3 ms·

I see this pattern a lot: leadership advice in the form of general principles/first principles, but not a lot of advice on the nuts and bolts of how you accompl

I see this pattern a lot: leadership advice in the form of general principles/first principles, but not a lot of advice on the nuts and bolts of how you accomplish those things. Human emotions, motivation, and communication are far fickler things than software, and it takes a lot of skill and work to create consistency and resilience from that mess. For example: how do you tell someone that they're underperforming while still motivating them? There's a lot of partial advice out there like "frame it as a growth opportunity." But how? What words do you use? Half of the new managers will flinch before they give the feedback, and the other half will flub the delivery. It's a hard-earned, fundamental leadership skill. MBA programs actually encode a lot of time-tested wisdom on leadership and management for the students who go looking for it. Huge emphasis on the caveat because not all MBA students are looking for that. They even do simulations to give you practice in a low-stakes setting. As a risky generalization based on my own observations, I think Silicon Valley has thrown the baby out with the bathwater with its historical hostility towards MBA's. Speaking of which, I think executive coaching is worth its weight in gold for younger startup leadership.

edoceo 8y ago
A concrete example of motivation: when someone on my crew identifies and issue and dispalys just beyond a moderate amount of interest - boom - just just volunteered to drive that issue, direct resources and own the outcome. People grow fast with responsibleity and accountability. Sometimes it's a little messy. Play a long game.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
doctorpangloss 8y ago
> how do you tell someone that they're underperforming... MBA programs When you ask someone, "Describe the person you'd like to work for," I seriously doubt talented people say, "An MBA." So surely you'd see why so many mediocre people wind up working for them.
- munchbunny 8y ago
  Talented people aren't going to decide on the basis of whether their manager-to-be has an MBA. Talented engineers will gravitate towards teams with likewise talented engineers and good leadership. I'm suggesting that, as a reliable way to raise the bar on leadership, engineers who want to manage might benefit a lot from going through MBA training.
  - watwut 8y ago
    Engineers who want to manage would definitely benefit a lot from learning about psychology and leadership. MBA training however does produces great leaders that attract skilled people. There is a reason MBAs are complained about so often - the reason is that their management style tend to be demotivating and offputting.
    - munchbunny 8y ago
      would definitely benefit a lot from learning about psychology and leadership That's a significant chunk of the MBA curriculum. Of course you don't have to get it from there, but if you look at who teaches in business schools, quite a few of the professors specifically research those subjects. the reason is that their management style tend to be demotivating and offputting What about it is demotivating and offputting? The typical complaint I hear isn't about their leadership skills, it's about a lack of technical expertise or lack of appreciation for subject matter expertise. As an example, I've seen some of Harvard Business School's materials, and their curriculum definitely teaches to seek technical expertise.
      - watwut 8y ago
        > That's a significant chunk of the MBA curriculum. Of course you don't have to get it from there, but if you look at who teaches in business schools, quite a few of the professors specifically research those subjects. I am mostly judging it from results of MBA managers. It seems that highly motivated happy teams are rather exception then rule. This kind of psychological knowledge seems to lead to manipulative behavior that most eventually figure out in the span of months and consequently leads to lack of trust, demotivation. > The typical complaint I hear isn't about their leadership skills, it's about a lack of technical expertise or lack of appreciation for subject matter expertise. As an example, I've seen some of Harvard Business School's materials, and their curriculum definitely teaches to seek technical expertise. As general as both complains are, they are closely related to leadership skill, they are not independent of it. The "no appreciation for subject matter expertise" is euphemism for "experts under their leadership are unable to use their skill and knowledge and are treated without respect and without regard". It means that project is running into the same problems again and the leader does not care, because problems are not affecting him right now and experts are effectively talking to a wall that smiles back. Lack of technical expertise means that experts are forced to implement decisions they know will lead to problems and then get resentfulness when those problems happen and they are blamed for it. It means you work around the manager and not with manager. It means that you have to keep secrets and manage manager, because manager cant be trusted. I don't know what exactly those schools teach, so I can not say what exactly is wrong with it. But I had managers that I respect to this day, not all of them were technical and they seemed to be able to work around lack of technical knowledge better then mba I have seen. Mba are good at creating illusion of well run project for upper management. That absolutely has value, especially in corporation, but is not really leadership skill and is not same as actually run the project well.

edoceo 8y ago

A concrete example of motivation: when someone on my crew identifies and issue and dispalys just beyond a moderate amount of interest - boom - just just volunteered to drive that issue, direct resources and own the outcome. People grow fast with responsibleity and accountability. Sometimes it's a little messy. Play a long game.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

doctorpangloss 8y ago

> how do you tell someone that they're underperforming... MBA programs When you ask someone, "Describe the person you'd like to work for," I seriously doubt talented people say, "An MBA." So surely you'd see why so many mediocre people wind up working for them.

munchbunny 8y ago
Talented people aren't going to decide on the basis of whether their manager-to-be has an MBA. Talented engineers will gravitate towards teams with likewise talented engineers and good leadership. I'm suggesting that, as a reliable way to raise the bar on leadership, engineers who want to manage might benefit a lot from going through MBA training.
- watwut 8y ago
  Engineers who want to manage would definitely benefit a lot from learning about psychology and leadership. MBA training however does produces great leaders that attract skilled people. There is a reason MBAs are complained about so often - the reason is that their management style tend to be demotivating and offputting.
  - munchbunny 8y ago
    would definitely benefit a lot from learning about psychology and leadership That's a significant chunk of the MBA curriculum. Of course you don't have to get it from there, but if you look at who teaches in business schools, quite a few of the professors specifically research those subjects. the reason is that their management style tend to be demotivating and offputting What about it is demotivating and offputting? The typical complaint I hear isn't about their leadership skills, it's about a lack of technical expertise or lack of appreciation for subject matter expertise. As an example, I've seen some of Harvard Business School's materials, and their curriculum definitely teaches to seek technical expertise.
    - watwut 8y ago
      > That's a significant chunk of the MBA curriculum. Of course you don't have to get it from there, but if you look at who teaches in business schools, quite a few of the professors specifically research those subjects. I am mostly judging it from results of MBA managers. It seems that highly motivated happy teams are rather exception then rule. This kind of psychological knowledge seems to lead to manipulative behavior that most eventually figure out in the span of months and consequently leads to lack of trust, demotivation. > The typical complaint I hear isn't about their leadership skills, it's about a lack of technical expertise or lack of appreciation for subject matter expertise. As an example, I've seen some of Harvard Business School's materials, and their curriculum definitely teaches to seek technical expertise. As general as both complains are, they are closely related to leadership skill, they are not independent of it. The "no appreciation for subject matter expertise" is euphemism for "experts under their leadership are unable to use their skill and knowledge and are treated without respect and without regard". It means that project is running into the same problems again and the leader does not care, because problems are not affecting him right now and experts are effectively talking to a wall that smiles back. Lack of technical expertise means that experts are forced to implement decisions they know will lead to problems and then get resentfulness when those problems happen and they are blamed for it. It means you work around the manager and not with manager. It means that you have to keep secrets and manage manager, because manager cant be trusted. I don't know what exactly those schools teach, so I can not say what exactly is wrong with it. But I had managers that I respect to this day, not all of them were technical and they seemed to be able to work around lack of technical knowledge better then mba I have seen. Mba are good at creating illusion of well run project for upper management. That absolutely has value, especially in corporation, but is not really leadership skill and is not same as actually run the project well.