that as recognition.

------
twunde
1) if you haven't already take a vacation. 2) What do you want to do? What do
you want to focus on? You used to have a lot of different tasks that you
probably did a good job at given your constraints but probably didn't excel
at. You're now being given the chance to specialize and focus on only a few
things. As others have said, your co-workers probably haven't thought too much
about growing your career. Once you decide what you want to do have a talk
with your vp of engineering and possibly your early co-workers. Your vp should
be willing to give you the opportunity to grow especially since you already
have a lot of technical knowledge and general company knowledge. Also they
presumably hired the vp because he has experience with bigger companies our
more mature companies. Take the time to soak up some knowledge. While not a
first choice, don't be afraid to leave for better opportunities. You've proven
that you can build up a product and accept general responsibilities.

------
dustingetz
Are you really young?

I would expect the first engineering employees to know the most about the
stack and thus naturally become the engineering leadership as the team grows,
which it sounds like you were. If they felt the need to hire above you, it
sounds like you were lacking some cross-section of experience that the
founders/board want. You should ask them.

------
staunch
You helped found a company and fell in love with the work of a founder. You
can't re-found the same company, so found again!

------
ziles88
I'm going to be honest here and say you're like the best person for the job
you have. The guy who got VP? He's a more qualified manager than you. The guy
who does support? He's got 8 years experience and a masters degree. You?
You're the best developer they have. This practice is even more common in
enterprise. I worked in tech for the largest company on the planet (take a
guess) and it was routine to find the best developer was as most a team lead,
never management. HR strategically will shoehorn these people but cutting off
their avenues for growth. In my experience however, if it's money you're after
these companies will happily shell out. It's not money their trying to save,
it's expertise. It will also pretty common in enterprise for guys to NOT want
to be moved up. Not everyone wants to put their neck on the line, and once you
move up it's impossible to move down.

------
cdnsteve
Here are my thoughts with limited knowledge of your situation.

As employee #2, you are a technical co-founder, period. The problems you have
outlined will not be solved be staying at the current company. It's apparent
that the owner has chosen to keep you as 'just a dev', even though your
contributions are outmatched and significant. It seems opportunity to seize
more than what you could have has unfortunately passed you by.

From what you're describing in your post, it seems you're showing regret.
Other people have been hired for these positions, even though you built it.

The thing is about being an early employee is that it's a blessing and a
curse. Most people don't realize this but the thing is the feeling you get for
being the guy that put this company where it's at today is unmatched.

The problem is that once it's built, you go into maintenance mode and it turns
into a corporate machine. Everything you enjoyed and discovered during the
process is now going through "procedures" and "process". The freedoms gone,
other people are here now and they start getting the ears of the owner instead
of you.

You feel like you own this company, you should, you built it and partied with
the owner for years (guessing here). The biggest regret at this point is that
you probably don't own enough (equity) or you were never made co-owner.

You have a choice, stay and give your last effort to be in the position you
earned. Or leave, full well knowing that you will likely not be #2 at a
successful startup again. We all know that startups getting successful is
about the same as winning in the lotto. However, you could be the guy you are
describing in your post, the VP of Engineering that gets hired for a startup
that is starting to grow...

In either case I wish you the best of luck and as another dev can appreciate
the weight of your decision.

------
pjbrunet
I would move on to starting the next business, but maybe you need the steady
paycheck? You started company A, company B will be even better.

On a related tangent, I would love to know how someone in his shoes could get
crowdfunded to start a new business. What do you advise? (Maybe I should start
a new thread and ask.)

------
bernardom
First, congratulations.

Second, let me focus on the management point. You wrote: "I managed an entire
team of 10 people without ever missing a deadline of the whole team, and now
they brought in an engineering manager"

a) Do you think the (now-bigger) team needs a full-time manager? b) If yes,
did you want to become that full-time manager? c) If yes, did you make your
desire known?

If the answer Yes, Yes, No, that's ok- lots of people want to continue being
individual contributors. It's still on you to work with management to define
the right structure that works for you and the company. Maybe you become some
sort of Chief Architect. Maybe you help hire the manager.

Either way, if you were as pivotal as you say you were, you should certainly
have the CEO's ear to bring this up in a constructive way.

------
webdisrupt
Quite frankly you should see this as an opportunity to start your own thing.
More importantly I would question why weren't you promoted especially being
the one of the first employees? Assuming you have done nothing to piss the
founder off, you should be truly appreciated for what you have achieved whilst
motivated through career progression etc.

Also bare in mind that this is a normal process for SOME companies as the more
they grow the more people are hired so as to try and achieve more (this is
debatable) work thus higher revenues.

Personally, I would see what you really want from life and if you are seeking
credit/appreciation for your own work then

start a new business or co-found a product or join a startup that is prepared
to give out equity

------
sunir
It's important to understand it's business, not personal. I strongly dislike
the comments in this thread that say "Leave". That's an emotional reaction but
it doesn't help you advance. In fact, you'll slide back down the ladder. You
should just explore what is the best option in front of you and do that.

Really, if you want more responsibility, you have to sell someone else that
you're the best person to have that responsibility. No one should give it to
you out of loyalty because that is a disservice to all the other people in
your organization that are relying on you to fulfill that responsibility.

It doesn't sound to me like you know what you want to do--mostly because you
have not explored your options. I will hope you have a good relationship with
the founders. In that case you should have an open and honest conversation
with them reflecting about your experience so far, that you're proud of the
range of experiences you've had, and hence why you think you're ready to do
something more--but you're not sure what.

If they are friends, they'll help you. You can ask them to give you feedback
on what they felt you did well and what they felt others could do better, so
they hired externally. This will give you something tangible you can work on.

If they are really loyal back to you, they'll create an opportunity for you to
develop skills that will lead to advancement.

Of course, this conversation is very shocking and anxiety inducing for the
founders so how you frame it is important. If you are not accusing them of
passing you over, but really genuine about learning and developing yourself,
most people will want to help you.

If not, you may find a better opportunity elsewhere. Again, it's just
business. Keep in mind, sometimes you have to sell yourself into a role that
you're not quite sure you can do--and then do it.

p.s. If you asked me, it sounds like you're interested in a engineering
management role, which is not the same as a CTO role. If you have a
conversation with the founders, you could focus on that.

~~~
hnnewguy
> _In fact, you 'll slide back down the ladder_

Money, titles, who cares? Life satisfaction is much more important than
climbing ladders.

------
iamjoday
If you are doing less things than you used too is typically a sign of growing
company... hopefully you will have your efforts payup in a big way... best of
luck!

I have always felt that working in startup is like giving a kid 10 toys to
play with and taking one toy away every year. It's very normal not liking and
feeling of giving up something you own but it is as important for a company to
get away from generalized to specialized resources with the growth.

a senior management leader once told, his goal every year is to find, train
and pass on the baton of some of his existing responsibilities to next person
until he has nothing else left...

Nash, [http://joday.com](http://joday.com)

------
gwbas1c
I'm in a similar situation, but with a much better outcome. In my case,
however, as the company grew I made it very clear what I wanted my role to be.

It's best not to assume that the people you work with know what the best role
is for you. I started around the same time as another engineer, but our roles
diverged. This was, in part, due to both of us being open about where we
expect our career to go as the company grew.

So, if you want to be something different, have the discussion with the people
who hired you. They clearly have seen your talents and shortcomings. If it
doesn't go where you want it to go, then it's probably time to find a new job.

------
myth_buster
All I see here is positives. Congratulations on building a startup.

Never been in your situation so my suggestions may not be appropriate. From
the order you specified the tasks I think for you Technical Strategy aspect
ranks highly. I think it gave you great challenges and satisfaction. If that's
true then I suppose a role would be that of a CTO given that one of the
founder is not playing that role.

Here is Fred Wilson's take on CTO vs VP of Engineering.
[http://avc.com/2011/10/vp-engineering-vs-cto/](http://avc.com/2011/10/vp-
engineering-vs-cto/)

------
davidw
This seems relevant: [http://jacquesmattheij.com/first-employee-or-
cofounder](http://jacquesmattheij.com/first-employee-or-cofounder) although in
this specific case it's not much help.

I think ChuckMcM's advice of chatting with the founders a bit sounds good. You
could try and spin it in a positive way... "I was doing all this stuff, and
even if it was really crazy at times, I felt like I was growing a lot and
contributing a lot, and I feel like I'd like to continue that somehow. What do
you think?"

------
tedchs
I have been approximately you a couple times. If it were me in your shoes
again, I would leverage the huge amount of knowledge/skills I've acquired and
jump into a new opportunity. There are basically 3 directions: 1) start your
own company that you will build yourself, 2) find another startup in a similar
spot to where you were 2 years ago, or 3) join a big company. I will say a
likely outcome of joining a big company is you will be expected to focus,
having relatively shallow but deep expertise (i.e. specialization of labor).

------
qodeninja
Maybe it's time to move on.

A company I was at started growing so fast (factor of 10) that it lost it's
identity and with it a lot of the things that made it enjoyable/interesting.
We opened new offices downtown and in other cities and from then on it was
time to pass on the torch.

Clearly, it wasnt about keeping the old guard, but about growth. I did learn a
lot and am respected for what I was able to accomplish.

It was a great experience, but sometimes it's good to realize when you're just
the launching pad.

Bowing out gracefully was the key for me.

------
scurvy
I'll be brutally honest. Most of the early employees at most startups aren't
very good engineers. In fact they're pretty mediocre. That's why we get the
term of technical debt. Take your options and experience and move on to the
next gig. Move aside so the better, more experienced people can clean up your
mistakes without you fighting them every step of the way.

Maybe it's a psychological thing, but really good engineers are never employee
#1-5 at a startup. They just aren't.

------
lunarmobiscuit
Two paths I followed when I faced similar growth issues:

1- Time to create company product #2. Ask for a tiger tea, break out of the
hierarchy, and have fun building something from scratch.

2- Move on. Find a great idea or another co-founder, and repeat the startup
experience in another startup.

I've done both of these paths. Both can work. Both play on the strength of a
generalist who can get a company off the ground, but then who doesn't fit into
the subsequent culture of a growth-stage company.

------
cyberpanther
If I was in your position and not in a lead role I'd be upset too. Either they
think your too valuable to lose as a developer or they don't think you can't
handle those jobs. Either way you need to express your desire to grow. If
nothing happens then it is time to find your next gig. It sounds like your a
kick ass developer so I'm sure that won't be hard. Just make sure your next
gig knows you want to do more than just development.

------
mrchess
Eerily close to an experience I've had in my career. Nobody is looking out for
your career except yoursel and as the company grew, they left you behind,
that's that. I'd attribute this to poor management, as you typically want to
keep the core members, but sometimes this does indeed happen.

I suggest you leave and take this experience with you and be more aware during
your next professional engagement. At this point, being in the company is
holding you back.

------
csabia
You can find analysis and hints on this and other similar situations in the
last book from Ben Horowitz "The Hard Thing About Hard Things"
[http://www.amazon.com/Hard-Thing-About-Things-Building-
ebook...](http://www.amazon.com/Hard-Thing-About-Things-Building-
ebook/dp/B00DQ845EA/). I'm reading it now. There are a lot of interesting
insights about how startup Companies scaling works.

------
wbillingsley
Perhaps if you can't advance inside the company it's time to advance outside
the company.

They may well consider you as "an engineer with little prior experience, and
we only gave him that role because we couldn't afford someone experienced
yet". To the next firm, you are an engineer with experience building a
company's central product from the ground up and leading a team of 40+ people
in a high risk start-up environment.

~~~
wbillingsley
(pardon, I misread your post and got the number of people you led wrong, but
the principle of the post is the same)

------
onezerozeroone
You can play the lottery ticket game and move on, taking your 2 years of
vesting with you.

Only do this if you think you've set the company up for long-term success and
it will still be successful even without you there.

Also only do this if you think you can make out better in the long-term (more
money, more equity, equally sure thing elsewhere), otherwise just buckle down
and ride out the remaining 2 years.

Unless you think your current company is trash, then just bounce.

------
codezero
Who do you report to? Did they discuss these hires with you? If you have a
good relationship with the founder, you should frankly express what you'd like
your trajectory to be and come up with a plan to make it happen. If this isn't
something you can discuss with your founder or whoever you report to, then you
should look for a better place to work that is willing to listen to you and to
help you grow.

------
csmajorfive
Were you considered for these roles or entirely left out of the process? How
much have you actually talked to your management about this?

------
jchrisa
Speaking as a founder who has tried hard to replace myself (so that I can
focus on what I do best, which by definition doesn't fit into an org chart),
maybe you'd benefit from switching gears completely, and using this
opportunity to learn and experience the business side of things. Probably it
would be hard to find a better chance to get a front row seat.

------
legendben
People have taken you for granted and don't care about you, period. 1. Be
vocal about what you want, be it a raise or promotion! This is America. If you
don't ask, you don't get anything. 2. You have other options! Go make your own
awesome startup. If you have so many skills like you said, why not? 3. Just
out of curiosity, are you white?

------
alex_mil
I was in the same boat, not sure if I can give advice but I just took another
corporate job while my company grows and I advise them and help where projects
actually sound fun, otherwise I just don't care

In the meantime I work on building my own sellable tech.

Hope that helps, I'm working on a sweet e-commerce platform right now and
building just little sellable tools

------
alex_millennial
I was in the same boat, not sure if I can give advice but I just took another
corporate job while my company grows and I advise them and help where projects
actually sound fun, otherwise I just don't care

In the meantime I work on building my own sellable tech.

Hope that helps, I'm working on a sweet e-commerce platform right now and
building just little sellable tools

------
tn13
I am unable to see what exactly "you" want from the company. Did you speak to
the founders about your career aspirations and they turned you down ?

Did you want to be a manager ? VP of Engineering ?

The way I see it, being developer seemed a natural thing for you. I also
assume you must have got significant stock options and you must be drawing lot
more salary as well.

------
criticas
If you don't know what you want, you have two options.

You can learn to be happy with what you have, or you can determine what you
lack, and work towards getting it.

Almost no one chooses the first option. When we don't actively work on the
second, we often embrace our dissatisfaction without mindfully working to
change it.

------
harmonicon
I guess my question is, since you are employee #2, why are you not any of the
guys you have named that "takes care of things". Like, it would be pretty
normal for you to be that VP of engineering or Engineering manager. Have you
sought for a more senior role?

------
tzm
Lots of good advice here. Sounds like you're in a good position and appear to
bring quantified value to companies, particularly to startups. Just reflect on
what you really want out of this short life and go with it. That includes the
willingness to walk away.

------
dkhenry
I know how you feel, there are many great engineers out there in the same
situation. I think you might be turning the corner to be a founder. You know
what needs to be done to scale a company to success the question is can you do
it for yourself or just for others ?

------
aug-riedinger
Go get yourself another job: your a bootstrapper, not a long time runner. Do
the same somewhere else. Plus you learned a lot since then, so you should be
able to get more responsibilities/remain fullstack longer!

------
Animats
Could be worse. I know someone who was an early employee of a startup. She had
the desk nearest the front door, so she ended up being the receptionist. Five
years later, she's still the receptionist.

------
pfitzsimmons
I went through this exact situation. I joined a company when it was just the
founders and me, and then we grew to dozens and then hundreds of people. As we
grew, I felt these same slights: I was left out of strategy meetings, I was
not mentioned on the website, managers were hired over me, etc. Overall, it
felt disconcerting as more and more happened outside of my control, and
without my knowledge. At first I was frustrated, then I realized I had the
best of all possible situations.

Some notes:

1) If you do not have much experience scaling a team, then it is sensible for
the founders to bring in someone with more experience. Scaling team requires
more than just hitting deadlines. It is about recruiting, retention,
recruiting, managing personalities, career growth, recruiting, managing up,
communicating across teams, etc.

2) Everyone's role changes as you grow, for better and worse. For instance,
early on the VP gets to have fun setting direction and designing the overall
product and strategy. Later on the VP might be spending 90% of their time
dealing with conflicts, recruiting, firing, managing up, etc. They may long
for the day when they got to play a big role in product development. Early on
as engineer, I had the benefit of being able to build an entire product by
myself. Later on, the advantage was that I could take vacations and did not
have to deal with bugs and outages 24/7.

3) You will have to specialize to some extent. You cannot be the jack-of-all
trades role forever, no one can. If you want to eventually have a VP/CTO role,
then you will need work with your VP to develop your management abilities. For
instance: ask for mentoring, start reading books and articles on management,
ask to have a junior engineer put in you, help out with interviews and
recruiting. (Note to actually get a VP role, you will probably have to switch
to a smaller startup in a few years, using your cred from this gig to get you
the job.) If you want to do greenfield development, work with your VP or
founder to carve out a role building out innovative/experimental/skunkworks
features. If you want to do scaling and architecture do that. There are lots
of ways to interesting work and build valuable skills, but you are going to
have to choose a course. (In my situation, I alternated between doing
experimental/greenfield features and doing scaling/rewrite work on existing
tools.)

4) With regards to customer facing roles, I highly advise that your company
have a policy that every engineer spend a half-day in support at least once a
month. It is essential that developers stay connected to the customer, both so
that you can intuitively understand how to solve their problems, and to
increase your empathy and motivation.

5) Try to figure out a way to get looped-in informally to the strategic
aspects of the business. Make some sort of effort to have lunch or beers with
a founder once a quarter. If you have 1:1's or have a wiki where decisions are
discussed, then that can be a good thing. The execs understandably want to
keep management and strategy meetings to a small number of people, otherwise
the meetings suck. But finding a way for you to informally connect and give
your two cents can be valuable both for you and the execs.

6) If you want to raise your profile and get your name known, use whatever
leverage you have to get some favors. Ask to have yourself put on the web site
as "Founding Engineer." Figure out a way to have the founders to introduce you
to useful people, and to help you get into some of the more prestigious invite
only events, whatever they are in your area. You have to use judgement and be
diplomatic, because you might also lose out on advancement if you are seen as
angling for a quick exit.

7) Generally, I would recommend sticking with the company as long as it is on
an upward trajectory (unless you have a compelling alternative). You will
learn a lot as you go, and your reputation will increase with growth.

Eventually I realized that I had the best of all worlds. Why does one want to
be a VP? Usually money and status. What sucks most about being a line-level
employee? Lack of agency/control. But in many ways it is less fun to be a VP,
than to be a high-status engineer, who has enough sway to avoid
micromanagement, enough credibility to control his or her own destiny, who can
spend their time working the craft that they love. As engineer #2, you get
status by virtue of your early employee number, and hopefully and you will get
good money from equity stake (if not, then that is truly unfortunate). So
hopefully you get the money/status benefits of being an executive, while still
getting to work your craft, and still getting to stay in a peer relationship
with your fellow engineers.

------
DrJ
You will need to fit into one of those positions (if it makes you happy) or
leave. You have a valuable set of skills and it's a great time to work on your
own ideas.

I am currently in a similar boat as you.

------
andrea_s
Do you think the company's management already knows that you'd prefer to keep
a more management-oriented role? They may be mistaken in assessing your
desires...

------
morenoh149
I would just leave and solve an interesting problem at another company. You
have a large chunk of equity. Unless you want recognition - that's a different
topic.

------
psp
Maybe you're experiencing small signs of burning out. Have you thought about
taking some time off to think what makes you tick (or even changing a job)?

------
flux03
I'm looking for a technical partner for this concept.

[http://crumz.biglaunch.net/](http://crumz.biglaunch.net/)

------
spiritplumber
1) Locate VP of engineering and/or engineering manager.

2) If you want their job: assert dominance.

3) Otherwise: flip finger, leave, start your own startup.

------
pbreit
If it's a promising company, ride it out 2 more years for vesting. Were you
interested in any of the roles you mentioned?

------
kylemathews
Leave. That's what I did when I got to the same point as you. Much happier now
as technical co-founder of a startup.

------
legendben
People have taken you for granted. 1. Be vocal about what you want, be it a
raise or promotion! This is America. If you don't ask, you don't get anything.
Are you an American? 2. You have other options! Go make your own awesome
startup. If you have so many skills like you said, why not? 3. Are you aware
of your own weaknesses? Maybe there is major weakness about you that stopped
you from getting promoted but you are not aware of it!

------
adamkittelson
Personally if I could eliminate all the aspects of my job that aren't _just_
writing code I would be ecstatic.

------
SeoxyS
Shoot me an email (it's in my profile), I can share my experience with this in
private.

------
0xdeadbeefbabe
Why must companies grow anyway?

~~~
gravedave
Because if they don't they'll be out-competed by those that do?

------
pitt1980
sounds like you're in a great position to craft the position you want, and
then shop around your experience to other startups

if you get a bite, go back to your startup, say you have another opportunity,
see how much they want you

------
timtas
> Where did I fail to claim my part when the company was growing?

You don't give us a clue to answer this. Your whole story is about things that
happened. You haven't told us about what you wanted. You haven't told us
anything that you did to get what you want. Did you know what you wanted? Did
you do anything to try to get it for yourself?

> I should just "be happy."

I call bullshit. If you were happy to passively accept what's being handed you
(money, responsibility, acclaim), you wouldn't have made this post. Honest
mindful gratitude makes a person happier, but cloaking bitterness with false
gratitude, which this sounds like to me, will make a person ever more bitter.

You have to start with what you want.

If you want to keep doing everything like you did before, then you should make
a career as early stage CTO. If you want reward and acclaim for that, then you
have to negotiate it up front, usually as a nice slice of equity. Be advised,
there's risk in that.

If you want to grow with a company, then you won't be able to do everything
you were doing before. You will have to focus. And you have to assert your
case that you want the role and can be successful in it. To grow with the
company in one of these roles, you'll need to cede the other roles to new
teammates. You will probably have to mostly stop coding. You will have to
embrace the thousand headaches that come with the new role as the company
grows.

These are two possible career strategies. There are others. All start with
knowing yourself. All depend on asserting yourself.

------
MagaManGo
Are you an owner or an employee? Employees get treated like employees.

------
BrainInAJar
I hope you negotiated for a whole whack of equity.

------
dcobbe
I'd be interested in speaking with you. Bring your experience to my early
stage, funded startup and let's talk about how you want to advance your
career:

www.jobville.co

BTW, where are you located?

------
kyleblarson
Did you file an 83b for your equity?

------
dcobbe
I'd be interested in speaking with you. You have the experience I need for my
early stage, funded startup:

www.jobville.co

BTW, where are you located?

------
krambs
Skunkworks!

------
criveros
Jack of all trades, master of none. Go to another start up or specialize.

------
bluedino
Get involved.

Evangelize.

Side project.

------
frozenport
Leave.

Be pragmatic: there will be other opportunities which are equally interesting
and staying isn't helping. You could be CTO at a different startup. Further,
you should be approximately at your zenith at the company and they should be
able to provide a strong reference, if you stay dissatisfied your performance
and appearance will suffer - along with your potential for future employment.

Also happiness is about the journey (career, parenting, etc). If you're not on
a journey you won't be happy!

~~~
untog
Very easy to say, but if you have significant equity (which, as employee #2,
you really should) it's a lot more difficult to just step away.

"The journey" is all very well, but if that journey involves checking out for
a year while you wait for a payout then so be it.

~~~
chime
> if you have significant equity (which, as employee #2, you really should)

That's the big unknown here.

If he does have significant equity (even 2.5% or more is good), then what's
the problem. He gets to share the long-term benefits without any of the
stressful responsibilities and can be solely devoted to doing what he's best
at. If a brief mention on About Us page is all he cares about, bring it up at
your next review and say that it's not about ego specifically but more about
career advancement and personal growth.

If he doesn't have decent equity then he should've quit long ago and hanging
around any longer isn't going to be any more satisfying. Unless he is super
critical to their development (i.e. only he knows how module X works), then he
could negotiate a better job title at the threat of leaving but that could be
a risky and burn-bridges move.

~~~
kasey_junk
I'd be surprised if he has any "equity". He may have options, but that is a
significantly different thing. Most onerously of course is that if he leaves
he will likely have to shell out actual cash on a lottery ticket. Who knows if
he can afford to do this, or if it makes sense to do this.

That is a long way of saying, under almost any reasonable scenario, whether he
has significant options (vested or no) should not be the determining factor on
if he should stay.

He should stay if it he enjoys the job, they are compensating him enough in
real compensation to overcome his lack of enjoyment, or he doesn't have other
job opportunities.

I will say, as a long term employee (though to be fair, it's not that long
term) he should have the ability to more forcefully outline what he wants to
continue with the company. If he doesn't, either he's fooling himself about
his real value, or he is doing a poor job communicating it to the company. In
either case, it's his issue.

------
beachstartup
as a founder, the most striking thing about your post is that you haven't
defined or communicated what you role you actually want.

you need to figure that out, ask for it, and if you don't get it, leave.

------
oldmanjay
I don't understand this "first world" business. Is it a generational thing to
be ashamed of not living in a shithole?

------
michaelochurch
This is a common problem. The startup has "grown above" you and it's time to
consider moving on, because unless you start playing politics you're going to
get demoted with each new hire. Negotiate a better title and salary (you'll
probably get something) so you can get a better next job, and see about
getting investor contact (preferably of a social nature rather than
"presenting to" investors, because you want social equality in order to get
investor-level mentorship that persists even if they can't fund your next bit)
but you'll probably be out the door in another 6 months.

Don't take it personally. Even if it is personal, it's not worth getting
bitter about it. The pro-young ageism only works for Stanford kids; if you're
an _average_ 24-year-old, this game still treats you like shit in most cases.
The "social climbing" dynamic in startups isn't uncommon. It sounds like they
don't have a culture of internal promotion. This will burn them, later on,
because people will catch on to the social-climbing/no-internal-promotion
culture and everyone will start doing bare-minimum work... but you probably
won't be there when it does.

Ask for a VP-level title, even if it doesn't involve you managing anyone. If
you don't have the experience to be the VP of Engineering, then you can't
expect them to give you that title, but you should get something at the same
level, so that you have political equality with these new guys. Even if it's a
meaningless VP title ("VP of Technical Culture") it at least shows that
they're committed to giving you the credibility that you need to continue
contributing meaningfully to the company. No one's going to take you seriously
if you're Employee #2 and don't have a title, and you can make this argument
in the negotiation. And saying "no one's going to take me seriously if I don't
get <X>, and I won't be able to do my job" is a great way of saying "I'll
leave if I don't get <X>" without _actually_ saying it; it has the added
benefit of speaking from a perspective of their needs (your ability to do your
job) rather than yours.

If you want to be a founder or CTO in your next gig, demand investor contact.
If they won't give it, the words you want are, "If you're not willing to give
me this, the right thing to do is to accelerate my equity vesting, so we can
separate cleanly." You're not actually threatening to quit, but you're
strongly implying it in a way that (a) makes it clear that your needs aren't
going to go away, because you've started to think seriously about the future,
but (b) doesn't commit just yet to one course of action. (They could re-up
your equity, or give you the investor contact, in which case you'd stay.)

If your founders are good and this just happened "accidentally" or because you
had your head down and didn't fight for yourself, you can improve your
position significantly. You may not get everything you want (you might have to
settle for a Director title and investor contact only to the more junior
partners) but you'll make progress and be ahead of most people your age. On
the other hand, if they're deliberately fucking you up the ass, then expect
them to denigrate your work. Again, don't take that personally either; they're
taking a political decision (to grow above and demote you, because they're
social climbers) and back-rationalizing it. So don't let that, should that
happen, embitter you either; just move on.

Good luck!

