9 ms·

Managers are literally responsible for managing people who report to them. If you don't have time for that, maybe you just don't get the job.

ozim 6y ago
What parent wrote - he has time and is responsible for managing people. What you might not see he is responsible for giving his time to people who contribute positively. Spending time on pulling someone up is taking time from solving issues of others. Where their issues are probably more tied to job at hand and delivering value to the customers. So what he means is that yes, one should help someone who falls behind but it is not fair to put too much effort that will be taken away from others. It is also not fair for the customers. How can you judge what is fair share of time to help someone? It depends on a situation of course but mentoring someone 1 on 1 for months or making day a week only for such person is just too much.
- blub 6y ago
  "What you might not see he is responsible for giving his time to people who contribute positively." So a manager only has to manage people that are good performers and easy to manage, but those that are hard to manage should be just fired? That sounds a bit too convenient for the manager. If someone's underperforming then it is absolutely the manager's duty to correct that through coaching and leadership before they reach for drastic measures. Btw, let's not bother to use the customers as an argument. They don't give a crap that Bob from accounting is underperforming. This is normal in any company and par for the course
bsder 6y ago
And sometimes "managing" is firing an individual. When I was brought in, I had one employee who somehow got hired way above his competency level. Everybody liked him, but he was too high in the technical chain. We had a long conversation because I simply couldn't take the time to teach him--it was a startup in which we simply didn't have time (we died about 6 months later). Either he had to go down a level (including salary) or he had to start looking for a new job. I was even happy to give him a decent referral ... but for a lower level. He left for a new company--I think he managed to keep most of his salary, but I know he had a downleveled title. He did quite well. Had I been in a big company with runway, I could have taken the time to teach him. And it would have likely been better than trying to hire someone new since everybody actually liked him. Managing is about balancing conflicting goals. If you think managing is easy, please stay away from it--your team will be better for it.
- blub 6y ago
  Interesting anecdote for startup managers, but on the other hand one must keep in mind that startups are caricatures of companies that can't be used to draw any conclusions about how a normal company can or should operate.

ozim 6y ago

What parent wrote - he has time and is responsible for managing people. What you might not see he is responsible for giving his time to people who contribute positively. Spending time on pulling someone up is taking time from solving issues of others. Where their issues are probably more tied to job at hand and delivering value to the customers. So what he means is that yes, one should help someone who falls behind but it is not fair to put too much effort that will be taken away from others. It is also not fair for the customers. How can you judge what is fair share of time to help someone? It depends on a situation of course but mentoring someone 1 on 1 for months or making day a week only for such person is just too much.

blub 6y ago
"What you might not see he is responsible for giving his time to people who contribute positively." So a manager only has to manage people that are good performers and easy to manage, but those that are hard to manage should be just fired? That sounds a bit too convenient for the manager. If someone's underperforming then it is absolutely the manager's duty to correct that through coaching and leadership before they reach for drastic measures. Btw, let's not bother to use the customers as an argument. They don't give a crap that Bob from accounting is underperforming. This is normal in any company and par for the course

bsder 6y ago

And sometimes "managing" is firing an individual. When I was brought in, I had one employee who somehow got hired way above his competency level. Everybody liked him, but he was too high in the technical chain. We had a long conversation because I simply couldn't take the time to teach him--it was a startup in which we simply didn't have time (we died about 6 months later). Either he had to go down a level (including salary) or he had to start looking for a new job. I was even happy to give him a decent referral ... but for a lower level. He left for a new company--I think he managed to keep most of his salary, but I know he had a downleveled title. He did quite well. Had I been in a big company with runway, I could have taken the time to teach him. And it would have likely been better than trying to hire someone new since everybody actually liked him. Managing is about balancing conflicting goals. If you think managing is easy, please stay away from it--your team will be better for it.

blub 6y ago
Interesting anecdote for startup managers, but on the other hand one must keep in mind that startups are caricatures of companies that can't be used to draw any conclusions about how a normal company can or should operate.