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

Learning to be managed

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–39 of 39 posts

Re: Learning to be managed

#31

Post by szundi »

082349872349872 wrote: post #19
alphazard wrote: post #16

This is a little too rose tinted for my tastes. In a high-performing small company, managers aren't necessary. Someone has to be responsible for hiring and firing people, but you can't afford people that don't get what the company's trying to do. If someone has to be managed, they aren't a good fit. If you've never worked at a place like this, or don't believe me, I'd recommend giving it a try. In a large company, ma…

> If you've never worked at a place like this, or don't believe me, I'd recommend giving it a try. +1 > Here management is essential to creating stress and getting any sort of productive output. I had friends whose company went from "high-performing small" to "large", and the way they described the transition was "we thought adding management was going to be like adding an internal skeleton, a structure that'd help g…

Like flowing into all direction would be good?

Re: Learning to be managed

#32

Post by 082349872349872 »

szundi wrote: post #31
082349872349872 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you've never worked at a place like this, or don't believe me, I'd recommend giving it a try. +1 > Here management is essential to creating stress and getting any sort of productive output. I had friends whose company went from "high-performing small" to "large", and the way they described the transition was "we thought adding management was going to be like adding an internal skeleton, a structure that'd help g…

Like flowing into all direction would be good?

Another analogy, from the book Blackhawk Down: the Regular Army units ("large company") required full military discipline (TPR reports, planning poker, etc.) just to survive in position. The Special Forces ("high-performing small company") unit didn't bother with hair length or reciprocal salutes, but instead of using the apparatus of the Army Way, they knew how to do things the right way, and so rapidly established a pattern of fire and movement enabling the RA units to break out and rendezvous with the UN rescue team.

Obviously any organisation, at some point during growth (at least under the traditional VC model), has to convert from "high-performing small" to "large". My view of the goal of founders and early employees is to (a) spot when this transition occurs, and (b) have arranged to already be liquid. When the settlers outnumber the pioneers and the range is fenced in, it's time to ride off into the sunset.

Re: Learning to be managed

#33

Post by RamblingCTO »

alphazard wrote: post #16

This is a little too rose tinted for my tastes. In a high-performing small company, managers aren't necessary. Someone has to be responsible for hiring and firing people, but you can't afford people that don't get what the company's trying to do. If someone has to be managed, they aren't a good fit. If you've never worked at a place like this, or don't believe me, I'd recommend giving it a try. In a large company, ma…

I'll say it, even tho I'll drown in down votes: Your attitude gives me "walking red flag" vibes. It sounds paranoid and hostile. Why would I want someone with that attitude in my team or as a colleague?

A good manager supports your development, keeps an eye on the big picture (which is quite hard if you're working on the smallest unit of the company, e.g. code), and would also send you home if you work too much. Because time != productivity in general.

A promotion means flight risk? What?

Just a thought: If everyone else sucks, it can be time to look inward.

Re: Learning to be managed

#34

Post by pfannkuchen »

ZephyrBlu wrote: post #30
pfannkuchen wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think that proper leveling can really be broken down in this way. It is more of an ape brain reputation score within the group. I think when managers are made to outline a concrete path to the next level, a gradual level inflation may occur at the company. This is because a manager is never going to say “I don’t know” when you ask them this, even if they don’t know, and then they are forced to advocate for yo…

That entirely depends upon whether you are in an environment that takes levelling seriously or not. It is possible to break it down like this if your org and manager are competent [0]. Good managers understand what the shape of each level looks like, and companies that care calibrate levelling across orgs. Your manager advocating for a report who does not meet the bar doesn't work because it requires approval from mo…

Leveling establishes a social hierarchy. The ape brains of the people on the team don’t care about the ladder. If you mess up the social hierarchy people will be unhappy.

If there is peer input into the grading system, the ape brain social hierarchy judgements are being leaked into the leveling system (in a good way). If someone feels bad about the reviewee being at the new hierarchy spot they aren’t going to support the promo, regardless of what the candidate did. Of course the candidate doing things influences the ape brain judgement so it’s not as if these things are completely disconnected, it’s just not how it looks on the surface.

Re: Learning to be managed

#35

Post by alphazard »

RamblingCTO wrote: post #33
alphazard wrote: post #16

This is a little too rose tinted for my tastes. In a high-performing small company, managers aren't necessary. Someone has to be responsible for hiring and firing people, but you can't afford people that don't get what the company's trying to do. If someone has to be managed, they aren't a good fit. If you've never worked at a place like this, or don't believe me, I'd recommend giving it a try. In a large company, ma…

I'll say it, even tho I'll drown in down votes: Your attitude gives me "walking red flag" vibes. It sounds paranoid and hostile. Why would I want someone with that attitude in my team or as a colleague? A good manager supports your development, keeps an eye on the big picture (which is quite hard if you're working on the smallest unit of the company, e.g. code), and would also send you home if you work too much. Beca…

I don't mind if you think I'm hostile. My understanding of management and it's role in organizations makes me a threat to many people's livelihoods. Maybe yours included. I would oppose hiring new managers, encourage people to choose companies with less management, dispel bad memes and conventional wisdom about what value, if any, management adds. I'm absolutely bad news.

Contrary to your insinuation, everyone does not suck. I've been fortunate enough to work with talented engineers, sales people, VPs, CTOs, CEOs, and founders. I have never come across a talented person who was brought on as a manager. And not one of these talented individuals needed to be managed.

Re: Learning to be managed

#36

Post by mettamage »

zigman1 wrote: post #12
mettamage wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did my best at not being promoted. Promotion equals change. I really liked my salary and remote position. Any extra responsibility would require me to do more work. Sure, I'd get paid more but the stress would outweigh the pay. If you're ever down with not getting a promotion, just know that there are ways to think about it that might be constructive.

Cool, but I’m not sure that’s the topic of conversation.

> and say that not getting that promotion isn't necessarily a failure

I thought it was because of this part. I gave another view of how not getting a promotion would not necessarily be a failure.

Re: Learning to be managed

#37

Post by RamblingCTO »

alphazard wrote: post #35
RamblingCTO wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll say it, even tho I'll drown in down votes: Your attitude gives me "walking red flag" vibes. It sounds paranoid and hostile. Why would I want someone with that attitude in my team or as a colleague? A good manager supports your development, keeps an eye on the big picture (which is quite hard if you're working on the smallest unit of the company, e.g. code), and would also send you home if you work too much. Beca…

I don't mind if you think I'm hostile. My understanding of management and it's role in organizations makes me a threat to many people's livelihoods. Maybe yours included. I would oppose hiring new managers, encourage people to choose companies with less management, dispel bad memes and conventional wisdom about what value, if any, management adds. I'm absolutely bad news. Contrary to your insinuation, everyone does n…

> VPs, CTOs, CEOs, and founders

but aren't these also managers?

> Maybe yours included Not really, no. I'm a startup CTO and co-founder and don't consider myself a traditional manager. And, of course, my livelihood isn't endangered by a stranger on the internet ;)

It's not that I disagree, you know. It's the black-and-white smell the comment had. And at least for me it's not much about managing someone, but enabling someone. People are no machines. And most people aren't very good with the long term view in my experience. Be it less interest in what happens in the long run or just an attitude, that's what I noticed.

Re: Learning to be managed

#38

Post by alphazard »

RamblingCTO wrote: post #37
alphazard wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't mind if you think I'm hostile. My understanding of management and it's role in organizations makes me a threat to many people's livelihoods. Maybe yours included. I would oppose hiring new managers, encourage people to choose companies with less management, dispel bad memes and conventional wisdom about what value, if any, management adds. I'm absolutely bad news. Contrary to your insinuation, everyone does n…

> VPs, CTOs, CEOs, and founders but aren't these also managers? > Maybe yours included Not really, no. I'm a startup CTO and co-founder and don't consider myself a traditional manager. And, of course, my livelihood isn't endangered by a stranger on the internet ;) It's not that I disagree, you know. It's the black-and-white smell the comment had. And at least for me it's not much about managing someone, but enabling…

> but aren't these also managers?

No, they were spread way too thin to possibly do anything in the featured article. They hired me and could have fired me though. If that's all a manager is, then yes--box checked.

Re: Learning to be managed

#39

Post by bitwize »

ZephyrBlu wrote: post #20
alphazard wrote: post #16

This is a little too rose tinted for my tastes. In a high-performing small company, managers aren't necessary. Someone has to be responsible for hiring and firing people, but you can't afford people that don't get what the company's trying to do. If someone has to be managed, they aren't a good fit. If you've never worked at a place like this, or don't believe me, I'd recommend giving it a try. In a large company, ma…

> The idea that most managers have something to teach you, are good judges of your flaws, or can give better advice than you would get from a senior peer is ridiculous. These are great traits that you should seek out in a mentor, but to claim the median manager anywhere has them is insane. In practice managers you encounter in the wild offer none of those things Have you ever had a good manager? Assuming equally comp…

The fictional company Initech from Office Space is depicted as a blandly oppressive corporate hellscape -- but it's fundamentally more honest than most corporations in the real world, do you know why? Because there's a big banner hanging over the offices that reads "Is this good for the COMPANY?" It's the question that all employees should be asking themselves at all times.

Being able to engage in personal feedback that cultivates fruitful relationships with their reports that make them happier and more productive is a nice-to-have. But ultimately a manager's responsibility is to the business, not their reports -- and sometimes what they need to do is implement whatever measures of process, control, or guidance the business demands and just cull the ones who don't get on board.

Post reply on HN