TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Why good managers are so rare

163 点作者 mmenafra大约 11 年前

28 条评论

pixelmonkey大约 11 年前
For the tl;dr crowd, here&#x27;s the key takeaway: &quot;Most companies promote workers into managerial positions because they seemingly deserve it, rather than because they have the talent for it. This practice doesn&#x27;t work.&quot;<p>Before I started a startup, I was a software engineer at a large firm, and it was clear they were grooming me for management because I was a strong individual contributor and had &quot;put in my time&quot;: 3 years as an engineer. Advancement at this firm was measured by &quot;how many reports&quot; you had, as in &quot;direct reports&quot;, or people managed by you, and if you just did superior individual work but had no one &quot;under you&quot;, you weren&#x27;t advancing. So they sent me to a couple of training courses about management and started prepping me for the path.<p>This was one of the many reasons I quit this BigCo to start my own startup.<p>I am now the co-founder &amp; CTO of Parse.ly (<a href="http://parse.ly" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;parse.ly</a>). In our first two years after starting up, I spent all my time building stuff -- which is exactly what I wanted. Ironically, because the company has grown and now has a 13-person product team, I am now technically &quot;managing&quot; my engineering team with 13 &quot;direct reports&quot;. But at our company, we have completely decoupled management from individual contribution -- certainly, if a strong individual contributor shows an interest in management, we&#x27;ll consider it. But becoming a &quot;manager&quot; is not how you &quot;advance&quot; here -- you advance by doing great work. Our first employee who joined in 2009 is a great programmer and he is still with the company, but he&#x27;s still doing what he loves: building &amp; shipping stuff. Based on our frank conversations on the topic, I think he would quit if I forced him to be a manager. The appropriate reward for doing great work isn&#x27;t a &quot;promotion to management&quot; -- that&#x27;s actually a <i>punishment</i> for a great individual contributor. The right reward is to ensure you continue to provide an environment where that great work can continue for that contributor, and where they can continue to grow their skills and apply themselves productively in the role.
评论 #7398765 未加载
评论 #7398701 未加载
评论 #7398741 未加载
评论 #7399159 未加载
评论 #7398700 未加载
评论 #7401136 未加载
评论 #7398931 未加载
评论 #7401118 未加载
评论 #7399129 未加载
btilly大约 11 年前
I just went through a situation where a reorg put a bad manager in a place of a good one. I was on the most talented and productive team that they had. Every. Last. One. Of. Us. Quit.<p>It turns out that there is an interesting feedback effect. People who have the capability to be smart, are only smart when the environment is right. Therefore your best people disappear first when you destroy the environment, because they are the ones who most strongly experience how their productivity has been undermined.
评论 #7398645 未加载
评论 #7398768 未加载
评论 #7398514 未加载
评论 #7398522 未加载
评论 #7398521 未加载
Ologn大约 11 年前
I see only one quality separating good and bad managers - their confidence in their own competence. Bad managers seem to feel they lucked out in getting their job. Like it might be &quot;found out&quot; that they are not really qualified. Good managers are at ease in their job. They usually seem to feel the company is lucky to have them, as with some effort they could get into a slightly better job. They often do, especially after static happens at a company.<p>A boss goes to his own boss, and that boss gives him an unrealistic goal to be accomplished in a short time frame. The good boss remains calm and pushes back. The bad boss walks out of the meeting full of anxiety and tells his team to accomplish the impossible, quickly. This might work the first few times, but soon the competent people on the team will leave.<p>One of the quirks here is management is usually better off in the long run hiring bosses who will say no to them once in a while. Bosses who always say yes are more pleasant in the short term to their superiors, but they will be better off in the long term to have someone who pushes back on requests which are too unreasonable. We see blog posts here every day about how hard it is to find good engineers. Incompetent bosses who are dripping with anxiety after a meeting with their own boss, relaying marching orders for yet another death march project - good engineers do not remain under such people very long, especially in job markets like the current one.
评论 #7400721 未加载
评论 #7400890 未加载
评论 #7400749 未加载
mattwritescode大约 11 年前
Because people generally fail upwards.<p>Take for example a poor developer who keeps breaking things. It can actually be difficult to get rid of someone. So the company instead makes him a low level manager (no longer directly touching code).<p>Yes! he comes up with stupid ideas etc, but, his team know he is wrong so they just work around the stupidity.<p>In a couple of years of poor management from this junior manager (who team keeps working through). Upper management (who forgot how bad a developer he was) think GOD! he has done a good job; his team get things done. Lets promote him.<p>Bad manager is now in a higher position again.
评论 #7398546 未加载
评论 #7398592 未加载
评论 #7399293 未加载
评论 #7398540 未加载
评论 #7398526 未加载
评论 #7398536 未加载
评论 #7398586 未加载
afthonos大约 11 年前
All in all great article, but it seriously lost credibility with <i>&quot;Talents are innate and are the building blocks of great performance. Knowledge, experience, and skills develop our talents, but unless we possess the right innate talents for our job, no amount of training or experience will matter.&quot;</i><p>Until such a time as we can (a) define &quot;innate talent&quot; precisely, (b) measure it so that we know now much a person has, and (c) determine that none of our current methods of teaching the related skill result in enough of an improvement, statements like that are just excuses for people to look at each other and say &quot;I just don&#x27;t think he has the talent to do this. Great guy, hard worker, but no talent.&quot;<p>Interestingly, if you dig into the links and studies provided, you find that &quot;talent&quot; is never defined and, where used, <i>completely replaceable</i> by &quot;skills&quot; or &quot;interests&quot;. And once you replace it in the above sentence, it becomes either obviously false (of course skills can be increased with training) or patently absurd (of course training rarely changes your interests).<p>Still a great article for the connection between management and employee satisfaction and productivity.
kolbe大约 11 年前
Anthropomorphizing companies, units, artwork, governments &amp;etc is a long trend in humanity that needs to stop. I don&#x27;t know the psychology behind it, but humans seem to love to find a handful of other humans to personify an agency, then become overly obsessed with them as the cause of success or failure.<p>The US government doesn&#x27;t suck: Bush or Obama suck. Apple isn&#x27;t a great company: Steve Jobs is a great leader. AIG doesn&#x27;t have a bad business model: Mo Greenberg makes bad decisions. The Patriots didn&#x27;t win a Super Bowl: Tom Brady won the Super Bowl!<p>No organization, NONE, has exploited this tendency more than Harvard. They are masters of the bait and switch. And this article is a classic example. They list all sorts of arguments for there being problems with companies&#x2F;units, then, without any proof of causation, attribute the failures to bad management. They talk about what it means to be a good manager, but in no way do they offer any evidence that the problems of bad employee engagement and productivity will actually be solved by introducing a good manager.<p>Why? Because Harvard is in the business of selling you its students as managers. They&#x27;ve developed a reputation of offering highly-credentialed applicants two (HBS) and four year (HUG) vacations to ride the marketing wave of &quot;Harvard grads are great managers.&quot; While MIT focuses on creating students who themselves will invent, create and further the pace of the world, Harvard instead seems to have chosen to exploit our tendency to anthropomorphize company success by latching onto shareholder and management insecurities (lack of engagement and productivity), even where there isn&#x27;t anything to be insecure about, and inserting their graduates into highly paid positions as &quot;the solution.&quot;<p>And they&#x27;ve been fabulously successful in this marketing campaign. I think SV has done a very good job of seeing through this schtick, but comments here make me think the tide is turning.<p>That&#x27;s not to say there&#x27;s no such thing as a bad manager. There are managers who can personally ruin&#x2F;save a company. But all problems are not caused by bad management. All productivity issues do not stem from bad management. Sometimes it&#x27;s a sociopath manager, but more often it&#x27;s a bad product or business plan or economic downturn or any one of a set of problems that no shiny new Harvard manager will fix.
评论 #7400106 未加载
评论 #7400444 未加载
argv_empty大约 11 年前
The authors sure took a long time saying, &quot;because companies select managers based mostly on factors other than managerial talent, like seniority.&quot;
评论 #7398655 未加载
edw519大约 11 年前
Manage things. Lead people.<p>If the hundreds of poor managers I have known would have just understood these 4 words, nothing else could have made more positive impact.
mediaserf大约 11 年前
The article points out that good managers don&#x27;t make decisions based on politics. What I have seen is not only do bad managers make decisions based on politics but also ego. I have seen ego destroy startups and big companies alike. Many tech companies interview managers purely from a tech perspective and do not effectively drill down into the management side.<p>A good interviewer can get a sense for someone&#x27;s ego vs. assertiveness pretty easily, but so many interviewers are looking at experience and skillset over character, personality and style. Experience and skill set are important but the other aspects are often overlooked. As an example, a hands-on development manager needs to not only be screened for the development chops but also if they are mature enough to handle the decisions that need to be made in that management role.
评论 #7398868 未加载
yiedyie大约 11 年前
This could also explain: <a href="http://cluborlov.blogspot.com/2013/04/understanding-organizational-stupidity.html" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;cluborlov.blogspot.com&#x2F;2013&#x2F;04&#x2F;understanding-organiza...</a>
评论 #7398532 未加载
001sky大约 11 年前
Note: This is not an original thought. It&#x27;s the premise of &quot;The Office&quot;, or something like that. But it&#x27;s worth considering.YMMV.<p>CEO&gt;Manager&gt;Employee<p>==<p>Sociopath&gt;Incompetent&gt;Suckers<p>TLDR:<p>Manager&lt;=&gt;Incompetent<p>In other words, from a game theory perspective, being a (mid-level) manager (in a hierachy) is an unstable equilibrium for a vast majority of situations. Truly excellent companies have deeper benches of talent (or are structured in ways that compensate, ie. they are more &quot;flat&quot;)
评论 #7398569 未加载
sz4kerto大约 11 年前
Kahneman thinks otherwise. Perceived CEO performance and company performance have low correlation -- as low as 0.3.<p>I could give references, but the book (Thinking, Fast and Slow) is not in public domain yet, so just some 3rd party links: <a href="http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/634181be-4769-11e1-b847-00144feabdc0.html" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.ft.com&#x2F;cms&#x2F;s&#x2F;0&#x2F;634181be-4769-11e1-b847-00144feabd...</a> <a href="http://www.delanceyplace.com/view_archives.php?2084#.UyL_vIUhK1k" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.delanceyplace.com&#x2F;view_archives.php?2084#.UyL_vIU...</a>
评论 #7398541 未加载
评论 #7398504 未加载
jasallen大约 11 年前
This is a great article and I think nails everything.<p>One thing I would add, contrary to conventional wisdom, is that Accountability is probably the least important. I don&#x27;t mean to say that you should let poor performers hang around, but that, given that everything else is firing on all cylinders, your team will let you know who their poor performing peers are. So an innate talent or process at &#x27;accountability&#x27; isn&#x27;t really overly important.
mikeleeorg大约 11 年前
In my opinion, the most optimal organizational structure to have is to train people who actively want to become managers (but don&#x27;t promote them unless they can actually do the job), and give individual contributors an alternate career path - like that of a technical architect, senior contributor, etc.<p>Being a manager is a very, very different mindset from being an individual contributor. And there ARE people who want the managerial career path too. The trick is in finding them and offering the appropriate training (because not everyone is cut out to be a manager).<p>Lastly, the &quot;manager&quot; title is very broad. There are people managers, technical managers, project managers, etc. So training someone to be a manager needs to be tailored to the types of managers at your organization.
ianamartin大约 11 年前
What I see more often than not is that bad managers come from lazy planning. Bob has been here for a long time now. We should reward him. Hmmmm. What to do . . . oh! Let&#x27;s make him a manager. That way we have an excuse for a small raise.<p>Next thing you know, Bob is a crappy manager. Sorry, Bob. The leadership was too lazy to plan out career paths for the people. Now Bob is a crappy manager who will be pushed aside and ignored until he either quits or gets fired.<p>But now Bob has management experience. What does he do? Go back to doing the scrub work for scrub pay? Hell no. He wants that middle management pay check. Now Bob is going to make a career out of being a bad manager. Because Bob&#x27;s first managers were lazy.<p>Sorry, Bob.
arijitraja大约 11 年前
I have managed people with different skills and demographics and have figured out being a manager is a natural progression in some countries like India and not many companies are bothered if the person truly is meant for the role. I have seen brilliant tech resources totally screwing up their career paths becoming a manager.<p>This is something which is less practiced in the UK. I have worked in the city and have worked with experts who have been in tech for 15 years and there is no pressure either from their within or from the management.<p>As the article very rightly cites - &quot;Companies fail to choose the candidate with the right talent for the job 82% of the time&quot;
alanlewis大约 11 年前
The conclusions in the report seem tenuous. Read the article, and you&#x27;ll learn that this is all based on the Gallup &quot;Q12&quot; poll (read the report for yourself: <a href="http://www.gallup.com/strategicconsulting/164735/state-global-workplace.aspx" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.gallup.com&#x2F;strategicconsulting&#x2F;164735&#x2F;state-globa...</a>) That poll is made up of 12 yes or no questions. 12. Including ones like &quot;I have a best friend at work.&quot; Google &quot;Gallup Q12 criticism&quot; after reading the original survey, read what you find, and see if you still take it seriously.
k__大约 11 年前
We had such a problem at the company I worked last year.<p>The RnD-Director was a dev and wanted to develop and not to tell people what they should do or don&#x27;t. So he went back being a dev and gave the position to another one, he probably still got the same pay but with a job he found much more pleasing.<p>The CTO of the company left it, because of the same reasons. He thinks of himself as a computer scientist and not a manager. He wants to solve technical problems and don&#x27;t talk to the big bosses of customer companies or manage people around.
SixSigma大约 11 年前
Promoting people to their level of incompetence aka the Peter Principle<p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Principle" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Peter_Principle</a>
lewaldman大约 11 年前
My take on Good vs Bad managers is very, very simple:<p>&quot;Good managers are like sea captains. Bad managers are like a slaves overseer.&quot;<p>The last pearl from my manager was: &quot;If you can produce 100% in 6 hours&#x2F;day you would for sure produce 150% in 9 hours&#x2F;day (Together with a puzzled look after I pointed that no, we are not a screws factory).&quot;<p>I don&#x27;t need to mention that the entire team is aggressively looking for new positions on other companies (BTW a it is&#x2F;was a VERY nice team).
jtbigwoo大约 11 年前
It&#x27;s also often true that managers tend to get promoted&#x2F;retained for advancing their own interests as opposed to advancing their subordinates. When upper management looks for junior managers to promote, they see the easy stuff first. They see the people who get their reports in on time, network effectively, and argue forcefully in meetings rather than figuring out who is actually leading.
afterburner大约 11 年前
I&#x27;m not seeing anything about the warning signs of some people being ambitious for a position merely because it pays better, gives more power over people, or gives more status&#x2F;bargaining power. Too awkward to talk about? Self-defeating for Harvard Business School?
trhway大约 11 年前
{set of good managers in software } = {set of people able to manage other people well } intersect {set of people able to do software engineering well}<p>No wonder that it is rare. If you add additional filter that a company need to be able to correctly identify and promote such people...
kevinskii大约 11 年前
&gt; <i>Leaders should...[choose] the right person for the next management role using predictive analytics to guide their identification of talent.</i><p>Such useful advice! We shall immediately assign one of our worker bees to create a predictive analytics system forthwith.
rabino大约 11 年前
The best managers I had share a few traits: They are creative and effective at solving problems when you have one, and they stay out of the way when you don&#x27;t.
mbesto大约 11 年前
Peter Drucker (the old father of modern management) and Gabe Newell (the new father of modern management) both agree - managing people is a skill in itself.<p>When will we ever learn?
aaronapple大约 11 年前
Based on what I&#x27;ve seen, even really, really smart, careful people make the wrong hiring&#x2F;promotion decision ~50% of the time
namenotrequired大约 11 年前
Does anyone have any advice on avoiding bad managers while looking for a job?
评论 #7399912 未加载