We're not organized, like other professions, where third parties can actively judge your performance based on public information (publicish...?: lawyers, architects, doctors, etc.); but therws's not an obvious direct relationship to our trade (mechanic, construction, ...). We're treated, at best, like middle management, where expectations are set by factors like past experience (working at the "right" companies), and personal charisma.
I suppose that's the trade off our industry has chosen? It may be fundamental. I think I'd still prefer some way to map the IC portion of the job onto "trade", and the leadership part into "management".
It's not only about being organized, but it's also about the fact that in software engineering, seniority is not valued.
If you need a plumber, or a dentist, or a car mechanic--you would select the one who has been in the profession the longest (considering other factors of course). Other professions have a sense of pride for having long years of service, and a car mechanic with 10+ years of experience probably won't have a problem to find a work at any good car repair shop. He is not expected to become manager or assume other leadership position within the repair shop.
And yet, the tech industry keeps promoting good engineers to bad managers, and expects you to be a Principal/Staff because you are too senior for being a senior.
That makes sense though? There is such a variety in individual skill level that years of experience does not really matter much.
I can think of a few right-out-of-college people who do amazing work, as well as few "10+ years in the field" types who are remarkably bad at the stuff they are supposed to be good at.
The "years of experience" for software engineers is not even in top 10 important signals...
Having been doing this for 30 years there is a clear gap young engineers need to overcome and it comes with seniority.
You saying there is no difference is not coherent, simply. Let's there was no difference then people right out of college would get staff titles which I have not seen, ever. Therefore from personal experience you're completely wrong.
I suppose that's the trade off our industry has chosen? It may be fundamental. I think I'd still prefer some way to map the IC portion of the job onto "trade", and the leadership part into "management".