5 ms·
Of course. Because they don't produce outputs directly, reputation is all a manager has to prove their worth to the company. If you take that away by publicly d
by WJW 3y ago
Of course. Because they don't produce outputs directly, reputation is all a manager has to prove their worth to the company. If you take that away by publicly demonstrating how their actions caused bad results, their boss might well fire them since they are apparently being a net negative. Managers face a much more difficult labor market than most engineers too.
So to exaggerate a little bit, not accepting "I told you so" from their reports is directly required to keep paying their mortgage and feeding their children. It's not weird that they get upset when you endanger their livelihood. OP has got the right idea and is just being zen about it IMO.
- nine_zeros 3y agoYou are not wrong. We both agree that the problem is the org structure as it stands. The incentives for layers and layers of management are divergent from the needs of the business and the needs of the producers of output. Perhaps we need to reduce the number of levels, replace managers with technical leaders whose incentives are aligned with the needs of the business. Offload all grunt paper work to an executive assistant. No need for EM1, EM2, EM3, Director, Sr Director, VP, SVP, SSVP nonsense.
- rbanffy 3y ago> Managers face a much more difficult labor market than most engineers too. Indeed. I've been thinking about shifting back into management after a couple years as an individual contributor (playing an instrument is fun, but so is conducting a well functioning orchestra). In this space, aligning with stereotypes has become very important in the past decade or so.