5 ms·

The other anomaly is that Jensen talks all the time with ICs doing the work. I was only a couple of months into working at the company before I got to have a fa

The other anomaly is that Jensen talks all the time with ICs doing the work. I was only a couple of months into working at the company before I got to have a face to face discussion with him about a project I was working on. I have seen many mid-level engineers (IC4-IC5) give him deep dives in these group meetings. It can be very stressful being under Jensen's microscope, but it dramatically reduces the "let's show pretty slides to the CEO to show him everything is good" BS. I was previously at a startup 1/100th of this size where the CEO was far less connected to rank and file engineers, so it has been a really nice change.

icedchai 3y ago
I've been on small teams where the direct manager was completely clueless about the day-to-day work of his 3 or 4 reports. These are professional meeting attenders, basically. 10+ years ago this seemed much less common in tech. Management was more technical and CEOs would actually talk to the ICs.
- kalupa 3y ago
  this might be unique to your experience. I can't say the same about my own a decade ago. it was due to the employer I was with at the time. they valued "attendance" and "billable hours" way more than quality or even meeting deadlines, let alone talking tech execution with a product manager
- Sebguer 3y ago
  By and large leadership of engineering companies have been subsumed by finance heads. Boeing is the canonical example, but Intel also (and their attempts to course-correct haven't been super successful).
squirrel6 3y ago
I’ve been reflecting on this a lot lately. Thinking over Chernobyl, Fukushima, and so many business scandals, I think this is the right way to run any organization, public or private. You just can’t have individuals encountering real issues of substance to the business without any voice to raise them to the highest levels of management. Moreover, I don’t know how any executive could expect to try and steer a behemoth of an organization when their only visibility into the business is at such a low resolution owing to the oversimplification baked in through so many reporting layers.
thelastgallon 3y ago
This is the right way to lead. Everyone lies to leaders: https://www.rubick.com/everyone-lies-to-leaders/ https://www.rubick.com/everyone-lies-to-leaders/
frognumber 3y ago
This is described in The Toyota Way (CEO walking the shop floor, talking to people, using products, etc., and generally having deep dives). Bill Gates did deep dives in Microsoft in its eighties prime (https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2006/06/16/my-first-billg-review/ https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2006/06/16/my-first-billg-rev..., and many other sources). Bad CEOs will micromanage or only look mile-high. Good CEOs will do deep dives, and use that to inform strategy, policy, and organizational design.
alphazard 3y ago
Incompetent management is so commonplace in tech that it is practically a cliche. This example is how it's supposed to be in a healthy hierarchy. It shows just how deeply imposters have infiltrated the industry. Somehow it has become conventional wisdom that people who are non-technical, or below average engineers, should manage the time of, and mentor engineers often much smarter, and more competent than them. That doesn't clear the bar of common sense. There is value in having a hierarchy, some people are more competent, and better at planning, and time management, and interfacing with other people. Those people should be in charge of how other people spend their time. The confluence of those skills is rare. There are exponentially fewer people qualified to fill those roles than there are qualified to be engineers. You shouldn't have managers unless you can find good ones. It is far better to spread management thin than to hire bad managers. You would never try to bring the quality of work, planning, and time management closer to that of a below average engineer, but that's exactly what happens when you bring in incompetent management. It looks like Nvidia is doing it right. 40 is a high branching factor, and he can engage meaningfully with every one of them about their work.
- cyanydeez 3y ago
  You're just describing capitalism.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
blitzar 3y ago
Our branch / satellite office of 100 people recieved a visit from the CEO, whom I happened to walk past in the corridor on their 2 day visit. I looked them in the eye and said Good Morning - they looked away and said nothing. They were gone 18 months later and only after the golden parachute had landed it turns out in addition to a multi million dollar salary they were padding the expense / travel account / banging their secretary.

icedchai 3y ago

I've been on small teams where the direct manager was completely clueless about the day-to-day work of his 3 or 4 reports. These are professional meeting attenders, basically. 10+ years ago this seemed much less common in tech. Management was more technical and CEOs would actually talk to the ICs.

kalupa 3y ago
this might be unique to your experience. I can't say the same about my own a decade ago. it was due to the employer I was with at the time. they valued "attendance" and "billable hours" way more than quality or even meeting deadlines, let alone talking tech execution with a product manager
Sebguer 3y ago
By and large leadership of engineering companies have been subsumed by finance heads. Boeing is the canonical example, but Intel also (and their attempts to course-correct haven't been super successful).

squirrel6 3y ago

I’ve been reflecting on this a lot lately. Thinking over Chernobyl, Fukushima, and so many business scandals, I think this is the right way to run any organization, public or private. You just can’t have individuals encountering real issues of substance to the business without any voice to raise them to the highest levels of management. Moreover, I don’t know how any executive could expect to try and steer a behemoth of an organization when their only visibility into the business is at such a low resolution owing to the oversimplification baked in through so many reporting layers.

thelastgallon 3y ago

This is the right way to lead. Everyone lies to leaders: https://www.rubick.com/everyone-lies-to-leaders/ https://www.rubick.com/everyone-lies-to-leaders/

frognumber 3y ago

This is described in The Toyota Way (CEO walking the shop floor, talking to people, using products, etc., and generally having deep dives). Bill Gates did deep dives in Microsoft in its eighties prime (https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2006/06/16/my-first-billg-review/ https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2006/06/16/my-first-billg-rev..., and many other sources). Bad CEOs will micromanage or only look mile-high. Good CEOs will do deep dives, and use that to inform strategy, policy, and organizational design.

alphazard 3y ago

Incompetent management is so commonplace in tech that it is practically a cliche. This example is how it's supposed to be in a healthy hierarchy. It shows just how deeply imposters have infiltrated the industry. Somehow it has become conventional wisdom that people who are non-technical, or below average engineers, should manage the time of, and mentor engineers often much smarter, and more competent than them. That doesn't clear the bar of common sense. There is value in having a hierarchy, some people are more competent, and better at planning, and time management, and interfacing with other people. Those people should be in charge of how other people spend their time. The confluence of those skills is rare. There are exponentially fewer people qualified to fill those roles than there are qualified to be engineers. You shouldn't have managers unless you can find good ones. It is far better to spread management thin than to hire bad managers. You would never try to bring the quality of work, planning, and time management closer to that of a below average engineer, but that's exactly what happens when you bring in incompetent management. It looks like Nvidia is doing it right. 40 is a high branching factor, and he can engage meaningfully with every one of them about their work.

cyanydeez 3y ago
You're just describing capitalism.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

blitzar 3y ago

Our branch / satellite office of 100 people recieved a visit from the CEO, whom I happened to walk past in the corridor on their 2 day visit. I looked them in the eye and said Good Morning - they looked away and said nothing. They were gone 18 months later and only after the golden parachute had landed it turns out in addition to a multi million dollar salary they were padding the expense / travel account / banging their secretary.