7 ms·

Another manager here and i might be able to provide some insight into WHY you find managers who cant manage people. Most large multinationals have very rigidly

Another manager here and i might be able to provide some insight into WHY you find managers who cant manage people. Most large multinationals have very rigidly defined jobs, job descriptions, point levels and compensation bands. The terminology may not be the same but the overall effects of the system are the same. Lets say you have a great tech, they are a "tech level 3", position level 100 and salary range "G". If they want to make more money they need to move to salary range "H" and need a JD that matches that salary range. So they are promoted to a manager role to keep them, and to pay them what it takes to keep them. Did they want to be managers? Are they suitable for the job? I've dealt with this scenario many times in my career. Sometimes it would be far better off for everyone of the system wasn't so rigid, and that good people could be paid to do their jobs and not be artificially promoted to management positions. It is an interesting "cobra" unintended consequences effect. The goal of the system was fairness and to manage costs. The unintended consequence is having many unqualified managers as people game the system to their advantage.

ralph84 4y ago
Not surprising that a pay system designed by managers pays managers more.
- nouveaux 4y ago
  Designing comensation systems for other people is a people management tasks. How do you envision a situation where ICs are doing management tasks but not given the title and/or pay of a manager?
  - ralph84 4y ago
    Unions are the obvious example where ICs have input into the pay system design.
Asooka 4y ago
Maybe we should dispense with managers except at the very top and just choose a random person from the team to be acting manager for the week. If some person from the team will end up being manager anyway, choosing randomly minimises the disruption to work, since your best performer will be saddled with managerial duties only occasionally.
- throwaway821909 4y ago
  Had a similar experience: I think regrettably if the timescale is this short, no-one knows who to talk to (from other teams/the proper managers the level above), there's some need for memory/dealing with long-running things, and so you end up with backseat driving, revisiting the same issues without decisive action taken, etc
- kovac 4y ago
  Kind of similar, but I was thinking of replacing them with team assistants (a kin to PAs or secretaries) for teams. This is nothing but just renaming the current roles except that it takes the connotation of a manager being better, more experienced or more jiggly valued than rest of the team. Perhaps that'd work?
skeeter2020 4y ago
Not disagreeing that many excellent technical ICs get promoted into roles where they are ineffectual managers, but dual career ladders that let technical people stay in technical IC roles while getting promoted have been around for quite a while by now. The last 3 companies where I was a manager all had them, and principal developers were parallel (in hierarchy and pay) to senior engineering managers. I think the biggest problem is that engineering management is not thought of as a craft to be learned and improved. Most managers don't put anything like the amount of time and effort into getting better compared to technical ICs.

ralph84 4y ago

Not surprising that a pay system designed by managers pays managers more.

nouveaux 4y ago
Designing comensation systems for other people is a people management tasks. How do you envision a situation where ICs are doing management tasks but not given the title and/or pay of a manager?
- ralph84 4y ago
  Unions are the obvious example where ICs have input into the pay system design.

Asooka 4y ago

Maybe we should dispense with managers except at the very top and just choose a random person from the team to be acting manager for the week. If some person from the team will end up being manager anyway, choosing randomly minimises the disruption to work, since your best performer will be saddled with managerial duties only occasionally.

throwaway821909 4y ago
Had a similar experience: I think regrettably if the timescale is this short, no-one knows who to talk to (from other teams/the proper managers the level above), there's some need for memory/dealing with long-running things, and so you end up with backseat driving, revisiting the same issues without decisive action taken, etc
kovac 4y ago
Kind of similar, but I was thinking of replacing them with team assistants (a kin to PAs or secretaries) for teams. This is nothing but just renaming the current roles except that it takes the connotation of a manager being better, more experienced or more jiggly valued than rest of the team. Perhaps that'd work?

skeeter2020 4y ago

Not disagreeing that many excellent technical ICs get promoted into roles where they are ineffectual managers, but dual career ladders that let technical people stay in technical IC roles while getting promoted have been around for quite a while by now. The last 3 companies where I was a manager all had them, and principal developers were parallel (in hierarchy and pay) to senior engineering managers. I think the biggest problem is that engineering management is not thought of as a craft to be learned and improved. Most managers don't put anything like the amount of time and effort into getting better compared to technical ICs.