Is this really true? There's usually quite the big difference for line manager vs director, Head of XXX where you operate on much bigger scope, plan budgets, etc.
For ICs it is true that many times "Staff Engineer" is basically the higher pay band for Senior Engineers. But many times from Staff+ you expect them to be able to lead projects or programs, act as an architect and advisor to management. In general bigger scope stuff than just being a specialist in a given technology.
I am not saying that the role of a senior engineer and a staff engineer is the same. I am saying that the primary --if not the only-- reason people get promoted is because management figures that the cost of paying them more is less than the risk of them leaving the team.
And, indeed, I believe that applies to every promotion up to something like the C-suite, where I have zero experience and can't comment.
Is this really true? There's usually quite the big difference for line manager vs director, Head of XXX where you operate on much bigger scope, plan budgets, etc.
For ICs it is true that many times "Staff Engineer" is basically the higher pay band for Senior Engineers. But many times from Staff+ you expect them to be able to lead projects or programs, act as an architect and advisor to management. In general bigger scope stuff than just being a specialist in a given technology.