4 ms·
So interesting to hear some of these views. I am totally middle management :) My sense is; at higher rank (i.e. those above me) the problems are more macro th
by ErrantX 5y ago
So interesting to hear some of these views.
I am totally middle management :)
My sense is; at higher rank (i.e. those above me) the problems are more macro than micro and so are the motivations and consequences. Therefore reality is dealt with on a broader platform and you have people to deal with the detail.
That's why my bosses boss has to worry about what error will land him in jail, and I just have to care about delivering
some quarterly goal or other.
(or in other words; that guy totally knows how hard it is to empower an organisation of 60+ engineering/product/agile folks to deliver consistently, but he doesn't really care because that's my problem)
- agumonkey 5y agoDoes your boss still know how things are going below. Most higher ranks I've seen live in a disconnected reality. Any time they had to enact their own orders they failed to carry threw. While the middle managers were constantly forcing people to follow orders. That's why I said it's mostly emotional buffering. They know shit will happen one way or another, shielded by intermediate layers of authority (relying on the fact that rent is not free so lower classes aren't free to talk much.) That said, lower layers aren't perfect. Lots of bad apples, liars, cons. But I believe all it would take is more honest, close to the ground interactions to solve this bad game theory setup.
- ErrantX 5y agoI think you hit on an interesting question; and the answer is yes. What is different is the value framework, right? The further down a hierarchy you go the more individual the problems become; therefore the guy at the top is never going to solve for N challenges, just the macro ones.