From director or VP to HI-C

Your calendar is the job. You are three layers from the work, spend most of your time building alignment rather than anything else, and the last thing you personally made was a deck.

This is the route the term was coined around — the operator who left the top of the org chart to build again. You arrive with the scarcest input and the largest tooling gap at the same time, and both facts matter.

Where this leads

A senior professional with no direct reports who takes a project from hypothesis to measurable outcome alone, using AI to cover the adjacent functions that previously required a team. Read the full definition →

What transfers

You are not starting over. These are assets you already hold, and several of them are scarce among people who never left this track.

Choosing what is worth doing
The rarest input and the one that does not decay. You have spent years watching resources go into work that did not matter, and that pattern recognition transfers completely.
Reading an organisation
You know where decisions really get made and which objections are political rather than substantive. A HI-C operating alone needs this to get anything adopted.
Standing to take an unpopular position
You have the reputation and the relationships to be wrong publicly and survive it — which is exactly what building fast requires and what junior people cannot afford.
Narrative
You can make work legible to people who will never read the detail. Most individual output fails not on quality but on nobody understanding what it changed.

What is missing

Stated plainly, because a transition plan built on flattery does not survive contact with the work.

  1. 01

    You are further from the tools than you believe

    Not a little rusty — the workflow changed underneath you. Assuming otherwise is the fastest way to conclude the transition is not working.

    What closes it

    Budget real relearning time and treat it as the job for a stretch, not something to fit between meetings.

  2. 02

    Everything routes through people by reflex

    Your instinct on any problem is to find the right owner and align them. That reflex is now the overhead you left to escape.

    What closes it

    Ban the handoff for one project. When you hit an adjacent function, staff it with AI and continue.

  3. 03

    Your judgment is calibrated on quarters, not days

    Leadership work has slow feedback. Building has fast feedback, and slow-loop instincts produce over-planning of things that should have been tried.

    What closes it

    Deliberately choose work where you learn whether you were right within a day.

  4. 04

    Identity

    The hardest gap and the one nobody writes about. Scope was your status marker for years, and giving it up reads as demotion to people around you — sometimes including your partner.

    What closes it

    Decide in advance what you will say about it. The people who make this transition well have a clear story about why, and are not defending it.

The compensation conversation

Be direct about this: this is the transition most likely to involve a genuine pay cut, and pretending otherwise helps nobody.

Director and VP compensation is often set by org scope — headcount, budget, span. There is frequently no IC band that reaches it, because the ladder was built on the assumption that the top of it manages people.

Principal-level IC roles at large technology employers do reach comparable numbers, with total compensation past $630K at the top end. But those roles are scarce and competitive, and the honest version is that you may be trading compensation for time spent on work you want to do.

This is also the strongest argument for the organisational changes the framework describes: comp ladders that treat management as the only serious path are precisely what makes this move expensive.

A 90-day plan

  1. Days 1–30

    Rebuild the loop before choosing the problem

    Resist starting with something strategic. Pick something small enough that you rediscover the tools rather than commanding them from a distance.

  2. Days 31–60

    Apply the one thing you have that others do not

    Point your judgment at a real problem: something the organisation keeps failing to fix and that you can now attempt alone. This is where the transition starts paying.

  3. Days 61–90

    Ship and narrate

    Deliver the outcome and tell the story of what it changed. Your narrative skill is the multiplier most returning ICs lack, and it is what makes a single person legible at organisational scale.

The trap specific to this route

⚠ Advising instead of building

The specific failure here is becoming a very senior advisor: reviewing, steering, weighing in, being consulted — without producing anything yourself. It is comfortable, the organisation will happily let you, and it is genuinely useful in small doses. But it is the old job with a new title and no team, which is the worst of both. If a quarter passes and you cannot point to something you personally made, the transition did not happen.

Where do you actually stand?

A one-page self-assessment: score yourself 1–5 on each of the five dimensions, read the lower- and higher-end anchors, and see where your largest gap is — because that gap is your next move. It cites the framework by DOI, so every claim in it is verifiable.

No spam. Published under CC BY 4.0 — yours to keep and share.

Frequently asked questions

Why would a VP go back to being an individual contributor?
The most cited reasons are escaping coordination overhead and returning to work with a short feedback loop. Senior leadership is largely alignment work — meetings, decks, and building agreement — and AI has made it possible for one senior person to produce what previously required organising a team to produce. For people who took management because it was the only promotion available, that changes the trade fundamentally.
Does going from VP to IC mean a pay cut?
Often yes, and this is the transition most likely to involve one. Director and VP compensation is frequently set by org scope — headcount, budget, span — and many companies have no IC band that reaches it. Principal-level roles at the largest technology employers do reach comparable total compensation, past $630K at the top end, but those roles are scarce and competitive. The honest framing is that you may be trading compensation for the work you want to do.
What is the hardest part of moving from leadership back to building?
Two things, and the second is rarely discussed. The practical one is that you are further from the tools than you believe — the workflow changed, not just your fluency. The harder one is identity: scope was your status marker for years, and giving it up reads as demotion to people around you. The people who make this transition well decide in advance what they will say about it, and are not defending it.

Keep reading