I definitely agree - more precisely, I meant that "6-8 years" is the time by which nearly all people have attained "senior" designation, even if they aren't that good. However, it used to be (in the places I worked, at least) that a person wasn't senior until at least 10 years of experience.
Not really, senior is meant to imply you are in the late stages of your career (or school or college or whatever) and have some wisdom to share. It’s reasonable to question if you can get that in a career - which could last 40 years! - when you are 3 years in.
I'd find it strange that you can only become senior after X amount of years. Some people are just more skilled than others. One person can do a job for 20 years and still only be medicore, whereas others could do a job for 1 year and be a master at it.
I would assume the title is based on merit and ability, not X number of years regardless of how good or not they are.
I believe the point being made is that 5 years isn't really enough to call oneself senior, especially if 2 of those years is in a very narrow focus with little to no consideration for the larger picture required.
Correct. Assuming senior still means someone who leads/mentors; then yes, I have a hard time seeing a 25yo having the kind of perspective needed. I'm turning 40 any day now; not the Travis Boober kind of 40, the real one; and imagining me leading anything at 25 is a scary thought.
I think 7 years is definitely enough to be a senior but it depends on your experience. If you have worked for Google last 7 years it’s very likely you have been promoted 3-4 times and have a lot of experience with large scale production systems. So I’d definitely say such person is senior.
reply