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

Manager's Handbook (2020)

themanagershandbook.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 136 posts

Re: Manager's Handbook (2020)

#21

Post by daniel-cussen »

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #19
dominotw wrote: post #3

Being a manager in modern day means you have to accept being a devious person to a certain degree. You are in the middle of managing two conflicting goals of company and the employee. Each wants to extract as much as possible from the other. Promotions for example are always based on nebulous criteria that are often made up on the fly. Yea there are career ladders and stuff but those are totally ignored for all pract…

> Promotions for example are always based on nebulous criteria that are often made up on the fly. I think you’ve worked at some very toxic work environments, but it’s a mistake to suggest that your experience is the norm. It’s funny to read HN comments about how all managers are terrible, devious people who are only out to abuse employees. Most of us managers started out as ICs. Do you really think we surrender our h…

He didn't say that, he just said it's antagonistic by nature, nothing like what "you" accuse him of saying. That's fine, you know chess is like that, in fact any game where the goals are diametrically opposite. And they aren't completely diametrical, they ways in which they are not diametrical are just boring, nobody cares, yeah work hard yadda yadda, yeah be polite and show up on time, nobody cares. But like don't stop there! Work like fuck! Be gentlemanly or an assertive woman, or some analog that suits you! And show up on time like the bill from the cemetery! I did these things and didn't get promoted, but well no one time I was promoted actually, looking back...well but you gotta do it without counting the cost, real enthusiasm, a real work ethic! And knowing full well your employer might equally be, as an employee is out to leech, out to leech his employees.

Re: Manager's Handbook (2020)

#24

Post by catach »

Kototama wrote: post #23

Oh no, it has a whole section on enneagram, which is pseudo-science.

They do preface with:

"It is not an exact science. It is not there to pigeonhole people or to be an excuse for bad behavior. It is just a useful framework for understanding yourself and others a little better. And the better you understand someone, the better you can work together."

Re: Manager's Handbook (2020)

#25

Post by tomtheelder »

dominotw wrote: post #9
atypeoferror wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a lot to unpack in this comment, but in general the situation described here is specific to certain kinds of organizations, with lamentably poor leadership and management cultures. If management views the employer-employee relationship as some sort of zero-sum game - they have already lost that game. In companies with mature (which doesn't mean old - a relatively young company can also be well-run!) structur…

> and ask about the management and leadership philosophy when you interview! Is this really useful though. They will always tell you what you want to hear, just like you say what they want to hear. > I struggle to see the wisdom in setting goals for an employee's promotion without the intention of rewarding them for working hard to meet those goals. Because low level managers don't really have the power to grant that…

> Is this really useful though. They will always tell you what you want to hear, just like you say what they want to hear.

100% it's useful.

First, not everyone is going to just tell you what you want to hear. I for one am entirely transparent in interviews, often criticizing the org. Hiring someone who doesn't like the culture is an absolute disaster.

Second, you should ask the same question to every person that interviews you. If you get a bunch of different answers you're probably getting bullshitted, or they just don't have a consistent answer across the org for what you are asking. That's valuable info either way.

Third, ask questions that don't have a "right" answer. If you ask "do people who work here care about the mission?" you're going to get a yes every time. If you ask "what would you say is the biggest source of motivation for you and your team?" you'll get lots of varied answers. I know because I've asked that question and gotten countless different ones.

For the leadership/management question they have no way to know what answer you are looking for when you ask about the management philosophy. If they give a nothing answer like "we try not to micromanage" then you push. You'll either find out what it is or you'll find out that the people you are asking don't know, which suggests that there isn't one.

Re: Manager's Handbook (2020)

#27

Post by asda5AS3mc »

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #18
thenerdhead wrote: post #11

I went through half of it. I think it has promise, but not really sure I would call it a handbook. Some things are just strange to me: > A senior employee comes to you with a competitive offer in hand, asking for a promotion. You investigate the situation and decide that, since you really don’t want to lose this employee, you will cave and give them a promotion. > You have just created a strong incentive for politica…

When you’re an employee, it feels like your manager’s job is to keep you happy and give you what you want. When you first get into management, you immediately realize that your job is to serve an entire team in ways that will some times not make individuals happy. You have to focus on doing what’s best for the team, not just giving the loudest team member what they demand. > Hard disagree. People look for more respon…

I don't buy the slippery slope argument. It presupposes that everyone has visibility into who is getting job offers, which from my experience, is false. Furthermore, if I went thought the pain of a job hunt, then I'm already dissatisfied, and any counter offer would be pushing on a string. To be attractive, the counter would have to provide genuine change in both role and comp. The dynamic here isn't complicated, it seems transactional.

Re: Manager's Handbook (2020)

#28

Post by thenerdhead »

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #18
thenerdhead wrote: post #11

I went through half of it. I think it has promise, but not really sure I would call it a handbook. Some things are just strange to me: > A senior employee comes to you with a competitive offer in hand, asking for a promotion. You investigate the situation and decide that, since you really don’t want to lose this employee, you will cave and give them a promotion. > You have just created a strong incentive for politica…

When you’re an employee, it feels like your manager’s job is to keep you happy and give you what you want. When you first get into management, you immediately realize that your job is to serve an entire team in ways that will some times not make individuals happy. You have to focus on doing what’s best for the team, not just giving the loudest team member what they demand. > Hard disagree. People look for more respon…

> When you’re an employee, it feels like your manager’s job is to keep you happy and give you what you want.

Exactly, that's why you go get a competing offer when you do not feel heard from your manager regarding what will make you happy. Especially when you have said career conversations with them and no progress is being made and you're tired of waiting because they are too busy "serving an entire team".

> If the person is deserving of the promotion then withholding it just because is silly. But in the real world that doesn’t really happen.

This happens all the time. People who are more "visible" or "political" can often see promotions before those who may actually deserve them waiting patiently in line. Also fiscal years and promotion cycles are a thing. So it does happen in the real world all the time. Why do you think boomerang employees are a thing?

> If you start giving out promotions to people who seek competing job offers, you’re telling the team that the promotion path is not based on merit or performance, but rather on your ability to hold your manager over a barrel with threats of quitting.

It's really not. If you see it that way, I think you're part of the problem. It's your direct telling you they do not feel heard and this is how they are resorting to being heard. This is usually a last resort for many people. You can "honor" it in many ways. You can decline it because you have no tools to address their concerns, you can accept it because you do have a tool to address their concern, or you can even let them know they are on the path and work with them to make sure they reach that destination. It doesn't even have to be tied to a promotion either, but for many bigger companies that's one of few tools they have to address them. Often they don't play ball and lose the tribal knowledge as well causing even worse issues for the team than just "resentment". Too many great people are lost this way. I'd argue that retaining employees is infinitely better than hiring. Who is going to train the new hires? A manager's first priority is results. Their second priority? Retaining their people.

Re: Manager's Handbook (2020)

#30

Post by bee_rider »

thenerdhead wrote: post #11

I went through half of it. I think it has promise, but not really sure I would call it a handbook. Some things are just strange to me: > A senior employee comes to you with a competitive offer in hand, asking for a promotion. You investigate the situation and decide that, since you really don’t want to lose this employee, you will cave and give them a promotion. > You have just created a strong incentive for politica…

I work with students and over the pandemic I've generally not asked them to put on their video when on Zoom. I figure -- they are in their dorms and bedrooms, it is their personal space, they've got enough shit going on in their lives -- I don't even really want to put them in the position of having to explain that they don't want to.

But it definitely reduces communication bandwidth significantly. There are always silent gaps when discussing anything technical. The silence of "I'm just totally befuddled" and "I'm digesting what you just told me, and about to understand it" is indistinguishable on a voice-only call, but instantly communicated when you can see the other person's face.

IMO a workplace culture of having video on by default would be necessary for me to be interested in remote technical collaboration for anything actually difficult.

Post reply on HN