3 ms·
Maybe this works with managers overseeing 1 or 2 people. But any broader than that is likely to be counter productive. Managers don’t just have 1:1s. They set
by xivzgrev 4y ago
Maybe this works with managers overseeing 1 or 2 people. But any broader than that is likely to be counter productive.
Managers don’t just have 1:1s. They set direction, clear obstacles (both upcoming and here now), ensure quality work, etc. that scales somewhat linearly with team size, plus or minus depending on the individuals.
If you remove a bunch of managers making them ICs, now the remaining managers have that much more to wrangle, and stuff will get dropped.
- arnvald 4y agoI mostly agree with you and I think it highly depends on the organizational complexity. In a smaller company (100 people) I was able to manage 10 people and still had time to write some non-critical code. That's because there was little overhead - just 2 PMs to work with, not many meetings. Then in a large org (5,000+) it became much harder. Even though I had only 5 reports, I had to attend plenty of cross-dept meetings, had multiple stakeholders, and in order to get anything done I had to talk to 5 different people. In order to "flatten" the organization, first this complexity must be tackled. If there's s lot of overhead to get things done, removing managers won't help, because now ICs will have to do the job that previously was done by managers