4 ms·

Although I can completely identify with your story (been there, done that, more than once), you have to realize that you haven't given her a solution, nor have

by rickmb 15y ago

Although I can completely identify with your story (been there, done that, more than once), you have to realize that you haven't given her a solution, nor have you taken responsibility (except for your own career, which sometimes is of course the best thing to do). You've only told her management is the problem, that "engineering should be run by someone who understood engineering", not that the engineers can run the engineering part themselves. "We need better managers" is just as non-constructive as "we need more programmers to make the deadline". You cannot open a can of competent managers just like you cannot open a can of competent programmers and everything will be alright. You want to convince management you can do a better job? Show them. Sure, it means sticking your neck out. It means you may fail. Hell, it means you may get fired for even trying, instead of being allowed the dignity of quitting yourself. But that is commitment. That is putting your ass on the line because you believe in what you stand for. You want good engineering practices? Start applying them. You want a realistic plan? Make one. (One caveat: incumbent managers may turn out not be your main impediment. Some coworkers who will gladly join you in bitching sessions will run for cover if you actually try to change things from the inside. You know, the guys that stayed when you quit and continued to take it up the ass without protest.) It's only when clueless management insists on telling you how to do your job and prevents you from doing it right is when you run out of options. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that is what you personally should have done. Most of the mismanagement you're describing is just pure mismanagement, nothing to do with being technical or not. But just doing it is the best chance of actually changing things, rather than to wait for a that rare manager-with-technical-background to come and rescue you. Or of course start your own company. In which case, unless you prefer to go solo, you may at some point find yourself dealing with the same issue from the other end.

deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
cookiecaper 15y ago
I think that you are taking it a bit too far here. If the new CEO couldn't pick up after he had laid all of that out, it was most likely hopeless. After years and years of banging my head against walls, I have learned that sometimes people are just not capable of processing what you're talking about, and that the best course of action is to leave these people totally alone and try again in 2-3 years and see what has changed. Sure, he could have tried to lead an internal revolution or whatever, but the reality is that after he hurt the wrong person's feelings on the third day he would have been fired anyway. He could have spent a few days laying out a very formal reiteration of everything he had just told the new CEO, but after she discarded the executive summary so flippantly, what would have been the point?
- nirvana 15y ago
  He's passing judgement on a situation he wasn't present at, based purely on his projections onto it. Essentially everything he said is false, but he's got an axe to grind and he's grinding it. I'm not needed for it, and there's not much point in debating him on events he has no knowledge of. In fact, this is part of the reason I think engineering managers should understand engineering. Its not that one who doesn't can't be a good manager, its just that by understanding engineering they understand the consequences of the decisions they make. If a manager simply trusted his subordinates, then knowing engineering might not be necessary. But the bad managers generally don't. They think that engineering explanations that go over their head are BSing because the engineer is lazy or doesn't want to do the work, or is padding the estimate or whatever. The tend to project onto engineers all the fault, and blame them for "not speaking up" (when in fact they did speak up but were ignored) or whatever rationalization is convenient at the time. They project this worldview onto actions to explain them, when in reality, what they're trying to "explain" has been already explained to them-- only in engineering terms. I think bad managers also often have a superiority complex where they see a class divide between "management" and "workers". And they think that they job is to keep workers working, as if we're orcs in Warcraft who have to be beaten with a stick or we'll lie down and take a snooze. Now I'm on the other side of the table. I am the manager. I've had challenges with employees, and they are always interesting and different.... but none of them are lazy, and none of them were making shit up to get out of work.

by rickmb 15y ago

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

cookiecaper 15y ago

I think that you are taking it a bit too far here. If the new CEO couldn't pick up after he had laid all of that out, it was most likely hopeless. After years and years of banging my head against walls, I have learned that sometimes people are just not capable of processing what you're talking about, and that the best course of action is to leave these people totally alone and try again in 2-3 years and see what has changed. Sure, he could have tried to lead an internal revolution or whatever, but the reality is that after he hurt the wrong person's feelings on the third day he would have been fired anyway. He could have spent a few days laying out a very formal reiteration of everything he had just told the new CEO, but after she discarded the executive summary so flippantly, what would have been the point?

nirvana 15y ago
He's passing judgement on a situation he wasn't present at, based purely on his projections onto it. Essentially everything he said is false, but he's got an axe to grind and he's grinding it. I'm not needed for it, and there's not much point in debating him on events he has no knowledge of. In fact, this is part of the reason I think engineering managers should understand engineering. Its not that one who doesn't can't be a good manager, its just that by understanding engineering they understand the consequences of the decisions they make. If a manager simply trusted his subordinates, then knowing engineering might not be necessary. But the bad managers generally don't. They think that engineering explanations that go over their head are BSing because the engineer is lazy or doesn't want to do the work, or is padding the estimate or whatever. The tend to project onto engineers all the fault, and blame them for "not speaking up" (when in fact they did speak up but were ignored) or whatever rationalization is convenient at the time. They project this worldview onto actions to explain them, when in reality, what they're trying to "explain" has been already explained to them-- only in engineering terms. I think bad managers also often have a superiority complex where they see a class divide between "management" and "workers". And they think that they job is to keep workers working, as if we're orcs in Warcraft who have to be beaten with a stick or we'll lie down and take a snooze. Now I'm on the other side of the table. I am the manager. I've had challenges with employees, and they are always interesting and different.... but none of them are lazy, and none of them were making shit up to get out of work.