4 ms·

I think that many good, effective managers would end up in the "bullshitter" basket by the definitions of this article: they delegate work (they better!), they

by ptero 10y ago

I think that many good, effective managers would end up in the "bullshitter" basket by the definitions of this article: they delegate work (they better!), they do not work themselves if you define work as writing code or spending time in the lab, etc. IMO effective managers should be doing exactly that -- surround themselves with smart people, delegate and make working conditions fulfilling and enjoyable for their teams.

switchbak 10y ago
Effective managers don't steal the credit that their team members have done. Quite the opposite in fact, they make a point of highlighting exemplary work and rewarding those that have made important contributions. Management is also much more than _just_ delegating (of course), and I think I'd be pretty clear the difference between a good manager and a bullshitting manager, unless the higher ups are easily fooled in the ways the article describes. Personally, I've seen a lot of this kind of behaviour, and I thought the article pretty much nailed it. Tangentially related to the highly cynical Gervais Principle: http://www.makingitanywhere.com/escape-your-job/ http://www.makingitanywhere.com/escape-your-job/
- ptero 10y ago
  Maybe my comment was not written clearly enough. I am not saying that what is described in the article as BS managers are good, effective managers. They are not -- two things: required long hours and not taking responsibilities are killer signs. My point was that the classification into S-W, etc. is simplistic and does not distinguish between good managers and poor ones. Good managers exhibit some of the same traits (delegating, surrounding themselves with smart people, etc.). On stealing credit: can you elaborate what you mean by that. In my book, a good manager should advertise his best contributors to his management in exceptional cases. But most of the time, the manager himself should receive credit from his superiors on his team progress and request goodies (raises, bonuses, etc.) for his team in return.
Arwill 10y ago
The things done by people described in the article is not the same as what the work of managers is. These are not managers, and as the article says, these can be more junior people who will "boss around" senior developers too. And besides that their self-promotion can be seen as unfair, i have seen some actual damages materialize as consequences: As they are focusing on perception, effective real work done becomes less. If the client once chooses to evaluate real progress and the paper-pushing becomes evident, the project might be cancelled. The bullshitter can transform the project itself. Instead of pursuing the original goal of delivering, they will invent new goals, and unnecessary work items. They will shape what the project does, so that they can deliver. If the project were to go in its original direction, they could not contribute anything useful. So now they invent administrative tasks or superfluous technical tasks, where they can deliver. Their toxic behavior can become accepted even by the management. This is when the real project manager accepts that its more profitable to bullshit, than to actually deliver. The project will fail at some point, but its easier for the whole team to bullshit until that time, than to deliver.

by ptero 10y ago

switchbak 10y ago

Effective managers don't steal the credit that their team members have done. Quite the opposite in fact, they make a point of highlighting exemplary work and rewarding those that have made important contributions. Management is also much more than _just_ delegating (of course), and I think I'd be pretty clear the difference between a good manager and a bullshitting manager, unless the higher ups are easily fooled in the ways the article describes. Personally, I've seen a lot of this kind of behaviour, and I thought the article pretty much nailed it. Tangentially related to the highly cynical Gervais Principle: http://www.makingitanywhere.com/escape-your-job/ http://www.makingitanywhere.com/escape-your-job/

ptero 10y ago
Maybe my comment was not written clearly enough. I am not saying that what is described in the article as BS managers are good, effective managers. They are not -- two things: required long hours and not taking responsibilities are killer signs. My point was that the classification into S-W, etc. is simplistic and does not distinguish between good managers and poor ones. Good managers exhibit some of the same traits (delegating, surrounding themselves with smart people, etc.). On stealing credit: can you elaborate what you mean by that. In my book, a good manager should advertise his best contributors to his management in exceptional cases. But most of the time, the manager himself should receive credit from his superiors on his team progress and request goodies (raises, bonuses, etc.) for his team in return.

Arwill 10y ago

The things done by people described in the article is not the same as what the work of managers is. These are not managers, and as the article says, these can be more junior people who will "boss around" senior developers too. And besides that their self-promotion can be seen as unfair, i have seen some actual damages materialize as consequences: As they are focusing on perception, effective real work done becomes less. If the client once chooses to evaluate real progress and the paper-pushing becomes evident, the project might be cancelled. The bullshitter can transform the project itself. Instead of pursuing the original goal of delivering, they will invent new goals, and unnecessary work items. They will shape what the project does, so that they can deliver. If the project were to go in its original direction, they could not contribute anything useful. So now they invent administrative tasks or superfluous technical tasks, where they can deliver. Their toxic behavior can become accepted even by the management. This is when the real project manager accepts that its more profitable to bullshit, than to actually deliver. The project will fail at some point, but its easier for the whole team to bullshit until that time, than to deliver.