Both CTO and VP are "hands-on" meaning they will get into the nitty gritty details of how we develop software or deploy infrastructure.
No roadmap to be seen. No high-level goal. No security policy in place. No offboarding process. No onboarding policy. No central auth server. A few different job schedulers. Few different container orchestration solutions. etc
My theory: they got promoted pushed to management roles (first as founder becoming CTO, then manager becoming VP) and now the salary is too high to go back.
This works as he is a strong, opinionated, intelligent, yet empathetic person who leads the charge on our engineering standards from the front line. He and the org have realised the problems that come with this approach, so have a head of engineering and the engineering leadership board (including the CTO) that fulfill the other functions of a CTO, such as the people management, resource planning, general process and procedure.
This leads to a great situation where we have a gun of a technical hands on CTO that rallies the troops, but the other typical CTO functions aren't neglected either
Have you asked about these things? Maybe they are there, just not visible to you. A 500-employee company is pretty big already.
> No security policy in place.
How is that possible? Are you saying there's no security policy or a minimal security policy? I can't imagine how a company gets to 500 employees without a single security incident that forces your hand to create some kind of formal policy.
Even a 50 person company without that is in for a bad time.
Do they have good advisors?