4 ms·

I never say "No". I just say, "Yes. And this is what it will cost you to do it right" You have a number of "this is what it will cost you" options which will

by azanar 16y ago

I never say "No". I just say, "Yes. And this is what it will cost you to do it right" You have a number of "this is what it will cost you" options which will only work if the party you are negotiating with is reasonable. There are teams and managers out there who will happily assert that they can violate the laws of space-time in order to avoid making the sacrifices you'll tell them they need to make. Note that "doing it wrong" or "doing it quick & dirty" are not options. What if you are told directly to do it "quick & dirty," and you refuse? Is that not the same thing as saying "No"? Or by never saying no, do you mean never say no without providing what qualifications would turn it into a yes? What do you do about people you know will attempt to spin things later on to bolster their claims that they weren't advised of the costs ahead of time? In other words, what do you do about people who don't have an impeccable sense of ethics? It seems like you would need that before you could feel safe being this agreeable.

j_baker 16y ago
"You have a number of "this is what it will cost you" options which will only work if the party you are negotiating with is reasonable. There are teams and managers out there who will happily assert that they can violate the laws of space-time in order to avoid making the sacrifices you'll tell them they need to make." Generally speaking though, it's less a matter of reasoning with them as it is a matter of finding the right buttons to push. Is it that their goals are misaligned from yours? Phrase your response in terms of their goals; they can't be too out of line if they need something from you. Do they not trust you? Point out that they're going to have to trust you whether you do it your way or theirs. If they're being genuinely unreasonable and out of touch with reality and they are completely unwilling to change their approach, I'd personally rather spend my time finding ways to not have to work with them. Chances are they really aren't though. They just have a different way of looking at things that you can't meet without learning to think like they do a bit.
- cdavid 16y ago
  But what if they don't trust you until you can do things that they ask ? The difficult situation is people who do not trust you and ask you to do their own way until they do - not realizing that doing it their way is exactly what prevents you from doing your job. It is fairly typical in my experience, but I have not found a way to deal with it effectively.
d2viant 16y ago
I have yet to work for a manager that knows the difference between the right solution and the "quick and dirty" solution. Estimate out what it would take to do it right and then tell them that's how long it will take to do the "quick and dirty" solution.
lnguyen 16y ago
The answer is to maintain a documentable trail of what went into the decision. Make sure that the details of the discussion are in meeting notes, an email thread, etc. Absolutely positively do not agree to anything on just a verbal agreement. You might still be stuck "doing it wrong" or "doing it quick & dirty" but you've got enough CYA material not to be the scapegoat.
loewenskind 16y ago
I agree with you in spirit. The worst place I ever worked had managers like this in spades (not sure if they had any other kind). But if we're honest with ourselves I think we have to admit that this is our fault. Why does the pointy haired boss even know about the "quick & dirty solution"? We always talk about how much better other engineering disciplines are, "you don't see bridges falling over every time someone makes a new model of car!" we say, but why is this? It's at least partially because no engineer offers a "quick & dirty" option for making bridges. They never say "well, we could use this material and skip all these steps to get done in 1/10th of the time for 1/5th of the cost but it's probably going to fall over" [1]. This is the key point. Of course for bridges purchasers are going to want the cheapest and fastest thing they can get. They aren't given an incomplete solution as an option so that's why they don't ask for it. If we want things to change in our industry we have to do what the GP suggested. Don't mention non-solutions, aren't you an engineer (at least partially, I know many of us think of ourselves as artists)? In fact, if a manager says "lets just do this quick & dirty" you should take that to mean that they still want a completely correct solution that just doesn't address some of the requirements (e.g. "handle email quick and dirty" might mean leaving out SSL). >What if you are told directly to do it "quick & dirty," and you refuse? This is the place where they shouldn't know this term. It shouldn't exist. No one asks a bridge builder for "quick & dirty" they ask for cheaper & faster. So the bridge maker considers all the possibilities that still leave a completely working bridge and answers based on that. The bridge builder recognizes that no one is asking him what is the cheapest/fastest way to possibly make something that looks like a bridge. What good would that do anyone? We also need to understand that no one is asking us for what we mean by "quick & dirty". Are they going to expect it to fail 70% of the time? No? Then what they're actually asking for is a correct solution but they want it fast, cheap and without unnecessary frills. [1] I have no doubt that some joker will find an example on the internet of exactly that happening. When you do, understand that you've found the exception that proves the rule, not that refutes the point.

by azanar 16y ago

j_baker 16y ago

"You have a number of "this is what it will cost you" options which will only work if the party you are negotiating with is reasonable. There are teams and managers out there who will happily assert that they can violate the laws of space-time in order to avoid making the sacrifices you'll tell them they need to make." Generally speaking though, it's less a matter of reasoning with them as it is a matter of finding the right buttons to push. Is it that their goals are misaligned from yours? Phrase your response in terms of their goals; they can't be too out of line if they need something from you. Do they not trust you? Point out that they're going to have to trust you whether you do it your way or theirs. If they're being genuinely unreasonable and out of touch with reality and they are completely unwilling to change their approach, I'd personally rather spend my time finding ways to not have to work with them. Chances are they really aren't though. They just have a different way of looking at things that you can't meet without learning to think like they do a bit.

cdavid 16y ago
But what if they don't trust you until you can do things that they ask ? The difficult situation is people who do not trust you and ask you to do their own way until they do - not realizing that doing it their way is exactly what prevents you from doing your job. It is fairly typical in my experience, but I have not found a way to deal with it effectively.

d2viant 16y ago

I have yet to work for a manager that knows the difference between the right solution and the "quick and dirty" solution. Estimate out what it would take to do it right and then tell them that's how long it will take to do the "quick and dirty" solution.

lnguyen 16y ago

The answer is to maintain a documentable trail of what went into the decision. Make sure that the details of the discussion are in meeting notes, an email thread, etc. Absolutely positively do not agree to anything on just a verbal agreement. You might still be stuck "doing it wrong" or "doing it quick & dirty" but you've got enough CYA material not to be the scapegoat.

loewenskind 16y ago

I agree with you in spirit. The worst place I ever worked had managers like this in spades (not sure if they had any other kind). But if we're honest with ourselves I think we have to admit that this is our fault. Why does the pointy haired boss even know about the "quick & dirty solution"? We always talk about how much better other engineering disciplines are, "you don't see bridges falling over every time someone makes a new model of car!" we say, but why is this? It's at least partially because no engineer offers a "quick & dirty" option for making bridges. They never say "well, we could use this material and skip all these steps to get done in 1/10th of the time for 1/5th of the cost but it's probably going to fall over" [1]. This is the key point. Of course for bridges purchasers are going to want the cheapest and fastest thing they can get. They aren't given an incomplete solution as an option so that's why they don't ask for it. If we want things to change in our industry we have to do what the GP suggested. Don't mention non-solutions, aren't you an engineer (at least partially, I know many of us think of ourselves as artists)? In fact, if a manager says "lets just do this quick & dirty" you should take that to mean that they still want a completely correct solution that just doesn't address some of the requirements (e.g. "handle email quick and dirty" might mean leaving out SSL). >What if you are told directly to do it "quick & dirty," and you refuse? This is the place where they shouldn't know this term. It shouldn't exist. No one asks a bridge builder for "quick & dirty" they ask for cheaper & faster. So the bridge maker considers all the possibilities that still leave a completely working bridge and answers based on that. The bridge builder recognizes that no one is asking him what is the cheapest/fastest way to possibly make something that looks like a bridge. What good would that do anyone? We also need to understand that no one is asking us for what we mean by "quick & dirty". Are they going to expect it to fail 70% of the time? No? Then what they're actually asking for is a correct solution but they want it fast, cheap and without unnecessary frills. [1] I have no doubt that some joker will find an example on the internet of exactly that happening. When you do, understand that you've found the exception that proves the rule, not that refutes the point.