Hello, At the end of your first point regarding timeliness, I presume you meant to say Beware procrastinators, instead of Beware prevaricators.
--ram vemuri
Discussion on:
View:
Show:
I had one boss who was originally hired as a consultant and has stayed on for years. So he didn't know how to manage his employees because he was use to being alone. This guy always shot down his own employees in public. He never gave credit - just critisism. He would not take any suggestions unless he was desparate. He would want you to solve the problem but then turn around and did it himself. He said he doesn't want to know about the small stuff but complained when he didn't know about it. He would constantly get sidetracked on the small things while there are biggers issues. He constantly complains about things he dislikes [he dislikes Windows - coming from a Novell environment]. He boasts he's an expert programmer but there has been a number of times when he didn't bother testing his programming and it caused major problems. He was also the biggest slob.
Incompetent managers often would not THINK about having married people work long hours for the good of the corporate, but don't think twice about single people because they have more time. [This actually happened to me long ago in my career.]
I'm thinking this is discrimination and HR should look at it. No wait, HR is part of the problem.
The truth is in this modern age that... well, I know a divorced guy who is taking care of his disabled son at home, taken in his down and out nephew, has some of his students come when they don't have a place and is an unpaid minister on the weekends. He used to be both a school teacher AND work for a restaurant chain [where he came up with some mighty fine recipes which were adopted]. He now just teaches in school.
The assumption that singles are available for empty corporate overtime [generated by someones lack of planning] is a very bad one.
I'm thinking this is discrimination and HR should look at it. No wait, HR is part of the problem.
The truth is in this modern age that... well, I know a divorced guy who is taking care of his disabled son at home, taken in his down and out nephew, has some of his students come when they don't have a place and is an unpaid minister on the weekends. He used to be both a school teacher AND work for a restaurant chain [where he came up with some mighty fine recipes which were adopted]. He now just teaches in school.
The assumption that singles are available for empty corporate overtime [generated by someones lack of planning] is a very bad one.
David Ogilvy may have argued that a good decision today is worth far more than a perfect decision next month, except when you have a month to make the decision. Ill-considered action is often worse than inaction.
Not sure about this one. A good manager, as well as those he mentored, should be able to stand alone and build new teams. Easy to read cronies for "former employees."
Although illegal in the government, our current management has replaced most of the managers in one department, with cronies from his former job. This of course has led to resentment among most of the current employees. None show signs of being especially good managers. One in particular has racked up grievances from most of her subordinates in her first few months. Makes us wonder why they were laid off from their old job. But the nice thing about government, is that new managers don't have tenure.
As much as many of you might disagree, competency is not a black and white thing. 20 years ago I would have disagreed with the statement myself but one thing experience has taught me, and I'll bet it's taught a lot of you, is as much as businesses, or more specifically business personnel, proclaims to be about "the best people" or "the best job" or "profits" that is usually only to an extent. You'll rarely see anyone, manager or not, intentionally and willingly cut off his own finger. Often the need to keep bright subordinates unseen and suck up to upper management is actually a real thing. It's the culture of that organization and this person can't feed his own family if he gets fired.
People are people and we aren't perfect. There will ALWAYS be someone better at any given job. I notice we rarely have long discussions about incompetent subordinates. If we lived by what we're asking management to live by, the right thing for us to do would be to start trying to find that person to replace ourselves and step aside for the sake of the company. That's not a realistic thing to ask.
All that said, I do think there's a growing population of folks in "management" positions that are entirely too narcissistic. They have desired power since way before they became managers and when they finally got some, they couldn't handle it because they felt like it was their reward for being "special." I'm noticing that trend is growing. In the US...and I'd bet in the UK also, I see it directly related to the breakdown of the home. No values are being taught. Kids are spoiled and they grow up thinking the world revolves around them.
People are people and we aren't perfect. There will ALWAYS be someone better at any given job. I notice we rarely have long discussions about incompetent subordinates. If we lived by what we're asking management to live by, the right thing for us to do would be to start trying to find that person to replace ourselves and step aside for the sake of the company. That's not a realistic thing to ask.
All that said, I do think there's a growing population of folks in "management" positions that are entirely too narcissistic. They have desired power since way before they became managers and when they finally got some, they couldn't handle it because they felt like it was their reward for being "special." I'm noticing that trend is growing. In the US...and I'd bet in the UK also, I see it directly related to the breakdown of the home. No values are being taught. Kids are spoiled and they grow up thinking the world revolves around them.
Incompetent subordinates have featured many times in Toni's blogs. They've also been much discussed, usually because the they ignored two key points. Quite often management are incapable of judging competency, and second why are your people incompetent, why do they remain so? How can you describe yourself as a competent manager if you employ incompetents?
Business is never about best people or kit or process, it's about the best you can afford while making the largest profit you can. Always has been, always will be. The real change over the last few decades is how much and how often quality is sacrificed for immediate profit. Whether that's staff or management, is effectively irrelevant. You get what you pay for.
Business is never about best people or kit or process, it's about the best you can afford while making the largest profit you can. Always has been, always will be. The real change over the last few decades is how much and how often quality is sacrificed for immediate profit. Whether that's staff or management, is effectively irrelevant. You get what you pay for.
I haven't been involved in those discussions but I'll take your word for it.
We do agree on what business is about. However, management usually is not made up of owners of the businesses in question, so the motivation may not be as clean and clear as your otherwise accurate assessment would indicate. It's a classic case of the agency issue. The manager is going to protect himself before he looks after the company. And unfortunately this often results in short-term decisions and dishonesty because:
1. People he reports to don't understand what he's doing and have unrealistic expectations.
2. These people are often complicit in the agency problem themselves in their own unique situation.
3. His skills, comfort zone, preferences, etc may be highest in areas that aren't the best solutions for the business issues.
4. Ego. Nobody is going to tell him the right way to do things. He's the boss by golly and if that means cutting off his nose to spite his face, he'll do it.
Of these, the only one I'm COMPLETELY unsympathetic to is the last one. It would be nice to say none of them are factors and you can bet every company out there will say that; however, I tend to think if there is such a company, it's not on planet earth.
I was addressing what I saw as a general vilification of all managers. What I've seen in my life is often folks who are complaining the loudest about management do the same things they complained about when they get some power themselves.
We do agree on what business is about. However, management usually is not made up of owners of the businesses in question, so the motivation may not be as clean and clear as your otherwise accurate assessment would indicate. It's a classic case of the agency issue. The manager is going to protect himself before he looks after the company. And unfortunately this often results in short-term decisions and dishonesty because:
1. People he reports to don't understand what he's doing and have unrealistic expectations.
2. These people are often complicit in the agency problem themselves in their own unique situation.
3. His skills, comfort zone, preferences, etc may be highest in areas that aren't the best solutions for the business issues.
4. Ego. Nobody is going to tell him the right way to do things. He's the boss by golly and if that means cutting off his nose to spite his face, he'll do it.
Of these, the only one I'm COMPLETELY unsympathetic to is the last one. It would be nice to say none of them are factors and you can bet every company out there will say that; however, I tend to think if there is such a company, it's not on planet earth.
I was addressing what I saw as a general vilification of all managers. What I've seen in my life is often folks who are complaining the loudest about management do the same things they complained about when they get some power themselves.
it the epitomy of honesty, when it's up front.
You want me to work harder so you get a pay rise, fine, what's my end? If there isn't one, discounting calls to corporate loyalty and other self serving drivel, you can do one.
Incompetent managers aren't those who do one to ten, eleven , or twenty-friggin'-three. They are the ones who forget I'm not doing this for a laugh.....
You want me to work harder so you get a pay rise, fine, what's my end? If there isn't one, discounting calls to corporate loyalty and other self serving drivel, you can do one.
Incompetent managers aren't those who do one to ten, eleven , or twenty-friggin'-three. They are the ones who forget I'm not doing this for a laugh.....
I know exactly what you mean. My agreeing with you isn't going to change the reality in the workforce though.
...recent events have shown us on both sides of the pond many businesses should have done some things differently.
I agree that all 10 are signs of incompetent managers. There are at least another dozen that could be added to the list.
While I agree with #9, I also hope that readers understand that the converse of this condition, an unreasonable aversion to consultants, can be just as destructive. In #9, the manager abdicates his/her responsibility to do any of the heavy lifting of improvement. In its converse, the manager insists "we've got it covered," and rejects the notion that the department can be helped by an independent, experienced perspective. Any business process improvement effort, however, requires the active partipation of manager and staff.
You can probably tell by now that I am a management consultant.
mark.scanlan@live.com
While I agree with #9, I also hope that readers understand that the converse of this condition, an unreasonable aversion to consultants, can be just as destructive. In #9, the manager abdicates his/her responsibility to do any of the heavy lifting of improvement. In its converse, the manager insists "we've got it covered," and rejects the notion that the department can be helped by an independent, experienced perspective. Any business process improvement effort, however, requires the active partipation of manager and staff.
You can probably tell by now that I am a management consultant.
mark.scanlan@live.com
Well this is so insightful i am bashful to admit i have some of these traits but not all. I recently read an interesting article about the leader versus manager management style (http://changingminds.org/disciplines/leadership/articles/manager_leader.htm).
From Toni's comments, I think my biggest flaw here is proceduremania. I also think some flaws listed here are flaws of manager style leaders while some are flaws of leader style managers. Having managers with these 2 styles @ the firm can nullify these weaknesses and enable them maximize their strengths as well e.g. the managers love for the book can be neutralized by the leaders allergy to deadlines.
In our firm i am Chief Software Architect our Business Dev manager is very inspirational and i do not see us working well without him. I think that good managers are understanding when it comes down to it and can see whether someone (a fellow manager or staff) means best for the long term vision of the company...without getting into personality clashes.
From Toni's comments, I think my biggest flaw here is proceduremania. I also think some flaws listed here are flaws of manager style leaders while some are flaws of leader style managers. Having managers with these 2 styles @ the firm can nullify these weaknesses and enable them maximize their strengths as well e.g. the managers love for the book can be neutralized by the leaders allergy to deadlines.
In our firm i am Chief Software Architect our Business Dev manager is very inspirational and i do not see us working well without him. I think that good managers are understanding when it comes down to it and can see whether someone (a fellow manager or staff) means best for the long term vision of the company...without getting into personality clashes.
On a positive note, I found that the ultimate measure of a competent manager was her ability to get her workers whatever we needed to get the job done. She stood between us and upper management like a mother bear guarding her cubs.
I agree with 1-9, but...long hours are your #1 sign of an incompetent manager? You've clearly never been involved in software development.
As manager of a development staff/tech architect, my work weeks are meeting heavy and the only time for heads-down detail work or brushing up on new technologies is night/weekends.
Applications development is not an 8-5 job, it's an extremely task/deadline-oriented endeavor that frequently requires lots of overtime.
As manager of a development staff/tech architect, my work weeks are meeting heavy and the only time for heads-down detail work or brushing up on new technologies is night/weekends.
Applications development is not an 8-5 job, it's an extremely task/deadline-oriented endeavor that frequently requires lots of overtime.
I suppose that a manager's overwork could be mitigated by effective "management" but if the people over him consistently give him oversized jobs and limit his team's overtime...
I don't know about IT; but friends of mine seem to always get the short end of the salary stick when they're promoted to "manager."
I don't know about IT; but friends of mine seem to always get the short end of the salary stick when they're promoted to "manager."
sixty hours of work to do in fourty, given it wasn't an inadequate estimate on your part, the failure to manage is with those who gave you it. Management is essentially the efficient allocation of resource, once you are 100% t'aint your fault unless you keep quite about it and do it on overtime with no pay. That fixes nothing, in fact worse it guarantees a repeat of the failure.
required? I've put an extra hour or two in myself over my career, near every one of them was the result of lack of analysis, scope creep, poor planning or inadequate contigency.
There are occasions where there is no option, but far too often the option to smack things into shape with overwork, is taken as a given. That's bad enough when you get paid for it.....
There are occasions where there is no option, but far too often the option to smack things into shape with overwork, is taken as a given. That's bad enough when you get paid for it.....
Agreed. Looks like the author has gotten fed up, working with losers for a long long time. Who wouldn't?
Working under a micro-managing "Area Manager", who had no idea of the area (was new to the country) and no idea of being a sales/brand/marketing manager (never did any of those too) i can relate to many of the points she has written. Not only was he incompetent, and riding on the company's success, he was also a racist, miser, lier, bribe-accepting bastard. I had left by the time he got fired (Thank God!) and i felt happy for my colleagues in the "area". The "Area" happened to be the country of U.A.E .
I believe competence gives the person the confidence to stand up against their sinister position-holding peers / uppers, because they know how to do their job, with or without them.
Cheers to all those who are honest, intelligent, competent and work hard.
Working under a micro-managing "Area Manager", who had no idea of the area (was new to the country) and no idea of being a sales/brand/marketing manager (never did any of those too) i can relate to many of the points she has written. Not only was he incompetent, and riding on the company's success, he was also a racist, miser, lier, bribe-accepting bastard. I had left by the time he got fired (Thank God!) and i felt happy for my colleagues in the "area". The "Area" happened to be the country of U.A.E .
I believe competence gives the person the confidence to stand up against their sinister position-holding peers / uppers, because they know how to do their job, with or without them.
Cheers to all those who are honest, intelligent, competent and work hard.
I guess this should not even be included because any self-respecting manager should never do this.
In the middle of a major systems upgrade that was not budgeted for but pushed by the CIO, our technical team discussed with our manager additional software licenses that needed to be purchased. When push came to shove for the $150K outlay, our wonderful manager did not support us at all. He took a stance that we only told him about the first $25K initial purchase and never discussed any other needs. The purchase was made and the project completed but the entire team was working under new management as soon as possible.
You have to stand up for your employees. When decisions are made - and they are the right decisions - you must stand up and be counted when some push comes from above. The weasel that throws his employees under the bus will lose any respect and lose good employees.
In the middle of a major systems upgrade that was not budgeted for but pushed by the CIO, our technical team discussed with our manager additional software licenses that needed to be purchased. When push came to shove for the $150K outlay, our wonderful manager did not support us at all. He took a stance that we only told him about the first $25K initial purchase and never discussed any other needs. The purchase was made and the project completed but the entire team was working under new management as soon as possible.
You have to stand up for your employees. When decisions are made - and they are the right decisions - you must stand up and be counted when some push comes from above. The weasel that throws his employees under the bus will lose any respect and lose good employees.
Of course I can't complain, item nine keeps me in business, and by any accounting it is getting larger. So I guess the boneheads are winning.
#5 Preference for Weak Candidates. At least 25 years ago, I read an article whose theme was "First Rate People Hire First Rate People, Second Rate People Hire Third Rate People." That made an impact and has proven itself true more often than not!
I pretty much ignore management these days and do my most excellent work as always. I know my job and do it well, work around foolish management decisions [which are the rule and not the exception] and when I can, slip in some extras for long term stability so that when the time comes and the problems I foresaw finally hit the fan, I can finally introduce the solution that got rejected months before.
Of course, I get no credit. On the other hand, I don't much pay attention to management and mostly, they leave me alone.
And at one point or another, all of them around here have exhibited each of the ten points.
I'm happy with my work and ignore the bad management. The only thing that would make everything perfect is if I could dispense with those senseless time wasting meetings we have to go to.
Of course, I get no credit. On the other hand, I don't much pay attention to management and mostly, they leave me alone.
And at one point or another, all of them around here have exhibited each of the ten points.
I'm happy with my work and ignore the bad management. The only thing that would make everything perfect is if I could dispense with those senseless time wasting meetings we have to go to.
12. Denigrates you in meetings before fellow employees. And/or Denigrates you to sub-contractors after he sends you on a trip to assist them ( You find this out-after helping them when they say " I wonder why his boss said he was no good?" )
13. Says you "work for him" . Not for the Company, not for the Contract, not for the Government ( if you are a sub-contractor ). Is mentally disturbed; if you try to do a good job without his pre-approval.
Thank you for this post. I have actually used it as a yard stick to measure my competence. of course am not revealing my score but i must say i found it very useful
I Agree completly, because my boss have the same Characteristics. he's very incompetent
HA!
Have you been talking to my boss and supervisor? Sounds like exactly what happens here. I have one manager who is ADD and micromanages everything... Then the other has no IT skills (Yep Government office), but fills a now useless position.
I have 2 degrees (1 IT and the other Art related)... So it is especially frustrating. I would quit but I am holding out for a Job in Colorado... (Hint, Hint)
Boy you nailed this one! Good bosses come and go. What I have learned is that the only two good jobs out there are the one you are about to start and the one you just left.
Have you been talking to my boss and supervisor? Sounds like exactly what happens here. I have one manager who is ADD and micromanages everything... Then the other has no IT skills (Yep Government office), but fills a now useless position.
I have 2 degrees (1 IT and the other Art related)... So it is especially frustrating. I would quit but I am holding out for a Job in Colorado... (Hint, Hint)
Boy you nailed this one! Good bosses come and go. What I have learned is that the only two good jobs out there are the one you are about to start and the one you just left.
there might be a time period during which former employee may not to be able to steal people.
The time honored practice of coming in after a competent manager / director, cancelling all maintenance, cutting costs to the bone, going to bare operation.
After a year, you move on up the corporate ladder, a hero to your peers and above, but reports, not so much. You saved money! You made the operation more efficient!
And then the next poor schmuck comes along and everything starts to fail -- gets blamed for everything. If he or she survives, it will be both a matter of Divine intervention and a serverely restricted future wherein his or her reputation is pretty much ruined.
Anyone seen this sort of behavior?
After a year, you move on up the corporate ladder, a hero to your peers and above, but reports, not so much. You saved money! You made the operation more efficient!
And then the next poor schmuck comes along and everything starts to fail -- gets blamed for everything. If he or she survives, it will be both a matter of Divine intervention and a serverely restricted future wherein his or her reputation is pretty much ruined.
Anyone seen this sort of behavior?
On #1. A prevaricator knowingly twists the truth or colludes to defeat the spirit or letter of some accepted norm. A procastinator habitually puts off taking action. It appears that Ms Heffernan meant to write, "Beware procastinators."
This is one everyone missed and it goes like this:
The manager approaches problems at an abstract level without considering the very real consequences. It is always a vision of what should be rather than what really works.
For example, a manager has the bright idea that there should be a new interface for the users based on a technology which does not exist. Look for the term, "It should work".
Thus it is that the day to day realities of paying for licenses and maintaining what we have to keep going yields to the vision that "when we get the new..." all the problems will be solved. Meanwhile, systems fail, applications dis-integrate, the hardware becomes unmaintainable and, when there is an upgrade, it is geriatric from the twilight of the product's existence.
Beware of the "High Concept" manager -- it is a pathetic creature which upper management loves but will make your life a living nightmare of trying to patch things together with bubble gum, baling wire, duct tape and spit at a time when it has been declared that the company can no longer afford the duct tape.
The manager approaches problems at an abstract level without considering the very real consequences. It is always a vision of what should be rather than what really works.
For example, a manager has the bright idea that there should be a new interface for the users based on a technology which does not exist. Look for the term, "It should work".
Thus it is that the day to day realities of paying for licenses and maintaining what we have to keep going yields to the vision that "when we get the new..." all the problems will be solved. Meanwhile, systems fail, applications dis-integrate, the hardware becomes unmaintainable and, when there is an upgrade, it is geriatric from the twilight of the product's existence.
Beware of the "High Concept" manager -- it is a pathetic creature which upper management loves but will make your life a living nightmare of trying to patch things together with bubble gum, baling wire, duct tape and spit at a time when it has been declared that the company can no longer afford the duct tape.
The failure to recognize when a bad decision has been made, and change course to fix correct the mistake.
I worked with manager in the past that when given several options made a bad decision. But after the decision was made they refused to change the course of action and fix the problem. In one case I had a manger throw well over $100,000 dollars at a problem, and spend over one year trying to justify the bad decision. After he left the company, the new manager took a look at the alternatives, picked a new option, and within six weeks we had a working solution.
I don't fault the first manager for making the initial decision - he was given what looked like three viable alternatives. I fault him for the inability to see the mistake and change direction.
Bill
I worked with manager in the past that when given several options made a bad decision. But after the decision was made they refused to change the course of action and fix the problem. In one case I had a manger throw well over $100,000 dollars at a problem, and spend over one year trying to justify the bad decision. After he left the company, the new manager took a look at the alternatives, picked a new option, and within six weeks we had a working solution.
I don't fault the first manager for making the initial decision - he was given what looked like three viable alternatives. I fault him for the inability to see the mistake and change direction.
Bill
I think that Nicolo Machielelli gave you all you need to detect when sypmptoms indicate the problem exists . "On Flattery" probably is the best chapter in this case as it sets out the underlying qualities of both the leader and of good and bad managers (those reporting to the leader in the case).
Determining craft traits which may or may not be evident and have to taken in context of the manager's environment and leader is unhelpful in the long run.
Brian Catt
(i) Definition of a Team. A group of people who work for me and do what they're told.
(ii) Definition of a trouble maker, not a team player - somone who works for me and doesn't do what they're told)
Determining craft traits which may or may not be evident and have to taken in context of the manager's environment and leader is unhelpful in the long run.
Brian Catt
(i) Definition of a Team. A group of people who work for me and do what they're told.
(ii) Definition of a trouble maker, not a team player - somone who works for me and doesn't do what they're told)
I'm a bit late to this party, but i'll diverge it a bit by tossing in a couple of MY marks of a bad manager.
1) They're an idiot.
if you work for an idiot, nobody will ever get anything done.
2) more seriously, tho: prioritizing the needs of their overlings ahead of the needs of their underlings.
a manager is only as good as their charges. in a proper professional environment, my review and pay is not based on what i did for my boss... always bump them to the head of the support line, take a guy from my team to help an upper manager with their work while expecting that guy to meet his every-day goals, etc. basically i'm talking about giving up resources from my pool for their pool.
if my employees don't have the resources (time, equipment, pay, whatever) to do their jobs effectively, then their work will suffer and consequently mine.
1) They're an idiot.
if you work for an idiot, nobody will ever get anything done.
2) more seriously, tho: prioritizing the needs of their overlings ahead of the needs of their underlings.
a manager is only as good as their charges. in a proper professional environment, my review and pay is not based on what i did for my boss... always bump them to the head of the support line, take a guy from my team to help an upper manager with their work while expecting that guy to meet his every-day goals, etc. basically i'm talking about giving up resources from my pool for their pool.
if my employees don't have the resources (time, equipment, pay, whatever) to do their jobs effectively, then their work will suffer and consequently mine.
Looks like a good list. Although, I'd prefer to be positive and focus on a list of 10 Things That Make A Great Manager.
If anyone is looking for a good IT Manager, I'm available.
Adam
http://vorba.com
http://adamcox.net
If anyone is looking for a good IT Manager, I'm available.
Adam
http://vorba.com
http://adamcox.net
I do not fully agree with the blog post, it should have been called "10 signs that may mean an incompetent manager"
Here is what I have to say:
1. Bias against action:
Decisions taken without considering appropriate information or complete information at hand may lead to a disaster, maybe in a long-term if not short. Getting ones hands on approrpiate information may require time, the amount of time that David Ogilvey may categorize within beyond "today".
A decision may be a part of some competition that dictates urgency; in that case the decision maker should not even stick her fingers in to the competition without the availability of appropriate information, unless the decision maker has some sort of assurity for information retrieval at some appropriate and reasonable time in the future. Urgent decisions based on incomplete or inappropriate information may also lead other parties involved in the competition to damages, only if you give a dime about others.
2. Secrecy:
Being pushed for a challenge and being actually challenged are two entirely different phenomenons. An employee might believe she is challenging you based on the extent of her intellectual capabilities but that might actually not be a challenge for you that may safely be ignored; sercrecy is a better approach if you have that kind of elements within your team.
3. Over-sensitivity:
Totally cool, I can't stand "Wilting Violets".
4. Love of procedure:
Totally not in agreement! Let's break it down by "calling titles" and "rule book":
Calling by names may create a family oriented work environment that may lead to a conflict of interest for the Manager. When it comes to a "its you or the company" situation they then tend to care more about the employee rather than the company. Managers are paid to work for the company rather than for the employees, in a situation like that. In a family oriented work culture, one tends to be biased; there is always a better one and they are out there, give them a chance.
Policies and Procedures aka Rules are developed and implemented for a reason, they are synonymous to national Law. Laws are not made to be broken in any case unless otherwise stated exceptional by that specific Law. Rule enforcement is a(n) (unorthodox) method of discipline enforcement within an organization.
I would term keeping the "Rule Book" policy as the most important for organizational growth and for meeting its future objectives. This is the most difficult part of a Manager's job. Compliance with industry standards such as BS7799 require strict adherence to the "Rule Book", rule broken once may lead to a number that is within Auditor's major non-compliance list.
It is easy for hundred people to make a mess but sure not for the janitor, even worse for others who like to stay clean.
5. Preference for weak candidates:
Unless she admitted to have been threatened, it may not have been the case. Some managers prefer to hire junior candidates and build them from ground-up so they may grow as the manager or the organization see fit. Older candidates seem to have lesser tendency (or a higher resistence) to change, change as desired by the organization (or the rapidly advancing technologies?).
6. Focus on small tasks:
Agree! damn bureaucrats, shine in the eyes of your bosses.
7. Inability to hire former employees:
Maybe the former employees were not good enough for the standards the manager would like to set? or maybe the manager would like to give freshers a chance? Do agree to some extent though.
8. Allergy to deadlines:
Agree to that!
9. Addiction to consultants:
Lets define consultant first, excerpt from Wikipedia "A consultant is a professional who provides advice in a particular area of expertise.". That said, consultant is an expert that a manager would like to consultant realizing and admitting to a domestic deficiency. That expense may lead to a better and a sustainable product. If this is happening quite often then the manager is better off getting rid of the incompetent staff and sticking with the consultant. How bad is that? Frequent use of or addiction to anything may lead to undesired results. Addiction is bad m'kay.
10. Long hours:
Very true! They show up right before the bosses arrive or stay until they leave. Productivity and efficiency needs to be measured quantitatively and qualitatively rather than on the look-and-feel. WYSINWYG.
Here is what I have to say:
1. Bias against action:
Decisions taken without considering appropriate information or complete information at hand may lead to a disaster, maybe in a long-term if not short. Getting ones hands on approrpiate information may require time, the amount of time that David Ogilvey may categorize within beyond "today".
A decision may be a part of some competition that dictates urgency; in that case the decision maker should not even stick her fingers in to the competition without the availability of appropriate information, unless the decision maker has some sort of assurity for information retrieval at some appropriate and reasonable time in the future. Urgent decisions based on incomplete or inappropriate information may also lead other parties involved in the competition to damages, only if you give a dime about others.
2. Secrecy:
Being pushed for a challenge and being actually challenged are two entirely different phenomenons. An employee might believe she is challenging you based on the extent of her intellectual capabilities but that might actually not be a challenge for you that may safely be ignored; sercrecy is a better approach if you have that kind of elements within your team.
3. Over-sensitivity:
Totally cool, I can't stand "Wilting Violets".
4. Love of procedure:
Totally not in agreement! Let's break it down by "calling titles" and "rule book":
Calling by names may create a family oriented work environment that may lead to a conflict of interest for the Manager. When it comes to a "its you or the company" situation they then tend to care more about the employee rather than the company. Managers are paid to work for the company rather than for the employees, in a situation like that. In a family oriented work culture, one tends to be biased; there is always a better one and they are out there, give them a chance.
Policies and Procedures aka Rules are developed and implemented for a reason, they are synonymous to national Law. Laws are not made to be broken in any case unless otherwise stated exceptional by that specific Law. Rule enforcement is a(n) (unorthodox) method of discipline enforcement within an organization.
I would term keeping the "Rule Book" policy as the most important for organizational growth and for meeting its future objectives. This is the most difficult part of a Manager's job. Compliance with industry standards such as BS7799 require strict adherence to the "Rule Book", rule broken once may lead to a number that is within Auditor's major non-compliance list.
It is easy for hundred people to make a mess but sure not for the janitor, even worse for others who like to stay clean.
5. Preference for weak candidates:
Unless she admitted to have been threatened, it may not have been the case. Some managers prefer to hire junior candidates and build them from ground-up so they may grow as the manager or the organization see fit. Older candidates seem to have lesser tendency (or a higher resistence) to change, change as desired by the organization (or the rapidly advancing technologies?).
6. Focus on small tasks:
Agree! damn bureaucrats, shine in the eyes of your bosses.
7. Inability to hire former employees:
Maybe the former employees were not good enough for the standards the manager would like to set? or maybe the manager would like to give freshers a chance? Do agree to some extent though.
8. Allergy to deadlines:
Agree to that!
9. Addiction to consultants:
Lets define consultant first, excerpt from Wikipedia "A consultant is a professional who provides advice in a particular area of expertise.". That said, consultant is an expert that a manager would like to consultant realizing and admitting to a domestic deficiency. That expense may lead to a better and a sustainable product. If this is happening quite often then the manager is better off getting rid of the incompetent staff and sticking with the consultant. How bad is that? Frequent use of or addiction to anything may lead to undesired results. Addiction is bad m'kay.
10. Long hours:
Very true! They show up right before the bosses arrive or stay until they leave. Productivity and efficiency needs to be measured quantitatively and qualitatively rather than on the look-and-feel. WYSINWYG.
Amazingly true, can not agree with you more.
If i had to add one more thing, it would be the Threats that managers make, for e.g "if i am going to be badly rated on this performance, so will you" amf the autocratic management traits which follow through
If i had to add one more thing, it would be the Threats that managers make, for e.g "if i am going to be badly rated on this performance, so will you" amf the autocratic management traits which follow through
focusing so much on the one product and inability to attempt understanding others... managaers out for clapping monkeys that could give a flying crap about good service
a manager focusing on call avoidance as a productive thing,
a manager that tries to make sure to cut corners that hurts consumers, employers, or other partnerships for the almighty dollar
a manager that tries to make sure to cut corners that hurts consumers, employers, or other partnerships for the almighty dollar
a manager with complete disregard for a person's situation
seriously i could make this list looooooong...
for instance, a manager that has an employee they use for sexual favors instead of doing his job
a manager that has more kiss ass skills than listening skills
a manager that is in their position only because they look good, are supporters of fanatical imbeciles, or are in the family
for instance, a manager that has an employee they use for sexual favors instead of doing his job
a manager that has more kiss ass skills than listening skills
a manager that is in their position only because they look good, are supporters of fanatical imbeciles, or are in the family
I think it was from John Cook's blog: hit and run managers. No input or oversight for a couple weeks at a time then fly in for an afternoon and micromanage a very small part of the project. You're left still with no clue what you should work on for the next two weeks but at least the shade of blue on that button on that form is just right.
Another one I've grown to hate: those that can't do themselves but insist they can come up with better estimates than you. As it "How long will it take you to build a system to do X". 3 weeks. "Oh but is is simple. Can you demo it to me tomorrow and we'll see where we need to go from there". Argh.
Another one I've grown to hate: those that can't do themselves but insist they can come up with better estimates than you. As it "How long will it take you to build a system to do X". 3 weeks. "Oh but is is simple. Can you demo it to me tomorrow and we'll see where we need to go from there". Argh.
- Keyboard Shortcuts:
- Prev
- Next
- Toggle
