The article "Neither manager, nor individual contributor…" by Nicolas Martignole explores the evolution of developer career paths in 2025, particularly with the rise of artificial intelligence. Traditionally, developers chose between becoming a manager or an individual contributor, but AI is transforming these roles. The author proposes three distinct paths: "AI Orchestrator", "Augmented Craftsman" and "Code Philosopher".
AI Orchestrator: managing an army of AIs
The AI Orchestrator (formerly technical management) manages an "army of AIs" rather than humans. This role involves defining AI implementation architectures, validating AI outputs, arbitrating conflicts between different AI tools, and training juniors to use these tools effectively. It requires a "big picture" vision, prompt engineering skills, infinite patience for debugging AI hallucinations, and the wisdom to know when to reject AI suggestions. While it saves time on administrative tasks, it introduces new cognitive loads related to arbitrating between human developers and AI.
Augmented Craftsman: hands in the code, augmented
The Augmented Craftsman (formerly individual contributor) keeps their hands in the code but uses powerful AI tools to increase productivity. They code much faster, solve complex problems beyond the current capabilities of AI, create patterns that AI can follow, and maintain technical excellence in a world where most code is AI-generated. This path suits those who love creating and possess sharp technical expertise, a constant-learning mindset, critical thinking, and the humility to accept that a junior with AI can sometimes code faster.
Cognitive Load 2.0: the burden of validation
The article highlights a major challenge common to both paths: "Cognitive Load 2.0", or the cognitive burden of validation. This includes checking AI-generated code for security flaws, understanding generated code, explaining AI-related issues, and managing the anxiety of not fully understanding one's own codebase. This new load adds to the intrinsic (learning AI tools), extraneous (managing AI notifications), and germane (maintaining the overall vision) cognitive loads.
Code Philosopher: the third path
Finally, a less-discussed third path is introduced: the Code Philosopher. This role involves questioning the "why" of code, conceptualizing ideal systems, advocating against inappropriate uses of AI, and protecting architectural integrity against AI overreach. Its value lies in understanding the purpose and implications of technology in a world where coding becomes ubiquitous. The author also discusses the environmental and energy impacts of AI, suggesting the need for "GreenAI" and prompt-optimization experts.
Fundamental questions for 2025
The article concludes by inviting developers to reflect on their motivations and aspirations for the next five years. Key questions: do you love coding or solving problems? Do you want to be a creator or a validator of AI's work? Committed to continuous learning or do you prefer capitalizing on what you already know? Are you seeking local impact (your code) or global impact (organizational architecture)? What will you be proud of in five years: orchestrating AIs, writing unique code, preventing AI misuse, or optimizing AI usage?
Autonomy redefined
The article insists: true technical autonomy now consists of understanding when, what, and why to code, with the human factor of organizational and human architecture remaining paramount. In this new paradigm, developers are no longer defined solely by their management track or individual contribution, but by how they choose to navigate and shape the AI-augmented development landscape.