Management wars

I read the thread on command line arguments and was quite surprised to see
the hostility manifested towards 'managers'.

Richard gave some very sound and clear advice that was within the framework
of what was requested. Michael was attacked for having been a manager, which
seems to me, no basis for attack. Some others were accused of 'management'
approaches in that they did not really understand the problem they were
responding to, and had simply looked for a summary. The Doc described a
management experience that made me have a sharp intake of breath.

The whole thread made me think about the perception of 'managers' by tech
staff.

Looking back over my own career, I can see managers who were excellent, who
grew themselves and their staff, and who showed by example really good ways
to motivate and encourage tech people. The ones who were not like that (I
can think of a couple) simply did not progress. (One of them remained in the
same job at the same middle management level for over 20 years, becoming
more and more bitter and twisted and finally actually working against the
company until he got fired. It couldn't happen to a nicer guy...)

It's hard to believe, I know, but I'll confess it here... I was not always
the easiest guy to manage....:-)
Eventually, like most people who are trying to advance a career, I got my
comeuppance by being pushed to the other side of the table and having to
deal with brash, intelligent, tech people who gave me every bit as hard a
time as I had given my managers. What goes around comes around... :-)

I'd like to pose a few questions for open discussion in this thread, if
anybody feels so inclined.

1. What is your personal attitude to your management? Do you see them as a
bunch of wankers who have no idea what's going on or is required, no
understanding of the problems you have to grapple with every day, and just
an unnecessary departmental overhead because a trained monkey could do their
job?
2. Do you have any aspirations to ever be management? Why? Why not?
3. Could your attitude affect your management? (d'you think...?)
4. Would you do exactly what is specified in say, a program spec., even if
you knew it was wrong, and would cause major disruption to downstream
processing? How would you deal with this situation (if at all)?
5. In meetings, do you speak your mind and to Hell with them if they don't
like it, or do you tend to pussyfoot for the sake of annual review? Would
you modify your language depending on the level of management present? Why?
Why not?
6. Are you gleeful when your manager is in trouble?
7. Does your manager socialise with you on occasion? Is it comfortable or
would you rather they didn't?
8. If you screwed up, would you look for support from your manager or would
you make every effort to hide your blunder or divert attention from it until
you could fix it, if you could fix it?

The above are designed to help you realise that, if you have bad management,
there is every possibility that you actually deserve them...:-)

The next step is to look at what can be done about improving your
management.

Yes, it is actually possible for you, as an unempowered, lower life form,
grunt, to actually make a difference. I'll cover it after we see the
responses to the above, if there are responses to the above... :-).

Pete.

Pete Dashwood wrote:
> I'd like to pose a few questions for open discussion in this thread, if
> anybody feels so inclined.

Why not - beats watching CNN's report on how filthy the water now in New
Orleans is...  :(

> 1. What is your personal attitude to your management? Do you see them as a
> bunch of wankers who have no idea what's going on or is required, no
> understanding of the problems you have to grapple with every day, and just
> an unnecessary departmental overhead because a trained monkey could do the
ir
> job?

I've seen both.  The best managers I've encountered had a background in
*doing* before ascending into management.  A Captain (prior enlisted)
was probably the most go-get-'em boss we had.  Our current manager is a
retired E-8 (one from the top).  Both have a management style that suits
me - they know I know what needs to be done, and for the most part, they
leave me alone and let me do it.  :)

> 2. Do you have any aspirations to ever be management? Why? Why not?

I wouldn't mind it, although I think I'd still have trouble keeping my
hands out of it.  I just enjoy this stuff too much.  Of course, if I
still have stuff I'm doing on the side, maybe that would keep me satisfied.

> 3. Could your attitude affect your management? (d'you think...?)

Of course.  :)  As I get older, I find myself having less toleration for
incompetence and laziness.  (On a side note, I can't stand myself these
days!  ;>  )

> 4. Would you do exactly what is specified in say, a program spec., even if
> you knew it was wrong, and would cause major disruption to downstream
> processing? How would you deal with this situation (if at all)?

I wouldn't do it.  A spec should be *what* they want done, not *how*
they want it done.  If what they want is what will cause this
disruption, I would make these concerns known, and I'd hope that we'd
have enough of a relationship that they would take my concerns seriously.

If they were hard-headed, I'd ensure we built in as many safety nets as
possible to avoid the negative consequences, and provide recovery from
them quickly.

> 5. In meetings, do you speak your mind and to Hell with them if they don't
> like it, or do you tend to pussyfoot for the sake of annual review? Would
> you modify your language depending on the level of management present? Why
?
> Why not?

I speak my mind.  (This probably comes as a surprise, I know...)  I may
do it more politically, depending on the audience.

> 6. Are you gleeful when your manager is in trouble?

It depends on the type of manager.  If they're reaping what they've
sown, I don't shed too many tears.  If they're being scapegoated, that
upsets me.

> 7. Does your manager socialise with you on occasion? Is it comfortable or
> would you rather they didn't?

They come around from time to time, and we have office socials
occasionally.  It doesn't bother me - I enjoy it.

> 8. If you screwed up, would you look for support from your manager or woul
d
> you make every effort to hide your blunder or divert attention from it unt
il
> you could fix it, if you could fix it?

That depends on the level of the blunder and how easily it can be fixed.
I actually did a big "oops" (well, it wasn't really my *fault*, but I
was the one who did it - so, it didn't matter if it didn't work the way
the manual said it would).  My big oops got compounded about 50 times,
when test settings for compiles ended up in the mainstream compile logic.

I explained what I had done to my boss, he went to the customer's boss,
and I stayed late rolling the changes back out and rebuilding all the
programs that had picked up the bad code.  They weren't really upset
with me over that, but now, when I suggest implementing something
similar (now that I'm more familiar with the "gotcha"s), it's always met
with pessimism.


--
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~   /   \  /         ~        Live from Montgomery, AL!       ~
~  /     \/       o  ~                                        ~
~ /      /\   -   |  ~          daniel@thebelowdomain         ~
~ _____ /  \      |  ~      http://www.djs-consulting.com     ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ GEEKCODE 3.12 GCS/IT d s-:+ a C++ L++ E--- W++ N++ o? K- w$ ~
~ !O M-- V PS+ PE++ Y? !PGP t+ 5? X+ R* tv b+ DI++ D+ G- e    ~
~ h---- r+++ z++++                                            ~
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

All comments here are my own and are not representative of any company that
is traded on the NYSE.
All comments here are my own and I reserve the right to correct, withdraw or
clarify any statement without notice.


"Pete Dashwood" <dashwood@enternet.co.nz> wrote in message
news:3o6sd6F4ij6lU1@individual.net...
>
> I read the thread on command line arguments and was quite surprised to see
> the hostility manifested towards 'managers'.

If you consider the words aimed at Michael to be representative to be
hostile, and he to be "managers"  :-)
There is nothing unusual about the progression of most thread.

A reasonable question is asked.
A reasonable solution is presented.
A somewhat valid disagreement was found with the solution.
A rebuttal was made using commonly accepted definitions of words like "like"
and "as I did on the mainframe" with a hint of condescension.
A response was formed with a touch of bitterness
Another person joins in with a slightly more visible tone of condescension.
Someone gets angered
Then some vitriol is added so we find some arbitrary thing to pick on
[Michael is a manager...they're all idiots]
DocDwarf inserts a story about his grandmother - may she rest with angels...
Someone answers with a question......

> Richard gave some very sound and clear advice that was within the
> framework of what was requested. Michael was attacked for having been a
> manager, which seems to me, no basis for attack.

Most attacks are without basis.

There is nothing unusual about the progression of most threads - I could
prove this by mentioning Iraq right here, right now ;-)

> Some others were accused of 'management' approaches in that they did not
> really understand the problem they were responding to, and had simply
> looked for a summary. The Doc described a management experience that made
> me have a sharp intake of breath.

Much of what he says has that effect.

> The whole thread made me think about the perception of 'managers' by tech
> staff.

It is less interesting the other way around because we all find out what our
managers think of us at some point.

Most tech people are overpaid for what they accomplish - they laugh at the
robustness of Windows (stupid thing crashed again, piece of crap bloatware -
the audacity of charging $100) yet they load a huge VSAM file into memory
and perform illogical code functions and size a single program to read and
write a file at 3 ws to write and test at a cost of $15,000.   I think
management is sort of a manifestation of the Microsoft Complex.

People hate it when I say that.  I know at least one contributor of this
forum who will have blood boiling in his veins on reading that.

> Looking back over my own career, I can see managers who were excellent,
> who grew themselves and their staff, and who showed by example really good
> ways to motivate and encourage tech people.
A manager should not need to motivate.  That's the result of a deficiency in
their employees.

There is difficulty in defining what a manager should do - and it's
different based more on circumstances than it is on people.  If a manager is
critical they should be critical to all.  If they are soft, they should be
soft to all.  There is wiggle room in *private*.   Have you ever seen a chef
run a restaurant?  Have you ever seen a coach of a professional sports team
[there's no crying in baseball]?

The role of a manager is to understand the requirements placed on their
staff, the expectations placed on their staff and to ensure it happens and
to make sure that the expectations are reasonable and understood by the
employees.  It is this understanding that determines the success of the
relationship.

> The ones who were not like that (I can think of a couple) simply did not
> progress. (One of them remained in the same job at the same middle
> management level for over 20 years, becoming more and more bitter and
> twisted and finally actually working against the company until he got
> fired. It couldn't happen to a nicer guy...)

I have seen a number of managers get "demoted" and it usually resulted from
one of two things.
1) The position was taken "to progress" without understanding that with that
comes additional responsibilities *including* fixing the last managers
problems (auditors/customers don't care if you weren't the manager at the
beginning.)  It is only a cushy job when times are good...but they go bad
real quick.

2) They couldn't reconcile their staff's level of competence with their own
and subsequently put too much pressure on their employees.  I think this is
a case of six of one,  half a dozen of the other. The staff member should
know clearly the expectations, and work harder.   A manager expecting 7
hours of work is not asking too much.

> It's hard to believe, I know, but I'll confess it here... I was not always
> the easiest guy to manage....:-)
> Eventually, like most people who are trying to advance a career, I got my
> comeuppance by being pushed to the other side of the table and having to
> deal with brash, intelligent, tech people who gave me every bit as hard a
> time as I had given my managers. What goes around comes around... :-)

I think that's my manager's feeling right now.

> I'd like to pose a few questions for open discussion in this thread, if
> anybody feels so inclined.
>
> 1. What is your personal attitude to your management? Do you see them as a
> bunch of wankers who have no idea what's going on or is required, no
> understanding of the problems you have to grapple with every day, and just
> an unnecessary departmental overhead because a trained monkey could do
> their job?

It's the employees responsibility to ensure that the manager understands
what is going on, and the managers responsibility for evaluating the success
of his team based on simple criteria.
The failure in most cases is that the simple criteria (also known as
direction/strategy/fulfillment requirements) are not met.

Unfortunately, I think that most managers do a poor job of laying out
expectations.  I *expect* a lot more when I work with a senior consultant
than I do working with an entry level junior - this expectation is not
always handled correctly by management.  I would like to run my company
using a more socialist method where everyone initially gets paid the same
and is expected to contribute the same. Salaries are then based on
expectations and not seniority.   I have found that expectations are more or
less the same even when seniority and salaries are not.

> 2. Do you have any aspirations to ever be management? Why? Why not?
Yes - I'd be better at it than most.
No - My employees would hate me as my expectations are too high.  I would
expect once a w one meeting 15 minutes :

"This w, what is hours_worked?"
"Do you deserve hours_worked pay?"
"Any ideas what you could do with the (40 - hours_worked)? to help [the
team, the company, me, you]? "
"What are your goals this w?"
"What are the impediments to those goals?"
"Let's leave early Friday and have a beer"

> 3. Could your attitude affect your management? (d'you think...?)
Err. Yes?

> 4. Would you do exactly what is specified in say, a program spec., even if
> you knew it was wrong, and would cause major disruption to downstream
> processing? How would you deal with this situation (if at all)?

I rarely do what is in a program spec even when I write one - though I
usually maintain a much higher functional level.  Strict program specs take
too much creativity out of the process.
Exceptions exist where the program spec defines a strict interface. Those
that have detail specs usually fail to maintain them meaning that the
documentation is inaccurate - whereas mine is accurate even with the
flexibility.

I am a firm believer that change management is just that: change management;
it's not change prevention.
I am a firm believer that documentation should only be produced if it's
useful and used - and in that case should be accurate.  I don't believe in
one document fits all needs school that so many places do.

I have refused to design a solution for a requirement that wouldn't work and
was improper accounting (not intentionally so, but sometimes sales do not
understand accounting practices).

> 5. In meetings, do you speak your mind and to Hell with them if they don't
> like it, or do you tend to pussyfoot for the sake of annual review?

Always be professional in front of customers. Period. Always be very up
front with managers, and always know more than one chain level - honesty is
appreciated.  I'm fortunate insofar as I know that my manager knows his
reputation is based on what I say, as much as mine on what he says.  Makes
it much easier.
As a giver of criticism I also accept criticism so that helps also.

> Would you modify your language depending on the level of management
> present? Why? Why not?

I modify my language depending on the "people" present.  My language is
appropriate to what I *know* of the people I am with.  I have never sworn in
front of my mother for example.
I don't swear that much - the only change I had to make was to not say
"crap" or "jesus" in front of someone who found that offensive.  I didn't
mind.

> 6. Are you gleeful when your manager is in trouble?

No.  My main responsibility is to make me look good.  I know that is the
case when my manager looks good.  I don't have time to worry about the
companies goals - I assume that my managers goals align with those and so
making him look good will allow most things to fall into place.

> 7. Does your manager socialise with you on occasion? Is it comfortable or
> would you rather they didn't?

Work is work, play is play.  There are people I work with that I like to
socialize with and hate to work with - probably more common the other way
around now that I think about it.

> 8. If you screwed up, would you look for support from your manager or
> would you make every effort to hide your blunder or divert attention from
> it until you could fix it, if you could fix it?

Both depending on the size of the screw up.  If it's my fault, then I don't
hide from it - if it's small I will fix it if I can (not likely now that I
have no authority to any system to execute anything).
I didn't even learn to lie when I admitted to doing things I shouldn't do
with PC's at college.....I figured I got busted, and well, may as well fess
up (two times...)...nearly got kicked out of school, and had my userids
removed, but then they looked at my records and other things I had done and
thought better of doing too much.

I am in the process of rethinking this taking responsibility thing.  I used
to invoke Spartacus.. once upon a time that would work, but now it's more
each for his own which is a result of downsizing and the associated
pressures.   The "broken windows" theory is also more true now....and the
"just good enough" philosophy of coding has become the "is this passable?"
philosophy so there are too many screw ups to want to take ownership of,
even if it does help the team.

> The above are designed to help you realise that, if you have bad
> management, there is every possibility that you actually deserve
> them...:-)

No.  I hope that people realize that often managers make poor decisions
because they are the wrong people to make those decisions.  I've always said
technical writers write manuals, not programmers;  generals define the
strategy, not politicians.

There is nothing unusual about the progression of most threads - I could
prove this by mentioning Iraq right here, right now referring to the last
statement ;-)


> The next step is to look at what can be done about improving your
> management.
Unfortunately this is not true where I am.  The bigger the company the
bigger the problems, the less relevant your manager on the environment -
they do what they can.
I've not had a lot of managers but I've not disliked, disrespected one yet.
I've had words about other people's :-)

I've also happened to have two of the finest managers that I have come
across - unfortunately one retired to the detriment of all, and the other
moved on due to the way that business works I guess.

The real issue in large corporations is that mantras come from way up on the
mountain and they are considered the "commandments" by some senior level
manager - and it only takes one - which then means that the flexibility is
gone (we had an issue where if we changed a single "requirement", we had to
restart the project because "CMM says that you have to manage the change"
and well, you're working off an unapproved requirements document now).  I've
spent years trying to convince people to manage requirements and not
projects...doesn't happen

> Yes, it is actually possible for you, as an unempowered, lower life form,
> grunt, to actually make a difference. I'll cover it after we see the
> responses to the above, if there are responses to the above... :-).
>
> Pete.

More than ever, I've been asked [somewhat as a compliment] recently "Why do
you work here?"

I'm beginning to wonder, and that's _no_ reflection of my immediate manager.


JCE

Pete Dashwood wrote:
> (snip)
> I'd like to pose a few questions for open discussion in this thread, if
> anybody feels so inclined.
>
> 1. What is your personal attitude to your management? Do you see them as a
> bunch of wankers who have no idea what's going on or is required, no
> understanding of the problems you have to grapple with every day, and just
> an unnecessary departmental overhead because a trained monkey could do the
ir
> job?

A good manager can get more useful work out of a team than a bad
manager.  But a good team is easier to manage.  I've had some terrible
managers and some very good managers.  It's much more pleasant and
productive to work for a good manager.

I've seen bad managers get their position because they wanted a
promotion and a raise, or because no one else wanted the slot.   A
good manager can be a real asset to the team, without necessarily
being able to do every team member's job.

> 2. Do you have any aspirations to ever be management? Why? Why not?

I would never want to be a manager, because then I would have to work
with budgets and project planning.  It would mean not writing programs
any more, and I would really miss that.  I have functioned
occasionally as a project leader, and found that it is hard work
guiding other programmers.  So anyone who can do it reasonably well
deserves my respect.  I'm much happier not being the boss.

> 3. Could your attitude affect your management? (d'you think...?)

It works both ways.  Bad management makes for unproductive workers,
and good workers will make their manager look better.  You have to be
as professional as possible, whether your manager is good or bad.  So
even if you have a bad manager, you still need to support him.

> 4. Would you do exactly what is specified in say, a program spec., even if
> you knew it was wrong, and would cause major disruption to downstream
> processing? How would you deal with this situation (if at all)?

If a program spec has major problems, it's my duty to raise questions.
I don't expect to win every battle.  Sometimes the issues aren't
black and white, but involve philosphical differences or technical
unknowns.  Over the years I have done several assignments that I had
strong doubts about.  Very few of them turned out as badly as I
feared.  Some turned out much better than I expected.

> 5. In meetings, do you speak your mind and to Hell with them if they don't
> like it, or do you tend to pussyfoot for the sake of annual review? Would
> you modify your language depending on the level of management present? Why
?
> Why not?

It should usually be possible to make one's views known without being
rude about it.  The manager might not be aware of technical issues
that I know about.  As the worker, I might not be aware of the
business issues or policies that might be driving the work assignments.

> 6. Are you gleeful when your manager is in trouble?

No.  If the manager is in trouble, it's bad for the team.  If the
manager is really bad and deserves to be fired, changing managers is
still very disruptive to the work.

> 7. Does your manager socialise with you on occasion? Is it comfortable or
> would you rather they didn't?

Yes.  It's not good for the manager to be either too aloof or too
buddy-buddy.  Whether or not it's comfortable depends a lot on the
social situation and the personalities of the manager and the worker.

> 8. If you screwed up, would you look for support from your manager or woul
d
> you make every effort to hide your blunder or divert attention from it unt
il
> you could fix it, if you could fix it?

The right thing to do is to take responsibility for your own actions.
Attempting to cover up your mistakes only compounds the problems.  I
would tell my manager and s support from him.  I would still have
to fix the problem anyway.

>
> The above are designed to help you realise that, if you have bad managemen
t,
> there is every possibility that you actually deserve them...:-)

In 25 years, I have worked for several managers who have been fired.
In one case I took a job at a different company to escape.  In another
case, I transferred to a different team within the same company.
Other times I have just tried to do my best and wait it out until a
new manager was brought in.  I've had several good managers as well.

I don't think I deserved all those bad managers.  It was just bad
luck.  Besides, even if I got to choose my manager, how will I know I
made the right choice until afterwards?

>
> The next step is to look at what can be done about improving your
> management.
>
> Yes, it is actually possible for you, as an unempowered, lower life form,
> grunt, to actually make a difference. I'll cover it after we see the
> responses to the above, if there are responses to the above... :-).
>
> Pete.

I would be interested in knowing how to improve my management.  The
one I have now is pretty good, but I might need to know those
techiques between now and when I retire.

--
http://arnold.trembley.home.att.net/


In article <3o6sd6F4ij6lU1@individual.net>,
Pete Dashwood <dashwood@enternet.co.nz> wrote:
>
>I read the thread on command line arguments and was quite surprised to see
>the hostility manifested towards 'managers'.

Hostility manifested towards managers is surprising?  What comes next, I
wonder... will you be shocked, *shocked* to find that gambling is going on
in here?

(your winnings, sir)

>
>Richard gave some very sound and clear advice that was within the framework
>of what was requested. Michael was attacked for having been a manager, whic
h
>seems to me, no basis for attack. Some others were accused of 'management'
>approaches in that they did not really understand the problem they were
>responding to, and had simply looked for a summary. The Doc described a
>management experience that made me have a sharp intake of breath.

I/it did?  Ummmm... I don't recall which tale I related but, for the most
part, the stories I tell of such things are based on experience; there's
no need for me to fabricate when Truth is wond'rous enow.

[snip]

>I'd like to pose a few questions for open discussion in this thread, if
>anybody feels so inclined.
>
>1. What is your personal attitude to your management? Do you see them as a
>bunch of wankers who have no idea what's going on or is required, no
>understanding of the problems you have to grapple with every day, and just
>an unnecessary departmental overhead because a trained monkey could do thei
r
>job?

My answer is E) Some of the Above.  As with any job/profession I've found
that 10% of the practioners have what I call 'The Touch', an almost
instinctive feeling/understanding for what will Do The Job Right... and
the rest are just kinda fumbling along, praying they don't get caught out.

>2. Do you have any aspirations to ever be management? Why? Why not?

No.  Managers have to do things for which I have little capability or
tolerance.  'Shoemaker, stick to your last'... I hump code and, at times,
can turn out a moderately well-crafted piece of it.

>3. Could your attitude affect your management? (d'you think...?)

It could... were they to permit it.  Let me relate another story: on one
site where I worked I once heard a rather... heated discussion going on in
one of the cubicles, along the lines of 'You must have changed the program
or something, the results are all messed up!'  'Let me check... no, the
load module hasn't been modified in four years.'  'I don't care what the
load module says, I ran the program just like always and the results are
all messed up... what did you do to screw up my results?'

I turned to the employee sitting nearby and raised an eyebrow... his
response was 'Oh, this happens all the time.  Accounting submits the job
ad-hoc after they TSO-edit a control card... sometimes they forget to
change the card and the results are a mixture of this month's data and
last month's.  Then they come over here and scream until Richie (the
corner-office idiot) comes over and makes everyone sit down and look at
stuff; Accounting then modifies the card, submits the job and it all goes
away.'

I then asked 'Why doesn't Richie go over to Accounting and gently tell
this woman's supervisor 'I don't *ever* want *any* of your people to even
*dream* of treating My Crew this way; if they have a problem then they go
to you and you come to *me*.  I will not tolerate My Crew being abused in
this manner.'?... and the response was 'Oh, that's not the way it works
here, managers try to let subordinates resolve situations before they get
involved.'

'Even if it means shouting matches like this on a regular basis?'  'Yep.'

Now... my idea of a manager is one who says, first and foremost, 'Don't
mistreat My People.  They are responsible to me and I have
responsibilities towards them.'  In my experience this is rare.

>4. Would you do exactly what is specified in say, a program spec., even if
>you knew it was wrong, and would cause major disruption to downstream
>processing? How would you deal with this situation (if at all)?

This just happened to me recently.  A corner-office idiot came to me,
directly, and asked for an 'all ya gotta do is...' solution.  I bounced it
back to my Tech Lead who asked 'Who analysed this?  Who spec'd it?  How is
it going to effect the downstream system?'

My response was 'The COI came to me and told me this, more than that I do
not know... I sweep floor now, yes?'  Tech Lead then went to COI and began
to ask questions... and in a very short while Tech Lead was called into
*his* COI's office and told he was being 'obstructionist' and to implement
the other COI's request, *now*.

I implemented the request, tested it... and noticed that in about 25% of
the cases it resulted in miscalculations.  I reported this to Tech Lead;
his response was 'I'm not going to obstruct anything' and he called he
Prod team to move it in.

I went back to the code and slipped in some mods outside of the spec to
cut the miscalc rate to 15%... when I mentioned this to Tech Lead he
smiled, ruefully, and said he understood why I had to do this... but he'd
have rathered I didn't.

So... on the one hand he and I are 'built' a certain way, you don't ship
out code that you know is buggy.  On the other hand pointing out that the
code is/may be buggy because of a lack of
analysis/co-ordination/specification is seen as being 'obstructionist'.

>5. In meetings, do you speak your mind and to Hell with them if they don't
>like it, or do you tend to pussyfoot for the sake of annual review? Would
>you modify your language depending on the level of management present? Why?
>Why not?

I am not usually invited to meetings.  When I do attend them I do my best
to limit my comments to strictly technical matters.

>6. Are you gleeful when your manager is in trouble?

No.  Even if it is the result of the manager's own petard doing the
hoisting it is not pleasant, to me, to see difficulties.

>7. Does your manager socialise with you on occasion? Is it comfortable or
>would you rather they didn't?

I avoid social occaissions.

>8. If you screwed up, would you look for support from your manager or would
>you make every effort to hide your blunder or divert attention from it unti
l
>you could fix it, if you could fix it?

When I screw up I do whatever is necessary to fix it.  If all that is
needed is doing something on the sly then that is what I do, if the
situation requires me to parade about in my skivvies singing 'La
Marseillaise' then I'll at least try to remember to put on a clean pair.

>
>The above are designed to help you realise that, if you have bad management
,
>there is every possibility that you actually deserve them...:-)

My situtation might not be applicable to others.  I am a
consultant/contractor/hired gun; I've noticed that, as such, I tend to see
the insides of 'sick' shops more than anyplace else.  On the other hand...
if the 'Dilbert' comic-strip shows that Art imitates Life then there might
be a bit more 'sickness' about than I have seen.

>
>The next step is to look at what can be done about improving your
>management.
>
>Yes, it is actually possible for you, as an unempowered, lower life form,
>grunt, to actually make a difference.

It is good to live in a world that has Hope in it, aye.

DD

Pete Dashwood wrote:
>
> 1. What is your personal attitude to your management? Do you see them
> as a bunch of wankers who have no idea what's going on or is
> required, no understanding of the problems you have to grapple with
> every day, and just an unnecessary departmental overhead because a
> trained monkey could do their job?

My management is kind, knowlegable, and a joy to be around. It anticipates
problems before they take place and has the best interests of the employees
always in the foreground. I firmly believe no better management has ever
existed in the history of the planet. I am the management.

> 2. Do you have any aspirations to ever be management? Why? Why not?

I did years ago. Now I are one. "If I'm going to work for a fool, it might
as well be me."

> 3. Could your attitude affect your management? (d'you think...?)

My attitude IS management.

> 4. Would you do exactly what is specified in say, a program spec.,
> even if you knew it was wrong, and would cause major disruption to
> downstream processing? How would you deal with this situation (if at
> all)?

Denial.

> 5. In meetings, do you speak your mind and to Hell with them if they
> don't like it, or do you tend to pussyfoot for the sake of annual
> review? Would you modify your language depending on the level of
> management present? Why? Why not?

I used to talk to myself. People looked at me funny. Now I write notes.

> 6. Are you gleeful when your manager is in trouble?

God no!

> 7. Does your manager socialise with you on occasion? Is it
> comfortable or would you rather they didn't?

We always do all things together.

> 8. If you screwed up, would you look for support from your manager or
> would you make every effort to hide your blunder or divert attention
> from it until you could fix it, if you could fix it?

Again, denial is the best remedy.

I didn't see the original message, and I'm too lazy to remove the double
greater-than signs.

> Pete Dashwood wrote: 

I've got two managers, a "business" manager who handles the finances of the
company (including my paycheck), and a "technical" manager who assigns me
tasks to complete. Most of my interaction with the financial manager has
been social, so doesn't really have direct relevance to my job. As for my
technical manager, he doesn't always know "what's going on" or "what is
required" with my specific task, but when/if I tell him, he listens. I think
he has a lot more people to worry about than just me so I'm not offended
when he doesn't know what problems I'm grappling with. I don't think a
trained monkey could do his job.

 

Not a "typical" manager because frankly I don't really like dealing with
people. I have some aspirations to become a technical lead though. My
imagination of the job description is I'd be given a high level technical
task, and I'd be in charge of breaking it down into lower level tasks and
assigning them to other people or to myself.
 

N/A, since I don't plan on "going into management"?
 

If I think I have a better idea of how to implement something than the
program spec says, or a better architecture or design or whatever, I let my
(tech) manager know. Sometimes he agrees with the change, and other times he
says "No, that's the way the client wants it, so we have to do it that way"
in which case I just do what the spec says.
 

Office politics hasn't been much of an issue where I work, so I guess
I'm lucky that way. There was one incident near the beginning where I saw
some code and commented that I thought it could really use an overhaul only
to find out it was written by one of the senior coders here. Since then
though, my input was typically heard early on in the design phase, so any
disagreement about designs got resolved before any code gets written.
 

No.
 

I'm somewhat antisocial, so I'm always uncomfortable (shy?) when
socializing with people I don't know well. That being said, I'm used to the
idea that "normal" people socialize, so it doesn't bother me any more than
random people socializing with me.
 

If I can fix it myself without anyone noticing anything going wrong, I
will. If it'll delay release of the product or otherwise screw things up for
other people, I'll notify the manager. I think this company has a "We're in
this together" mentality, so there isn't a big fear of blame being cast,
just a question of what's the most efficient way to fix things again.

- Oliver

"HeyBub" <heybubNOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:11httq128jr1h29@news.supernews.com...
> Pete Dashwood wrote: 
>
> My management is kind, knowlegable, and a joy to be around. It anticipates
> problems before they take place and has the best interests of the
> employees always in the foreground. I firmly believe no better management
> has ever existed in the history of the planet. I am the management.

No further comment, I did that last time.

http://groups.google.com/group/comp...3b3ff54466ce9f9

JCE

I am followin
"Pete Dashwood" <dashwood@enternet.co.nz> wrote in message
news:3o6sd6F4ij6lU1@individual.net...
>
>
> I read the thread on command line arguments and was quite surprised to see
> the hostility manifested towards 'managers'.
>
> Richard gave some very sound and clear advice that was within the
> framework of what was requested. Michael was attacked for having been a
> manager, which seems to me, no basis for attack. Some others were accused
> of 'management' approaches in that they did not really understand the
> problem they were responding to, and had simply looked for a summary. The
> Doc described a management experience that made me have a sharp intake of
> breath.
>
> The whole thread made me think about the perception of 'managers' by tech
> staff.
>
> Looking back over my own career, I can see managers who were excellent,
> who grew themselves and their staff, and who showed by example really good
> ways to motivate and encourage tech people. The ones who were not like
> that (I can think of a couple) simply did not progress. (One of them
> remained in the same job at the same middle management level for over 20
> years, becoming more and more bitter and twisted and finally actually
> working against the company until he got fired. It couldn't happen to a
> nicer guy...)
>
> It's hard to believe, I know, but I'll confess it here... I was not always
> the easiest guy to manage....:-)
> Eventually, like most people who are trying to advance a career, I got my
> comeuppance by being pushed to the other side of the table and having to
> deal with brash, intelligent, tech people who gave me every bit as hard a
> time as I had given my managers. What goes around comes around... :-)
>
> I'd like to pose a few questions for open discussion in this thread, if
> anybody feels so inclined.
>
> 1. What is your personal attitude to your management? Do you see them as a
> bunch of wankers who have no idea what's going on or is required, no
> understanding of the problems you have to grapple with every day, and just
> an unnecessary departmental overhead because a trained monkey could do
> their job?
> 2. Do you have any aspirations to ever be management? Why? Why not?
> 3. Could your attitude affect your management? (d'you think...?)
> 4. Would you do exactly what is specified in say, a program spec., even if
> you knew it was wrong, and would cause major disruption to downstream
> processing? How would you deal with this situation (if at all)?
> 5. In meetings, do you speak your mind and to Hell with them if they don't
> like it, or do you tend to pussyfoot for the sake of annual review? Would
> you modify your language depending on the level of management present?
> Why? Why not?
> 6. Are you gleeful when your manager is in trouble?
> 7. Does your manager socialise with you on occasion? Is it comfortable or
> would you rather they didn't?
> 8. If you screwed up, would you look for support from your manager or
> would you make every effort to hide your blunder or divert attention from
> it until you could fix it, if you could fix it?
>
> The above are designed to help you realise that, if you have bad
> management, there is every possibility that you actually deserve
> them...:-)
>
> The next step is to look at what can be done about improving your
> management.
>
> Yes, it is actually possible for you, as an unempowered, lower life form,
> grunt, to actually make a difference. I'll cover it after we see the
> responses to the above, if there are responses to the above... :-).
>
> Pete.
>
>
>

Oops! Sorry, the ole cursor on SEND while typing on a notebook... a keyboard
bounce sends the message... (Note that I have not learned to avoid this
behaviour by simply moving the cursor when the reply window opens, despite
having made several incomplete posts to this newsgroup over the years. I
thought about this and decided it isn't because I'm stupid; it's because I
don't get a banana every time I remember to move the cursor... some of you
may disagree with analysis...:-))

As I was saying...

I am following this thread with great interest and some very useful
information is emerging. Thanks to all who have contributed so far. I plan
to give it another day or two, so that people who have not contributed yet
won't have their posts influenced prematurely, and will then respond to
everybody. If you have any anecdotes showing what you consider good or bad
management, do please post them (some already have and they make
entertaining as well as informative reading.)

Pete.


"Pete Dashwood" <dashwood@enternet.co.nz> wrote in message
news:3o6sd6F4ij6lU1@individual.net...
>
>
> I read the thread on command line arguments and was quite surprised to see
> the hostility manifested towards 'managers'.
>
> Richard gave some very sound and clear advice that was within the
> framework of what was requested. Michael was attacked for having been a
> manager, which seems to me, no basis for attack. Some others were accused
> of 'management' approaches in that they did not really understand the
> problem they were responding to, and had simply looked for a summary. The
> Doc described a management experience that made me have a sharp intake of
> breath.
>
> The whole thread made me think about the perception of 'managers' by tech
> staff.
>
> Looking back over my own career, I can see managers who were excellent,
> who grew themselves and their staff, and who showed by example really good
> ways to motivate and encourage tech people. The ones who were not like
> that (I can think of a couple) simply did not progress. (One of them
> remained in the same job at the same middle management level for over 20
> years, becoming more and more bitter and twisted and finally actually
> working against the company until he got fired. It couldn't happen to a
> nicer guy...)
>
> It's hard to believe, I know, but I'll confess it here... I was not always
> the easiest guy to manage....:-)
> Eventually, like most people who are trying to advance a career, I got my
> comeuppance by being pushed to the other side of the table and having to
> deal with brash, intelligent, tech people who gave me every bit as hard a
> time as I had given my managers. What goes around comes around... :-)
>
> I'd like to pose a few questions for open discussion in this thread, if
> anybody feels so inclined.
>
> 1. What is your personal attitude to your management? Do you see them as a
> bunch of wankers who have no idea what's going on or is required, no
> understanding of the problems you have to grapple with every day, and just
> an unnecessary departmental overhead because a trained monkey could do
> their job?
> 2. Do you have any aspirations to ever be management? Why? Why not?
> 3. Could your attitude affect your management? (d'you think...?)
> 4. Would you do exactly what is specified in say, a program spec., even if
> you knew it was wrong, and would cause major disruption to downstream
> processing? How would you deal with this situation (if at all)?
> 5. In meetings, do you speak your mind and to Hell with them if they don't
> like it, or do you tend to pussyfoot for the sake of annual review? Would
> you modify your language depending on the level of management present?
> Why? Why not?
> 6. Are you gleeful when your manager is in trouble?
> 7. Does your manager socialise with you on occasion? Is it comfortable or
> would you rather they didn't?
> 8. If you screwed up, would you look for support from your manager or
> would you make every effort to hide your blunder or divert attention from
> it until you could fix it, if you could fix it?
>
> The above are designed to help you realise that, if you have bad
> management, there is every possibility that you actually deserve
> them...:-)
>
> The next step is to look at what can be done about improving your
> management.
>
> Yes, it is actually possible for you, as an unempowered, lower life form,
> grunt, to actually make a difference. I'll cover it after we see the
> responses to the above, if there are responses to the above... :-).
>
> Pete.
>
>
>