Numbers to Know for Managing (Software Teams) • Hacker News Board

Re: Numbers to Know for Managing (Software Teams)

#11

Post by nobodyandproud » Wed, Mar 22, 2023, 3:30 PM UTC

Uvix wrote: post #4

nobodyandproud wrote: post #2

I’m wincing at each number. I’ve been a manager for 4 years, and I think I’ve done worse and not better as my team doubled/tripled in size.

If your team has tripled, it might be time for another layer of management.

It’s still within the ideal number (up to 9). I just find I’m most effective managing a small team and contributing.

We also have a flat structure.

I’m seriously considering leaving for an IC role at this point, though the market is terrible and I’ve never been good with leetcode style interviews.

Re: Numbers to Know for Managing (Software Teams)

#12

Post by glonq » Wed, Mar 22, 2023, 4:26 PM UTC

40 - The number of hours per week that you should "expect" people to work.

You can hope or inspire or ask for more. But don't expect it. And don't take it for granted.

Re: Numbers to Know for Managing (Software Teams)

#13

Post by tolstoshev » Wed, Mar 22, 2023, 7:33 PM UTC

cntainer wrote: post #6

500 - the number of employees before your CEO becomes a political figure 1000 - the size of company when you’re at risk of losing accountability From my own experience and other sources ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35206141 ) those numbers seem too high. I've seen this happen 2 times in front of my eyes while both companies were in the 100-200 range. One of them managed to go to the next level and adapt to…

Yep, Dunbar's number is what you are looking at for this phase change: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbar%27s_number

So around the 150-200 mark.

Re: Numbers to Know for Managing (Software Teams)

#14

Post by BerislavLopac » Mon, Mar 27, 2023, 3:56 PM UTC

tolstoshev wrote: post #13

cntainer wrote: post #6

500 - the number of employees before your CEO becomes a political figure 1000 - the size of company when you’re at risk of losing accountability From my own experience and other sources ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35206141 ) those numbers seem too high. I've seen this happen 2 times in front of my eyes while both companies were in the 100-200 range. One of them managed to go to the next level and adapt to…

Yep, Dunbar's number is what you are looking at for this phase change: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbar%27s_number So around the 150-200 mark.

I remember reading a CEO's categorisation of companies: he said, when I do to the office restroom, and another guy is at the urinal next to me, there are three different results based on the size of the company:

  1. I know who he is, and he knows who I am.
  2. I don't know who he is, but he knows me.
  3. Neither of us has any idea who the other one is.