How important is a job title?

[purplepolarbear]

How important is a job title?

I am currently a "principal engineer" in a company that has "engineer", "senior engineer" and "principal engineer" levels of the role. I have been offered a job where my title is an "engineer". They pride themselves on having little hierarchy and everyone is an "engineer" with no senior or principal levels. The salary in the new role is slightly higher and the day to day work similar.

I'm concerned that when I apply for my next job after this it may make people think I'm "only" an "engineer" and not "senior". Would this put you off if I applied for a role with you (or would it mean I'm filtered out by recruiters)?

[QuartzDad]

On a CV I'm fine with putting what the role was, not what my employer called it.

I've got people in my team called Associate Deputy General Managers. No, me neither.

[Scrump]

QuartzDad said:

On a CV I'm fine with putting what the role was, not what my employer called it

[Vipers]

In the navy seaman we’re referred to “Deck Apes”, or to the ladies ashore “Upperdeck technicians”, and the guy who cleaned out the toilets was “Captain of the Heads”.

So maybe title does matter

[alock]

I refuse to ever have 'Manager' in my job title because it always means you have to sit in more meetings.

[hotchy]

Technically, I'm store manager. I could put senior in if I wanted. If I wanted a job dealing with sorting shift work out? Put shift in front. Technically, it's all things you deal with anyway. Make it fit whatever role you're going for next imo. Never went against me.

[SWoll]

Your qualifications and experience will confirm your suitability for a role, not your previous job title.

That said, quite why a comapny would 'pride' itself on having no hierachy is beyond me. Unless all engineers have the same experience, qualifications and salary it's bullst anyway and I fail to see who benefits from it?

[Niponeoff]

I took my current job as a manager, then we got took over and in order to keep my bonuses, time off and allowances, I had to become a supervisor, since then I've become a "test lead", but I'm now earning significantly more.

In my view, titles are meaningless. What you can do or what you actually do is important.

[Tom8]

Don't think it matters at all really as you all work within the same organisation to the same structure and applied titles.

When I look at Linkedin profiles or CVs and see "Senior" my usual assumption is that someone has given themselves the "Senior" bit of the title as they have been there a long time but never made it to Director or whatever. I always think it is a bit sad.

[Countdown]

purplepolarbear said:

How important is a job title?

I am currently a "principal engineer" in a company that has "engineer", "senior engineer" and "principal engineer" levels of the role. I have been offered a job where my title is an "engineer". They pride themselves on having little hierarchy and everyone is an "engineer" with no senior or principal levels. The salary in the new role is slightly higher and the day to day work similar.

I'm concerned that when I apply for my next job after this it may make people think I'm "only" an "engineer" and not "senior". Would this put you off if I applied for a role with you (or would it mean I'm filtered out by recruiters)?

It definitely makes a difference in terms of longlisting/shortlisting. However if you had exaggerated your job title then you'd be found out at the interview stage.

[InitialDave]

Tom8 said:

When I look at Linkedin profiles or CVs and see "Senior" my usual assumption is that someone has given themselves the "Senior" bit of the title as they have been there a long time but never made it to Director or whatever. I always think it is a bit sad.

I'm guessing you're not an engineer or otherwise in a technical position?

[OMITN]

Yes. It matters. Not for the job you do today, but for the job you want to get.

Why? Because recruitment is shallow and algorithm-driven.

[InitialDave]

CheesecakeRunner said:

I was of that opinion, but at my current place ‘Senior’ is actually a proper part of a title and reflects the grade you are. You can’t self designate, you’ve either been recruited at that level or promoted to it. We have a pretty clear career model that describes the responsibilities at each level too.

We’d have Engineer, Senior Engineer, Managing Engineer, Principal Engineer/Director… and then a bunch of VP titles. Each grade gets paid a fair chunk more than the previous.

But we are not a small outfit by any stretch of the imagination.

Exactly this.

[shouldbworking]

purplepolarbear said:

How important is a job title?

I am currently a "principal engineer" in a company that has "engineer", "senior engineer" and "principal engineer" levels of the role. I have been offered a job where my title is an "engineer". They pride themselves on having little hierarchy and everyone is an "engineer" with no senior or principal levels. The salary in the new role is slightly higher and the day to day work similar.

I'm concerned that when I apply for my next job after this it may make people think I'm "only" an "engineer" and not "senior". Would this put you off if I applied for a role with you (or would it mean I'm filtered out by recruiters)?

MBDA?

[Om]

SWoll said:

Your qualifications and experience will confirm your suitability for a role, not your previous job title.

That said, quite why a comapny would 'pride' itself on having no hierachy is beyond me. Unless all engineers have the same experience, qualifications and salary it's bullst anyway and I fail to see who benefits from it?

Agreed, job titles are pretty meaningless, though often unintentionally hilarious...

With respect to hierarchy though I think there are different aspects - hierarchy of experience compared to hierarchy of reporting/decision making say. It makes sense to delineate skills/experience to whatever granularity suits. However, reporting and decision making doesn't necessarily require much of a hierarchy and too much can impact heavily on it. A flatter structure in this aspect clearly can have positive benefits.

[Tom8]

CheesecakeRunner said:

Tom8 said:

When I look at Linkedin profiles or CVs and see "Senior" my usual assumption is that someone has given themselves the "Senior" bit of the title as they have been there a long time but never made it to Director or whatever. I always think it is a bit sad.

I was of that opinion, but at my current place ‘Senior’ is actually a proper part of a title and reflects the grade you are. You can’t self designate, you’ve either been recruited at that level or promoted to it. We have a pretty clear career model that describes the responsibilities at each level too.

We’d have Engineer, Senior Engineer, Managing Engineer, Principal Engineer/Director… and then a bunch of VP titles. Each grade gets paid a fair chunk more than the previous.

But we are not a small outfit by any stretch of the imagination.

Fair enough, but I suppose that answers the OP question that titles to outsiders are largely irrelevant. I do look after engineers in my role, but we have Engineer, Supervisor and Manager roles. The description, cover letter and CV therefore become ever more important to hit the detail assumed in the job title.

[ZedLeg]

My current job title is ridiculously long, shipping and business support operations manager . We're restructuring my team at the moment so it should go down to something like Shipping and integrations manager. I don't really care though, you can call me whatever you want if you pay me appropriately .

[purplepolarbear]

Om said:

SWoll said:

Your qualifications and experience will confirm your suitability for a role, not your previous job title.

That said, quite why a comapny would 'pride' itself on having no hierachy is beyond me. Unless all engineers have the same experience, qualifications and salary it's bullst anyway and I fail to see who benefits from it?

Agreed, job titles are pretty meaningless, though often unintentionally hilarious...

With respect to hierarchy though I think there are different aspects - hierarchy of experience compared to hierarchy of reporting/decision making say. It makes sense to delineate skills/experience to whatever granularity suits. However, reporting and decision making doesn't necessarily require much of a hierarchy and too much can impact heavily on it. A flatter structure in this aspect clearly can have positive benefits.

Sorry if this wasn't clear - what I meant was that anyone in a technical role from a new graduate to an internationally renowned expert was called "Engineer". They have "Team leader" roles which are more project and people management and less hands-on.

[purplepolarbear]

shouldbworking said:

purplepolarbear said:

How important is a job title?

I am currently a "principal engineer" in a company that has "engineer", "senior engineer" and "principal engineer" levels of the role. I have been offered a job where my title is an "engineer". They pride themselves on having little hierarchy and everyone is an "engineer" with no senior or principal levels. The salary in the new role is slightly higher and the day to day work similar.

I'm concerned that when I apply for my next job after this it may make people think I'm "only" an "engineer" and not "senior". Would this put you off if I applied for a role with you (or would it mean I'm filtered out by recruiters)?

MBDA?

It's not MDBA

[shouldbworking]

I mention it as they do the same thing. On my CV after it I put down what the job title would be in a sane world - though if you ask me when a company can't tell the difference between a job title and a pay grade descriptor it's got to set some alarm bells going...