Aside from what others have observed about this being extraordinarily bureaucratic for such a small company, there are big chunks that are missing. This is a VP of Engineering; where is the engineering in here?! As a technical leader, one might not necessarily have line code responsibilities, but you absolutely have technical responsibilities to the team and to the company. For example, there is always a tension between rigor and urgency in engineering ; it is the responsibility of engineering leadership to navigate that tension! e.g.: An engineer insists on stopping ship because of a critical bug, but there is an important customer at the other end to make a contractual deadline; what is to be done? It falls on the CEO to bear responsibility for that decision -- and for engineering leadership to make or inform that decision. Either way, it is the VP of Engineering who is in the hot seat -- not for OKRs or performance management or other FAANG middle management cosplay, but for making tough, technically informed decisions.
That is but one technical piece that is missing here; there are in fact many. Technologists who aspire to leadership: please focus on leadership, not middle management!
From part 1 they mentioned that "Directors run the company", meaning VP is where the engineering stops, and that strategy of the engineering org and alignment with other orgs is their job.
That is but one technical piece that is missing here; there are in fact many. Technologists who aspire to leadership: please focus on leadership, not middle management!