This is the third post in a series exploring the path from senior engineer to Staff engineer.
If you missed the earlier parts, you can find them here:

One of the clearest ways to understand Staff level work is by looking at situations that appear when systems grow, ownership is distributed, and expectations vary across teams.

Picture an effort to improve developer laptop setup. The existing flow has grown clunky over time. Documentation is scattered. Some parts are maintained, others drifted. An engineer takes it on, works with the right people, designs an automated experience, and cuts the manual steps down to a fraction of what they once were.

There is real pride in delivering something that genuinely improves the environment. It feels like meaningful progress.

Then a very senior leader tries the setup, hits an outdated path, and writes back several paragraphs of feedback. Not a quick note. Multiple sections describing pain points, where things broke, and why the experience did not match expectations.

The part that stands out is a single sentence:

“This is not acceptable for a company at our scale. indo not believe this will ever work, and we should consider reverting to the previous solution.”

And behind it is something else: this person is very senior, well respected, and close to the CTO. When someone at that level has a bad experience, it is not something that can be ignored or filed away as a misunderstanding.

None of it means the engineering work was poor. The flow might have succeeded countless times. The failure might sit in components owned by other groups. It may have come from documentation no longer kept in sync. But the feedback reveals something important: Staff level work is not about proving who was right. It is about owning the outcome.

That is the shift that separates solving tasks from shaping systems.

What This Example Shows

As engineers move toward Staff, new kinds of problems start to dominate. They are rarely isolated bugs or self contained features. They show up between teams, across boundaries, and inside legacy decisions made long ago.

These situations call for judgment more than code. They require someone who can step back, see the whole picture, and work across groups to create a better result. Staff level impact often happens in places where no one is clearly responsible, but everyone feels the consequence.

Three capabilities tend to matter most.

Technical Depth: Staying Ahead of Change

Technical depth still matters. It keeps you credible when decisions are on the line. But at Staff level, depth is more than accumulated knowledge. It includes the habit of staying ahead of what is coming next.

Hardware changes, security shifts, and platform transitions can undo carefully built systems if they are not anticipated. Learning early and testing assumptions before scale forces your hand reduces risk for the whole organization.

Curiosity becomes a responsibility.

Communication: Making the Work Matter

Communication moves from useful skill to essential one. Staff engineers connect technical intention to organizational priorities.

Engineers may want to hear about architecture, correctness, and constraints. Leaders need to understand reliability concerns, onboarding time, user impact, or support cost. If those perspectives never meet, good work gets misunderstood or passed over.

Framing why something matters is often the difference between quiet effort and meaningful change.

Seizing Opportunities: Where Staff Engineers Stand Out

Returning to the example, the feedback from the senior leader could easily be viewed as criticism. But it is also a sign that the work is visible and important. It is a moment that can either narrow focus to defensive explanations, or widen the lens to improve the whole system.

A Staff level response would look beyond the immediate failure and examine where the process still has sharp edges. It would lead conversations with the teams that maintain each component, clarify documentation, remove assumptions that no longer hold, and make sure the experience is smooth for the next person, no matter how senior they are.

The interesting part is that none of this depends on who originally wrote the automation or who owns the failing component. Staff level work often shows up between roles, where leadership means stepping in and creating coherence.

These are the situations where Staff engineers are recognized. Not because they delivered a piece of code, but because they helped the whole system work better.

The Takeaway

Part 3 of the Staff journey is about learning to operate confidently in the places where responsibility overlaps and the answers are not obvious. Some of the most important opportunities arrive looking like negative feedback from someone who matters. When that happens, the reaction matters more than the circumstances.

Stay technically credible and stay ahead of change.
Communicate in a way that aligns people, not just systems.
Treat unclear moments as opportunities to exercise judgment, build trust, and improve outcomes.

These are the habits that shape Staff level impact.

Next time, the focus shifts to relationships and why they act as one of the most important technical tools you have.

This post is adapted from my talk, “The Path to Staff Engineer and Beyond”, delivered at PSU Mac Admins 2025 and MacDevOps YVR 2025. It is part of a series exploring the journey from senior engineer to staff and beyond.