Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A CTO should be technical

blog.southparkcommons.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 367 posts

Re: A CTO should be technical

#221

Post by Spivak »

dqpb wrote: post #212
mbesto wrote: post #201

> So let me put it plainly: the CTO/VPE/Engineering Director candidate should pass your coding interview. In fact, they should excel. I've interviewed over 300+ CTOs over the last 8 years. I don't think the author is saying this literally, but i'll bite - no the CTO doesn't need to pass your coding interview. CTOs need two capabilities to excel - technical ones and human resources ones. That's it. No need to get any…

If the CTO isn't a technical domain expert then they are just middle management overhead.

This misunderstands the role of CTO which is to be a single point of responsibility and leadership for all the deliverables in engineering. And a lot of times CTOs are actually CPOs as well meaning they are also the final desk and driving force behind the strategic direction of new development as well.

Middle management overhead is real but this isn’t really an example of it — there is always a CTO and a CPO but not always in name. Sometimes they’re technical and in the trenches, other times at small companies it’s the CEO who’s wearing multiple hats.

Re: A CTO should be technical

#224

Post by bruce511 »

givemeethekeys wrote: post #43
dijit wrote: post #23

I just became a CTO. So, let me bear my thoughts. Since July of this year I've been CTO for a small games company, I've worked in this industry before in a more specialised role but this is much broader scope. I've gone from being responsible for 1 person to 10 which will likely become 50 by the end of next year. I'm terrified. I'm terrified because I feel like I will let my reports down. I'm terrified because a lot…

I've reported directly to good CTOs and really bad ones. The shitty ones: - Either never built trust or broke trust. - Were impulsive and reactionary. - Didn't rely on the expertise and skills of their reports as much as they told them what to do because they already knew everything. Didn't ask questions. Gave orders. - Literally used the words, "because I said so". - Believed that they were the only one doing any re…

Interestingly this list covers "bad manager skills". Which emphasises the point that bad managers are bad.

Equally a good manager with average tech skills can do everything opposite to this list with the help of technical advice.

Sure we'd all like a great tech guy who somehow is also a fantastic manager. But let's accept those are rare.

Next best is a great manager (emphasis on good, not bad) who listens well and takes advice regarding pure tech matters. Over time their tech will improve (remember, good manager) but in the meantime IT flourishes.

Only then comes a great tech guy with poor management skills. Frankly poor management will kill a team faster than good tech skills can save it.

So yeah, as the article suggests, a great all rounder would be the best option. But I feel there aren't enough of those to go around. In that case I'll take a good manager over a good techie all day long.

Re: A CTO should be technical

#225

Post by 29athrowaway »

givemeethekeys wrote: post #43
dijit wrote: post #23

I just became a CTO. So, let me bear my thoughts. Since July of this year I've been CTO for a small games company, I've worked in this industry before in a more specialised role but this is much broader scope. I've gone from being responsible for 1 person to 10 which will likely become 50 by the end of next year. I'm terrified. I'm terrified because I feel like I will let my reports down. I'm terrified because a lot…

I've reported directly to good CTOs and really bad ones. The shitty ones: - Either never built trust or broke trust. - Were impulsive and reactionary. - Didn't rely on the expertise and skills of their reports as much as they told them what to do because they already knew everything. Didn't ask questions. Gave orders. - Literally used the words, "because I said so". - Believed that they were the only one doing any re…

Because bad organizations conflate leadership and dominance.

Raw dominance is the dynamic governing primitive social animals.

Chimps are a bit smarter, and would collaborate as a group to beat up alphas that they hate.

Re: A CTO should be technical

#226

Post by ArcMex »

I believe it’s better if they are.

I once reported to a CTO whose bible was How To Influence People and Make Friends.

He ordered a migration of 4 million records to be done in a weekend because he had promised the CEO “everything would be fine by Monday” but I had told him that that plan would require 5 days to put everything in place, even a rollback.

The fact that he refused to hear me out when I pointed out the infrastructure capacity and the SQL scripts tested beforehand to arrive at my estimate made me wary of management that doesn’t understand even the basics of the technology we use.

So I think it goes a long way when CTOs are technical. They can give more realistic deadlines to reports while being able to be reasonably honest to their colleagues about estimates and progress.

Re: A CTO should be technical

#227

Post by 29athrowaway »

citizenpaul wrote: post #46
dijit wrote: post #23

I just became a CTO. So, let me bear my thoughts. Since July of this year I've been CTO for a small games company, I've worked in this industry before in a more specialised role but this is much broader scope. I've gone from being responsible for 1 person to 10 which will likely become 50 by the end of next year. I'm terrified. I'm terrified because I feel like I will let my reports down. I'm terrified because a lot…

I was a CTO once. Transparency is not your job. You're job is to keep telling your reports that everything is on track no matter what everything else is just "rumors". If you don't they will start getting anxiety or looking for new jobs instead of pressing on. This could actually be the difference between what makes things fail or succeed. You're job is not to be transparent or honest. Its to make sure everyone stays…

> "You're job"

I could not even finish reading this comment. As a C-level leader in an organization, communication should be your strong card. It's unacceptable that you don't even know the difference between "you are" and "your".

If as an employee I get an e-mail from a "CTO" consistently getting confused with such elementary, trivial shit, I would fucking resign immediately as that makes it evident that the organization is led by illiterate people and has absolutely no future.

Re: A CTO should be technical

#228

Post by dqpb »

Spivak wrote: post #221
dqpb wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the CTO isn't a technical domain expert then they are just middle management overhead.

This misunderstands the role of CTO which is to be a single point of responsibility and leadership for all the deliverables in engineering. And a lot of times CTOs are actually CPOs as well meaning they are also the final desk and driving force behind the strategic direction of new development as well. Middle management overhead is real but this isn’t really an example of it — there is always a CTO and a CPO but not…

Let me guess, CFO's also don't need financial expertise?

Re: A CTO should be technical

#229

Post by dqpb »

Joel_Mckay wrote: post #218
dqpb wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would be a Chief Liaise Officer.

You obliviously haven't met a CTO at an 8000 user facility. Damage control is the primary Role... whether you want the task or not. Most lack the discipline to tolerate that level of verbal abuse. ;)

I try not to do anything obliviously.

Re: A CTO should be technical

#230

Post by jjav »

spaetzleesser wrote: post #5
SkipperCat wrote: post #3

I'd say it's important for a CTO to be a CTO. I've been at too many places where the CTO only wanted to be a software developer/architect and would not focus on process, cost, employees, etc. CTO is a leadership role, and leadership means you have to take care of all the responsibilities under your authority, not just the interesting ones. IMHO, too many people chase the CTO title but few really want the actual job.

I personally believe it's easier for a technical person to become reasonably competent at process, cost and other management stuff vs a management person to become reasonably competent at technical things. When I was contractor I saw terrible decisions made by CTO and CIO in several companies because they didn't have any technical taste and ran everything by numbers and processes. I definitely believe a CTO should be…

> I saw terrible decisions made by CTO and CIO

While a CTO needs to have grown up in the technical trenches to have credibility, a CTO should not be making any technical decisions anymore. If they are, that's a red flag for a CTO who can't let go and keeps micromanaging.

Post reply on HN