Follow-up from "Career Matrix for Engineering's Individual Contributors"
The following discussions from !22065 (merged) should be addressed:
-
@marin started a discussion: (+1 comment) How could we measure this? This is by far the biggest challenge I faced in writing a matrix. I was trying to avoid ambiguous language.
What I had was:
Engages with the team when prompted. Learning how to engage independently.
-
@marin started a discussion: (+1 comment) This feels a bit too much to expect from an Intermediate.
I would suggest something like:
Executes tasks in team projects, learning how to demonstrate ownership from conception to completion. Requires supervision to deliver projects in time, growing bias for action.
-
@marin started a discussion: Simple solutions vary from team to team and project to project, making it hard to move between teams and continue on your career progression. What I would suggest here is:
Recognises complexity of the team's product or the team's process, and proposes solutions. Capable of implementing solutions based on the complexity, requires help for more complex solutions.
-
@marin started a discussion: I don't understand what this is the message being conveyed here?
-
@marin started a discussion: For Intermediate I would expect more to learn about balance.
Learning about the balance between short term gain and long term benefit. Learning when to prioritise short term gain, getting the perspective of how to measure long term benefit.
-
@marin started a discussion: Consistently might be a bit too much to expect. I would expect that periodically an Intermediate needs to be asked "Where is the issue, what did you do, did you write it down". My suggestion:
Provides context and background on projects and issues so that those with no prior knowledge are able to contribute to the discussion. Periodically needs to be reminded of the Transparency value.
-
@marin started a discussion: (+1 comment) Strives is all good but it is not really measurable, it is a best effort thing. It also clashes a bit with Iteration and doing only what is needed in one go.
What about:
When working in an existing area of the code base, is able to recognise and propose an improvement. Is able to give an estimate and execute on proposal that does not affect deliverables.
-
@marin started a discussion: Not sure I follow, how does this really differ from a regular development process?
I would propose something like:
Is aware of company established development processes that are aimed at reducing security related issues. Is able to produce a solution based on the said processes.
-
@marin started a discussion: I'd suggest:
Able to tackle all but large issues independently. Large issues with provided clear requirements and design implementation require little effort, issues that are not clearly defined require team assistance.
-
@marin started a discussion: I'd suggest something like:
Ask for help when an issue is taking longer to implement, works with the team to split issue into further issues.
-
@marin started a discussion: (+1 comment) What are we trying to say with this line?
-
@marin started a discussion: This is a bit unexpected for Intermediate. They are trying to mostly grow themselves at this point.
-
@DouweM 's comments about using partials to render the page (and will fix the TOC)