As engineering, product, design, DS, etc. melt into a new kind of role, I was reflecting on what roles might look like in the future. For example, when I look at the Claude Code team I see what I think is five archetypes: 1. Prototyper: comes up with brand new ideas; churns out many ideas, most of which don't ship 2. Builder: quickly turns a prototype/idea into production-grade product/infra 3. Sweeper: cleans up the UI, simplifies the code and system, unships, optimizes performance 4. Grower: takes a product that has been built and iterates on it to improve Product-Market Fit 5. Maintainer: owns a mature system to make it secure, reliable, fast, and efficient as it scales Many people span across 2 roles, and sometimes 3 roles. I also notice that these roles are not really tied to job function -- eg. across Anthropic, some designers match category 1, some 2, some 3; same for engineers, PM, DS. A healthy team needs a mix of these, depending on the product: - A product that is new and pre-PMF needs people that are strong at 1+2+3 - A product that is growing and has found PMF needs 2+3+4 and some 5 - A product that has strong PMF needs 3+4+5 and some 2 Maybe product roles of the future will look more like this, and less like the domain-specific roles of today?

Jun 28, 2026 · 11:45 PM UTC

884
2,444
20,082
3,153,667
Sort replies: Relevant Recent Liked
Replying to @bcherny
i never quite liked the idea of defining archetypes, because it's easy for people to look at it and think "ah that's who i am" and never question themselves again in reality, a person's role often needs to evolve along with the project. when i'm starting a new project i'm a prototyper and builder, but very soon i become a sweeper when rough edges become the bottleneck. then i become a grower and maintainer as the project becomes more mature. if i box myself into a particular role, i would have to give up the project somewhere along the way and increasingly, when we juggle between multiple projects at the same time, we need to be able to play different roles in different places. categorizing ourselves into certain archetypes often prevent people from expanding their ambition so my advice - stay flexible and be obsessed with whatever is important for achieving your goal, and care less about the boundaries of roles that will continue to blur over time
25
26
782
115,989
Totally agree. Roles often change over time/project
10
1
247
78,462
Replying to @bcherny
The missing sixth archetype: the Orchestrator. The person who knows which of these five to deploy, when, and how to transition between them as the product matures. That role is rarer than all five combined and nobody has a job title for it yet.
3
13
16,367
The way I think about it: ideally you hire the kinds of people and set up team/incentives in a way that people self-organize. As projects and ideas change more and more frequently, I’ve found that having a central coordinator works less well. Claude can do some of this also.
28
10,873
Replying to @bcherny
Why do we need builder and sweeper roles if coding is mostly solved? Can't you just loop Claude on it?
6
1
86
56,349
Claude can help with all of these to varying extents, and will improve over time. Agree that Sweeper/Builder Claude is quite good at today.
3
56
46,060
Replying to @bcherny
Curious how DS is fitting into the archetypes? Is it mostly 4? at other companies where those roles were more compartmentalized, I feel like DS’s role is increasingly reduced to “data folks” whom can be replaced with self-serve analytics.
1
14
39,110
When I look at Anthropic, we have a mix of DS archetypes also. Some DS are really good at zero-to-one projects, some are great at optimizing mature systems, etc. What is interesting is these archetypes do not seem to be specific to engineering.
3
1
55
30,503
Replying to @bcherny
I'm a grower, not a shower/prototyper
1
1
192
8,797
Replying to @bcherny
I don’t know, it kinda feels like you just made this up.
2
124
6,432
Replying to @bcherny
the a-team (1983) gave us the architecture for the modern ai-enabled software delivery team - the leader (col hannibal smith) - the face (lt tempelton peck) - the muscle (sgt ba baracus) - the wildcard (capt murdock) kids these days just keep reinventing management!
5
6
83
7,919
Replying to @bcherny
Maxim Leyzerovich
@round
May 24
thinking of just calling myself a “constructor”
2
2
28
7,834
Replying to @bcherny
Uh yes I’m here about the grower job? You may have heard of me
32
2,339
Replying to @bcherny
what about ensuring it doesnt have memory leaks?
1
1
23
3,816
Replying to @bcherny @awilkinson
that might work great for startups but the problem starts when you try to turn prototype code into decent code i think we can use Claude Code as an example here. it has improved a lot, but not enough to keep competing with other CLI tools i think it’s only surviving because the real competitive advantage is Anthropic subscriptions
1
24
2,573
Replying to @bcherny
6. Shower: GTM/Marketing
2
20
3,020
Replying to @bcherny
Interesting that the roles are defined by time rather than subject.
1
19
2,222
Replying to @bcherny
pretty sure it will all just collapse to people who just have more intelligence/speed/attention the bitter lesson doesn't just apply to llms
1
15
2,331
Replying to @bcherny
The strongest people I back have never fit the function written on their offer letter.
2
12
462
Replying to @bcherny
Of course
yoni rechtman
@yrechtman
Mar 31
Article

There are only four jobs

A few weeks ago I wrote this aside about how companies/jobs/functions are reorienting toward a new organizing principle. Then this week is went tragically/comically viral for no good reason because of
2
7
2,361
Replying to @bcherny
if you can do 1+2+3+4+5, i want to hire you
5
10
2,784
Replying to @bcherny
Another interesting analog is Imagineering at Disney. They have similar roles and they iterate over prescribed workflows.
11
1,412
Replying to @bcherny
The value of employees with a forward-thinking mindset is understated. While they may not always match others in routine productivity, they are constantly envisioning ways to innovate.. I have worked with team members who are highly skilled at executing tasks with precision within established guidelines. Yet they do not seem to push beyond what is in front of them or imagine new possibilities. I remember when I started at my job, I kept asking the girl training me why she did something the way she was doing it, and her only answer was that it was the way she was taught. She had worked there for years and never once thought there might be a better way. Bringing together these two types of workers... those who dream up ideas and those who bring them to life... creates incredible synergy. The visionary-and-executor combo can create incredible things. Every team benefits from someone who is always thinking one step ahead.
1
10
1,576
Replying to @bcherny
um nothing UX/market research /general consumer facing ??
5
905
Replying to @bcherny
I’ve always been a prototyper only. Claude lets me be all 5 for my site, which is what makes it possible.
4
612
Replying to @bcherny @inababi
Super interesting, and agreed, new roles are coming, and I think you have a pretty good structure here. I also see the prototype + builder role compressing into one. Honestly it was seeing Fable in action for a few days that made me think this. With the next gen models, anyone that can prototype, can build.
1
5
2,682
Replying to @bcherny
Isn’t that just ??? 1. PM 2. Engineer 3. QA 4. Sales/Solutions 5. DevOps/SRE
5
176
Replying to @bcherny
Can you just make an agent for each then?
6
1,325
Replying to @bcherny
Yes exactly you need more skills across multiple disciples now - it’s hard to describe and lots of current jobs / roles don’t understand it but they will soon valueaddvc.com/work

Trace Cohen — Proof of Work

2,900+ pages shipped · 1M+ monthly Google impressions · 15 autonomous AI pipelines in production.

valueaddvc.com
5
1,255
Replying to @bcherny
We already have a term for all five of those: its called a SWE :)
4
334
Replying to @bcherny
이제 분업화는 그닥 의미없지 한사람이 아이디어 발굴과 구현이 모두 가능하니깐
1
2
475
Replying to @bcherny
在市场上找到 5 种不同的角色，会比较困难。 我倾向于让现有的角色多做一些事情。 原来的产品跟设计，除了负责提出新的 idea，同时兼顾着把 idea 与市场匹配，还要做一点原型开发。 工程负责想法的开发、落地、优化与维护，比起以前来说，他们也可以提出自己的想法。 算法跟工程的区别是尝试前沿的技术，并跟工程做一样的事情，他们不过于依赖产品的输入。
2
957
Replying to @bcherny
This is interesting. It also maps pretty neatly with the different stages of company growth. Pre-seed through growth then being a mature incumbent. Perhaps it was never about roles but about what needs to be accomplished.
3
389
Replying to @bcherny @awilkinson
Sweeper seems like a brand new role that came to be as a side effect, pretty important though!
4
841
Replying to @bcherny @DBurkland
Are you seeing companies start to position roles like this? What kind of job descriptions / qualifications should companies use to attract and qualify talent for these roles since they're so different from what the roles have traditionally been?
3
644
Replying to @bcherny
Roles are to make hiring more legible, not cos that's what's needed exactly.. Ideally claude should help the same person wear diff hats at diff times. Then the philosophy carries through.. Also can one rapidly shift between these hats - learning more and compounding in new things . Is the future career more fluid? Will need multiple cycles to figure out..
3
511
Load more