4 ms·

Point 1: I see a lot of highly-upvoted comments blaming management for why engineers are messed up. Hardly surprising for such a venue, I guess. If we're goin

Point 1: I see a lot of highly-upvoted comments blaming management for why engineers are messed up. Hardly surprising for such a venue, I guess. If we're going to blame management, though, perhaps we should look at why the managers themselves are messed up. Personally I think it might have something to do with the conceit that management is the uber-skill, so important in itself that a couple of years (at most) of generic training in management qualifies a person to manage any activity effectively even without a shred of domain knowledge. Pfeh. Point 2: maybe not all of the blame lies with management, and the most important exercise for a crowd of technical people involves introspection instead of blaming others. We get enough of that in politics; we don't need a bunch of little techie-Trumps playing the same tune. Some of the blame belongs with the engineers themselves, who hoodwink naive managers or exert peer pressure to create a culture of deliberate ignorance. When "disruption" is one of the most popular words within an industry, it's easy to lose sight of the fact that even one's thoroughly disrupted predecessors knew a thing or two worth learning. Good software engineering is a lot like recycling - instead of incinerating all "legacy" code just because it's legacy, find the parts (ideas) that can be used as part of something new. New solutions to old problems can be found without having to reintroduce the old problems in new code.

titzer 10y ago
> a couple of years (at most) of generic training in management qualifies a person to manage any activity effectively even without a shred of domain knowledge. Pfeh. +1 to that. However, it cuts both ways. Being an engineer with a recently bolted-on manager responsibility, I am struck by the many ways that nothing in Engineering or Science prepared me for dealing with the people side of management.
- Bartweiss 10y ago
  This double-bind seems like one of the deepest problems in software management. At high levels and large companies, managers are often trained in 'management', without any of the domain knowledge needed to understand their choices. But throughout all levels of the industry, the alternative is raising engineers to management with only a seminar (or nothing at all!) for training. It seems fairly obvious that effective technical management involves two different skills. But I virtually never see people react to that knowledge and seek (or train) expertise in both domains. As a result, the best management seems to be from engineers who are naturally adept at management, or eager to learn on their own. Project management is already its own skillset. Do you think people in your position would benefit from some short-and-intensive course in "software team management"?
- ryandrake 10y ago
  Most companies I have ever worked for did used the "bolt-on" method for creating engineering managers. "Roger is really smart, and we want to reward smart people, but in order to give him more money he needs to be a manger, so poof Roger you're now a manager! Go off and figure out how to manage!" What we need is more companies with robust technical career development that does not necessarily involve management.
- groby_b 10y ago
  I've said it before (in fact, I've given entire presentations on it :) - technical managers are the "Bard" class, if you play D&D. It's at its core a multi-skill/prestige class, it's really hard to learn to do right, everybody makes fun of them ("hey guys, I found the bard!"), a successful party really needs them - and the way they make things happen is by augmenting the rest of the party subtly. Which means you need to dump a whole lot of skill into Charisma, and up your game of fascinate. (If you don't play D&D, apologies for totally nerding out. If you do, leveling up a Bard and becoming a manager is really surprisingly similar. Just don't bring a lute ;)
  - notacoward 10y ago
    Good analogy. I think more generally managers could be considered a "buff" class. Since I've played LOTRO I can say the Captain sort of plays this role. There are probably WoW and ESO equivalents, but I haven't played those. But this leads to an interesting exercise. What are the corporate equivalents of other RPG roles? I have my own ideas, but let's see what others come up with.
    - groby_b 10y ago
      Engineer -> Wizard (high INT) Tech lead-> Shaman (WIS/INT) PM -> Warlock (high CON) UI -> Monk or Rogue (DEX) (OK, that's stretching a bit) Customer support -> Paladin (STR) Testing -> Ranger (STR)

titzer 10y ago

> a couple of years (at most) of generic training in management qualifies a person to manage any activity effectively even without a shred of domain knowledge. Pfeh. +1 to that. However, it cuts both ways. Being an engineer with a recently bolted-on manager responsibility, I am struck by the many ways that nothing in Engineering or Science prepared me for dealing with the people side of management.

Bartweiss 10y ago
This double-bind seems like one of the deepest problems in software management. At high levels and large companies, managers are often trained in 'management', without any of the domain knowledge needed to understand their choices. But throughout all levels of the industry, the alternative is raising engineers to management with only a seminar (or nothing at all!) for training. It seems fairly obvious that effective technical management involves two different skills. But I virtually never see people react to that knowledge and seek (or train) expertise in both domains. As a result, the best management seems to be from engineers who are naturally adept at management, or eager to learn on their own. Project management is already its own skillset. Do you think people in your position would benefit from some short-and-intensive course in "software team management"?
ryandrake 10y ago
Most companies I have ever worked for did used the "bolt-on" method for creating engineering managers. "Roger is really smart, and we want to reward smart people, but in order to give him more money he needs to be a manger, so poof Roger you're now a manager! Go off and figure out how to manage!" What we need is more companies with robust technical career development that does not necessarily involve management.
groby_b 10y ago
I've said it before (in fact, I've given entire presentations on it :) - technical managers are the "Bard" class, if you play D&D. It's at its core a multi-skill/prestige class, it's really hard to learn to do right, everybody makes fun of them ("hey guys, I found the bard!"), a successful party really needs them - and the way they make things happen is by augmenting the rest of the party subtly. Which means you need to dump a whole lot of skill into Charisma, and up your game of fascinate. (If you don't play D&D, apologies for totally nerding out. If you do, leveling up a Bard and becoming a manager is really surprisingly similar. Just don't bring a lute ;)
- notacoward 10y ago
  Good analogy. I think more generally managers could be considered a "buff" class. Since I've played LOTRO I can say the Captain sort of plays this role. There are probably WoW and ESO equivalents, but I haven't played those. But this leads to an interesting exercise. What are the corporate equivalents of other RPG roles? I have my own ideas, but let's see what others come up with.
  - groby_b 10y ago
    Engineer -> Wizard (high INT) Tech lead-> Shaman (WIS/INT) PM -> Warlock (high CON) UI -> Monk or Rogue (DEX) (OK, that's stretching a bit) Customer support -> Paladin (STR) Testing -> Ranger (STR)