4 ms·
Sorry dude, that's not true, and is very naïve. When you're an IC, you have no idea what your manager does. You have even less of an idea of what your manager'
by deanCommie 5y ago
Sorry dude, that's not true, and is very naïve.
When you're an IC, you have no idea what your manager does. You have even less of an idea of what your manager's manager does.
I know I was naive about direct management until I tried it and realized just how much they do that I never was aware of. And as I became a more senior IC, now working directly with senior managers (managers of mangers), I found out just how much they're involved with.
At high-intensity high-output companies (including gaming ones), it's very rare that senior managers end up just resting on their laurels and letting the line managers do all the work.
First of all, it's an all-encompassing job. You are effectively oncall for various escalations, personnel issues, priority/project issues, conflicting incentives - you are responsible for all the people underneath you, and all the conflicts that might occur that direct managers don't handle - they escalate to you. At that level, there is no expectation of work-life balance, you might get called in the evening/weekend to deal with something. While you're detached from the depth, you are responsible for way more breadth.
Secondly, line managers are still expected to be primarily focused on their technical projects and their people. Senior managers have to start dealing with Legal, Marketing, Sales, Facilities, office issues, christmas party organization, press release, etc. Sure, some of it is just coordination and delegation, but the point is that you have to organize all sorts of disparate considerations that frankly are not in technical people's forte. This arguably becomes 50% or more of the job, and this is where things get really tough. Do you want someone technical for this that will be MISERABLE spending time on 50% of their job, and not doing an amazing job at it? Or do you want some MBA type that will be great, but then have no credibility with their team, no ability to influence the techncial direction, because their people will sniff out their technical weaknesses and not respect them for it.
Naturally none of this is universal. There are exceptions of exactly what you're imagining - someone that just steps back, lets everyone else do the work, and they aggregate/summarize and take all the credit. But I don't think those are actually the majority.
- Jach 5y ago> frankly are not in technical people's forte Amusing to see this attitude on HN in the 21st century. Have not the last 20 years of startup successes having very technical founders successfully transition to more managerial roles more than demonstrated otherwise?
- jwagenet 5y agoIt would seem to me founders, technical or not, would be well suited to management positions with a lot of control/freedom since that is likely not so different from starting a business, except scaled up.
- Jach 5y agoIs your suggestion that they wouldn't do well in more constrained middle management roles? Perhaps (I don't really agree), but then does coming from the other side with the whole idea of "technical managers" and ICs "retiring into management" (many later ending up as high as any level you want to pick with various domains of focus -- some even go get MBAs!) matter to you? I find it laughable to create a technical/non-technical dichotomy as it relates to predictive managerial suitability (programmers deal with absurd complexities in software, but somehow aren't suitable to organize a Christmas party?) and even fundamental preferences. The father of quality management (Deming, whom more people in software should read, especially managers) was himself quite technical.
- deanCommie 5y agoMaybe you're right. My overarching point to OP who was doubting what managers-of-managers do, is that this a big part of the job, and it takes time, and effort. There is also a big difference between doing these things as the CEO of a 100-person startup, where every choice you make is a reflection of you, a reflection of the culture you're setting up, and contribute to the legacy that YOUR company will have, vs as the Sr. Manger of a 100-person org in a huge company, where ultimately it's not your company.
- Fiahil 5y agoNo, absolutely not. Going from a beeing an expert into a new management role is almost a different career, and there’s no predisposition for « technical people » to succeed at it.
- Jach 5y agoThere's no predisposition for them to not succeed at it either on account of them being technical. That's my point, drawing a technical/non-technical dichotomy for who is best suited a priori for management (let alone organizing Christmas parties) is silly, and extremely old fashioned given the broad successes of technical people switching to management at every level from front line to CEO over the last decades.