3 ms·

I don't think it is bizarre. I see lots of MBAs running things. They don't have the engineering background, they have the "resources management" background. I

I don't think it is bizarre. I see lots of MBAs running things. They don't have the engineering background, they have the "resources management" background. I think engineer brings the numbers to management to decide course. I prefer the situation where the CTO has no MBA and worked their way up - but that is uncommon IME. So, in many orgs, engineer puts their comms hat on an presents a solid case. The engineer who can communicate well, and show the metrics is typically the one who can get promoted to the decision maker role. First from the bottom up, then as a great leader

Aeolun 2y ago
> I don't think it is bizarre. I see lots of MBAs running things. They don't have the engineering background, they have the "resources management" background. That part is fine. What I do not understand is why there is so little interest in learning what makes engineering different from running a widgets factory. “Tell me why it won’t work” is a fine question, but it’d be nice if I didn’t have to force all their education on them. E.g. how many managers ignore that oft repeated adage that 9 women cannot have a baby in a month, and just spam more people on a project in the hope it’ll go faster.