12 ms·

Leadership is basically just people-engineering and business-engineering. Engineers use tools to build products, and so do leaders. The immediate assumption is

by warent 8y ago

Leadership is basically just people-engineering and business-engineering. Engineers use tools to build products, and so do leaders. The immediate assumption is that people are tools/resources to build the product. That's talking like an engineer. Don't use your team to work on a project/product. Use the project to work on your team. They're not there to build the product. They're there to gain some personal fulfillment. Use the development of the product to grow them. In my humble opinion, that's talking like a leader. Flip the engineering perspective over and communicate a new set of values with a layer of empathy.

ceefry 8y ago
I love this take.
linkmotif 8y ago
> Don't use your team to work on a project/product. Use the project to work on your team. They're not there to build the product. They're there to gain some personal fulfillment. Use the development of the product to grow them. This is extremely well said and something I’ve been dancing around in my head and couldn’t quite articulate. THANK YOU.
forgotmypw2 8y ago
I recently heard the perspective that a good leader is always thinking about how to bring value to their team, and reviewing how much value they contributed to their team the previous day, and trying to come up with new ways to bring value to their team, and so on. This is paraphrased from my notes that someone else paraphrased for me, but it really struck a cord for me.
rcfox 8y ago
> The immediate assumption is that people are tools/resources to build the product. That's talking like an engineer. That's more management-speak than engineer, in my experience. I hate being referred to as a resource.
- aantix 8y ago
  Agree. Whenever I get contacted by a recruiter from Tek* .com or * Resource.com, I absolutely cringe. Who uses these companies? Who entrusts them to negotiate salaries on their behalf?
- ospider 8y ago
  I think the OP is saying that a good manager does not treat employees as resources
kazinator 8y ago
In this case, the boss is telling OP to talk like a leader rather than engineer to him, not necessarily to the engineers below. To the engineers below, you still have to talk like an engineer to some extent, some of the time. That's the virtue/advantage of a manager that is from the engineering background.
borski 8y ago
People often say to me “it must be nice not to have a boss.” I explain to them that I have no idea what that’s like, since I have 12 or 13 bosses. My job is to empower my reports to do their best work, using empathy and engineering the team as a well-oiled system. Sure, they report to me, but my job is to keep them productive.
- umanwizard 8y ago
  Sorry if I sound harsh but I disagree extremely strongly with this. If you are evaluating someone's work and you can fire them, then you are their boss. There is a trend of calling managers "supporters" where I work, and I absolutely can't stand it. It seriously reminds me of "War is Peace" from 1984. I don't mind having a boss; hierarchies are fine. But I feel extremely patronized and condescended to when people try to pretend they don't exist. > my job is to keep them productive Well, you could say the same thing about a manager at Wal-Mart or McDonald's. Their job is to make sure their underlings are productive. "Empower my reports too do their best work" is just an unusually nice way to put it. The thing that sounds nice to most people about not having a boss is exactly that: nobody that you feel is judging whether you are productive.
  - suff 8y ago
    Another way to put it is building a culture that helps everyone perform better. There are conscious levers that conscious managers can pull to make sure his happen. Have you ever worked in an environment where managers created conflicting goals or perverse incentives? Did that help teamwork, or create frustration? Do frustrated teams perform at their best? How many people have you managed?
    - umanwizard 8y ago
      Everywhere I've worked from McDonald's to tech companies, managers were trying to help everyone perform better (i.e., make more money for the business per hour).
      - 8y ago
emeerson 8y ago
This is very wise advice, and I can especially appreciate the layer of empathy: empower engineers to add to their toolchain (mgmt or technical). To complement this thinking, however, I also expect a leader to align engineers to business priorities. There is a fine line to walk in balancing the growth of engineers with the needs of a business. I expect engineers with certain years of experience to understand that as professionals we are hired to address these needs. Of course there is also the flip side of this alignment: aligning the business to the real (vs. imagined) capabilities or investment needed.

by warent 8y ago

ceefry 8y ago

I love this take.

linkmotif 8y ago

> Don't use your team to work on a project/product. Use the project to work on your team. They're not there to build the product. They're there to gain some personal fulfillment. Use the development of the product to grow them. This is extremely well said and something I’ve been dancing around in my head and couldn’t quite articulate. THANK YOU.

forgotmypw2 8y ago

I recently heard the perspective that a good leader is always thinking about how to bring value to their team, and reviewing how much value they contributed to their team the previous day, and trying to come up with new ways to bring value to their team, and so on. This is paraphrased from my notes that someone else paraphrased for me, but it really struck a cord for me.

rcfox 8y ago

> The immediate assumption is that people are tools/resources to build the product. That's talking like an engineer. That's more management-speak than engineer, in my experience. I hate being referred to as a resource.

aantix 8y ago
Agree. Whenever I get contacted by a recruiter from Tek* .com or * Resource.com, I absolutely cringe. Who uses these companies? Who entrusts them to negotiate salaries on their behalf?
ospider 8y ago
I think the OP is saying that a good manager does not treat employees as resources

kazinator 8y ago

In this case, the boss is telling OP to talk like a leader rather than engineer to him, not necessarily to the engineers below. To the engineers below, you still have to talk like an engineer to some extent, some of the time. That's the virtue/advantage of a manager that is from the engineering background.

borski 8y ago

People often say to me “it must be nice not to have a boss.” I explain to them that I have no idea what that’s like, since I have 12 or 13 bosses. My job is to empower my reports to do their best work, using empathy and engineering the team as a well-oiled system. Sure, they report to me, but my job is to keep them productive.

umanwizard 8y ago
Sorry if I sound harsh but I disagree extremely strongly with this. If you are evaluating someone's work and you can fire them, then you are their boss. There is a trend of calling managers "supporters" where I work, and I absolutely can't stand it. It seriously reminds me of "War is Peace" from 1984. I don't mind having a boss; hierarchies are fine. But I feel extremely patronized and condescended to when people try to pretend they don't exist. > my job is to keep them productive Well, you could say the same thing about a manager at Wal-Mart or McDonald's. Their job is to make sure their underlings are productive. "Empower my reports too do their best work" is just an unusually nice way to put it. The thing that sounds nice to most people about not having a boss is exactly that: nobody that you feel is judging whether you are productive.
- suff 8y ago
  Another way to put it is building a culture that helps everyone perform better. There are conscious levers that conscious managers can pull to make sure his happen. Have you ever worked in an environment where managers created conflicting goals or perverse incentives? Did that help teamwork, or create frustration? Do frustrated teams perform at their best? How many people have you managed?
  - umanwizard 8y ago
    Everywhere I've worked from McDonald's to tech companies, managers were trying to help everyone perform better (i.e., make more money for the business per hour).
    - 8y ago

emeerson 8y ago

This is very wise advice, and I can especially appreciate the layer of empathy: empower engineers to add to their toolchain (mgmt or technical). To complement this thinking, however, I also expect a leader to align engineers to business priorities. There is a fine line to walk in balancing the growth of engineers with the needs of a business. I expect engineers with certain years of experience to understand that as professionals we are hired to address these needs. Of course there is also the flip side of this alignment: aligning the business to the real (vs. imagined) capabilities or investment needed.