The AE/SE pairing model is broken, and there is no functional escalation path when it goes wrong. I spent three years split between two partnerships: one where I was actively undermined, scapegoated in front of customers, and effectively muzzled from communicating directly with prospects near quarter-end—and a second where I carried the full strategic and technical load for an AM who openly described himself as "not an IT guy" in customer meetings and never developed the fluency the role requires. In both cases, I raised concerns. In both cases, nothing structurally changed.
The compensation model is inequitable by design. SEs run 80/20 salary-to-commission. AMs run 50/50. But when attainment is shared, SEs absorb identical downside with a fraction of the upside. Across three years I received zero raises—not one—while the cost of living climbed steadily. I was passed over for RSUs in years where my AM, carrying the same attainment number, received them. My final performance review contained auto-generated language threatening my job. My AM's did not. Same number. Different consequences. No one ever explained why, because there is no good explanation.
Leadership stood on a CPX stage and invited "brutal honesty"—displayed the CEO's email on the screen and told us to use it. I did. The response I got wasn't from the CEO. It was from a middle manager telling me to filter feedback through hierarchy before it reaches the top. That's not a feedback culture. That's the performance of one.
If you are an SE considering this role: go in with eyes open. You may be evaluated on a number you don't control, penalized for outcomes driven by a partner you didn't choose, and find that the internal systems designed to protect you are mostly decorative.
