I’ve written plenty about documentation already (just recently here and here), so consider this a continuation of that thread. If you missed the earlier pieces, I’ll drop placeholders for them at the end. For now, let’s talk about a role that quietly makes or breaks the whole idea of “documentation as a real product” inside an engineering organization: the principal engineer.
People love to treat documentation like something you toss over the wall to a tech writer or leave in a Jira ticket until someone “has time.” A principal engineer doesn’t get to play that game. If anything, they’re the last person who can afford to pretend docs are an afterthought, because they’re the ones who end up carrying the blast radius when those docs fail. And they will fail if the principal engineer isn’t shaping them with the same rigor they apply to architecture, APIs, and operational design.
A principal engineer isn’t writing every page. They’re not your documentation vending machine. What they do is far more structural. They set the expectations for how documentation fits into the engineering lifecycle. They define the standard for what good looks like. They remove ambiguity. They make it impossible for other engineers to shrug and say, “I didn’t know that needed to be documented.” And they act as the connective tissue between engineering, product, and whoever else depends on what the system actually does versus what people assume it does.
Continue reading “How Principal Engineers Shape Documentation as a Product + Punch List Lagniappe”
You must be logged in to post a comment.