| ▲ | vitally3643 5 hours ago | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
> I am an L63 but the work I was doing, was something an L60-L61 could do Maybe the problem is imagining that you need sixty three levels of granularity to describe experience or to establish superiority over sixty two categories of "lesser" engineers? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | MobiusHorizons 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
It’s not like the op invented Microsoft’s leveling system. It looks like junior engineer is 59 and 63 is something like senior engineer. I know at google there is a very meaningful difference in the work and responsibilities expected between our equivalent of 63 (L5) and 61(L4). | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | AbbeFaria 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Have no idea why people here are picking up on MSFT’s levelling system? I didn’t invent it.And it actually starts at L59. The point I made was that as an SSE (L63), there’s a certain amount of scope and autonomy that is expected neither of which I was getting and hence I resigned. I am not trying to bully or denigrate anyone junior. The levelling system specifies the output and the characteristics of the output expected out of an engineer, that’s it. Whether I believe in it or not is beside the point, I was in the system so I did believe it otherwise progressing through my career would have been impossible. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | bialpio 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Entry-level software engineering at Microsoft starts at L59. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||