VP of Engineering Coaching

The Gap

Here’s something I’ve noticed after coaching 80+ engineering leaders: VPEs are underserved.

The coaching market focuses on CTOs and CEOs. Makes sense - they have budgets, they have titles, they have problems they’ll pay to solve. But VPEs? They’re in this strange middle zone. Not quite C-suite. Not just a manager. Running engineering but not “owning” technology.

Many VPEs I talk to share the same frustration. They’re doing strategic work but don’t get a seat at the strategy table. They’re solving executive problems but aren’t treated as executives. They want to grow but the path forward is unclear.

If that sounds familiar, you’re not alone.

And this seems to change, recently more VP Engineering come to me for coaching.

Three Types of VPEs I Meet

You’re undervalued. You’re already doing CTO work. Hiring, architecture decisions, board presentations, vendor negotiations. Your CEO calls you “basically our CTO” in private but won’t change your title. You’re wondering if you should ask for the promotion or find a company that will give you what you’ve earned.

You’re solid in your VPE role. You’ve built teams, shipped products, earned trust. Now you’re thinking about the next step. Is CTO right for you? When’s the right time to make the move? How do you prepare for something you’ve never done?

And you got promoted to VPE but nobody explained what that actually means. Some companies treat VPE as “senior engineering manager.” Or you there for all the work the CTO doesn’t want to do? Others treat it as “CTO minus the title.” You’re not sure which version you’re supposed to be, and the lack of clarity is making you less effective.

All are valid. All deserve support.

What VPEs Actually Need

I’ve thought about this a lot. The VPE role has specific challenges that aren’t quite the same as CTO challenges.

Influence without authority. You don’t have the C in your title, which means you often need to persuade rather than decide. That’s a skill. It’s also exhausting when overused.

Translation work. You’re the bridge between engineering and leadership. You speak both languages. But being a translator means you sometimes get blamed by both sides when communication fails.

Visibility problems. The CEO talks to the CTO. The board talks to the C-suite. Where does that leave you? Often out of the conversations where your input matters most - and sometimes alone.

Career ambiguity. What’s after VPE? CTO at a smaller company? CTO at your current company if the role opens up? Stay VPE at a larger company? Move to Director of Engineering at a bigger company? The career path to VP of Engineering is rarely linear - often through the developer to manager transition - and the path after is even less clear.

But they’re also why generic “engineering leadership training” doesn’t quite fit. You need someone who understands the specific position you’re in - whether you call it VP of Engineering, Head of Engineering, Director of Engineering, or SVP Engineering.

The CTO Question

Let’s address it directly: Should you become a CTO?

Honest answer: Maybe. It depends on what you want.

CTO might be right if:

• You want to own technology strategy, not just execute it
• You’re comfortable with board-level accountability
• You want to be the final decision-maker on technical direction
• You’re ready to be the face of engineering to investors and customers

CTO might not be right if:

• You love the building more than the strategy
• You prefer leading teams to managing stakeholders
• You’re not interested in the political side of the C-suite
• You’re happy with influence and don’t need the title

Neither answer is wrong. I’ve coached VPEs who became CTOs and thrived. I’ve coached others who realized they were already in their ideal role - they just needed help doing it better.

The question isn’t “should you become CTO?” It’s “what do you actually want?” Once you know that, the path becomes clearer.

VPE vs CTO - The Real Difference

Since people ask constantly - what’s the difference between CTO and VP of Engineering? Here’s my honest take:

In theory:

• CTO owns technology strategy and vision
• VPE owns engineering execution and team

With owns I mean: Making the decisions. If you own a car, you have the last word on where it is going.

In practice: At most companies, especially startups, these blur completely. I’ve seen CTOs who only code and never talk to the board. I’ve seen VPEs who set all the technical direction while the CTO does… something. The title matters less than the actual responsibilities.

What matters for you is understanding what your company expects from each role, and whether you’re doing work that matches your title (and compensation). Does the VP of Engineering report to the CTO? Sometimes. Sometimes they’re peers. Sometimes there’s no CTO at all. If there’s a mismatch between your responsibilities and your title, that’s worth addressing.

Most coaching programs ignore VPEs entirely. They’re focused on the C-suite or on early managers. The senior-but-not-quite-executive level falls through the cracks.

That’s a mistake. VPEs are running engineering at companies that matter. They’re making decisions that affect hundreds of developers and millions in revenue. They deserve someone in their corner who understands the specific challenges of the role.

Whether you’re trying to grow into your current role, preparing for the next one, or just need someone to think through problems with - you shouldn’t have to figure it out alone.

I coach VPEs and engineering leaders who want to level up. Whether that means becoming a better VPE or preparing for CTO, I’ve been in both seats and I know what it takes.

Learn About VP Engineering Coaching