4 ms·

We are putting too much into the word "management" - supervision (did you turn up on time, are you capable of doing the basic functions needed) - coaching (th

We are putting too much into the word "management" - supervision (did you turn up on time, are you capable of doing the basic functions needed) - coaching (this team needs someone to do X, but I have two Ys. One goes or one changes) - administration (budgets, projects, scheduling etc). Certainly the part most at threat from software - looking at you Project Manahers - strategic decision making (yeah that's the part everyone wants to do because it's the big bucks with years before anyone can judge you. It is also oddly under threat - not from software but from voting - my guess is most strategy is going to be voted for in twenty years. don't like the strategy - binding vote at the AGM for new Board. would save Elon the effort of buying twitter) All four of these (and I am sure MBA text books have better selections) are wildly different, at different levels of an org and need different skill sets and people. just thinking we could ever ask one person to get on with it all is crazy.

acjohnson55 5y ago
The job of being a manager is to understand the leadership roles that need to be fulfilled within the team and to figure out how to make sure they're all performed. You don't have to embody them all yourself. You are accountable for anything you delegate, however.
travisgriggs 5y ago
This resonates with a basic "anti management" feeling I have. I don't hate managers as people. I often really like them. But I hate what the title "manager" does to people. Like "domestic engineers" and "waste engineers" of the past, it's basically become a title grab for "get paid more money." In particular for managers, it usually establishes a "the principal said I can climb higher than you on the jungle gym, and from this point, I'm to wield authority over how you play on said gym." They may even protest "how bad it is up here" and "how I'm suffering for you." What I really wish would happen, is that we'd abolish the title "manager" as overly vague and oft abused, and instead just call it what it is. - Public Relations (go to meetings) - Clerk (push papers, manage minutia) - Meeting Caller/Planner - etc Anecdotally, an off the cuff euphemism from my Advanced Fluid Dynamics Professor in the early 90's still holds too true all to oft in my experience. He had great rapport with our class of ~100 students. After one test, the class was collectively whining about grading to a curve. After humoring us for a bit, he said something like "Look, you A students, you're going to go out in industry for a bit, but the lack of idealism is going to frustrate you, and you'll be back here soon with me. You B students know what compromise is. When it's good enough. That's why you're going to make great engineers." And then he turned to begin his lecture like that was it. And someone yelled out "wait, what about us C students." "Management" was his terse reply. (Apologies to the venn intersection of managers <-> HN readers <-> "A" students.)
- gkop 5y ago
  What does engineering leadership mean to you? What factors make it easier or harder to practice engineering leadership? For me, I like having a budget and a staff - it’s way easier to influence my organization with a budget and a staff, than without. I’m saying this only to encourage engineering leaders not to be afraid of formal management roles. You can make them your own. You might find what I found.
  - travisgriggs 5y ago
    I have worked in the classical management structure a good chunk of my career. And a couple of times (including mostly right now), I have worked in something that feels more like a basketball team with zero or little management. Competent engineers play the court together and get the job done. I prefer (greatly) this second model.
  - lifeisstillgood 5y ago
    I think the difference here is in "corporate structure". I mean Bezos and Musk are both extraordinary people - but say Bezos employees about 1 million people and is worth about 150bn - why is the world structured so that each employee "gives" Bezos 150 grand? There are other ways to structure our corporations, our tax and investment incentives. The Early Victoria British style of corporate structure worked so it got copied naturally. And I am not saying there are easy fixes. But co-operative movements were born at similar times. One day we will see VCs funding co-op unicorns and the world will look differently
    - mgfist 5y ago
      Simplicity, speed, responsibility, authority. A lot of reasons why having a clear hierarchy makes sense. How do you assign blame in a co-op that makes bad decisions?
      - travisgriggs 5y ago
        I can’t tell if you’re doing /s or not. If a group of people performs/delivers poorly, how effective is it to assign blame to one select member? It may be efficient, but I’m not sure it’s effective.
jjmorrison 5y ago
No, management means 1 thing: productivity.

acjohnson55 5y ago

The job of being a manager is to understand the leadership roles that need to be fulfilled within the team and to figure out how to make sure they're all performed. You don't have to embody them all yourself. You are accountable for anything you delegate, however.

travisgriggs 5y ago

This resonates with a basic "anti management" feeling I have. I don't hate managers as people. I often really like them. But I hate what the title "manager" does to people. Like "domestic engineers" and "waste engineers" of the past, it's basically become a title grab for "get paid more money." In particular for managers, it usually establishes a "the principal said I can climb higher than you on the jungle gym, and from this point, I'm to wield authority over how you play on said gym." They may even protest "how bad it is up here" and "how I'm suffering for you." What I really wish would happen, is that we'd abolish the title "manager" as overly vague and oft abused, and instead just call it what it is. - Public Relations (go to meetings) - Clerk (push papers, manage minutia) - Meeting Caller/Planner - etc Anecdotally, an off the cuff euphemism from my Advanced Fluid Dynamics Professor in the early 90's still holds too true all to oft in my experience. He had great rapport with our class of ~100 students. After one test, the class was collectively whining about grading to a curve. After humoring us for a bit, he said something like "Look, you A students, you're going to go out in industry for a bit, but the lack of idealism is going to frustrate you, and you'll be back here soon with me. You B students know what compromise is. When it's good enough. That's why you're going to make great engineers." And then he turned to begin his lecture like that was it. And someone yelled out "wait, what about us C students." "Management" was his terse reply. (Apologies to the venn intersection of managers <-> HN readers <-> "A" students.)

gkop 5y ago
What does engineering leadership mean to you? What factors make it easier or harder to practice engineering leadership? For me, I like having a budget and a staff - it’s way easier to influence my organization with a budget and a staff, than without. I’m saying this only to encourage engineering leaders not to be afraid of formal management roles. You can make them your own. You might find what I found.
- travisgriggs 5y ago
  I have worked in the classical management structure a good chunk of my career. And a couple of times (including mostly right now), I have worked in something that feels more like a basketball team with zero or little management. Competent engineers play the court together and get the job done. I prefer (greatly) this second model.
- lifeisstillgood 5y ago
  I think the difference here is in "corporate structure". I mean Bezos and Musk are both extraordinary people - but say Bezos employees about 1 million people and is worth about 150bn - why is the world structured so that each employee "gives" Bezos 150 grand? There are other ways to structure our corporations, our tax and investment incentives. The Early Victoria British style of corporate structure worked so it got copied naturally. And I am not saying there are easy fixes. But co-operative movements were born at similar times. One day we will see VCs funding co-op unicorns and the world will look differently
  - mgfist 5y ago
    Simplicity, speed, responsibility, authority. A lot of reasons why having a clear hierarchy makes sense. How do you assign blame in a co-op that makes bad decisions?
    - travisgriggs 5y ago
      I can’t tell if you’re doing /s or not. If a group of people performs/delivers poorly, how effective is it to assign blame to one select member? It may be efficient, but I’m not sure it’s effective.

jjmorrison 5y ago

No, management means 1 thing: productivity.