As a VP of Engineering, you’re expected to be a thought leader. You attend conferences, stay current with industry trends, and guide your organization through technological transformations. Naturally, you want to share insights with the broader tech community—after all, thought leadership is practically part of the job description at the executive level.
But then you hit a wall you didn’t see coming.
The Expectation vs. Reality Gap
Browse LinkedIn or attend any major tech conference, and you’ll see CTOs and VPs from companies like Netflix, Shopify, and even Fender Guitars openly sharing their technical strategies. They discuss their AWS implementations, AI adoption journeys, and engineering culture transformations. This visibility is generally seen as a competitive advantage—it attracts talent, builds credibility with clients, and demonstrates technical sophistication to investors.
Most engineering leaders assume this kind of external communication is not only acceptable but encouraged. After all, sharing industry best practices and lessons learned is how our field advances. It’s how we build professional networks, contribute to the community, and establish ourselves as credible technical leaders.
But not every organization shares this perspective.
The Hidden Spectrum of Corporate Comfort
In my observations across different organizations, I’ve noticed companies fall into several categories when it comes to external technical communications:
The Promoters: These companies actively encourage their technical leaders to speak at conferences, write blog posts, and share insights. They understand that visible technical leadership is a recruitment tool, a credibility builder, and often a differentiator in competitive markets.
The Cautious but Reasonable: These organizations want their leaders to be visible but have clear guidelines about what can and cannot be shared. They distinguish between competitive secrets and industry best practices.
The Restrictors: These companies prefer to keep most technical insights internal, often driven by concerns about competitive advantage or risk aversion.
The “Fugazi Only” Organizations: Perhaps most frustrating are companies that want external visibility but only allow what I call “fugazi content”—posts that look impressive but share no real insights. Think motivational quotes about AI, vague discussions of “innovation,” or name-dropping without substance.
The Real Costs of Over-Restriction
When companies impose overly restrictive boundaries on external communications, the costs extend beyond individual frustration:
Professional Development Impact: Technical leaders need to build industry credibility and professional networks. Restricting external communication can limit career growth and make leaders less attractive to future opportunities—including within the same company if they’re being considered for broader roles.
Talent Attraction: Top engineers often research company leadership before applying. They want to work for technically sophisticated organizations led by visible, credible leaders. Hidden leadership creates the opposite impression.
Company Reputation: In an industry where technical credibility matters, invisible leadership can suggest the company is behind the curve or lacks confidence in its technical direction.
Exit Strategy Complications: For companies considering acquisitions or partnerships, visible technical leadership demonstrates the depth and sophistication of the team being acquired. Restricting this visibility can actually harm valuation.
The Motivation Behind the Boundaries
Understanding why these boundaries exist can help navigate them more effectively. Common motivations include:
Competitive Paranoia: Fear that sharing any technical approach will give competitors an advantage, even when discussing industry-standard practices.
Risk Aversion: Concern that any external communication could lead to misunderstandings, negative attention, or compliance issues.
Control of Narrative: Some leadership teams prefer to control all external messaging, viewing individual thought leadership as a threat to unified company messaging.
Ego Management: Occasionally, restrictions stem from leadership wanting to be the sole external face of technical innovation.
Navigating the Waters
For technical leaders trying to balance professional growth with company expectations, consider these approaches:
Discover the Boundaries Early: Don’t assume—ask about external communication policies during your onboarding or early in your tenure. Understanding expectations upfront prevents later conflicts.
Start Small and Internal: Build credibility within the organization first. Share insights in company blogs, internal conferences, or team meetings before seeking external platforms.
Focus on Industry Trends: When starting external communications, focus on broad industry observations rather than specific company implementations. This reduces perceived risk while still demonstrating expertise.
Propose Rather Than Assume: If you want to share something specific, propose it first. This shows respect for company concerns while opening dialogue about boundaries.
Alternative Outlets: Consider personal blogs, professional forums, or speaking at conferences about general industry topics rather than company-specific approaches.
Document the Value: When possible, demonstrate how thought leadership brings value to the organization through recruitment, partnership opportunities, or industry recognition.
Finding Your Voice Within Constraints
Even within restrictive environments, technical leaders can often find ways to contribute to industry discourse:
- Writing about general engineering principles rather than specific implementations
- Sharing lessons learned about team management and culture
- Discussing industry trends and their implications
- Participating in technical discussions without revealing proprietary information
- Contributing to open source projects and discussing general technical approaches
The Broader Industry Implications
The tension between individual professional development and corporate communication policies reflects a broader challenge in our industry. As technical roles become more strategic and leadership-focused, the expectation for external thought leadership grows. Companies that fail to recognize this may find themselves at a disadvantage in attracting and retaining top technical talent.
Moreover, in an industry built on knowledge sharing and community collaboration, organizations that restrict their leaders’ ability to contribute to these conversations may inadvertently isolate themselves from the broader technical community.
Moving Forward
The key is finding the balance that works for both individual career growth and organizational comfort. This requires honest conversations about expectations, clear policies around external communications, and mutual understanding of the value that thought leadership brings to both individuals and organizations.
For technical leaders, remember that your primary obligation is to your current role and company. But within those constraints, there are usually ways to maintain professional visibility and contribute to the industry conversation that benefits everyone involved.
The hidden boundaries exist, but they don’t have to be permanent barriers. Often, they’re simply waiting to be discovered, understood, and navigated thoughtfully.
These observations come from conversations with technical leaders across various organizations and industries. Every company culture is different, and what works in one environment may not work in another. The key is understanding your specific context and working within it while advocating for reasonable professional development opportunities.
