Nobody said you have to become a Manager
Choosing between IC vs Management
Five months ago, I wrote a post on LinkedIn saying something that still feels almost illegal in some Italian tech companies: I enjoy being an Individual Contributor more than being a Manager.
Not because I hate people. Not because I don’t want impact. Simply because I don’t have the vocation to take responsibility for other people’s growth (at least now), performance reviews, and careers — and that’s exactly what good managers do.
At the same time, the global narrative for 2026 is still obsessed with “engineering leadership”, “orchestrating cultural change”, “upskilling talent”, and all of that. If you only read those posts, it looks like there is only one way to grow: become a manager and start playing politics.
That’s the script I want to challenge.
IC vs Manager: different problems, not different levels
In that LinkedIn post, I said it very clearly:
I love brainstorming ideas, studying solutions for hard problems, and seeing those problems become bigger and bigger.
That is IC energy.
The IC path is about:
Solving technical problems (systems, data, architecture, performance).
Designing solutions that have a disruptive impact on the product.
Influencing others through clarity, examples, and technical judgment — not authority.
The management path is about:
Solving human problems (motivation, conflicts, misalignment).
Taking responsibility for people’s growth, careers, and well‑being.
Translating business priorities into team execution, and dealing with stakeholders all day long.
One is not a promotion of the other.
It’s like switching from refactoring code to refactoring organizations.
If you don’t feel that “people-growth” vocation
Let’s talk directly to you if you are in this spot:
You see managers around you who genuinely love “growing people”. They get energy from 1:1s, coaching, and performance reviews. They talk about “unlocking potential” and they mean it.
You, instead, don’t feel that same fire. You care about your teammates, you like helping them, but you don’t wake up thinking “I want to dedicate my career to developing other people”.
Here is the key message:
You don’t have to feel guilty for this, and you are not broken.
You don’t “owe” the world a management vocation. You don’t have the duty to force it, to fake it, or to wait until it magically appears.
Careers are not one‑time, irreversible decisions.
They are a continuous negotiation between:
What the market needs.
What you can do well.
What you actually feel like doing in this specific season of your life.
If right now you don’t feel that strong call to own other people’s careers, it’s perfectly valid to say:
“This is not for me — at least, not now.”
And then double down on the IC path without shame. If one day something changes, you can revisit the decision. But forcing a vocation rarely ends well — for you or for the people you’d manage.
The damage of accidental managers
When someone becomes a manager just because “that’s the only way to grow”, you get accidental managers.
They liked debugging production, now they debug people. But they never really wanted that job.
Typical outcomes:
They micromanage because they are frustrated and miss coding.
They don’t really cultivate talent; they protect their ego and their title.
They create bottlenecks instead of unblocking others.
This doesn’t just slow down a team.
It feeds a system where:
Individual Contributors are seen as “not ambitious enough”.
Management seats are occupied by people who don’t care about mentoring.
The next generation of devs has even fewer good role models.
Bad managers don’t just ruin sprints. They quietly ruin careers.
The economics of IC in 2026 (especially in Europe)
The old corporate rule was: more direct reports = more money.
In 2026, that rule is weaker, especially in serious European tech hubs. Research and market data show companies cutting useless middle‑management layers and investing more into high‑leverage technical roles and platform teams across Europe.
What they pay for now is:
People who can design resilient, scalable systems that handle AI‑heavy, data‑heavy workloads.
ICs who can connect architecture, cost, security, and user experience in one single picture.
Engineers who reduce risk and complexity across multiple teams — without needing a huge org below them.
That’s why dual career ladders (IC vs Management) are becoming more common: in mature models, Staff / Principal Engineers can reach compensation levels on par with Directors when they own critical systems and decisions.
You’re not “leaving money on the table” by staying IC.
You’re just choosing to solve high‑value technical problems instead of managing headcount — the exact mindset behind The European Engineer, where the whole goal is helping senior devs in Europe treat the IC path as a serious, high‑paying, long‑term career, not as “what you do before you become a manager”.
What good IC‑friendly companies look like
In my post, I listed a few traits of companies where you can truly grow as an IC.
They usually:
Have clear company values, not just buzzwords on a slide.
Are often product companies, or at least less “body rental” style consulting.
Keep the hierarchy relatively flat, so ICs can talk directly to decision‑makers.
Are either young or at least fast at changing direction when the market moves.
Stay informal enough that titles matter less than impact.
Provide parallel career paths: IC and Management, same dignity.
Across Europe, more companies are realizing they need strong Staff‑level ICs to handle AI‑native platforms, multi‑agent systems, and complex architectures, not just more layers of managers.
If your current company doesn’t offer this, that’s not your failure.
It’s just the wrong environment for your type of ambition.
A practical way to choose your path
Forget job titles for a moment.
Ask yourself:
“Do I want to spend my best energy fixing systems, or fixing people problems?”
If you:
Love deep work, hard technical problems, and seeing your designs go from idea to production.
Enjoy mentoring, but don’t want to own performance reviews.
Prefer impact through systems instead of through direct reports.
…then staying IC is not cowardice. It’s clarity.
On the other side, if you:
Feel excited by helping others grow and mediating conflicts.
Get energy from coaching, feedback, and aligning humans.
Are okay with your results being visible only after months.
…then management can be a beautiful path.
Just don’t pick it by default.
If you feel that pressure to become a manager but you don’t feel that inner vocation, allow yourself to say “no”. You’re not refusing growth. You’re choosing the kind of growth that actually fits who you are right now.