5 ms·
There's no substitute for technically competent management, period. If you don't have it, you will be limited, and its something you just have to accept -- as i
by cloverich 7y ago
There's no substitute for technically competent management, period. If you don't have it, you will be limited, and its something you just have to accept -- as in, make that a high priority question to ask about when interviewing for your next job. Further, its not that software developers are bad at estimating. Its that software estimation is only useful when taken as a very rough guide for strategic planning. You need to know if something will take 2 weeks or 2 years. You don't need to know if it will take 2 weeks or 4 weeks. If you think you do (as most shops I've worked do) -- you are micro managing your team. The sooner we start calling it that, the sooner we can all accepts its as much an anti-pattern in software development as it is every other facet of business.
In short, estimate roughly. Agree to high level deliverables. Assert that technical management needs some control over strategic business decisions, and flexibility in implementation and timelines. If you can't get those things, temper your expectations, or look for a job with more competent leadership. The last point has become my guiding principle. Stop thinking you can "fix" an org from the bottom. You can only fix an org if they hire / promote you to do so, and empower you as such. That's what you ask for (or look for in your managers).
- shakezula 7y agoI dunno, some of the worst managers I’ve had have been great engineers and fully technically competent. It doesn’t always translate, and even during estimates or sprint planning I’ve seen them make these same mistakes.
- cloverich 7y agoI agree and should have clarified -- technical competence is _a_ requirement for good management, but you still also need to be(come) a good manager in the traditional sense. Its a different job than writing code and not everyone will be good at it (and arguably by definition, of the relatively small number of good engineers, even fewer will be good managers on top. I would expect quality technical managers to be relatively expensive).
- shakezula 7y ago> I would expect quality technical managers to be relatively expensive Now that I can fully agree with. I can count on one hand the number of technically competent _good managers_ that I know. They're few and far between.
- zip1234 7y agoThe point is that it is generally easier for an engineer to learn business skills than a non-technical background person to learn engineering.
- nilkn 7y agoI think it was being advanced as necessary but not sufficient. Certainly being technically competent does not qualify one for a management position. It requires an entirely new skillset to be developed and a shift in mindset that many developers aren't going to be willing to make (i.e., despite being elevated to a management role, you are decidedly not the "star" of the team and must delegate the most interesting work to your team members).
- magicalhippo 7y agoWhen my boss asks for estimates I break down the work into rough chunks and estimate a range for each chunk. Added up I might end up with an estimate of between 4 days to two weeks. I also explain my reasoning, telling him which factors that have the largest variance, either due to uncertainty or maybe which route we need to take depending on client wishes. This is usually good enough for him to give a decent estimate to the clients for when they can expect fixes and features. Regardless of my estimates, not seldom other more important stuff comes up, pushing things a week or more.
- wool_gather 7y agoCan you share any specific thoughts on how to look for this when you're interviewing?