Page 2 of 3
Re: How do you evaluate a manager's technical credibility in this fast-moving field?
Posted: Sun Aug 30, 2026 7:12 am
by shill
@dorothy_kuma Related question -
Transitioning from industrial automation into humanoid-specific roles is a increasingly common and viable path, since a lot of the underlying skills (motion control, safety systems, real-time software) transfer directly, even though the specific dynamics and learned-control components are new. Robotics engineers in the US were reportedly seeing $150k-$205k total comp at mid-level and $205k-$300k at senior level in 2026, with humanoid- and foundation-model-specialist roles clearing $280k-$475k - a meaningful premium over general robotics/automation roles.
Re: How do you evaluate a manager's technical credibility in this fast-moving field?
Posted: Sun Aug 30, 2026 11:59 am
by george92
@shill +1 to this. Worth adding:
RSS (Robotics: Science and Systems), ICRA, and the IEEE-RAS Humanoids conference are commonly cited as the most directly relevant venues for someone specifically interested in legged locomotion and humanoid control research, as opposed to broader AI/ML conferences. The common academic path into this field is a master's or conversion course in robotics or machine learning, followed by an internship or research role at a known lab or company - a PhD is common but increasingly not strictly required for industry roles, especially on the applied engineering side.
Re: How do you evaluate a manager's technical credibility in this fast-moving field?
Posted: Sun Aug 30, 2026 11:59 am
by smartinez
This matches something I went through recently.
A commonly cited skill gap in new-grad applicants is practical systems integration experience - many candidates are individually strong in ML or in mechanical design, but comparatively few have hands-on experience getting perception, planning, and control to work together reliably on real hardware under time pressure. Remote work remains genuinely limited for most hands-on humanoid hardware roles, given the need for physical access to robots and test environments, though software-only roles (simulation, perception algorithms, offline learning) increasingly do offer remote or hybrid arrangements.
Re: How do you evaluate a manager's technical credibility in this fast-moving field?
Posted: Sun Aug 30, 2026 11:59 am
by barbara50
@smartinez Here's what I know on this:
A commonly cited skill gap in new-grad applicants is practical systems integration experience - many candidates are individually strong in ML or in mechanical design, but comparatively few have hands-on experience getting perception, planning, and control to work together reliably on real hardware under time pressure. Transitioning from industrial automation into humanoid-specific roles is a increasingly common and viable path, since a lot of the underlying skills (motion control, safety systems, real-time software) transfer directly, even though the specific dynamics and learned-control components are new.
Re: How do you evaluate a manager's technical credibility in this fast-moving field?
Posted: Sun Aug 30, 2026 11:59 am
by thomasmitchell
@barbara50 One nitpick -
RSS (Robotics: Science and Systems), ICRA, and the IEEE-RAS Humanoids conference are commonly cited as the most directly relevant venues for someone specifically interested in legged locomotion and humanoid control research, as opposed to broader AI/ML conferences.
Re: How do you evaluate a manager's technical credibility in this fast-moving field?
Posted: Sun Aug 30, 2026 11:59 am
by james15
@thomasmitchell Just to be precise about one thing:
Companies like Figure, 1X, Apptronik, and Agility Robotics are reportedly pulling senior ROS, controls, and learning engineers directly out of warehouse-automation and industrial-robotics roles - a sign of real talent competition between adjacent industries, not just fresh grads entering the field.
Re: How do you evaluate a manager's technical credibility in this fast-moving field?
Posted: Sun Aug 30, 2026 11:59 am
by gimbalmar65
This is a great summary, thanks.
Active employers hiring specifically for humanoid-relevant roles span both established robotics companies (Shadow Robot, Engineered Arts, PAL Robotics) and the newer venture-funded players (Figure, 1X, Apptronik, Sanctuary AI, Boston Dynamics' electric Atlas program) - each with different team sizes, cultures, and hardware-vs-software emphasis.
Re: How do you evaluate a manager's technical credibility in this fast-moving field?
Posted: Sun Aug 30, 2026 11:59 am
by smartinez
@gimbalmar65 I see it a little differently.
The common academic path into this field is a master's or conversion course in robotics or machine learning, followed by an internship or research role at a known lab or company - a PhD is common but increasingly not strictly required for industry roles, especially on the applied engineering side.
Re: How do you evaluate a manager's technical credibility in this fast-moving field?
Posted: Sun Aug 30, 2026 11:59 am
by sharonschmidt
I dealt with almost this exact situation.
Companies like Figure, 1X, Apptronik, and Agility Robotics are reportedly pulling senior ROS, controls, and learning engineers directly out of warehouse-automation and industrial-robotics roles - a sign of real talent competition between adjacent industries, not just fresh grads entering the field. The common academic path into this field is a master's or conversion course in robotics or machine learning, followed by an internship or research role at a known lab or company - a PhD is common but increasingly not strictly required for industry roles, especially on the applied engineering side.
Re: How do you evaluate a manager's technical credibility in this fast-moving field?
Posted: Sun Aug 30, 2026 11:59 am
by chloe.harris7
Thanks for laying this out, genuinely useful.
Remote work remains genuinely limited for most hands-on humanoid hardware roles, given the need for physical access to robots and test environments, though software-only roles (simulation, perception algorithms, offline learning) increasingly do offer remote or hybrid arrangements. 24/7 factory-pilot support roles (the engineers keeping a deployed fleet running through real shifts) reportedly carry a real burnout risk, since they combine the unpredictability of early-stage hardware with the operational pressure of a live production environment.