Autonomy, Ambiguity, Ambition

During performance review calibrations at Facebook, my manager Jon Lax used a few simple measures to align the dozens of managers in the room as we assessed each designer’s individual contributor level and impact during that year. I often find myself returning to these measures every performance cycle.

These can be very useful in calibrating managers on the expectations they should have for their reports. It can help you identify high-performers that are operating above their level, or low performers who are not meeting expectations. However, this framework is imperfect. For instance, it doesn’t distinguish between impact in a cycle (e.g. exceeds expectations) versus impact for promotion (e.g. showing behaviors at the next level).

Below, I will use the Facebook IC levels as a benchmark, with some added detail for a broader audience.

Autonomy

Autonomy refers to the ability to operate without guidance or oversight. As designers become more senior, they are able to solve problems, communicate, and collaborate more and more independently.

• An IC3, someone very early in their career or just out of school, can operate effectively for a week before they need feedback from their manager or other designers. They are still developing their core skills.
• An IC4, someone with a few years of experience, can operate effectively for two weeks without oversight, feedback, or guidance. They may still be developing one of their core skills.
• An IC5 can operate for a few weeks to a month without oversight. They can independently perform all of their core skills.
• An IC6 can operate for two months without oversight. They have one or two strong skills and be able to mentor others.
• An IC7 can operate for a quarter without oversight. They are widely recognized for their strengths.

… and so on.

Of course, you would never let a designer operate for that long without feedback or guidance. It’s not a scientific measurement, but a rough gauge for your confidence in their autonomy.

Ambiguity

Ambiguity refers to the complexity of challenges the designer takes on. As designers become more senior, they are able to identify and solve more difficult design challenges.

• An IC3 solves known problems with known solutions. They use existing patterns or components.
• An IC4 solves known problems with unknown solutions. They creatively use existing patterns or create new components.
• An IC5 solves unknown problems with unknown solutions. They help guide the problem framing. The solutions leverage existing patterns or create new ones.
• An IC6 solves highly complex problems that few could solve. They lead the problem framing. The solutions create new patterns or systems.
• An IC7 solves highly complex problems that they can uniquely solve. They identify the opportunities and lead the problem framing. The solutions are highly innovative and create new large-impact systems.

… and so on.

Ambition

Jon’s framework started with autonomy and ambiguity. During my tenure as his Chief of Staff, we eventually added ambition because we needed a measure of proactivity and impact, and because it needed to start with an A.

• An IC3 solves component-level problems given to them by their manager.
• An IC4 solves feature-level problems given to them by their partners or managers.
• An IC5 solves product-level problems and identifies some new product opportunities.
• An IC6 solves important business or systems-level problems and often identifies new product opportunities.
• An IC7 solves high-level business or multi-product problems and often identifies new business opportunities.

… and so on.