4 ms·

People don't like to hear this, but management jobs will be the least impacted.

it_citizen 4y ago
If I need 5 developers instead of 20. I need 1 manager instead of 4. Also a large chunk of manager work is grunt work like filling spreadsheets, writing emails, scheduling meetings, etc… With those tasks partially automated, I am pretty sure a manager could oversee larger teams and focus on the big picture instead of doing boilerplate tasks.
- nemo44x 4y ago
  Let me ask you why you wouldn’t do more now that your developers are more productive? I think the game changes here where dev teams get super charged and do more in the same time. In fact if you downsize to keep doing what you’re doing and your competitor keeps their team size, wouldn’t they overwhelm you? Can you beat them on price? Maybe but software prices are not affected by labor costs really so that’s not a differentiator.
  - it_citizen 4y ago
    I agree that companies will probably just do more but my point was that managers are not safer than other jobs. It is linked to the jobs they manage and a large part of their day to day can also be automated.
    - nemo44x 4y ago
      I guess there’s 2 types of managers - those concerned with day to day managerial things (resource allocation, roadmap planning, 1-on1’s, reviews, etc) and higher level managers concerned with strategy, leadership, managing managers, etc. Do you see both classes being affected the same?
nemo44x 4y ago
Indeed. Managers that can not only run a department but can also do the tasks associated with it will thrive. They’ll get more done with the same team sizes. One thing to remember is managers line to have as many people under them as possible. VPs and directors care a lot about this. They’ll find ways to continue to grow teams whine harvesting more productivity.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
ada1981 4y ago
I’m not so sure. What is management doing that is so special? We’ve see a gaming company install a bot as a CEO and its stock has gone up. I imagine management LLMs will be a layer in development.
mejutoco 4y ago
Could you provide some argument as to why you think this is the case?
- krapp 4y ago
  It seems obvious - the people who make the decisions about who to hire and fire aren't going to volunteer themselves for the chopping block.
  - therealdrag0 4y ago
    That’s not how it works. Management has their own management. It’s a tree. Each node has a parent who can let them go.
    - Ekaros 4y ago
      That is true, but on other hand management in growing economic environment does not aim at actual efficiency. But to apparent efficiency. And more people is still more power. Including having your own managers under you. I don't really see this dynamic changing.

If I need 5 developers instead of 20. I need 1 manager instead of 4. Also a large chunk of manager work is grunt work like filling spreadsheets, writing emails, scheduling meetings, etc… With those tasks partially automated, I am pretty sure a manager could oversee larger teams and focus on the big picture instead of doing boilerplate tasks.

nemo44x 4y ago
Let me ask you why you wouldn’t do more now that your developers are more productive? I think the game changes here where dev teams get super charged and do more in the same time. In fact if you downsize to keep doing what you’re doing and your competitor keeps their team size, wouldn’t they overwhelm you? Can you beat them on price? Maybe but software prices are not affected by labor costs really so that’s not a differentiator.
- it_citizen 4y ago
  I agree that companies will probably just do more but my point was that managers are not safer than other jobs. It is linked to the jobs they manage and a large part of their day to day can also be automated.
  - nemo44x 4y ago
    I guess there’s 2 types of managers - those concerned with day to day managerial things (resource allocation, roadmap planning, 1-on1’s, reviews, etc) and higher level managers concerned with strategy, leadership, managing managers, etc. Do you see both classes being affected the same?

nemo44x 4y ago

Indeed. Managers that can not only run a department but can also do the tasks associated with it will thrive. They’ll get more done with the same team sizes. One thing to remember is managers line to have as many people under them as possible. VPs and directors care a lot about this. They’ll find ways to continue to grow teams whine harvesting more productivity.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

ada1981 4y ago

I’m not so sure. What is management doing that is so special? We’ve see a gaming company install a bot as a CEO and its stock has gone up. I imagine management LLMs will be a layer in development.

mejutoco 4y ago

Could you provide some argument as to why you think this is the case?

krapp 4y ago
It seems obvious - the people who make the decisions about who to hire and fire aren't going to volunteer themselves for the chopping block.
- therealdrag0 4y ago
  That’s not how it works. Management has their own management. It’s a tree. Each node has a parent who can let them go.
  - Ekaros 4y ago
    That is true, but on other hand management in growing economic environment does not aim at actual efficiency. But to apparent efficiency. And more people is still more power. Including having your own managers under you. I don't really see this dynamic changing.