Promoting a senior engineer into a management role without preparation is a risky shortcut. Many organizations either promote by tenure or expect new managers to figure things out on the fly. A Manager-in-Training (MiT) program reduces that risk by giving future leaders structured practice, feedback, and real accountability before they inherit full team responsibility.

Why run a Manager-in-Training program

Developing managers internally preserves institutional knowledge, rewards technical career paths, and improves retention. More importantly, a short, focused program converts natural technical authority into people leadership skills: running 1:1s, prioritizing work across stakeholders, coaching for performance, and making trade-offs that balance product and engineering health.

Overview of the approach

This is a practical, phased case-style approach that teams can adapt. It combines mentoring, hands-on leadership experiments, and objective evaluation. The program is scalable: you can run it for one candidate or a small cohort.

• Duration: A six-month sequence of guided practice and review (customize to your context).
• Structure: Four phases Prepare, Shadow, Practice, Lead with support.
• Outcomes: A candidate who can run core managerial responsibilities independently and demonstrate measurable impact on team health and delivery.

Phase 0: Clarify intent and success signals

Before you start, be explicit about why the program exists and what success looks like. Typical objectives include:

• Reduce risk when promoting by providing supervised experience.
• Create a consistent leadership baseline across teams.
• Offer a compelling career path for ICs who want to lead without surprise.

Define success signals that are observable and objective. Examples you can adapt:

• Can run effective 1:1s where coaching goals and next steps are set.
• Can lead planning conversations and influence prioritization decisions across product and engineering.
• Is able to resolve at least two interpersonal or technical disputes with a coach present and document the outcome and learning.
• Delivers a small program of work that improves a team metric or developer experience item.

Selecting candidates

Not every star IC will make a great manager, and thats okay. Use a lightweight nomination and application process:

• Self-nomination or manager nomination with a short written rationale.
• Manager and peer references focusing on evidence of collaboration, curiosity about people work, and willingness to take ownership beyond code.
• A short interview focused on scenarios: handling a missed deadline, delivering tough feedback, and prioritizing competing requests.

Selection criteria should emphasize mindset and coachability more than polished soft skills. Candidates who demonstrate curiosity, empathy, and a desire to learn usually progress fastest.

Program curriculum and activities

Mix classroom-style sessions with practical experiments. Below is a modular curriculum you can run weekly or biweekly.

• Foundations workshops short, peer-led sessions on running 1:1s, giving feedback, delegation patterns, prioritization frameworks, and escalation paths.
• Shadowing candidates observe an experienced manager for 46 weeks: team meetings, 1:1s, stakeholder syncs, and performance conversations.
• Paired leadership the candidate co-leads meetings with the manager and takes responsibility for follow-ups.
• Micro-assignments short, timeboxed responsibilities such as owning an on-call rotation redesign, conducting a retrospective to address a recurring team issue, or owning a small hiring task.
• Coaching labs role-play exercises for tough conversations (e.g., performance problems, mismatched expectations) with a coach and peers giving feedback.
• Stakeholder rotations short stints working directly with product, design, or support to practice translating technical trade-offs into product outcomes.
• Reflective practice a structured learning journal and biweekly reflection session with the coach to capture lessons and adjust the plan.

Evaluation framework

Use a rubric with concrete behaviors rather than vague impressions. Keep evaluation transparent and evidence-based. A simple three-level rubric (Developing / Competent / Ready) across core domains works well:

• Communication: Sets clear expectations, summarizes decisions, adapts style for stakeholders.
• Coaching and feedback: Identifies skill gaps, delivers actionable feedback, supports follow-through.
• Execution and prioritization: Makes trade-offs explicit, aligns team goals with product outcomes, manages delivery risks.
• Team health and culture: Detects early signs of burnout, fosters trust, handles conflict constructively.
• Operational skills: Runs rituals with purpose, maintains documentation, escalates issues timely.

Gather evidence for each rubric item: meeting recordings or notes, artifacts from micro-assignments, peer feedback, and the candidate’s reflection journal. Use monthly calibration sessions with the coach and sponsoring manager to avoid bias.

Support structure

Successful MiT programs are staffed, not just suggested. Key roles:

• Sponsor: A senior leader who secures time and sets expectations with the candidate’s manager.
• Coach: An experienced manager who runs the program, gives feedback, and acts as an escalation point.
• Peer cohort: A small group of candidates who share lessons, practice together, and provide mutual support.

Protect candidate time. If a candidates workload is full of high-priority delivery, they won’t learn management by being pulled into more tickets. Adjust responsibilities so candidates can fully engage in the program.

Real-world example

Consider an anonymized composite example to see how this plays out. A mid-size product org ran a six-month MiT pilot with three candidates. Each candidate spent the first month shadowing, the next two months co-leading and taking micro-assignments, then two months owning a small team charter with a mentor available. Outcomes included clearer readiness signals for promotions, reduced churn among senior ICs who were undecided about management, and stronger alignment across product and engineering in the teams where candidates practiced.

Note: this example is representative of common practice and offered to illustrate the program flownot as a universal template. Adapt timelines and scope to your team’s context.

Scaling and measuring impact

Start small and iterate. Track qualitative and quantitative signals over time:

• Promotion readiness rate: percentage of candidates approved to take on full manager responsibilities after the program.
• Retention of participants compared to peers.
• Manager effectiveness feedback from direct reports and peers collected at regular intervals.
• Operational outcomes from micro-assignments, such as reduced on-call noise or improved deployment predictability.

Avoid over-indexing on single metrics. The primary goal is reducing the risk of a bad promotion and creating reliable leadership habits.

Common pitfalls and how to avoid them

• Too theoretical Avoid long lecture tracks with no practice. Prioritize real, supervised leadership tasks.
• Insufficient coaching bandwidth One coach for many candidates dilutes feedback. Keep cohorts small or fund dedicated coaching time.
• Promotion by assumption A candidates technical excellence isnt enough. Use the rubric to make promotion decisions transparent.
• No timeline or protected time If candidates are overloaded with delivery work, learning stalls. Ensure deliverables are rebalanced.

Practical templates you can copy

• Weekly agenda 1 workshop session, 1 shadow session, 1 coaching lab, and 36 hours of micro-assignment work.
• 1:1 checklist Agenda, two coaching questions, one development goal, and one follow-up item.
• Micro-assignment template Objective, scope, stakeholders, success criteria, timebox, and handoff plan.

Next steps to launch

To get started this quarter:

1. Secure a sponsor and a coach with protected time.
2. Run a one-month pilot with one candidate and short micro-assignments.
3. Collect feedback, iterate the rubric, and document the playbook for future cohorts.

Building managers is an investment that pays off in team stability and better outcomes. A structured Manager-in-Training program turns intuition into repeatable practice and gives both candidates and organizations a safer path to leadership.