4 ms·
Good post. The manager doesn't always have to fit that description totally to be a bad manager. As the post suggests, if people are saying "You should check wi
by devmonk 16y ago
Good post.
The manager doesn't always have to fit that description totally to be a bad manager. As the post suggests, if people are saying "You should check with ____ before doing that," that probably indicates some micromanagement tendencies, which are just as demoralizing and counterproductive, even if the manager is otherwise well-loved as a person by some/all members of the team.
Also, if a team member tells you: "If you want to make that change, just do it, because if you check with ____, it'll take a while or might never happen," that is a sign of an overly-political manager.
Finally, I'd like to add the "smiley"/"fake" manager attitude. It's one thing to have a fun manager, but at some point you expect that your manager is trying to get work done. If they seem always happy and poking fun at things, it can be really annoying and make you second guess why they are trying to make everything seem so fun (probably because it sucks).
- heathlilley 16y agoAlso beware the "if it ain't broke don't fix it" types who always view system design and framework suggestions as general programmer whining and thus not worth investing any time. A lot of times this is true but prolonged adherence to this will leave you with a fairly antiquated technology stack.
- deleted 16y ago[deleted]
- Tamerlin 16y agoThese tend to be the same folks who deny that it's broken, leading to piles and piles of steaming code that make adding new features and fixing problems exceedingly difficult. They routinely turn simple, six-week projects into six-month death march projects.