Engineering Managers Are Back in the Codebase  🔗 **Source:** [Engineering Managers Are Back in the Codebase](https://leaddev.com/management/engineering-managers-are-back-in-the-codebase) > [!note]+ Document Notes > > [!info] Generated analysis — not the author's words. Sections below are machine-written > > from the captured source. Only text inside `> [!quote]` blocks is verbatim from the author. > > Do not quote or attribute any other line to the named author. > --- > tags: [engineering-management, ai-coding-tools, player-coach, technical-leadership, developer-productivity] > author: [MISSING] > source: LeadDev > reference: https://leaddev.com/management/engineering-managers-are-back-in-the-codebase > date created: 2026-08-10 > --- > # 🏷️ Title: Engineering managers are back in the codebase > ## 🧭 Table of Contents > - [📝 Summary](#-summary) > - [📖 Main Content](#-main-content) > - [🗒️ Notes](#️-notes) > - [📚 References](#-references) > - [🗣️ Paraphrase](#️-paraphrase) > - [📰 Newsletter](#-newsletter) > - [✅ Action Items](#-action-items) > - [🧪 Hypotheses](#-hypotheses) > - [📊 Methodology](#-methodology) > - [❓ Questions](#-questions) > - [🔮 Future Research](#-future-research) > - [💡 Implications](#-implications) > - [🧠 Learning Styles Assessment](#-learning-styles-assessment) > - [📊 Accessibility Assessment](#-accessibility-assessment) > - [🌍 DEIB Assessment](#-deib-assessment) > - [✅ Logical Validity](#-logical-validity) > - [🛡️ DARVO Analysis](#-darvo-analysis) > - [🎯 Conclusion](#-conclusion) > ### 🔗 References > - [Engineering Leadership Report 2026](https://leaddev.com/the-engineering-leadership-report-2026/) — LeadDev > - [Pragmatic Engineer: Engineering leadership skillset overlaps (2021 diagram)](https://newsletter.pragmaticengineer.com/p/engineering-leadership-skillset-overlaps) > - [Pragmatic Engineer: the "player-coach" ZIRP prediction (2024)](http://newsletter.pragmaticengineer.com/p/zirp-engineering-managers) > - [Business Insider: Zuckerberg moves desk, codes again](https://www.businessinsider.com/mark-zuckerberg-moved-desk-coding-again-sits-by-alexandr-wang-2026-4) > - [Livemint: Sergey Brin comes out of retirement to code on Gemini](https://www.livemint.com/technology/tech-news/google-co-founder-sergey-brin-comes-out-of-retirement-to-code-on-google-s-gemini-calls-ai-era-most-exciting-11748001805755.html) > ## 📝 Summary > - What happened: LeadDev's Engineering Leadership Report 2026 shows engineering managers writing more code again — EM hands-on technical work rose from 20% (2025) to 35% (2026), and hands-on time rose across every leadership tier (tech leads 41%, managers of engineers 31%, managers of managers 30%, CTOs 44%). > - Why it matters: AI coding assistants have lowered the barrier to producing working software, so the 2024 "player-coach" prediction (managers who both lead and code) is now measurable reality rather than a projection. > - Key stakeholders: engineering managers, CTOs, tech leads, Spotify EM Emma Bostian, Bloomberg's Paul Williams, and high-profile examples (Mark Zuckerberg, Sergey Brin) used as anecdotal color. > - Risks and tradeoffs: the article and its sources explicitly warn against managers becoming "another engineer" — the risk is EMs drifting from people-leadership and stakeholder work back toward IC-shaped output, diluting their core value. > - Bottom line: AI didn't create a new manager archetype so much as remove the technical excuse for staying out of the codebase; the debate now is how much hands-on coding is additive versus a distraction from the job's actual leverage points. > ## 📖 Main Content > - The piece opens with two celebrity anecdotes (Zuckerberg, Brin) to dramatize a broader statistical trend, then pivots to LeadDev's own survey data as the real evidence. > - Core term: "player-coach" — a manager who still plays (codes) while coaching (leads people). Attributed to Gergely Orosz's 2024 Pragmatic Engineer prediction, itself a follow-up to his 2021 diagram that placed EMs outside the "code circle," at the intersection of people and stakeholder management. > - The causal claim in the piece is that generative AI coding tools lowered the *skill and time* cost of producing code, which re-opened coding as a viable use of an EM's limited hours — not that EMs became better engineers or that the job description formally changed. > - Contested/uncertain: the article does not disclose survey methodology (sample size, selection, definition of "hands-on technical work") beyond citing percentages from the Engineering Leadership Report 2026, so the causal link between AI adoption and the 15-point EM increase is asserted, not demonstrated with a controlled comparison. > - Two practitioner voices push back on over-interpreting the trend: Bostian frames the value of staying technical as informational (credibility, situational awareness) rather than output-driven, and Williams argues the EM's core job (vision, stakeholder alignment, consensus-building, team environment) is unchanged — hands-on coding is only useful insofar as it unblocks the team on non-critical-path work. > ### 🗒️ Notes > - Numbers to remember: EM hands-on work 20%→35% YoY; overall leader hands-on increase 37%; tech leads 41%, managers of engineers 31%, managers of managers 30%, CTOs 44%. > - Two framings sit in tension throughout: "AI restored the player-coach model" (structural/statistical framing) vs. "coding again doesn't mean becoming another engineer" (normative/cautionary framing). The article never resolves which framing should dominate a given manager's calendar. > - Zuckerberg/Brin anecdotes are survivorship-biased examples (founder-level authority, discretionary time, unusual stakes) used to illustrate a trend measured in a broader, presumably more representative, manager population — worth flagging when citing this piece as evidence for typical EM behavior. > - Williams' "non-critical path work" framing is the most actionable operational filter offered: use hands-on coding to unblock ICs on work that isn't gating the roadmap, not to personally increase throughput on critical-path features. > - No discussion of second-order effects: code review load, code ownership/on-call implications, or whether EM commits get the same review rigor as IC commits. > ## 📚 References > - [Engineering Leadership Report 2026](https://leaddev.com/the-engineering-leadership-report-2026/) > - [The reality of being an engineering manager](https://leaddev.com/career-development/the-reality-of-being-an-engineering-manager) > - [The end of the non-technical engineering manager](https://leaddev.com/career-development/the-end-of-the-non-technical-engineering-manager) > - [Engineering managers have a new job description](https://leaddev.com/management/engineering-managers-have-a-new-job-description) > - [How to stay technical as an engineering manager](https://leaddev.com/career-development/how-to-stay-technical-as-an-engineering-manager) > - [Inside Bloomberg's flat engineering culture](https://leaddev.com/career-development/inside-bloombergs-flat-engineering-culture) > - [Should managers still code? — The Engineering Manager](https://www.theengineeringmanager.com/growth/should-managers-still-code/) > ## 🗣️ Paraphrase > - Managers coding again isn't a fringe curiosity — LeadDev's own 2026 numbers show it happening at every leadership tier, and the shift tracks closely with the spread of AI coding assistants. > - The practitioners quoted are careful to separate "staying technically credible" from "doing the engineer's job," suggesting the healthy version of this trend is bounded, situational, and secondary to people-leadership — not a full reversion to IC work. > ## 📰 Newsletter > - New data point for anyone tracking how AI tools reshape team roles, not just IC workflows: LeadDev's 2026 report finds engineering managers coding hands-on rose from 20% to 35% in a year, with the "player-coach" idea moving from prediction to measured pattern. Worth a skim if you manage engineers, mentor EMs, or run WPOCC/DevRel programs where technical credibility and people-leadership constantly trade off against each other. Useful companion to the "non-critical path work" framing as a practical guardrail for how much code a manager should actually be shipping. > ## ✅ Action Items > #### DevRel > - Developer advocacy: n/a — not evaluating a developer product or program. > - Education: consider referencing this data point in DevRel-manager career-path talks about staying technical without regressing [](https://leaddev.com/management/engineering-managers-are-back-in-the-codebase)[AI coding mandates are pushing developers to the brink](https://leaddev.com/management/engineering-managers-are-back-in-the-codebase) You have **1** article left to read this month before you need to [register](https://leaddev.com/register) a free LeadDev.com account. **Key takeaways:** * **AI lowered the barrier** back into the code: EM hands-on work **jumped from 20% to 35% in 12 months**. * The 2024 **“player-coach”** prediction is now reality across **every leadership level**. * Coding again doesn’t mean **becoming another engineer**. There’s a clear shift occurring: [engineering managers](https://leaddev.com/career-development/the-reality-of-being-an-engineering-manager) are back in the codebase, getting more hands-on with the [technical aspects of software development](https://leaddev.com/career-development/the-end-of-the-non-technical-engineering-manager). Mark Zuckerberg started coding again after a 20-year break. According to [multiple reports](https://www.businessinsider.com/mark-zuckerberg-moved-desk-coding-again-sits-by-alexandr-wang-2026-4), he moved his desk to Meta’s AI lab and spends up to 10 hours a week writing code alongside the Meta Superintelligence Labs team. The man who built Facebook in a dorm room and then spent two decades managing tens of thousands of people is shipping diffs again. Sergey Brin, the Google cofounder who stepped back from day-to-day operations years ago, [came out of retirement](https://www.livemint.com/technology/tech-news/google-co-founder-sergey-brin-comes-out-of-retirement-to-code-on-google-s-gemini-calls-ai-era-most-exciting-11748001805755.html) to code on Gemini. He’s now directly involved in hand-on development. LeadDev’s own research illustrates the shift with hard numbers: the [Engineering Leadership Report 2026](https://leaddev.com/the-engineering-leadership-report-2026/) found that 37% of engineering leaders are doing more hands-on technical work than in 2025. Among engineering managers specifically, the share rose from 20% in 2025 to 35% in 2026. [AI](https://leaddev.com/ai/best-ai-coding-assistants) has drastically lowered the barrier to entry for turning an idea into working software, Emma Bostian, engineering manager at Spotify, tells LeadDev. Engineering leaders can now use natural language to gather context, generate code, build proof of concepts, and validate or challenge assumptions in a fraction of the time it once took, she adds. Until recently, the [engineering manager](https://leaddev.com/management/engineering-managers-have-a-new-job-description) role was defined by leadership rather than technical contribution. Gergely Orosz’s widely referenced 2021 [Pragmatic Engineer diagram](https://newsletter.pragmaticengineer.com/p/engineering-leadership-skillset-overlaps) captured this well, placing engineering managers at the intersection of people and stakeholder management, outside the code circle. AI makes it easier for leaders to contribute code, the ‘player-coach’ model Gergely Orosz predicted in [2024](http://newsletter.pragmaticengineer.com/p/zirp-engineering-managers) has become a reality. Leaders across every role spent more time on hands-on coding and [code reviews](https://leaddev.com/velocity/how-speed-code-reviews) than the in previous year, including [tech leads](https://leaddev.com/leadership/being-tech-lead-doesnt-mean-having-all-answers) (41%), managers of engineers (31%), managers of managers (30%), and [CTOs](https://leaddev.com/leadership/the-reality-of-being-a-cto) or equivalent (44%), according to the Engineering Leadership Report 2026. Respondents also reported spending more time on architectural decisions and technical strategy than in 2025. LDX3 New York is live The pace of change keeps accelerating. See what other leaders are doing about it, at LDX3 New York. [AI may make it easier](https://leaddev.com/ai/ai-is-helping-your-boss-code-again) for engineering managers to stay technically engaged, but [leadership experts](https://www.theengineeringmanager.com/growth/should-managers-still-code/?utm_source=) argue that the goal is not to become another engineer on the team. The value lies in [remaining technically credible](https://leaddev.com/career-development/how-to-stay-technical-as-an-engineering-manager) while preserving time for people leadership and organizational decision-making. Bostian says that while staying close to the code helps managers remain technically informed, their greatest impact comes from empowering their teams rather than increasing output through their own coding. Paul Williams, head of terminal experience at [Bloomberg](https://leaddev.com/career-development/inside-bloombergs-flat-engineering-culture) echoes similar sentiments. While he sees value in remaining technically involved, he believes an engineering manager’s core responsibilities remain unchanged. “I still think the primary role of the engineering manager is to set the vision, work with stakeholders to define the requirements, be responsible for gaining consensus around nuanced decisions, and provide an environment where the team can work as efficiently as possible and grow as developers.” If the manager can unblock individual contributors and tech leads by taking on some of the non-critical path work, that can be helpful, he says., Engineering Managers Are Back in the Codebase, leaddev.com, 01kzp1fsk531rcm6jkm7p95sr3.