3 ms·

Maybe it's time people stopped thinking of "geeks" as a homogenous, broadly categorizable group of people. IMO, that worldview is as much a part of the problem

Maybe it's time people stopped thinking of "geeks" as a homogenous, broadly categorizable group of people. IMO, that worldview is as much a part of the problem as anything else. I wouldn't assume a random set of 10 doctors are all going to have the same personalities, the same motivators, and the same quirks. I wouldn't assume 10 randomly grouped MBAs are identical, either. Perhaps non-technical managers would do well to stop thinking of all technical employees as interchangeable. That's the first step toward being a better manager -- be it of engineers, of marketers, of financial analysts, or of sales staff. A lot of the principles on this list are great, but honestly, the list could just as easily be rebadged as "How to Manage People." And perhaps that's what makes it a good list.

gapanalysis 15y ago
+1 Labeling and classifying folks with common educational backgrounds and career "orientation" is a common error when managing people. Technically oriented people can be marginal programmers but excellent team/project leaders or managers. Marginalizing staff - thinking they can't manage people - because they have a technology affinity, however, is a common bias. Good managers don't buy into stereotypes.
dpritchett 15y ago
There's also the fact that tech geeks compulsively analyze systems. If your insufficient, stagnant incentive/communication/empowerment systems are all out of whack it's going to be extremely demoralizing to the people who see them for what they are.
gaius 15y ago
employees as interchangeable That's baked into alot of management thinking/training, e.g. referring to people as "X resources" where X is some particular language or technology. "We need 5 database resources for this project!" etc etc.
j_baker 15y ago
I think some level of this is ok, just as long as one is clear about the difference between a generalization and a stereotype. IE, "Geeks tend to want X" isn't necessarily bad, but "Geeks always want X" is probably bad. I mean, it's somewhat naive to assume that there are absolutely no common threads between people of the same profession. The problem begins when you start treating these ideas as rigid rules: "Geeks know nothing about the business side of things. They need us managers to tell them how to build a good product."
- jonnathanson 15y ago
  "it's somewhat naive to assume that there are absolutely no common threads between people of the same profession" Absolutely. There are certainly some commonalities among groups of people -- especially among groups of people who self-select into the same profession or skill set. And, as a geek, I'll be the first to admit that a lot of the stereotypes about people like me are at least grounded in some observable shade of reality. But underneath my geek layer, I've also got a personality layer. And a motivations layer. And a background layer. Etc. I may share the same external, readily observable, surface-level traits as many of my peers. But that doesn't mean my peers and I are the same people. Are there general principles that apply to managing geeks? Yes. Are there things that geeks, as a set, will pick up on or respond to more readily than other sets of people? Yes. But a good manager shouldn't stop there.

gapanalysis 15y ago

+1 Labeling and classifying folks with common educational backgrounds and career "orientation" is a common error when managing people. Technically oriented people can be marginal programmers but excellent team/project leaders or managers. Marginalizing staff - thinking they can't manage people - because they have a technology affinity, however, is a common bias. Good managers don't buy into stereotypes.

dpritchett 15y ago

There's also the fact that tech geeks compulsively analyze systems. If your insufficient, stagnant incentive/communication/empowerment systems are all out of whack it's going to be extremely demoralizing to the people who see them for what they are.

gaius 15y ago

employees as interchangeable That's baked into alot of management thinking/training, e.g. referring to people as "X resources" where X is some particular language or technology. "We need 5 database resources for this project!" etc etc.

j_baker 15y ago

I think some level of this is ok, just as long as one is clear about the difference between a generalization and a stereotype. IE, "Geeks tend to want X" isn't necessarily bad, but "Geeks always want X" is probably bad. I mean, it's somewhat naive to assume that there are absolutely no common threads between people of the same profession. The problem begins when you start treating these ideas as rigid rules: "Geeks know nothing about the business side of things. They need us managers to tell them how to build a good product."

jonnathanson 15y ago
"it's somewhat naive to assume that there are absolutely no common threads between people of the same profession" Absolutely. There are certainly some commonalities among groups of people -- especially among groups of people who self-select into the same profession or skill set. And, as a geek, I'll be the first to admit that a lot of the stereotypes about people like me are at least grounded in some observable shade of reality. But underneath my geek layer, I've also got a personality layer. And a motivations layer. And a background layer. Etc. I may share the same external, readily observable, surface-level traits as many of my peers. But that doesn't mean my peers and I are the same people. Are there general principles that apply to managing geeks? Yes. Are there things that geeks, as a set, will pick up on or respond to more readily than other sets of people? Yes. But a good manager shouldn't stop there.