4 ms·

while these horrible boss threads are always enjoyable (hey, scott adams' career is built on it), how about switching perspective for a moment. the majority of

while these horrible boss threads are always enjoyable (hey, scott adams' career is built on it), how about switching perspective for a moment. the majority of programmers are employees. what makes a horrible employee? - disregard of communication etiquette. you're running late on something, a meeting, a task, anything - say it, write it, text it early, and loud enough for your boss to hear. a manager needs that info to counter-steer. - in the same vein, the non-ability of constructive criticism. don't just think 'this won't work' but continue to work on it anyhow. communicate it, in plain language, with reasons. want to be excellent? provide an alternative. - play politics. try to brown-nose. etc. hint: your manager likely became one because he/she is good at politics. can see through your attempts and gets easily annoyed by it. as a manager you need to protect your team from bad apples. the no-assholes rule applies, but as programmers tend to have anti-social behaviors it is harder to apply. is the behavior of the employee destroying the productivity of others? is his/her productivity high enough to compensate? a rockstar programmer might be worth putting up with. managing people is hard. and you can't learn it like you can with programming. no theoretical studies help, no tutorials, no forums. no stackexchange to quickly solve a problem. that's why a lot of managers suck - cause they are on their own. or as Peter Drucker put it, there are only a few possibilities to learn true management skills out there - the army being the biggest of them, followed by the boy scouts. think about that and what it means for modern organizations.

ricardobeat 15y ago
Do you really see the army as a reference in management? Focus on discipline, strict hierarchies and codes doesn't do much good for most software businesses. And yes, you can learn it. Every profession that involves people has it's dose of "magic" that you must grasp - project management isn't special. Ask a teacher.
- hef19898 15y ago
  Not even inn leadership one my think (the army as an example, I mean), but in terms of management of large organisations, yes armed forces (as long as they are used from time to time, so NOT the germen ones) or the roman catholic church are pretty good examples. For leadership, you rather go look somewhere else for examples.
  - rwallace 15y ago
    The army, the Catholic church and a successful software company have very different jobs to do, under very different circumstances. It's no surprise that they are organized very differently. Trying to model any of them on the organization of either of the other two will not produce good results.
    - hef19898 15y ago
      In th end, yes. But all three face the common task of organizing trully global organizations with thousands of peoples spread all over the place. It doesn't matter if you programming software, preaching to the world of fighting wars. AFAIK there were even books written about the lessons one take from the organization of the church. The point I wanted to make is, that you can learn from everyone even if it's from a different sector. As far as the church goes, you clearly see the old roman heritage.
  - pinaceae 15y ago
    particularly in leadership, why would you single that one out? squad leaders, platoon leaders, up to officers - they all lead people. all they rely on is their people. if you are out there in afghanistan all that can save your life is your people. the days of WWI style large-scale battles are long over. ever talked to veterans? most i talked to confessed that it is pretty likely that more officers died by 'friendly fire' than enemy contact. if you suck as a leader in war, feedback is pretty direct. the modern army is the outcome of a lot of field testing. it is a learning organization, they employ their own historians to assess past activities and learn from them. leaders are actually being trained in leadership. practical training, you get your own team in a controlled environment and then exercise with them. which organization has such a process? i particularly like the AAR. not even SCRUM has such a feedback loop, nothing is learned.
    - hef19898 15y ago
      Maybe I should have been clearer on that point. Yes, the leadership you mention certainly is there and hopefully good (I'm not american and didn't serve). What I meant was more the fact there arose quite some incidents where the leadership aparently failed. Not in a combat situation, mind that, but rather in a global scope, allowing the burning of korans for example isn't best pratice. I don't want to into a political discussion so, it really is just an example.
- pinaceae 15y ago
  yes. the army of today has progressed a lot. lead by objective, after action reviews - most companies do not implement these techniques as they are too disruptive. even better: maneuvers. exactly which companies 'train' things? a roll out? a disaster recovery? you fight as you train.
  - PakG1 15y ago
    When I was working as a technology manager for the Winter Olympics in Vancouver, we had what were called technical rehearsals. These were simulations of Games-time trouble scenarios to test and improve our systems and processes. It was one of the most nerve-wracking/stressful experiences I've ever had. You could essentially liken them to maneuvers the military uses to train for real battle. The result was that I was much more prepared for the real Olympics, and felt confident to handle almost any disaster situation within my area of responsibility. The same for almost everyone else in the technology department. I do realize this type of thing is rare though in most settings. For the Olympics (and I think most big events), technical rehearsal is a staple exercise because you get only one chance to make it right and the world is watching.
- marcusf 15y ago
  There's a book on how the marines does management called Corps Business [1], it makes a pretty decent argument for implementing some stuff from the armed forces, eg. adaption, steering by objective, breeding culture etc. It was a while since I read it, but I remember that I thought it was a decent book sans some needless glorification of the marine corps. [1] http://www.amazon.com/Corps-Business-Management-Principles-Marines/dp/0066619785 http://www.amazon.com/Corps-Business-Management-Principles-M...
- gaius 15y ago
  The military doesn't work like you think it does http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_Corporal#Strategic_Corporal http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_Corporal#Strategic_Co...
silvestrov 15y ago
As a fellow programmer: the worst programmer is the guy who doesn't want to consult other programmers and who doesn't think other programmers might have important insight into datastructures etc. My experience: the better the programmer, the more willing to ask/involve other people.
- wpeterson 15y ago
  This is an important thing to realize. For most teams, the differences in backgrounds and experience provide different perspectives that are key to a good design or decision. More importantly, any meaningful system/product is large and complex enough one person can't know everything or have considered all of the implications.
michaelochurch 15y ago
no stackexchange to quickly solve a problem. that's why a lot of managers suck - cause they are on their own. Well said. Someone once told me the real reason being a CEO is a such a tough job: "The work is easy, and you have people who can answer any question you might have, but everyone is lying to you." the army being the biggest of them, followed by the boy scouts. think about that and what it means for modern organizations. The military is different. People will die for their country, and will subordinate in ways that they would in no other context because of this impulse. No one is actually willing to subordinate his own interests for the sake of Initech's bottom line. The "eager foot soldier" act that office politicians play when they're young and at the bottom is paper-thin.
- jetti 15y ago
  The military is different. People will die for their country, and will subordinate in ways that they would in no other context because of this impulse. This isn't a natural instinct though, on top of that, I would only say that a small percentage of recruits are willing to die for their country. I remember hearing from a recruiter awhile back (2008 era) that the number one segment of recruits are males from farm towns because it is one of the few "reputable" ways out of the farm life. For people who want out of where they are and want a better life, death sure isn't the answer. It takes management skills to make people fight their urge to self sustain and dig in and fight 'til the possibility of death. It takes management skills to keep morale up when people are in some foreign land for years at a time.

ricardobeat 15y ago

Do you really see the army as a reference in management? Focus on discipline, strict hierarchies and codes doesn't do much good for most software businesses. And yes, you can learn it. Every profession that involves people has it's dose of "magic" that you must grasp - project management isn't special. Ask a teacher.

hef19898 15y ago
Not even inn leadership one my think (the army as an example, I mean), but in terms of management of large organisations, yes armed forces (as long as they are used from time to time, so NOT the germen ones) or the roman catholic church are pretty good examples. For leadership, you rather go look somewhere else for examples.
- rwallace 15y ago
  The army, the Catholic church and a successful software company have very different jobs to do, under very different circumstances. It's no surprise that they are organized very differently. Trying to model any of them on the organization of either of the other two will not produce good results.
  - hef19898 15y ago
    In th end, yes. But all three face the common task of organizing trully global organizations with thousands of peoples spread all over the place. It doesn't matter if you programming software, preaching to the world of fighting wars. AFAIK there were even books written about the lessons one take from the organization of the church. The point I wanted to make is, that you can learn from everyone even if it's from a different sector. As far as the church goes, you clearly see the old roman heritage.
- pinaceae 15y ago
  particularly in leadership, why would you single that one out? squad leaders, platoon leaders, up to officers - they all lead people. all they rely on is their people. if you are out there in afghanistan all that can save your life is your people. the days of WWI style large-scale battles are long over. ever talked to veterans? most i talked to confessed that it is pretty likely that more officers died by 'friendly fire' than enemy contact. if you suck as a leader in war, feedback is pretty direct. the modern army is the outcome of a lot of field testing. it is a learning organization, they employ their own historians to assess past activities and learn from them. leaders are actually being trained in leadership. practical training, you get your own team in a controlled environment and then exercise with them. which organization has such a process? i particularly like the AAR. not even SCRUM has such a feedback loop, nothing is learned.
  - hef19898 15y ago
    Maybe I should have been clearer on that point. Yes, the leadership you mention certainly is there and hopefully good (I'm not american and didn't serve). What I meant was more the fact there arose quite some incidents where the leadership aparently failed. Not in a combat situation, mind that, but rather in a global scope, allowing the burning of korans for example isn't best pratice. I don't want to into a political discussion so, it really is just an example.
pinaceae 15y ago
yes. the army of today has progressed a lot. lead by objective, after action reviews - most companies do not implement these techniques as they are too disruptive. even better: maneuvers. exactly which companies 'train' things? a roll out? a disaster recovery? you fight as you train.
- PakG1 15y ago
  When I was working as a technology manager for the Winter Olympics in Vancouver, we had what were called technical rehearsals. These were simulations of Games-time trouble scenarios to test and improve our systems and processes. It was one of the most nerve-wracking/stressful experiences I've ever had. You could essentially liken them to maneuvers the military uses to train for real battle. The result was that I was much more prepared for the real Olympics, and felt confident to handle almost any disaster situation within my area of responsibility. The same for almost everyone else in the technology department. I do realize this type of thing is rare though in most settings. For the Olympics (and I think most big events), technical rehearsal is a staple exercise because you get only one chance to make it right and the world is watching.
marcusf 15y ago
There's a book on how the marines does management called Corps Business [1], it makes a pretty decent argument for implementing some stuff from the armed forces, eg. adaption, steering by objective, breeding culture etc. It was a while since I read it, but I remember that I thought it was a decent book sans some needless glorification of the marine corps. [1] http://www.amazon.com/Corps-Business-Management-Principles-Marines/dp/0066619785 http://www.amazon.com/Corps-Business-Management-Principles-M...
gaius 15y ago
The military doesn't work like you think it does http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_Corporal#Strategic_Corporal http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_Corporal#Strategic_Co...

silvestrov 15y ago

As a fellow programmer: the worst programmer is the guy who doesn't want to consult other programmers and who doesn't think other programmers might have important insight into datastructures etc. My experience: the better the programmer, the more willing to ask/involve other people.

wpeterson 15y ago
This is an important thing to realize. For most teams, the differences in backgrounds and experience provide different perspectives that are key to a good design or decision. More importantly, any meaningful system/product is large and complex enough one person can't know everything or have considered all of the implications.

michaelochurch 15y ago

no stackexchange to quickly solve a problem. that's why a lot of managers suck - cause they are on their own. Well said. Someone once told me the real reason being a CEO is a such a tough job: "The work is easy, and you have people who can answer any question you might have, but everyone is lying to you." the army being the biggest of them, followed by the boy scouts. think about that and what it means for modern organizations. The military is different. People will die for their country, and will subordinate in ways that they would in no other context because of this impulse. No one is actually willing to subordinate his own interests for the sake of Initech's bottom line. The "eager foot soldier" act that office politicians play when they're young and at the bottom is paper-thin.

jetti 15y ago
The military is different. People will die for their country, and will subordinate in ways that they would in no other context because of this impulse. This isn't a natural instinct though, on top of that, I would only say that a small percentage of recruits are willing to die for their country. I remember hearing from a recruiter awhile back (2008 era) that the number one segment of recruits are males from farm towns because it is one of the few "reputable" ways out of the farm life. For people who want out of where they are and want a better life, death sure isn't the answer. It takes management skills to make people fight their urge to self sustain and dig in and fight 'til the possibility of death. It takes management skills to keep morale up when people are in some foreign land for years at a time.