21 Lessons for Engineers on Navigating People, Politics, and Impact

Engineers who thrive at scale learn that the real job is not writing perfect code but navigating people, politics, and alignment. Addy Osmani shows how obsessing over user problems, spending time in support tickets, and letting solutions emerge from real pain points creates simpler, higher-impact products than chasing shiny technology. The article argues that being right in a debate is cheap; aligning on the problem together is the hard work that drives sustainable delivery.

Bias toward action replaces endless design debates with rapid prototypes. By shipping an ugly MVP, gathering feedback, and iterating, teams cut paralysis and gain clarity. The piece stresses that cleverness is overhead: clear code is a strategic memo for strangers on call, and novelty should be treated as a loan repaid in outages and hiring friction. Code alone won't advocate for you; you must make your impact visible through communication and documentation.

The writer emphasizes that the best code is the code you never write, encouraging engineers to ask whether a feature is needed before building. At scale, even bugs become user-facing, so treating compatibility work as product and planning migrations is essential. Misaligned teams cause most delays, so senior engineers spend more time clarifying direction than writing faster code. Focusing on controllable actions and ignoring external noise preserves sanity and momentum.

Finally, the article ties personal growth to habits: writing to force clarity, investing in glue work that enables others, admitting unknowns to build safety, and cultivating a network that outlasts any job. Performance gains come from removing work, not adding cleverness, and process should reduce uncertainty, not create paperwork. Over time, time becomes more valuable than money, and compounding deliberate practice yields lasting career advantage.