9 ms·

This should be re-written: "You must like dealing with people to be great at management." This is more accurate: "You must like talking with people to be gre

This should be re-written: "You must like dealing with people to be great at management." This is more accurate: "You must like talking with people to be great at management." When I first started managing, I tried to send people a lot of email. I like writing, so email comes naturally. One thing I learned, rather quickly, is that most people don't like writing. Even well educated people don't like writing. Most people find it easier to talk than to write. Most people would rather talk an issue through than write about it. The more difficult the issue, the more that people want to talk. The next line should have been the sub-headline: "Imagine you spend a full day in back-to-back 1:1s talking to people. Does that sound awful or awesome?" This bit is very true: "Unfortunately at many places, you’re roadblocked in advancing your career unless you become a manager. This sadly incentivizes the wrong outcomes, in which people who don’t love dealing with people become bad managers, and both they and their team suffers." I wish this was more true: "In more technical roles, we are fortunate that many companies support separate but equal career tracks, where at a certain level of seniority you can choose to go deep into the craft of your discipline or go into people management." I have mostly worked with startups during the last 16 years, and in all of them the top managers were paid more than the top engineers. The only "exceptions" were the founders who weren't paying themselves. But obviously, their path to renumeration is very different than it is for those of us getting paid a wage.

sokoloff 11y ago
Good point on talking vs writing. I've stumbled the same. Finding the right balance among writing and talking crossed with 1x1/small group and large group is an art. Though I'm in management now, I can say that our pay scale is fairly even. Top engineers make more than most managers, though our very most senior execs (CxO) still more than our top engineers, which I think is fine.
djKianoosh 11y ago
no. talking in person appeals to extroverts, sure, but for real complex subjects I actually prefer writing it all out so I can explore every detail and nuance. verbal communication has its place, but I find more complex ideas deserve more thoughtful and thorough exposition. ymmv
- nostrademons 11y ago
  Part of what makes a good manager is understanding what works for each report and then adjusting your communication style to them.
kzhahou 11y ago
I take exception with the all-day 1-1s thing. It's actually pretty easy to spend all day talking to people (minus a hoarse voice after 3-4 hours). What's HARD, and what actually makes for a good manager, is to actually then get off your ass and work hard over the next week to actually help SOLVE the problems you heard about. Either directly, or assisting the team member to find a solution. Oh, how many managers I've had that were happy to listen and nod attentively and give easy advice, but who didn't actually put any energy into my problem. Or... They wound up spending the week making it worse.
- branchless 11y ago
  Exactly. Empathy for 30 minutes out of my day then at 17:30 I'm still hammering out a problem when they leave.
- ianbicking 11y ago
  I've found it effective when a hard problem comes up in a 1:1 to actually try to solve it on the spot, or at least get the solution launched - look at some code, compose an email together, try something out, do a little research. It's important to give your report your devoted attention, but it's appropriate to also direct attention at your reports problems and work through them collaboratively. It also might help the person solve those problems more confidently on their own in the future.
  - danieltillett 11y ago
    You have to be really careful here as you can very quickly lead the person into “learned helplessness”. If they can rely on you to solve all problems they often will. Early on I fell into this trap and it was very difficult to get out of.
    - karmelapple 11y ago
      The difference may be finding where to remove a barrier (a good thing for a manager to do) and doing someone's work for them (a bad thing for a manager to do).
danieltillett 11y ago
My experience is you must spend considerable one-on-one time with each of your reports to be a “good” manager. You need to allocate at least 30 minutes per day (1 hour is better) just talking (averaged over the week) and not micromanaging. You don’t even need to talk about work, you just need talk devoting 100% of your attention to the person. If you do this then everything will be great no matter what else happens - if you don’t you just build up management debt that will come back and bite you in the backside at some point in the future. Of course the problem is as soon as you have more than a few direct reports you will run out of time in the day and you will start to build up management debt. I haven’t solved that problem :)
- thaumasiotes 11y ago
  > as soon as you have more than a few direct reports you will run out of time in the day and you will start to build up management debt. I haven’t solved that problem Surely the solution to this is to introduce a middle layer of management between you and your formerly-direct reports? Assuming a limit of 15 direct reports, managing 1000 people will require 3 layers of management - 67 front-line managers, 5 middle managers, and one Boss of All the Bosses. One person can't do it.
  - danieltillett 11y ago
    This is exactly why middle management exists :) My experience is more than eight direct reports starts to build up management debt if you have other things to do. Once you go over this you can only make it work by doing a lot of overtime. At one point I had 14 direct reports and I did nothing other than work, sleep and eat. Of course this is not sustainable.
    - capitalsigma 11y ago
      I heard the same thing (>= 8 reports --> all of your time is 1:1s) from my manager.
    - eitally 11y ago
      I'm with you on most of your ideas, but I don't want people thinking 8 is some kind of magic number. For new managers, it might be 3. For experienced managers managing other experienced managers providing mostly strategic guidance but not getting into weekly supervision, it could be 20. For me, an experience leader of people, I get uncomfortable above about 6 directs because I know I can't commit to knowing enough about their work to adequately assess their performance, or coach them through career success ... but that "6" is a very personal and somewhat arbitrary number. Maybe in five more years I'll be able to do more ... or maybe I'll become yoda-like and only tackle one pet at a time.
Jimmy 11y ago
>One thing I learned, rather quickly, is that most people don't like writing. Even well educated people don't like writing. Most people find it easier to talk than to write. Most people would rather talk an issue through than write about it. The more difficult the issue, the more that people want to talk. This is one of the first things I learned on my first job, and it was a somewhat bizarre realization. I both love writing, and find that it's the easiest mode of communication for me. When I had a question for someone, my first instinct was to send them an IM and start a discussion. The response was always "come to my desk so we can talk". I almost felt like they were intentionally going out of their way to pick on me. Eventually, I realized that was just the preferred mode of communication for most people. There are definitely situations, like if you need help debugging, where it's nice to have someone standing there in person. But if we're just going to have a discussion about something, like a design issue for example, then I like writing. It also has the practical benefit that it gives you a permanent record of what everyone said for free.
- rorykoehler 11y ago
  I agree. When people talk 80% of what is said is gone within the day (whiteboard and a camera help this somewhat). Writing is a much better form of communication for longterm business health. Also IM allows async communication so you're not disturbing people who are in the flow.
analog31 11y ago
As others have suggested, it helps to be able to handle whatever mode of communication is preferred by the other person. Writing things down works better for some people, but there are a lot of things that people will never communicate in writing, or express verbally in front of an audience. This is especially true if there is a "political" atmosphere, which is also when a good manager's abilities are needed the most. I don't think it means a manager needs to be an extrovert. I had a boss who was quite introverted, but she handled 1:1's extremely well because of just being a great manager, as well as deeply respected throughout the organization. And I had an extroverted boss, to whom I was afraid to reveal any substantive information in my 1:1's.
- nicoburns 11y ago
  Introverts are often just as good or better than extraverts in 1-on-1 social situations - it's large group situations (esp. with loud personalities who don't leave gaps in the conversation) where they can struggle.
dustingetz 11y ago
I have a theory about the manager vs I IC pay thing, it's that information is more valuable than skills?
nunez 11y ago
> "In more technical roles, we are fortunate that many companies support separate but equal career tracks, where at a certain level of seniority you can choose to go deep into the craft of your discipline or go into people management." Something inside of me makes me feel like many (MANY!) senior managers like to only pay lip service to this. Something like "sure, we'll pay the senior software engineers/architects/fellows/whatever a pretty good salary, but you can gosh darn bet that their managers are making more/way more" Please tell me that I'm wrong here. (As for me, I really want to give management a try. I like meetings, I like people and I like making awesome things with awesome teams. I also feel like I'm starting to hit my compensation limit as an engineer. Lastly, I want to start my own business in the next few years and I feel that the skills learned from doing management are more cross-applicable than the skills learned as an engineer.)

sokoloff 11y ago

Good point on talking vs writing. I've stumbled the same. Finding the right balance among writing and talking crossed with 1x1/small group and large group is an art. Though I'm in management now, I can say that our pay scale is fairly even. Top engineers make more than most managers, though our very most senior execs (CxO) still more than our top engineers, which I think is fine.

djKianoosh 11y ago

no. talking in person appeals to extroverts, sure, but for real complex subjects I actually prefer writing it all out so I can explore every detail and nuance. verbal communication has its place, but I find more complex ideas deserve more thoughtful and thorough exposition. ymmv

nostrademons 11y ago
Part of what makes a good manager is understanding what works for each report and then adjusting your communication style to them.

kzhahou 11y ago

I take exception with the all-day 1-1s thing. It's actually pretty easy to spend all day talking to people (minus a hoarse voice after 3-4 hours). What's HARD, and what actually makes for a good manager, is to actually then get off your ass and work hard over the next week to actually help SOLVE the problems you heard about. Either directly, or assisting the team member to find a solution. Oh, how many managers I've had that were happy to listen and nod attentively and give easy advice, but who didn't actually put any energy into my problem. Or... They wound up spending the week making it worse.

branchless 11y ago
Exactly. Empathy for 30 minutes out of my day then at 17:30 I'm still hammering out a problem when they leave.
ianbicking 11y ago
I've found it effective when a hard problem comes up in a 1:1 to actually try to solve it on the spot, or at least get the solution launched - look at some code, compose an email together, try something out, do a little research. It's important to give your report your devoted attention, but it's appropriate to also direct attention at your reports problems and work through them collaboratively. It also might help the person solve those problems more confidently on their own in the future.
- danieltillett 11y ago
  You have to be really careful here as you can very quickly lead the person into “learned helplessness”. If they can rely on you to solve all problems they often will. Early on I fell into this trap and it was very difficult to get out of.
  - karmelapple 11y ago
    The difference may be finding where to remove a barrier (a good thing for a manager to do) and doing someone's work for them (a bad thing for a manager to do).

danieltillett 11y ago

My experience is you must spend considerable one-on-one time with each of your reports to be a “good” manager. You need to allocate at least 30 minutes per day (1 hour is better) just talking (averaged over the week) and not micromanaging. You don’t even need to talk about work, you just need talk devoting 100% of your attention to the person. If you do this then everything will be great no matter what else happens - if you don’t you just build up management debt that will come back and bite you in the backside at some point in the future. Of course the problem is as soon as you have more than a few direct reports you will run out of time in the day and you will start to build up management debt. I haven’t solved that problem :)

thaumasiotes 11y ago
> as soon as you have more than a few direct reports you will run out of time in the day and you will start to build up management debt. I haven’t solved that problem Surely the solution to this is to introduce a middle layer of management between you and your formerly-direct reports? Assuming a limit of 15 direct reports, managing 1000 people will require 3 layers of management - 67 front-line managers, 5 middle managers, and one Boss of All the Bosses. One person can't do it.
- danieltillett 11y ago
  This is exactly why middle management exists :) My experience is more than eight direct reports starts to build up management debt if you have other things to do. Once you go over this you can only make it work by doing a lot of overtime. At one point I had 14 direct reports and I did nothing other than work, sleep and eat. Of course this is not sustainable.
  - capitalsigma 11y ago
    I heard the same thing (>= 8 reports --> all of your time is 1:1s) from my manager.
  - eitally 11y ago
    I'm with you on most of your ideas, but I don't want people thinking 8 is some kind of magic number. For new managers, it might be 3. For experienced managers managing other experienced managers providing mostly strategic guidance but not getting into weekly supervision, it could be 20. For me, an experience leader of people, I get uncomfortable above about 6 directs because I know I can't commit to knowing enough about their work to adequately assess their performance, or coach them through career success ... but that "6" is a very personal and somewhat arbitrary number. Maybe in five more years I'll be able to do more ... or maybe I'll become yoda-like and only tackle one pet at a time.

Jimmy 11y ago

>One thing I learned, rather quickly, is that most people don't like writing. Even well educated people don't like writing. Most people find it easier to talk than to write. Most people would rather talk an issue through than write about it. The more difficult the issue, the more that people want to talk. This is one of the first things I learned on my first job, and it was a somewhat bizarre realization. I both love writing, and find that it's the easiest mode of communication for me. When I had a question for someone, my first instinct was to send them an IM and start a discussion. The response was always "come to my desk so we can talk". I almost felt like they were intentionally going out of their way to pick on me. Eventually, I realized that was just the preferred mode of communication for most people. There are definitely situations, like if you need help debugging, where it's nice to have someone standing there in person. But if we're just going to have a discussion about something, like a design issue for example, then I like writing. It also has the practical benefit that it gives you a permanent record of what everyone said for free.

rorykoehler 11y ago
I agree. When people talk 80% of what is said is gone within the day (whiteboard and a camera help this somewhat). Writing is a much better form of communication for longterm business health. Also IM allows async communication so you're not disturbing people who are in the flow.

analog31 11y ago

As others have suggested, it helps to be able to handle whatever mode of communication is preferred by the other person. Writing things down works better for some people, but there are a lot of things that people will never communicate in writing, or express verbally in front of an audience. This is especially true if there is a "political" atmosphere, which is also when a good manager's abilities are needed the most. I don't think it means a manager needs to be an extrovert. I had a boss who was quite introverted, but she handled 1:1's extremely well because of just being a great manager, as well as deeply respected throughout the organization. And I had an extroverted boss, to whom I was afraid to reveal any substantive information in my 1:1's.

nicoburns 11y ago
Introverts are often just as good or better than extraverts in 1-on-1 social situations - it's large group situations (esp. with loud personalities who don't leave gaps in the conversation) where they can struggle.

dustingetz 11y ago

I have a theory about the manager vs I IC pay thing, it's that information is more valuable than skills?

nunez 11y ago

> "In more technical roles, we are fortunate that many companies support separate but equal career tracks, where at a certain level of seniority you can choose to go deep into the craft of your discipline or go into people management." Something inside of me makes me feel like many (MANY!) senior managers like to only pay lip service to this. Something like "sure, we'll pay the senior software engineers/architects/fellows/whatever a pretty good salary, but you can gosh darn bet that their managers are making more/way more" Please tell me that I'm wrong here. (As for me, I really want to give management a try. I like meetings, I like people and I like making awesome things with awesome teams. I also feel like I'm starting to hit my compensation limit as an engineer. Lastly, I want to start my own business in the next few years and I feel that the skills learned from doing management are more cross-applicable than the skills learned as an engineer.)