7 ms·

I think the conclusions miss the mark slightly and focus on a symptom of good bosses: they care about tasks from a state of understanding what is required to do

by skeeter2020 6y ago

I think the conclusions miss the mark slightly and focus on a symptom of good bosses: they care about tasks from a state of understanding what is required to do them well, they have empathy for the challenges, and respect for the talent in completing them. Obviously the easiest way to get to this perspective is to experience it first-hand, hence the correlation between those who could do the job and being good managers of the job, but I don't see this as a requirement, just a common path. I also don't see this a refutation that we shouldn't hire good engineers into management, rather we shouldn't do this blindly and as the single criteria. My best managers were all top quartile engineers but probably not top 5-10%, because they also cared about the non-technical requirements that a good manager needs to cover, and this inevitable consumes focus, effort and time that your best engineers don't want to allocate. I'm a relatively new engineering manager (~3 years) and wrote about the traits of a good development manager from my perspective here: https://www.codeleadmanage.com/articles/20200204-four_qualities.html https://www.codeleadmanage.com/articles/20200204-four_qualit...

geoduck14 6y ago
I like what you wrote because it makes me feel better about my own short comings. But is it actually true?
- random314 6y ago
  Very often when folks describe the ideal manager, they are describing themselves.
  - Aeolun 6y ago
    I am fairly confident I would agree with myself, so this makes sense. At the very least our scheduling would start being based on reality, not what we’d like it to be.
skohan 6y ago
> probably not top 5-10%, because they also cared about the non-technical requirements that a good manager needs to cover It sounds like you're saying that top-tier engineers are not generally qualified in terms of non-technical requirements, and I don't know that this assertion is justified. From my perspective, as a relatively new technical manager who also spent years as an engineer working with technical managers, it's not only about empathy but also about having a thorough understanding of, or at least an accurate intuition around the subject matter. When I was working as an engineer, what I often found frustrating about working with non-technical managers is that they often work on the wrong set of parameters. Discussions often revolve around details which are not really important to the success of the project, or are relevant to the work, and often the team is led down a more difficult path than is necessary because requirements are set in the wrong terms. I think it's possible to compensate to some degree with empathy and people skills, but it's hard to compete with having the experience and speaking the language.
- varjag 6y ago
  Essentially a manifestation of bikeshedding. Yep, very common.
  - skohan 6y ago
    Yes and it can go especially poorly when you have a "problem oriented" person on the team: 1. Manager proposes low quality requirements 2. Problem oriented team member points out a flaw in the requirements which is orthogonal to the actual goal of the feature/team/organization 3. Endless discussion around this one detail 4a. Manager changes the requirements just to end the debate, in a way which sacrifices the core goal and weakens the product/team/organization when there is a simpler solution available to reach the core goal OR 4b. Manager accepts an extremely complicated solution which maintains the specific requirement which was not required to reach the core goal in the first place, thereby risking the timeline
    - tomlagier 6y ago
      Oof. The number of 4b's I've had to deal with in my career... What are some techniques to use when you see this happening? I frequently try to get stakeholders to simplify and really identify the core problem / proposed solution, but I run into a lot of "all or nothing" or "design for every possible use case" folks in startups.
pydry 6y ago
I see it mostly as a refutation of the idea that MBA style management-as-a generic-function works - nothing more.
- madhadron 6y ago
  I have come to the conclusion that management is not a profession. Engineering, law, medicine, teaching are professions, that is, occupations that require considerable training or study. Manager is a role in a team that requires you not to be deficient in social and organizational skills. In settings where the people being managed are professionals, I have come to think that there should be a vote of no confidence option where a majority vote of the team can immediately remove the manager.
  - chasd00 6y ago
    it's the opposite really, a good manager is rare because being a good manager is very very hard and takes an enormous amount of both study and experience. Being a good manager is like being a therapist for a dozen people with deadlines on mental health. The soft skills required cannot be acquired from reading the documentation.
    - loopz 6y ago
      When the work is managed well there's never need for escalations, defusing, death marches and therapy.
      - skohan 6y ago
        But I think the parent comment's point is that this can be a very challenging job. A good manager's task is to absorb the chaos of the outside world, and give the team a calm, structured workflow. It's easy to see where a manager is failing, but if they're doing their job right their work is invisible.
        loopz 6y ago
cjfd 6y ago
Is somebody with empathy somebody with empathy or a pushover? The problem is the existence of architecture astronauts. How is a manager without technical skill going to distinguish between an engineer pointing out a real problem that needs some work versus the utterings of the architecture astronaut who is going to create an overly complex architecture just because he can get away with it?

geoduck14 6y ago

I like what you wrote because it makes me feel better about my own short comings. But is it actually true?

random314 6y ago
Very often when folks describe the ideal manager, they are describing themselves.
- Aeolun 6y ago
  I am fairly confident I would agree with myself, so this makes sense. At the very least our scheduling would start being based on reality, not what we’d like it to be.

skohan 6y ago

> probably not top 5-10%, because they also cared about the non-technical requirements that a good manager needs to cover It sounds like you're saying that top-tier engineers are not generally qualified in terms of non-technical requirements, and I don't know that this assertion is justified. From my perspective, as a relatively new technical manager who also spent years as an engineer working with technical managers, it's not only about empathy but also about having a thorough understanding of, or at least an accurate intuition around the subject matter. When I was working as an engineer, what I often found frustrating about working with non-technical managers is that they often work on the wrong set of parameters. Discussions often revolve around details which are not really important to the success of the project, or are relevant to the work, and often the team is led down a more difficult path than is necessary because requirements are set in the wrong terms. I think it's possible to compensate to some degree with empathy and people skills, but it's hard to compete with having the experience and speaking the language.

varjag 6y ago
Essentially a manifestation of bikeshedding. Yep, very common.
- skohan 6y ago
  Yes and it can go especially poorly when you have a "problem oriented" person on the team: 1. Manager proposes low quality requirements 2. Problem oriented team member points out a flaw in the requirements which is orthogonal to the actual goal of the feature/team/organization 3. Endless discussion around this one detail 4a. Manager changes the requirements just to end the debate, in a way which sacrifices the core goal and weakens the product/team/organization when there is a simpler solution available to reach the core goal OR 4b. Manager accepts an extremely complicated solution which maintains the specific requirement which was not required to reach the core goal in the first place, thereby risking the timeline
  - tomlagier 6y ago
    Oof. The number of 4b's I've had to deal with in my career... What are some techniques to use when you see this happening? I frequently try to get stakeholders to simplify and really identify the core problem / proposed solution, but I run into a lot of "all or nothing" or "design for every possible use case" folks in startups.

pydry 6y ago

I see it mostly as a refutation of the idea that MBA style management-as-a generic-function works - nothing more.

madhadron 6y ago
I have come to the conclusion that management is not a profession. Engineering, law, medicine, teaching are professions, that is, occupations that require considerable training or study. Manager is a role in a team that requires you not to be deficient in social and organizational skills. In settings where the people being managed are professionals, I have come to think that there should be a vote of no confidence option where a majority vote of the team can immediately remove the manager.
- chasd00 6y ago
  it's the opposite really, a good manager is rare because being a good manager is very very hard and takes an enormous amount of both study and experience. Being a good manager is like being a therapist for a dozen people with deadlines on mental health. The soft skills required cannot be acquired from reading the documentation.
  - loopz 6y ago
    When the work is managed well there's never need for escalations, defusing, death marches and therapy.
    - skohan 6y ago
      But I think the parent comment's point is that this can be a very challenging job. A good manager's task is to absorb the chaos of the outside world, and give the team a calm, structured workflow. It's easy to see where a manager is failing, but if they're doing their job right their work is invisible.
      - loopz 6y ago

cjfd 6y ago

Is somebody with empathy somebody with empathy or a pushover? The problem is the existence of architecture astronauts. How is a manager without technical skill going to distinguish between an engineer pointing out a real problem that needs some work versus the utterings of the architecture astronaut who is going to create an overly complex architecture just because he can get away with it?