5 ms·

They need to do more than get rid of the higher up executives. If they aren't that good, then everyone from middle management up needs to be cleared out. What t

They need to do more than get rid of the higher up executives. If they aren't that good, then everyone from middle management up needs to be cleared out. What they do instead is regularly clear out others and it results in nothing but a weaker environment and more fear-based maneuvering (which is probably what's desired given how weak Twitter's management is). Twitter gets fairly good ratings on Glassdoor overall, but settles on a 3.2/5 for senior management (ie, even Google's 3.9/5 rating is reflective of poorly regarded senior management). In order to think of management as good (according to Glassdoor), they need a 4.0/5. If they get a 4.2/5 or higher, then they can be considered elite or special. That is, they need to get rid of their crap middle management that's likely getting in the way of everything and driving it all (slowly) into the ground, then use the space that creates to get people in who know what they are doing and that are about progressing forward.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
majormajor 10y ago
Middle management is a really easy area for a growing company to end up weak in. If you promote a junior manager (out of necessity, or as a reward for being a very good junior manager) who's never seen what good higher level management looks like, they don't even know enough about what they don't know. And then most junior managers never end up seeing it. Took me a while before I did - I liked my boss, even, but then they left and someone new came in, and the difference was night and day. Being able to come into a new place and figure out what details to focus on and what to not, identify common problem areas, identify people to delegate to and trust, get upper-management support for you when necessary, figure out where you're still uncomfortable and how to get you to start stretching yourself there... it's not stuff I knew I was missing. And I could've gone another decade without knowing it, probably! Late edit: the more I see of the skills it takes to be good at it, and how easily it can be a thankless role, the more I'm kinda terrified even more of that jump than the dev->manager jump.
- just_had_tea 10y ago
  > And then most junior managers never end up seeing it. Took me a while before I did - I liked my boss, even, but then they left and someone new came in, and the difference was night and day. Being able to come into a new place and figure out what details to focus on and what to not, identify common problem areas, identify people to delegate to and trust, get upper-management support for you when necessary, figure out where you're still uncomfortable and how to get you to start stretching yourself there... it's not stuff I knew I was missing. And I could've gone another decade without knowing it, probably! Perhaps a silly question, and definitely tangential, but do you have resources / pointers on where to learn about these kinds of skills? Or is that what MBA's are for? (sounds snarky but meant sincerely)
  - heymijo 10y ago
    Peter Drucker & W. Edwards Deming These are the two best management thinkers of the 20th century and they are largely ignored today. Here's your chance to engage in some information arbitrage and profit. Drucker wrote A LOT. Assumption from your question: you have yet to gain much, if any, idea about what good management is. If so, The Daily Drucker [1] is a good, easily digestible entry point to the entire body of Peter Drucker's work. Deming came from a statistics, systems, and manufacturing background, which at a glance, makes his work seem from a different world. That couldn't be more wrong. His principles are broadly applicable. Toyota and much of Japanese industry post-WWII learned from Deming and built their businesses on his principles. The easiest place to start with him is with his 14 Points [2]. Read a bit. Compare it to what you have seen or not seen in your work experience. Read more. I spend a lot of time thinking about management and the more I learn, the less convinced I am that there has been anything truly new since these two thinkers. [1] https://www.amazon.com/Daily-Drucker-Insight-Motivation-Getting/dp/0060742445/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1478787358&sr=8-1&keywords=the+daily+drucker https://www.amazon.com/Daily-Drucker-Insight-Motivation-Gett... [2] https://www.deming.org/theman/theories/fourteenpoints https://www.deming.org/theman/theories/fourteenpoints
- baccheion 10y ago
  The reviews on Comparably suggests the executives at Twitter are more of a problem than middle management. That is, they get a rating of 63/100, versus middle management's 71/100. I suppose it doesn't matter either way, as 75/100 (or 80 is even better) would be the lowest score I'd be comfortable with. Ratings according to Engineers: executives = 66/100 and managers = 75/100. Either way, whoever's bad should go.
nikcub 10y ago
> They need to do more than get rid of the higher up executives. Adam Bain built Twitter's ad business from scratch to a respectable ARPU on a product that many thought was not conducive to it. It's arguably one of the only achievements at Twitter since the original concept was born. He is the fall guy for flattening revenue while user growth and product remain stagnant, while other execs increase their own spending by $1.5B a year and make zero improvement to either of these metrics. They are the ones who need to go - that they're not being held accountable is bad.
- intoverflow2 10y ago
  I was thinking the same, the increase in ads is the only thing I've actually notice change in Twitter in the last several years. So even if 200 people worked on that it doesn't explain what the other few thousand are doing.
- perseusprime11 10y ago
  With excessive focus on ads, he was also responsible for a weaker product and also a weaker platform for developers. Can someone who worked at Twitter chime in?
  - aioprisan 10y ago
    Twitter was always a weak platform for developers and I don't think ads had anything to do with the many developer-unfriendly decisions that Twitter has taken over the years.
    - perseusprime11 10y ago
      Well, your engineering team can either focus on optimizing the platform for ads and doing integrations with third parties or focus on building a great product.
- baccheion 10y ago
  I'm not saying anything about Adam Bain or anyone else, as I'm not clear on who specifically is good or bad. What I am saying is that Twitter's senior management is poor and needs to be replaced.
perseusprime11 10y ago
How do you see these ratings on Glass door?

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

majormajor 10y ago

Middle management is a really easy area for a growing company to end up weak in. If you promote a junior manager (out of necessity, or as a reward for being a very good junior manager) who's never seen what good higher level management looks like, they don't even know enough about what they don't know. And then most junior managers never end up seeing it. Took me a while before I did - I liked my boss, even, but then they left and someone new came in, and the difference was night and day. Being able to come into a new place and figure out what details to focus on and what to not, identify common problem areas, identify people to delegate to and trust, get upper-management support for you when necessary, figure out where you're still uncomfortable and how to get you to start stretching yourself there... it's not stuff I knew I was missing. And I could've gone another decade without knowing it, probably! Late edit: the more I see of the skills it takes to be good at it, and how easily it can be a thankless role, the more I'm kinda terrified even more of that jump than the dev->manager jump.

just_had_tea 10y ago
> And then most junior managers never end up seeing it. Took me a while before I did - I liked my boss, even, but then they left and someone new came in, and the difference was night and day. Being able to come into a new place and figure out what details to focus on and what to not, identify common problem areas, identify people to delegate to and trust, get upper-management support for you when necessary, figure out where you're still uncomfortable and how to get you to start stretching yourself there... it's not stuff I knew I was missing. And I could've gone another decade without knowing it, probably! Perhaps a silly question, and definitely tangential, but do you have resources / pointers on where to learn about these kinds of skills? Or is that what MBA's are for? (sounds snarky but meant sincerely)
- heymijo 10y ago
  Peter Drucker & W. Edwards Deming These are the two best management thinkers of the 20th century and they are largely ignored today. Here's your chance to engage in some information arbitrage and profit. Drucker wrote A LOT. Assumption from your question: you have yet to gain much, if any, idea about what good management is. If so, The Daily Drucker [1] is a good, easily digestible entry point to the entire body of Peter Drucker's work. Deming came from a statistics, systems, and manufacturing background, which at a glance, makes his work seem from a different world. That couldn't be more wrong. His principles are broadly applicable. Toyota and much of Japanese industry post-WWII learned from Deming and built their businesses on his principles. The easiest place to start with him is with his 14 Points [2]. Read a bit. Compare it to what you have seen or not seen in your work experience. Read more. I spend a lot of time thinking about management and the more I learn, the less convinced I am that there has been anything truly new since these two thinkers. [1] https://www.amazon.com/Daily-Drucker-Insight-Motivation-Getting/dp/0060742445/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1478787358&sr=8-1&keywords=the+daily+drucker https://www.amazon.com/Daily-Drucker-Insight-Motivation-Gett... [2] https://www.deming.org/theman/theories/fourteenpoints https://www.deming.org/theman/theories/fourteenpoints
baccheion 10y ago
The reviews on Comparably suggests the executives at Twitter are more of a problem than middle management. That is, they get a rating of 63/100, versus middle management's 71/100. I suppose it doesn't matter either way, as 75/100 (or 80 is even better) would be the lowest score I'd be comfortable with. Ratings according to Engineers: executives = 66/100 and managers = 75/100. Either way, whoever's bad should go.

nikcub 10y ago

> They need to do more than get rid of the higher up executives. Adam Bain built Twitter's ad business from scratch to a respectable ARPU on a product that many thought was not conducive to it. It's arguably one of the only achievements at Twitter since the original concept was born. He is the fall guy for flattening revenue while user growth and product remain stagnant, while other execs increase their own spending by $1.5B a year and make zero improvement to either of these metrics. They are the ones who need to go - that they're not being held accountable is bad.

intoverflow2 10y ago
I was thinking the same, the increase in ads is the only thing I've actually notice change in Twitter in the last several years. So even if 200 people worked on that it doesn't explain what the other few thousand are doing.
perseusprime11 10y ago
With excessive focus on ads, he was also responsible for a weaker product and also a weaker platform for developers. Can someone who worked at Twitter chime in?
- aioprisan 10y ago
  Twitter was always a weak platform for developers and I don't think ads had anything to do with the many developer-unfriendly decisions that Twitter has taken over the years.
  - perseusprime11 10y ago
    Well, your engineering team can either focus on optimizing the platform for ads and doing integrations with third parties or focus on building a great product.
baccheion 10y ago
I'm not saying anything about Adam Bain or anyone else, as I'm not clear on who specifically is good or bad. What I am saying is that Twitter's senior management is poor and needs to be replaced.

perseusprime11 10y ago

How do you see these ratings on Glass door?