From where you're coming from, I think, your next steps would be thinking "who should work on this" vs. "I'll pick this up because I can do it quickly."
If you're not enabling your team to take over your job, you're doing it wrong. And by a comment I saw elsewhere, the tendency to control things is natural, but you should resist that - it's the only way you can scale.
If your organization doesn't have that kind of individual contributor leveling, that would be a good conversation to have. Or if your team isn't big enough, maybe its time to look for a new challenge.
There will be a learning curve and a mindset shift, but it's really the only way that you truly become a force multiplier.
Soon, your commits will go down, but your reviews will go up.
Later, your reviews will go down, but your strategy/design/planning docs/conversations will go up. Your job is designing for the 1-3yr future (or more but rare) and across the organization.
Curious - how do you end up handling transactions that span services?
I'm getting into go, but there doesn't seem to be a great pattern for this. Used to @Transactional on the service, so feels annoying in having to build that.
If you're not enabling your team to take over your job, you're doing it wrong. And by a comment I saw elsewhere, the tendency to control things is natural, but you should resist that - it's the only way you can scale.
If your organization doesn't have that kind of individual contributor leveling, that would be a good conversation to have. Or if your team isn't big enough, maybe its time to look for a new challenge.
There will be a learning curve and a mindset shift, but it's really the only way that you truly become a force multiplier.
Soon, your commits will go down, but your reviews will go up.
Later, your reviews will go down, but your strategy/design/planning docs/conversations will go up. Your job is designing for the 1-3yr future (or more but rare) and across the organization.