5 ms·

> Should they be able to jump into the code, start grabbing JIRA tickets on a moment's notice, or throw together a new feature when a deadline is looming? Absol

by pvorb 4y ago

> Should they be able to jump into the code, start grabbing JIRA tickets on a moment's notice, or throw together a new feature when a deadline is looming? Absolutely not. The point was that a CTO should be able to do this in theory. Of course they won't ever actually do this unless there's no other way. If your CTO can actually relate to the problems of their staff, they'll be able to make better decisions which also see more acceptance.

scarface74 4y ago
I’ve had two jobs where I reported directly to the CTO - the first as Dev lead with people management responsibilities and the second as the de facto “cloud architect” that was responsible for the “application modernization” initiatives. My second CTO was very technical and up to date the first wasn’t. The only difference between the two day to day was with the second one, I could use terms without defining them first. They both deferred to my technical judgement and I worked with the understanding of how to align my initiatives with the company’s. I work with CxOs all the time in consulting now. I have no problem getting my ideas through CxOs or architecture review boards.
- pvorb 4y ago
  Thanks for the insight. I'm wondering what the devs at both companies were thinking about their CTOs. My point wasn't that much about direct reports to the CTO, who might already be used to talking in management terms, but rather the developers who are directly affected by the CTO's decisions.
  - scarface74 4y ago
    If the devs are reporting directly to the CTO, the CTO should be technical. If not, the CTO should delegate dev leadership to someone who is both technical and business oriented. As my last company grew, the CTO just didn’t have the bandwidth to be technical at work and delegated different responsibilities to the people who could wear both the technical hat and had the soft skills needed. He would just dabble in things on the weekend. His entire family was technical. His wife was a lead data analyst for a telecom and his daughter got an internship as an SWE at BigTech.
- nordsieck 4y ago
  > My second CTO was very technical an up to date the first wasn’t. The only difference between the two day to day was with the second one , I could use terms without defining them first. They both deferred to my technical judgement and I worked with the understanding of how to align my initiatives with the company’s. > I work with CxOs all the time in consulting now. I have no problem getting my ideas through CxOs or architecture review boards. Something to consider: there is probably not much difference between technical and non-technical when their reports are good. But a technical CTO can stand up to reports that want to go down an obviously bad road, whereas a non-technical CTO would have as much defense as I would at jiffy lube when the tech asks me if I want my fluids flushed. It kind of sounds like a scam, but I really don't know.
  - geertj 4y ago
    > But a technical CTO can stand up to reports that want to go down an obviously bad road, whereas a non-technical CTO would have as much defense as I would at jiffy lube when the tech asks me if I want my fluids flushed. It kind of sounds like a scam, but I really don't know. Very true. GP probably had good tech judgement which is why their technical CTO was following their judgement.
    - scarface74 4y ago
      I had never logged into AWS when I was hired. I just had theoretical knowledge. In the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king, I’m amazed to this day that the CTO trusted me knowing that in advance. Don’t get me wrong, he didn’t blindly trust me. He pushed me harder than any other manager ever had to do things correctly and to think deeply and to write well reasoned documentation and presentations. I told myself that there were only two positions at two companies that could have convinced me to leave. I got hired by one of those companies. He left less than a year later after the company was acquired for 10x revenue. He’s working somewhere else now. I would work for him again in a heartbeat if I were working anywhere else besides where I work now.
  - dijksterhuis 4y ago
    > whereas a non-technical CTO would have as much defense as I would at jiffy lube when the tech asks me if I want my fluids flushed. It kind of sounds like a scam, but I really don't know. I am genuinely wondering if I need some jiffy lube for flushing those fluids of mine. It... sounds like... a thing... that people... do?
tluyben2 4y ago
You are right; you have to relate to the problems to value your people more I find. I used to jump into code as cto and I lost good people because of it as they felt it was lack of trust (it was I think but I did not realise that back then). When understanding how things work and giving the team the means to get it done by supporting them instead of trying to do their job is something I see go wrong in many cto’s, including my former self. I still like coding more than managing but I realise that there are other people so much better at the code part and I need to hire and guide them.

by pvorb 4y ago

scarface74 4y ago

I’ve had two jobs where I reported directly to the CTO - the first as Dev lead with people management responsibilities and the second as the de facto “cloud architect” that was responsible for the “application modernization” initiatives. My second CTO was very technical and up to date the first wasn’t. The only difference between the two day to day was with the second one, I could use terms without defining them first. They both deferred to my technical judgement and I worked with the understanding of how to align my initiatives with the company’s. I work with CxOs all the time in consulting now. I have no problem getting my ideas through CxOs or architecture review boards.

pvorb 4y ago
Thanks for the insight. I'm wondering what the devs at both companies were thinking about their CTOs. My point wasn't that much about direct reports to the CTO, who might already be used to talking in management terms, but rather the developers who are directly affected by the CTO's decisions.
- scarface74 4y ago
  If the devs are reporting directly to the CTO, the CTO should be technical. If not, the CTO should delegate dev leadership to someone who is both technical and business oriented. As my last company grew, the CTO just didn’t have the bandwidth to be technical at work and delegated different responsibilities to the people who could wear both the technical hat and had the soft skills needed. He would just dabble in things on the weekend. His entire family was technical. His wife was a lead data analyst for a telecom and his daughter got an internship as an SWE at BigTech.
nordsieck 4y ago
> My second CTO was very technical an up to date the first wasn’t. The only difference between the two day to day was with the second one , I could use terms without defining them first. They both deferred to my technical judgement and I worked with the understanding of how to align my initiatives with the company’s. > I work with CxOs all the time in consulting now. I have no problem getting my ideas through CxOs or architecture review boards. Something to consider: there is probably not much difference between technical and non-technical when their reports are good. But a technical CTO can stand up to reports that want to go down an obviously bad road, whereas a non-technical CTO would have as much defense as I would at jiffy lube when the tech asks me if I want my fluids flushed. It kind of sounds like a scam, but I really don't know.
- geertj 4y ago
  > But a technical CTO can stand up to reports that want to go down an obviously bad road, whereas a non-technical CTO would have as much defense as I would at jiffy lube when the tech asks me if I want my fluids flushed. It kind of sounds like a scam, but I really don't know. Very true. GP probably had good tech judgement which is why their technical CTO was following their judgement.
  - scarface74 4y ago
    I had never logged into AWS when I was hired. I just had theoretical knowledge. In the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king, I’m amazed to this day that the CTO trusted me knowing that in advance. Don’t get me wrong, he didn’t blindly trust me. He pushed me harder than any other manager ever had to do things correctly and to think deeply and to write well reasoned documentation and presentations. I told myself that there were only two positions at two companies that could have convinced me to leave. I got hired by one of those companies. He left less than a year later after the company was acquired for 10x revenue. He’s working somewhere else now. I would work for him again in a heartbeat if I were working anywhere else besides where I work now.
- dijksterhuis 4y ago
  > whereas a non-technical CTO would have as much defense as I would at jiffy lube when the tech asks me if I want my fluids flushed. It kind of sounds like a scam, but I really don't know. I am genuinely wondering if I need some jiffy lube for flushing those fluids of mine. It... sounds like... a thing... that people... do?

tluyben2 4y ago

You are right; you have to relate to the problems to value your people more I find. I used to jump into code as cto and I lost good people because of it as they felt it was lack of trust (it was I think but I did not realise that back then). When understanding how things work and giving the team the means to get it done by supporting them instead of trying to do their job is something I see go wrong in many cto’s, including my former self. I still like coding more than managing but I realise that there are other people so much better at the code part and I need to hire and guide them.