3 ms·

This, I think, is the crux of the problem. A manager, traditionally, has the power. They can hire and fire, and have the organisation's power structure behind

This, I think, is the crux of the problem. A manager, traditionally, has the power. They can hire and fire, and have the organisation's power structure behind them. But in a software team, the devs have the power and they know it. There is literally nothing a manager can do to make the project go faster or be successful if the devs don't co-operate. And often the manager has no visibility into the process and don't understand what's going on or why. For a lot of (bad) managers this makes them very insecure, and they react badly. It also puts them in a very difficult situation. For example: if the rest of the management team agree on a deadline that they would like the devs to meet, the dev manager is put in the awkward position of having to ask the devs if they can meet it, and then carrying the answer back to the management team, and generally being a go-between rather than in control. The temptation is clearly to agree to the deadline and then impose it on the dev team. It becomes a conflict situation where the dev manager has to pick a side and either fight the dev team or fight the rest of the organisation. Avoiding this is tricky. Managing without power can be difficult.

discreteevent 5y ago
> It becomes a conflict situation where the dev manager has to pick a side and either fight the dev team or fight the rest of the organisation. I think that describes a weak dev manager because they immediately got caught in the trap of playing a fictional estimation game instead of trying to deal with reality. A strong dev manager will communicate the risk to the rest of the managment team. Then they will make decisions based on risk and reward and educate the rest of the managment team about that. If the rest of the managment team wants to pretend that risk doesn't exist and that they want to be shielded from reality then they in turn are weak and there is not much you can do about it. (other fields are similar, e.g. the military).
- marcus_holmes 5y ago
  agree completely, except for the terms "strong" and "weak" - I would substitute "experienced" or "good" ;)
rramadass 5y ago
>Managing without power can be difficult It is impossible. Whether the Power (in the most general sense of the term) is overt or covert is a function of circumstances and the nature of the people being managed. The way i look at it is as consisting of three distinct axes; * People - Their Nature, Wants, Psychology and Behaviour. This is what everybody should focus on majorly since this is the most variable, malleable, amorphous and difficult to learn and master. An analogy i use (and which often raises people's ire) is how we train other species to get them to do what we want; eg. Lions/Tigers in a Circus vs. Sheep herding Dogs vs. Teaching a parrot to Talk etc. You get the idea. There are some fundamental principles but they all have to be tailored for each species and the individual within a species. We are the same except that our social/communication structures are vastly more complex. * Resources - Materials and Time. You are given a finite amount of these with which you have to do the best you can. The big problem here is Time due to our equating it with Money and the self-imposed breakneck speed towards everything. * Domain Knowledge - This is a must and especially relevant to Software Development domain because of the breadth and complexity of the subjects involved. The author of the article seems to conflate this with the whole of "Management". All the above three will have to be "Managed" for a successful outcome but the emphasis on each will vary according to Circumstances and Issues involved.
- marcus_holmes 5y ago
  > It is impossible. I think this is where you're talking about the same thing but using different words. Is the ability to persuade people to do something (without any ability to force them to do it) the same as having "power" over them?
  - rramadass 5y ago
    Yes. Influence/Persuasion where you start from an advantageous position and/or don't give up much of anything is "Soft Power". Note that being anointed a "Manager" gives you this implicit Power over the "Managed". Persuading a Peer is very different from Persuading a Subordinate. Otoh, Negotiation where both parties give up something to come to an understanding and treat each other as equals is different. Power is still being exercised but with equal emphasis.

discreteevent 5y ago

> It becomes a conflict situation where the dev manager has to pick a side and either fight the dev team or fight the rest of the organisation. I think that describes a weak dev manager because they immediately got caught in the trap of playing a fictional estimation game instead of trying to deal with reality. A strong dev manager will communicate the risk to the rest of the managment team. Then they will make decisions based on risk and reward and educate the rest of the managment team about that. If the rest of the managment team wants to pretend that risk doesn't exist and that they want to be shielded from reality then they in turn are weak and there is not much you can do about it. (other fields are similar, e.g. the military).

marcus_holmes 5y ago
agree completely, except for the terms "strong" and "weak" - I would substitute "experienced" or "good" ;)

rramadass 5y ago

>Managing without power can be difficult It is impossible. Whether the Power (in the most general sense of the term) is overt or covert is a function of circumstances and the nature of the people being managed. The way i look at it is as consisting of three distinct axes; * People - Their Nature, Wants, Psychology and Behaviour. This is what everybody should focus on majorly since this is the most variable, malleable, amorphous and difficult to learn and master. An analogy i use (and which often raises people's ire) is how we train other species to get them to do what we want; eg. Lions/Tigers in a Circus vs. Sheep herding Dogs vs. Teaching a parrot to Talk etc. You get the idea. There are some fundamental principles but they all have to be tailored for each species and the individual within a species. We are the same except that our social/communication structures are vastly more complex. * Resources - Materials and Time. You are given a finite amount of these with which you have to do the best you can. The big problem here is Time due to our equating it with Money and the self-imposed breakneck speed towards everything. * Domain Knowledge - This is a must and especially relevant to Software Development domain because of the breadth and complexity of the subjects involved. The author of the article seems to conflate this with the whole of "Management". All the above three will have to be "Managed" for a successful outcome but the emphasis on each will vary according to Circumstances and Issues involved.

marcus_holmes 5y ago
> It is impossible. I think this is where you're talking about the same thing but using different words. Is the ability to persuade people to do something (without any ability to force them to do it) the same as having "power" over them?
- rramadass 5y ago
  Yes. Influence/Persuasion where you start from an advantageous position and/or don't give up much of anything is "Soft Power". Note that being anointed a "Manager" gives you this implicit Power over the "Managed". Persuading a Peer is very different from Persuading a Subordinate. Otoh, Negotiation where both parties give up something to come to an understanding and treat each other as equals is different. Power is still being exercised but with equal emphasis.