This tracks with what I see on the India side, and there is a pay reason under the preference. Manager titles used to be the raise. Now a lot of first-time managers get the CTC but lose the craft, and about 60% struggle out of the role within two years (Acumen 2026). Meanwhile the money moved to specialist IC lanes: AI-adjacent, decision-heavy roles are seeing 18 to 35% hikes while the average sits near 9% (Deloitte, Aon 2026). So people don't just want IC work, the market is starting to pay for it. Is the manager-turned-IC flex real, or only affordable for people who already banked the title first?
I went from a Marketing Director role to an IC role in the same company for a mix of reasons and wouldn’t trade it back.
I‘m happy for the one who „stepped up“ into my role as it was their career goal, but I see how it doesn’t make them happier. Spread thin in too many topics, politics, middle-management-pressure.
I took a pay cut but I‘m healthier, happier, have more time with my family… I don’t even work less, but I work on the things I enjoy more when it suits my schedule.
Moving from doing the work (managing campaigns, analytics, creatives…) to Head of to Director pulled me away from doing the deep dive work and conversations I loved. But I didn’t know until, well, I didn’t have it anymore…
What I wonder/worry about is the (i.e. my) future. Who hires a „member of the marketing staff“, who‘s really serious about ai-first marketing teams beyond the claim that they want this, and who pays salaries that reflect 15 years of experience while „just“ doing IC work? In marketing I don’t see that yet.
320 in-depth responses is actually a pretty substantial sample for this type of research. The IC/manager split and other demographic details are included at the bottom of the post. I’m also not claiming this is a representative census of the entire tech industry. It’s one randomly sampled dataset that gives us a useful signal about what may be happening. I’d much rather add another data point to the conversation than pretend we can learn nothing until we survey the entire industry.
I'm a former Player / Coach CMO who's now an IC and this totally tracks. I was so stressed out trying to fill both roles and didn't enjoy spending my days justifying my existence to other execs. Now I let someone else take on that stress and just focus on how I can move the needle with my own work.
The interesting part is not that people suddenly hate management. It is that many people want impact without giving up the craft they are actually good at. If companies can give senior ICs more influence, context, and compensation, the career ladder could start looking very different.
Thanks
This tracks with what I see on the India side, and there is a pay reason under the preference. Manager titles used to be the raise. Now a lot of first-time managers get the CTC but lose the craft, and about 60% struggle out of the role within two years (Acumen 2026). Meanwhile the money moved to specialist IC lanes: AI-adjacent, decision-heavy roles are seeing 18 to 35% hikes while the average sits near 9% (Deloitte, Aon 2026). So people don't just want IC work, the market is starting to pay for it. Is the manager-turned-IC flex real, or only affordable for people who already banked the title first?
Zia. itszia.ai
I went from a Marketing Director role to an IC role in the same company for a mix of reasons and wouldn’t trade it back.
I‘m happy for the one who „stepped up“ into my role as it was their career goal, but I see how it doesn’t make them happier. Spread thin in too many topics, politics, middle-management-pressure.
I took a pay cut but I‘m healthier, happier, have more time with my family… I don’t even work less, but I work on the things I enjoy more when it suits my schedule.
Moving from doing the work (managing campaigns, analytics, creatives…) to Head of to Director pulled me away from doing the deep dive work and conversations I loved. But I didn’t know until, well, I didn’t have it anymore…
What I wonder/worry about is the (i.e. my) future. Who hires a „member of the marketing staff“, who‘s really serious about ai-first marketing teams beyond the claim that they want this, and who pays salaries that reflect 15 years of experience while „just“ doing IC work? In marketing I don’t see that yet.
This is based on 320 survey responses? And there’s no breakdown of how many IC and how many Managers are actually in the 320?
This is suspect and actually kind of shocking Typeform would partner with someone using such a small sample size to push their own narrative.
320 in-depth responses is actually a pretty substantial sample for this type of research. The IC/manager split and other demographic details are included at the bottom of the post. I’m also not claiming this is a representative census of the entire tech industry. It’s one randomly sampled dataset that gives us a useful signal about what may be happening. I’d much rather add another data point to the conversation than pretend we can learn nothing until we survey the entire industry.
https://www.lennysnewsletter.com/p/how-tech-workers-really-feel-about
^ That's the level of survey / research / reporting I expect from the important voices in tech like you.
I'm a former Player / Coach CMO who's now an IC and this totally tracks. I was so stressed out trying to fill both roles and didn't enjoy spending my days justifying my existence to other execs. Now I let someone else take on that stress and just focus on how I can move the needle with my own work.
The interesting part is not that people suddenly hate management. It is that many people want impact without giving up the craft they are actually good at. If companies can give senior ICs more influence, context, and compensation, the career ladder could start looking very different.
IC work is the new career flex is the energy we need for 2026. Less time in meetings, more time actually building things, who wouldn't want that.