IT Employment

Ask something
Discussion Locked

how Technical an IT manager should be ?

0 helpful
165 replies

by asmaklad

Closed to new repliesThis discussion is closed. It stays readable, but it takes no new replies.

one Question I have about IT managers:

How technical they should be .

do they have to know only the basics?
or should they be very knowlogable about their teams tasks?
should he be involved in daily activities and how deep ?
deep enough todo it on his own ?
should he provide Technical Guidance to his staff, or just know in concept what they are doing?

165 replies

by jamesrl

You don't hire a manager to do a technical job, you hire them to manage people, budgets and tasks. Managing is not doing.

If you are building a new department or have understrained or under skilled staff, thats when you need a manager who can teach their skills to staff.

But when you have competant staff the manager should be technical enough to be able to ask the right probing questions to ensure that things are being done right, but doesn't have to be able to do the job themselves, though they should be smart enough to be able to do the job if they received the right training.

Last year I managed three groups of staff, each with about 10 people including one manager. In order to give our managers broader job experience, we hada rotation where a Unix project leader was given the chance to be the manager for Desktop support, and the manager of the Unix technical group traded places with the manager of the NT technical group. The latter switch was done because the managers were essentially leading their staff by the nose through projects and decisions, instead of relying on their staff for good information and decisions. By switching places we took them out of their techical comfort zone and forced them to be real managers.

Managers need to be able to develop staff with expertise and involve them in decision making. To do this well they need some experience in a technical environment but not necessarily in the same environment that they will manage. They have staff to keep current in technology.

Managers have to marry the technology stuff with business and that doesn't require the same level of expertise as the "doing" staff.

James Linn

by pnmiller

Question, When you wrote:

"But when you have competant staff the manager should be technical enough to be able to ask the right probing questions to ensure that things are being done right,"

How would you know your staff is competant?
How doyou know the right probing questions?
What do you define as enough?

A Middle manager has to know about the area they are managing. They have to be able to do the job, or they can't answer the question of compentancy or ask the probing questions.

Your definition works well for a Senior manager - they do not need to know the nitty-gritty details. A Mid Manager needs to know how in order to really develop the staff, define correct budgets etc.

A manager that can do the technical job and manage is rare indeed and worth their weight in gold. Throughout my career - those are the managers I remember with great respect. Those are the managers whose departments succeeded because of them - not in spite of them.

by wayne

Let's just face it.. if you don't understand the laymans perspective(at least) of the technology surrounding you, you can't manage diddley in this business. I don't care how good your "people skills"!

When you have to find out those 'specs' or decide the most efficent way to expand your toplogy, you had better be as good as those you surround yourself with.

There's nothing more frustrating than taking a careful, thorough proposal to an MIS/IT manager that doesn't understand the first thing about the technical end of their possition and having them sit there looking at you like you're from mars as you 'try' to explain it in terms they can grasp.

If you're not technologically aware of your environment and keeping abreast of changes in technology over all (this means understanding it too!) then you DO NOT have the tool set required to manage (middle, lower, semior, any level)in an MIS/IT position.

by spyy

Managers should know the basics of what they are managing. They should be people who had a background in technology and worked their way up to a management position.
There are way too many overpayed, clueless project managers out there who mismanage technical projects and then expect Techies to pull miracles in order to clean up the mess.

by shanghai sam

Well James I think you are right, but answering the discussions question, I have to say that it depends. Before saying that it depends on I'll say what are the elements of an IT Manager. I think that there are two variables:1- Technical abilities ?2- Management abilities. And I believe if a person sets his mind to develop one of those factors, it will probably be on the cost of the other one. So let?s say that X has 40% Technical abilities and 60% Management and Y has 80% management 20% Tech. They are both managers with technical background, but the questions is not which to choose?. It depends on what your company needs. If you are understaffed, I guess you?ll need X coz he might be rolling up his selves. The more structured the company is the less technical they should to an extent!.

James?, can a (computer literate) financial manager run the IT dept.? I surely run my own finance at home, can I run the financial dept?.

by shanghai sam

Through out the whole of your e-mail you have continually contradicted yourself (a sign of a true manager) you state that a manager does not have to be technically minded to manage technical people and yet they should have enough knowledge to ask probing questions, what is the point in asking probing questions if the manager does not understand the answer? We have been given a manager who has no technical abilities at all and he is supposed to be good at man managment, he fails on both accounts. If he asks us to perform tecnical tasks or if he questions us he does not understand what is either urgent or needs to be done, he does not understand why we are doing the tasks and he is more interested that we perform petty admin tasks then perform are true job of taking care of the daily running of mission critical systems. He is nothing more than a gloryfied receptionist who even manages to fail at doing this properly. He was recently involved in a system upgrade to one of our servers, he did not bother to consult us on any of the aspects of the move (and if had off then he would have listened to us and then still done his own thing as per usual (mainly because not being technical he does not understand our responses)and hence it was a total bulls up) we are still trying to pick up the pieces. So as far as you saying that a manager does not have to be technical, that is the gravest of errors any one can make. Managers should be made up of people who work their way up and gain theneeded skills and experience from their past exploits as man management can easily be picked up but technical knowledge is something that has to be gained through use/trial and error. So basically what i am saying is pull your head out from up your arse and look at the real world for a change and not at the world as a manager in dream land!!!!!!!!!

by jj5772

I believe IT managers should have deep and extensive experience in technical matters for he handles and approves IT operation. His experience and knowledge would validate his staff/team reasoning in implementation matters. But he should also know management principles to direct people.

by kwf777

I have been involved in projects that have been very successful involving both a manager who was very technical and one who was not. They were both great, but it had more to do with soft skills than it did with technical skills. It was their ability to lead and motivate the team.

by myakus

I've worked in places where technical management was not technical. The message it sends to your technical people is that they should find work elsewhere - they're not going to be promoted beyond the technical level. How many managers make less than their reports? Not very many. Do I want to work for someone whose main skill is filling out expense vouchers and performance reviews? Absolutely not. Having non-technical managers is a disincentive to your technical people to stay. Two track systems are a dead end.

by dmckeag

I do not think you have to be an expert in every field of the IT world. However, our
IT managers have a poor understanding. The
communications breaks down trying to
"educate" these high dollar managers. Evenually the techs give up communicatingsaying "what is the use" and even when we
see cost saving measures.
Lack of knowledge leads to lack of communications!

by rjw_mpwr

i read from somewhere that at microsoft, in order to be a manager, you have to be the best programmer. how can you hire a guy who does not even know what is tcp/ip to manager a IT Operations? i think an it manager should have broad knowledge of things, maybe not the nitty gritty implmentation details. so, i consider the staff under an it manager is a vertical expert, where the it manager itself is a horizontal expert.

by spost

If he doesn't know the teams tasks then how can he be called a manager. The first thing a true manager must know is every phase of the job to be done. That should have been the reason he was chosen for the job in the first place.

by dcavanaugh

I'll describe this in terms of baseball. There are "teaching" managers, who build the skills of their team. Not to win the World Series, but to become competitive. Some organizations need this kind of manager. The "technical" IT manager builds ateam, raises skill levels, shows up as a pinch-hitter every so often.

When it's time to win the World Series, a different approach is needed. This is the "pure" manager, whose team is already well-trained in the fundamentals. This manager does not need to hit or pitch, just run the team and understand how to utilize his star players to win the game.

For a small IT department, you generally need the first type of manager. Once the group gets large, it's time for the second example.

IMHO when employers fill a position (management or otherwise), they generally want whatever they didn't have before.

by hieb

That would depend upon the size of the organization or the extent of the technology required for that organization. Smaller organizations may not have the budget for the know it all. However, it might be a good idea to hire someone that understands enough technology to install some degree of project management to oversee the major projects. Or at least keep the vendors honest.

by xxx123

The tech manager has to know if his/her people know what they are doing. How do you know if the estimates your people are giving you are any good? How do you know if the choices they're making will serve you well in the future? How do you make hiring judgements?

Having said that, there's an enormous amount of non-tech stuff every manager has to do and it's pretty rare to find one person who can do it all.

by netscot

No I don't think you have to be the technical expert to manage technology. I do think you need to have enough experience to know what the technology will deliver. Re: getting a job? how often have you been hired by someone who knows what you know? In most cases you are hired because they don't have anyone who can do what you do. My concern is that too many managers have come from the technical line and don't have enough management experience.

by mikkawi

I agree that management is management, I also believe that knowing all the technical background doesn't make you a good manager either. So Ideally the best IT Manager would be both, a good manager plus the best technical background, because without the proper technical background, the "Manager" can't be an "IT Manager".

by dburr

YOU CAN'T MANAGE SURGEONS UNLES YOU ARE A SURGEON, YOU CAN NOT BE THE CAPTAIN OF A SHIP UNLESS YOU HAVE GONE THROUGH THE RANKS, YOU CAN NOT MANAGE A MANUFACTURING FACILITY UNLESS YOU KNOW MANUFACTURING, YOU CAN NOT MANAGE CPA'S UNLESS YOU ARE A CPA,YOU CAN NOT MANAGE REAL ESTATE AGENTS UNLESS YOU ARE A LICENSED BROKER. AND YOU CAN NOT MANAGE TECHNOLOGY UNLESS YOU UNDERSTAND AND KNOW THE TECHNOLOGY. (NOTE: THIS DOES NOT MEAN YOU HAVE TOKNOW MORE THAN EVERY ONE ELSE, JUST KNOW AND UNDERSTAND )

by shanghai sam

First, let me say I agree with James Linn. Ideally, however, it would be preferable to have an excellent IT background. But finding that one in a million ?techy? with the innate managerial skills is not an easy task. Consequently, way too often the manager of a tech group must be trained to understand AND utilize the skills of management. Techies are, by nature, ?hands on?, ?get to the guts? people and being a good manager is a very difficult task for most. However, once in a great while,you will find that individual that has both the technical knowledge and the managerial skills. When that happens, concider yourself extremely lucky. In the mean time, one with the innate skills and is technically minded, who can learn the ins and outs of the group is your best bet.

by mindbump

As I read through this rather large and active discussion I detect one thing. There are three camps: those who believe only techical people can lead other technical people; those who believe non-technical folks can get the job done; and those who are trying to stay diplomatically in the middle.

All I have to say is that I believe there is an obvious extreme bias in the tech-tech proponents that only a member of one's kind can manage that kind. So only a programmer can manage programmers, a CPA can manage accountants, a superintendent can manage floor moppers. No one could ever know enough to judge and manage something different.

My conclusion is there are a lot of egos afraid of being bruised because they dislike or fear having a non-technical member enter their management team and break into their private club. We don't have private clubs, just one organizational team. Everyone needs to be reminded that we work for the good of our organizations. That's why we get paid so well.

by epepke

If the goal is to produce good solutions on time, a manager should have significant experience in the trenches. It is not necessary to know every detail, but it is necessary to have experience in patterns of what can go wrong, be delayed, etc. This is not taught in any managerial school I know of.

If the goal is, as it is in most organizations, to have someone who just Does the Managerial Thing, all you need is an MBA, a shiny smile, and an ability to play golf.

by jamesrl

Its not experience in the trenches thats being asked about, its whether that experience is relevant to the group that they are managing that is the question the original poster wanted answered.

I've worked for 3 person consulting companies and Fortune 100 giants and many companies in between. There are very few opportunities for MBAs to walk in and take a job at the management level. Managers who get an MBA on their own time however, do pretty well.

The experience of troubleshooting problems, implementing new systems or keeping customers happy is fairly transferrable if you have the right person. I know of good staff who have fixed networks, severs and desktop in their careers and been good at all of them. If you want to hire a manager of say, Unix Tech support, you should find a manager that understands tech support processes, troubleshooting, configuration management etc, but if they don't have that experience on Unix, its still appropriate to hire them, if they can learn whatthey need to know. And they don't need to know as much as a super tech to manage super techs.

Managers manage people, budgets and high level tasks. If they have to roll up their sleeves their group isn't resourced properly(or there are too many managers and not enough staff). Managers need to understand what their groups do, but don't have to be the resident expert.

And I am lousy at golf, and rarely smile.

James

by epepke

I was a manager for about six years, but not any more, so you're right, technically. It seems to me I did a pretty good job when I was a manager. We achieved some minor fame with a large scientific visualization package that was used at more than 100 research sites.

Now I'm somewhere else, working for a manger who used to be the QA point person, who is in turn working for the IT VP who is very technical. It seems to me that this works very well.

You may be right about what managers do or are supposed to do. However, the status quo isn't all it's cracked up to be. Project failure rates are quoted between 30% and 80%, and it is hard for me to believe that they are so bad. I can't point to a single project that we've had that has really failed. About 5% of the projects at the most are abandoned, largely due to factors outside project management, but let's be conservative and call them failures.

I like a 95% success rate more than a 20%-70% success rate. I like being ableto crank out products regularly that save the company an order of magnitude or two more than the development costs.

This is simply a reflection of my personal taste. I like to see projects succeed nearly all of the time; all of the time would bebetter. It may be a minority opinion, and looking at the output of a lot of places, it seems to me that it probably is. It also may be an opinion that marks me as non-managerial.

But, what can I say? The very first project I worked on (a bisynchronous communication package emulating the HASP system, both server and client) only had one defect that was found in the field. I was hooked.

People have tried to convince me I'm wrong. But then again, maybe there's a reason that NASDAQ is sucking pond scum.

But what do I know? I'm not a manger any more.

by shanghai sam

Besides the fact that you are lousy at golf and you don't smile..you don't get IT either.
For years the only response to this question of technical ability required for management has been answered in just the manner proffered here. Managers say itdoesn't matter and Technicians say it does.
After 6 years of military service (USMC) and 3 years of college at night I started my career as a Programmer. 20 Years latter I am Director of Information Technology not because I have a degree but because I have vision. I have vision because I have worked from mom & pop shops to Fortune 100 consulting companies DOING all the work.
Management skills are the most easily taught which is why MBA grads are had so easily and are trusted so greatly by other MBA's. The magic is to get a technician to sit still long enough to teach it to him.
I say this because the end result is so beneficial that even died in the wool MBA's can see value in:
1. The Mgr. discusses the work, annotates the technical and business risk, supplies real insight not just words of encouragement.
2. When the server is down, the time for training is over, get in, get it done, get out!
3. Balance the two and never loose sight of whom is leading, not just managing (managing to get by!)
Fulfillment in dealing with technical issues, people and business will also probably help your golf game....IT has mine. :-)

by shanghai sam

James, what you're saying is absolutely true to a point. I believe the BEST IT managers are those who have been able to make the transition from technician to management. Not many technicians can do that and THAT is what limits their careers. In fact, you must be willing to put away your holster with your screw driver to become more strategic, and have as much a love of administration as you did figuring out what makes technology tick.
HOWEVER, you must have an understanding of the technology and have been in the trenches at some point in your career to be able to reasonably provide a strategy that covers all the bases. At least have a feel for who is technically competent and who is not. I'm not saying you have to know how to installa router or switch, but you had better know what they are and where to get the best information from regarding costs, support issues, technology trends, standards organizations etc.in order to provide a certain amount of guidance.

KEY if you don't know the answers, know where to get them from.

Example 0-technical manager... my company recently hired a new technical services director who has a manufacturing background, somehow wound up managing the acquisition portion of a large bank's internal support function and now is responsible for our entire support organization. One of his ideas was to have a newly constructed building set up with brand new workstations and on move day just have everyone move to their new equipment in the new building.

Sounds lovely, however, anyone who has been in the network or desktop support arena knows that would be disasterous unles you have a highly standardized environment like a law firm with cookie cutter deployment (something that a multi-discipline, creative development organization likely does not have). Additionally, creating the new site while maintaining the existing one would require almost double the manpo

by pwilhelm

I'm a manager that has come up through the techie ranks during the past 16 years. I have two Certifications and a wealth of technical experience but I think my passion is for the people is much more important. Computers are, after all, a simply a tool to help people get their work done.

What is going on?
All too often technical staff are shut out of corporate IT decisions because they can't or won't play the management game. Like it or not those who hold the power/$ in a company hang on to it carefully and they won't let it go to someone who's mainly interested in perfecting .cgi scripts or the latest cool registry hack.

Solution?
Yes, a manager should have a solid general technical grasp as deep as possible but they need to have formal management training. What makes it a rare occurance is that they are opposing apptitudes and very different skill sets. It is not a natural occurrence but must be worked at.

Paul

by tejas_tt

IT Mgr need right background per goal. Need to then have core competence of reasoning, analyzing and questioning subordinates. More techies could gain more respect probably

by tony derosa

It is dificult to say the least, for one manager to meet all of the criteria required for technical management. Most sucessful operations I have been involved with use a management staff.

Director: Provide interface to business management and marketing. Oversees development projects at requirements and design levels. Requires Technical experience in releated areas, business/application knowledge, project management and personnel skills.

Project Manager: Collects and categorizes projectrequirements, creates and maintains project schedules and resource allocation. Requires project managament skills, business/application knowledge.

Project Leader (System Architect) : Analyzes requirements and produces design. implementation, and test plan documentation. Oversees technical staff and implementation. Often allocates as much as 50% of his time as project resource. Requirements current, active technical experience plus personnel and project management skills.

All three together provide a winning combination, however, this is generally the most expensive way to go and is usually only implemented in larger corporate environments.

by techrepublic member

An IT manager should have enough technical skills so as to understand do's and dont's of softwares his techies are working on. Even better if he was techie himself. This will surely help him interact with technical staff effectively and may help them solve their problems. The bottom line is; the more software knowledge he has, the better manager he will make.

by v_echeverry

The IT manager should (on the VERY least) have an understanding of what are O.S. routers switches and hubs. But most, rely heavily on their techies to gain their knowledge.

The must frustrating thing that happens often is a manager that wastes their technicians time by asking what everything is, instead of asking what the problem is and guidelines towards fixing it.

Proper IT managers should have in-depth knowledge, doesnt matter if its only one field of IT, only because they will adapt much easier to the other fields, rather than a manager that don't even know the difference between an application and an operating system.

but provably the worst managers are the ones that move over from another department that is under re-developement.They know that there is a need for some equipment and your deparment's budget is there, but instead they spend the IT budget on their original department, leaving the problem to become worse, and it is only when, every body that relies upon theIT System (which is just about every one)starts breathing down their necks, that they realize how urgent the problem was in the first time when you originally asked for that new printer, or lamp for the projector.

it IS indeed impossible to know it all, and do it all, but if there are some of us that do more than one thing at our departments, how come that they can't adapt?

by pep-inc

An IT manager needs to have a good basic understanding of the dept he/she is managing,
but this can be learned. What is more important is knowing what you don't know and what you do know. In that light, if a manager doesn't know the answer to a problem he/she needs to know how or where the answer can be accessed.

by microcat

IT managers should know at least enough to back up their technicans, and support upgrading requirments. After all its a very political society, joining managment.
Ive found in the past 10 yrs once a Snr Technician has moved into the role of Managerthat they lose the edge they once held. Understanding the requirements to do the job seem to dissapear, as if they were never in the field. Ive had the experience of Our manager being appointed, and having no understanding of our job, and because heonce was the company accountant, all progress at the cutting edge goes out to save the budget. Hence 2yrs after he's gone our company are 5 yrs behind our competitors, with no budgets yet in the forseeable future to catch up

by hip-man

In a nutshell this is IT.

It?s preferably better if the manager has learned along the way, or enough to be able to understand the question's answer(s) once that is found. Then know how/when to ask the follow up questions (as there is no such thing and a black and white answer in IT) and couple it with a vision to make the call of what the course of action NEEDS to be.

THEN be willing to push the discussion (by whatever path that may be; direct or indirect) with the IT manager?s superiors (who may be as prone to glassing over) to ensure that no domino effect wipes out stability due to the success of the current project under consideration. 2 rights often DO make a wrong and an ego has no place in this process when damage could end up measured on the Richter scale due to ?visionaries? at the maximum levels whipping themselves into a bad decision based on good intentions!

Be willing to do the research with your own people (and some outside "networking buddies" or "knowledgeable sources" to balance), then do what you are paid for and make it all work the best way you can under the circumstances!

by Member 24751753

Managemet is about command and leadership. If you have an in depth technical knowledge of the systems you are managing you will get in the way of the people that you hired to maintain them and you will loose sight of why you are there, which is to oversee the effective running of an IS department. To me, good management is allowing your staff to do their jobs and making sure that they are meeting their performance targets and you are meeting yours.

by patrickmiller

Not required, it is much better to have the technical people driving the machine. Managers are consumed by paperwork and politics and need to stay out of the way. A rudimentary understanding is fine otherwise a fully proficient tech manager just serves as an interuption and a bothersome back-seat driver.

by jasin

I have read all 16 replies and have to say that all virtually have good and relevant points. As previously both a manager and techie; I have experienced the Accounting influence, the non-IT manager influence and all of the political infighting for control of company turf. The bottom line is if you don?t have a strong MANAGER that understands the IT department, it Will be under-staffed, under-equipped, and constantly under the gun. Finally yet importantly, a truly good manager surrounds himself with Excellence (the required talent to do the job and lets them do it).

by wayne m.

Management must provide leadership or there is little point to management. A manager cannot merely create schedules, justify budgets, and then disappear and let his staff do their own things. A manager needs to constantly improve his staff and teach them new things.

It is impossible for any one individual to have fully detailed knwoledge on every technology and technique. Members of the technical staff will have detailed knowledge in different specific areas. The manager, however, needs to have a solid understanding of who knows what, what no one knows, and what new technologies and techniques are available. The manager also needs to understand technical details well enough to be able to plan how to bring new people up to speed.Yes, a manager needs to be technically knowledgeable, particularly the first level manager or supervisor. This does not mean doing the work, but teaching and ensuring the staff know how to do the work.

by treamer

Manage and Manager have slightly different meenings in the 'OL Thesauraus. A manager if more of a director of sorts, a steward if you will. To manage is more on the boss side.

Neither can be accomplished if you don't truly understand the technologies and the people you are working with. To truly be a respected technical manager, you must know or learn the skills that your employees posses. In order to understand this - take it down a level to a grocery store. How can a manager show someone exactly how to stock a shelf if they have never done it themselves. Not to mention - how is the employee expected to respect that manager knowing that they have no knowledge in the job they are being shown.

People MUST come first when you arein a managerial role, if you don't have the skills to understand what your people do, then you will never be a good Manager - you will only manage.

by jdow

In the corporate world, IMHO I believe that the manager/director/VP, CIO whatever, should have a solid understanding of technologies. How VPN, Wireless, and the such can help the business. Then work with the team to implement it. I have been in the corporate world a long time in IT, and I have yet to see anyone above the title of Manager ask for a detailed implementation plan. The purpose of management is to manage. While it is best for our management to have knowledge/experience with technology, if you have a good staff, it isnt absolutely neccessary. My two cents.

by invictuscole

Listen to my fellow Marine. Vision is the thing to be had by a successful manager. Breadth and depth of vision. Without a vision, a managed group fails.
Depth of vision involves all of those conventional management skills: balancing the bottomline, making the deadlines, the high levels tasks, the hob-nobbing, etc.
Breadth of vision in IT is where the technical knowledge/experience makes its mark. The projects are oft far-reaching and interface with several other ongoing projects. The IT manager must know these dynamics in order to manage the project(s) correctly.
Three years coaching a growing and respectful collegiate rugby program at a large university and six years of managing Marine intelligence field operations gave enough management experience for me to fill the IT Account Management position I am in now. Excellent stuff, if you ask me.
"Resourced properly?" Welcome to the TechSlump! Who is really resourced properly?
My technical and programming experience allows me to shield my programmers from putting out the piddly fires. I DO that. They have the extra time to concentrate on their assigned tasks. They see that, and they see that when we come in on Saturdays and Sundays to put a project to bed on time, I am there with them. I review code and test the product for them before it goes to QA. Why? Because, in an IT world like ours, that's what a manager does to be a leader.
Without leadership, what is a manager, really?

by leasure suit larry

Ever run a large computer Dept. And your boss is the corporate accountant , and just because he or she has a commmpuuter at home makes them the expert. Just try explaining a Unix or Win 2000 server to these people , their eyes just gloss over. And then comes the out of their mouth the question that comfirms ( THIS IDIOT IS TRULY CLUELESS).
Once again Non-computer people making computer Decisions.

by rschmid1

I am also an ex Marine,and a lone wolf in a manufacturing plant.. Im the IT manager/tech all rolled together. I've worked in environments where the manager had no clue, and where thier knowledge was greater than mine. I preferred the latter. Leadership by example is always the best method..

by shanghai sam

How much is enough? A project manager needs to be competent in the project management aspect of the job. Thoroughly competent and experienced. This in itself is sufficient to complete the job in-principle. However in-practice, a firm understanding of operational IT technology makes the PM an ITPM. After that, any experience in coding or program design is cream. However this doesn?t mean that a PM should code. If the PM is getting this close then it must be a small project or the PM isn't doing the job he or she was hired to do. A PM Plans, Schedules and measures. The PM advises, approves, removes administrative roadblocks and mentors but never does the job his or her team does. Have you ever watched a rowing team?

by rpineda

I dont' think we need the classic manager that we are takning about.

I don't need my Software Development Shop to be run by an acountant that have not read a book in the last 5 years. I don't want my Database group to be manage by a Finance MBA that the last think he did was stock analyis on access. I don't want my Harware Operations department to be run by Marketing specialist.

Traditional Manager DONT BELONG in IT, get it & get out.

I need managers that know what a Vic-20 is , thathave developed 10 accounts payables system & 5 pacmans. I want managers taht know what VGA stands for and what is the maximum trasfer speed of the USB 2.o specification. I want managers that have started using DB2, DBF 10 years ago and know how to install Oracle blind folded.

This area of the business world is changing at the speed of light, I want someone that can keep up. Someone that can talk to the troops at the same level , someone that really understands taht changing 1 feature means redeveloping half of the application. Someone that can undertand the artistic part of the software world.

If you have not been in the trenches of this ultradynamic world you can not CUT it, Go sale Soap bars ( they still are made the same way that 100 years ago )

And if you are a amanger & you dont like it. Go play Golf, I'll go play Starcraft.

Rod Pineda

by shanghai sam

I read, with wry amusement, your requirements for a manager you will work for. Nowhere did I see such little niceties as conflict management, project management skills, negotiating skills, customer relations, counseling/coaching skills, etc.

Itseems you are one of many techies who believe that those skills are unimportant, and I suggest you are wrong.

A good manager is an umbrella who keeps crap you don't even know about from interfering with your job. He understands what you do, certainly, but he has larger roles than that. He is the guy who takes all the heat and manages the expectations of the people you 'really' work for...the users. He is the guy who, by working with the business groups, keeps scope creep from spiralling wildly out of control. He is the guy who goes to war with senior management to get the new resources...or to get you that company paid offsite training you need to improve your skillsets. He is the guy who got you that last raise when budget cuts were flying around the company. He is the guy who got you that week off when your kid was sick and you were out of vacation time. He is NOT the guy holding the screwdriver for you while you swap a board.

I grew up in the field, supporting systems, performing systems integration, development, etc. I am now a technology manager and trust me, without those skills, and the time to develop them, I would be a lousy one. Managers need to have enough of a technical background to understand issues, and to lead dedicated techies in the performance of their duties, but I do not believe they should have to know every detailed aspect of every techie's job on their team. Frankly, if thery are good managers, they are too damned busy taking care ofyou to do that.

Yes, you'll find lousy managers on the golf course...but the good ones got to work before you did today...and they will be there when you go home.

by shanghai sam

I have been in a situations where I had to manage a project and work the project as a techie. Those projects nearly killed me. The project would get done on time but something would usually go lacking. Overall I was not able to give my customer/client the value they deserved by wearing most of the hats in the project. To bring sanity to my situation, I had to make a decision. If I was going to do the work I couldn't manage the project. If I was going to manage the project I needed to develop, motivate and direct my team to our goal. The lesson I learned, get their buy-in, give direction, and nudge when neccesary. Occasionally I would get involved with a the technical aspect of a problem but generally I would push back on my people toresearch, then supply me with options and we would make a decision based on the needs of the project. I found out that my people grew technically and stayed motivated and I was able to give our customer/client value for the service we provided. Technical ability is good to have but having a good team is better.

by jamesrl

The hard way of course.

Sometimes its necessary in small project due to resource constraints to have technical leads and project managers be the same person, but its not ideal. You have described the ideal.

I expect the people I manage to come to me not with a problem but with a sitaution, a few alternatives and a proposal. I then evaluate the business impacts and risks and we all agree on the decision.

James

by fatwhitedog

Managers aren't born. They're created. And usually the managers are the buttkissers in the organization.

An IT manager needs to know the technology as well as have the "soft skills" to succeed. If a manger hasn't done the work, they always need to be educated about what it is that the tech people are doing. I find it strange that Developers are always promoted to managerial positions over tech support people. And vice versus.
If you can't walk the talk...you don't deserve the big pay for managing systems and people. I agree that if a manger doesn't know technology through the ranks, they can't base the competency of staff on solid foundations. (besides, most managers toe the corporate line regarding employee reviews and it's still a game of politics, more so now that the "business" side of IT has become a focus in corporate america).

by fitzroy

In my opinion and IT Manager should be a guy/girl that was a techie prior to becoming manager. This is so that they will fully understand the kind of pressure that IT personnel work under. A person can always learn managerial techniques but cannotreadily learn and understand what goes on in the IT World. Thier experiences as a fellow techno geek will aid them in a new role a manager.

by a. a. nakamura

You must be the one in a million I referred to in my post. Yes, you are right. Vision is a most important ingredient. And it does come with life experience, and usually creates an excellent manager, eventually.

by jamesrl

Ok lets break it down:

How would you know your staff is competant: When their technical decisions are consistently good. When their customers are happy. When their peers respect them.

How do you know the right probing questions?

I don't have to be a Unix guru to know that if the person whose job it is to spec new Unix servers is doing a good job. I simply find out how well the servers the person spec'd perform in real life. And that is things like availability, stability, CPU utilization, disk usage etc.

My organization measures all staff on a set of mutually agreed objectives. Both the management and the staff have a stake in making sure that objectives are met. Good objectives are statistically measureable: reduce costs byX, improve performance by Y, increase availability by Z. You develop staff by helping them achieve those objectives.

Again I say alot of the skills are transferrable. If a manager can ask questions about an NT server, they should be able to learnhow to ask questions about a UNIX server. They don't have to know how to install the OS to know whether or not the server is sized properly. They find some measures and use them.

I have seen too many situations where technical managers make all the technical decisions for their staff and it smothers the staff and does not help them develop.

In project management, they strive for project managers who could manage any project, be it building a bridge or a peice of software. If managing is controlling budgets, resources and schedules, than this in theory is possible. While I think its less realistic in management, I think IT managers should be able to manage outside of their technical dispipline if you hire the right ones.

James Linn

by dburr

"And that is things like availability, stability, CPU utilization, disk usage etc."

Please....
We work in such a fast moving industry that ANY non-technical manager would be cannon fodder for those he managed. Talk about pulling the wool over. I have seen it happen over and over again ( does the word DOTCOM mean anything to you ).

by mindbump

It sounds like some participants are very paranoid or worried about the capabilities of their employees. If you don't trust your staff enough to have a non-technical manager, then your staff is obviously not melding with the company.

Their job isto do their responsibilities plus do so in a way that shows good will and belief in the company's vision and mission.

I have seen a staff that didn't meet that criteria. They tried pulling their wool over our eyes constantly and created 3 distinct mafias/teams to block management from reaching the systems.

The best solution: I hired consultants on-site for 4 weeks then restructured the department. The power of a pink slip should help your non-technical manager when you work in shark infested waters.

by jeanfarmer

Why shouldn't they be required to be technical? If they are supervising technical people, they have to understand what they do otherwise how can they truly evaluate if someone is any good? Plus, just because someone is technical does that mean they shouldn't rise to management level? Hiring non-technical people to supervise technical people is a sure-fire way to piss-off your technical staff. The IT Manager may not be an expert in every dicipline he/she manages, but they should come from a technical background.

by moiz_aziz

IT Manager are the Backbone.. They should how to handle the team in any case of of situation. IT Manager should be a sound Techie guy with sound knowledge of Technology he/she is using in the organization. This is required for the guidance. Also when a IT Manager Plans to upgrade the Technology or implement the new technology for the company he should also be in the position to explain to management how will it help the organization when upgrading the technology in Layman as wel as Technical terms...

And after all the IT Manager is nothing but one step ahead of the S.E. So he is by default a Techie...

by jamesrl

If you read the thread from the beginning, the basic question was: does the manager have to be able to do the job of the people he/she manages. My argument is that if you have good it technical skills, and good management skills you should be able to work outside your technical discipline as a manager. And don't you prove my point in your own experience?

In other posts i certainly did point out that MBAs don't make instant managers. I don't have one, might get one now that I have enough workexperience (close to yours) to make it relevant.

If you say I have no vision, then I'd better quit, because its part of my job to define the IT vision for hundreds of people.

I never said that you shouldn't move technicians/programmers up fromthe ranks. Thats where I come from. But I also learned that I could keep myself fresh and motivated by not limiting myself to one particular discipline. I have sold systems, been a DBA, a desktop publisher, a desktop technician, security specialist,project manager, people manager and QA manager. I have had some wonderful managers who i worked for who were came from other IT groups and did a great job of managing, because they had a good grasp on the fundamentals of IT.

Your numbered points are dead on.

So I am not quite sure why you are so anxious to disagree with me.

James

by epepke

about being presumptuous. Or, for that matter, about inventing a straw man to knock it down, as you did that with respect to my message.

by xtrout

As a person who has gone from "techie" to manager I would have to say that yes, the manager should have technical skills. As a techie who is now a manager, I find that the management skills are easier to learn than the techie. Both post challenges. I would say the hardest thing is to find techies that actually want to learn the management skills.

by shanghai sam

I have had many managers of varying technical backgrounds and now that I am one I have found that it is essential to know the issues and products your technicians face. This requires that as a manager you have to keep up to date with your staff. Theonly thing worse then a manager who knows nothing is a manager who knows outdated information. I have read all the arguements here about a good IT manager can manage no matter what the project is, well that is a false statement. A good manager can always manage people effectively no matter the situation but an IT manager is often the last resource a technicain has before he looks the customer in the eye and says "I don't know." The manager has to be able to understand what the technician has done and the best way to proceed from that point. An IT manager is usually the one to propose updates to the technology in the workplace. How can an unskilled manager propose new technology when they don't know what works and what doesn't from personalexperience. I have been part of too many projects that were started by a manager that had no idea what he was doing that ended up in a huge waste of time, money, and resources. I will never do that to my technicians.

by lee44

You make a good point. If my manager sees that we have a high workload or a short deadline. He will jump into the fray, whenever he does it defintely raises the motivation of the team to get the job done.

by kloran-[thrawn34

I think it would be best if the managers and those that they manage, should be pretty well informed. Because the time could arise when the manager would have to do the job himself, you can always rely on those that they are in charge of managing.

by jdunn

In my experience, IT managers who are not technical in nature, and do not understand how IT systems work, make inappropriate and uninformed decisions. They also tend to have unrealistic expectations about timelines and exactly what can and cannot be done and when. At the same time they also need to know how to Manage. I've know IT managers who couldn't manage and also those who were not technical. Both were disasters looking for a place to happen.

by jbwconsulting

I've been an IT manager, Director, and consultant, and before that I worked in a variety of IT positions reporting to both technical and non-technical people.

The downside of a non-technical manager is that, in the best case, s/he isn't really tuned to the issues and can't appreciate the pros and cons of a difficult situation. But--as James Linn points out--the non-teckie stays above the fray and has greater credibility above, on the business side. This works in stable situations where there is a strong, well managed IT group with good lead people.

It doesn't work in situations where a group is changing, or the technology is changing. Ideally, the teckie manager would have strong basic management skills, but it is difficult to comeby managers with strong skills on both sides. I haven't seen too many. My advice to businesses is that if you need, or have an IT manager with strong technical skills, slot a CIO type in above them, even on a part-time basis.

by admin

Why not stick to discussing the issues rather than slamming the person? Actually, your experience section is valuable in the thread. Why lose your cool and logic by trying to slam someone for not being happy? This is not the mark of a true leader- attempting to cut down others with details (speculated) unrelevant to the discussion.

by admin

In my experience on both sides in many situations, there is an order of selection in this. Here is my list with numeral 1 being most desireable:

1) Strong Managerial and Strong Technical Skills
2) Strong Managerial and Some Technical Skills (Possesses Ability to Improve Tech Skills)
3) Strong Technical and Some Managerial Skills (Possesses Ability to Improve Managerial Skills)

If none of the above: Keep Looking!

I would also add that a good manager is ALWAYS looking for someone too replace themselves. This starts with hiring and then continues through grooming people to improve their skills in these areas.
If you do have a SUPER managerial candidate without skills, suggest some learning paths or books to read. If someone can come back in a week with real knowledge, I would consider them. Same goes for the tech person who wants to become a manager, suggest some learning opportunites and see if they follow up and are capable of learning. Quick learning ability and flexibility, if demonstrated, is a great indicator of future success if you can't get the person with both.

by shanghai sam

I think that management is management, regardless of the field. The main resource to be managed is people. The crew I supervise is valuable to me and I treat them like it. But I am the boss and they treat me like it. I can't do their individual jobsbetter than any of them but when I look at their jobs, I see the project to be accomplished. The main difference is in this perception. I have to remain current but also distanced so my vision of the project as a whole is unobstructed. I'm a tech who is not an IT supervisor but a kind of crossover position.

by dbertsche

I would expect an IT manager to be technical enough to be able to perform a large number of tasks and to also undertand what his subordinates are telling him. Unfortunately a new manager may be up to speed but quickly fall behind with new technology coming into play since as a manager he will likely be devoting more time to management tasks and less time to technical topics.

I believe those managers who were at the top technically will probably be able to keep up the changes. Those managers who were not at the top technically will probably have a harder time keeping up with changes and therefor be more dependent on their subordinates.

by thadd

I have been in the arena for 20 years (net mgmt, db programmer, chief of computer svcs, etc.) and have found that the moment one gets to the managment role, the technical skills not only diminish, they are not needed in the day-to-day events.
We hire folks to do the things we used to do and although I don't remember how to write a SQL program, I have the concepts. Although I don't remember much about Unix, I can discuss & understand when a techie talks to me.
At a minimum, a clear understanding of the technical concepts are required to adequately manage an IT group... whether first line supervisor or CIO.
The bottom line, to try to maintain technical skills in all areas of IT while plotting strategy, vision, budgets, & meeting with upper mgmt, staff, vendors, etc. would be biting off more than I could chew.
There just isn't enough time in the day!

by epepke

and focusing on the details. While this is nice, it isn't the kind of technical knowledge that an IT manager needs.

An IT manager needs to know about the technical environment. They have to know what is possible, how it gets done, how it gets estimated (and how far off it is), how pressure affects the environment, etc.

An IT manager doesn't need to know the exact syntax for making a hash of references to hashes, but he and/or she should know that programming is different from making a cheeseburger! This is the knowledge that nearly all managers who have not worked in the trenches utterly, defiantly, and proudly lack.

You can be a decent IT manager if you have forgotten or haven't kept up with the details, but you can't be a decent IT manager with just management training or education.

Managers are trained to produce people who make cheesebergers, shock absorbers, cars, and buildings, produce paychecks, do taxes, etc. where a substantial portion of what is done is routine and falls into nice, linear models. Running an IT department is more like running a hospital than it is like running a factory.

Putting a classically trained manager in charge of an IT department is like trying to put Alan Levitt (of Levittown)in charge of designing the Statue of Liberty.

by shanghai sam

The point that I made is that detailed technical knowledge isn't necessary, but having vision and strategy in managing the IT group is AND that a knowledge of IT concepts is a must.
While I had detailed background, it isn't possible to maintain that level & manage. Since the original question pertained to a manager & technical skills... I think it's clear - a manager needs to manage & hire technical skills.

by admin

Good point. Product Management is generally not appropriate in IT settings. We usually fit more neatly into the service arena, similar to hospitals etc.
I am still amazed that this is not general knowledge. Bad Management, Marketing, Sales etc. etc. etc. are often the result of people failing to understand the importance of this.
Thanks for pointing it out ;>

by srichards

As an IT Manager and having extensive experience I can honestly say it makes things much easier. When I was one of the employees I can say that having a manager who knew what he was talking about made it much easier for me to do my job. When working for a manager or an executive (like a CTO) who does not know technology, (ie: Routers, Servers, Switches, Applications and ect.) Makes it very difficult to get a point across. Lack of understanding and not having the experience in this area is a severe weakness when it comes to effective management.

by rob_mancini

As they say... The captain of the ship needs to know every bolt in the boiler room. Usually, that's true.

Stated another way, if you have not come up through the trenches enough to know your turf, you aren't qualified to lead at a high level.Is there an exception? Sure. Only one.

If the requirements of the I.S. Manager aren't very technical and ONLY amount to basic stuff (for which the manager has sufficient knowledge to add some value), then a less technical person could be effective in that situation. This is where the difference in each organization comes into play.

In general, I'd stick to the bolt-in-the-boiler room analogy... but make an exception if the I.S. Manager in your organization doesn't serve a role that requires a high degree of technology experience. Some organizations don't need as much technology as others in order to compete. As such, the degree of technical prowess in your I.S. Manager could vary.

It's just one more thing that an organizationneeds to balance and tune.

Bob

by salmonslayer

If you happen to belong to a unionized shop, or a shop with a small IT department, it is essential for the manager to also be a doer.

Traditionally managers will need to take over during a labor dispute, and if the manager can not handle the system, things could go from bad to worse in a hurry. Of course, that could also be seen as a method of ensuring a speedy settlement!

by sportymen

At a managers level, its about Public Relations. Being fully technical in every detail may lead to micro-managing. Better to have enough knowledge to delegate.

by shanghai sam

I have read alot of the repsonses and couldn't decide who to respond to. I think the question is too broad in its domain. Certainly, managers need to understand what it is they are managing, technical or not, and that applies to all mangers from theline supervisor to the CEO.

That knowledge should usually be more than cursory. For instance, knowledge of personal financial management does not make one qualified to be a finance manager in an enterprise. The depth and breadth of the knowledge,however, must change as the scope of responsibility changes. A VP of IT or CIO, even if he has worked his way up through an IT organization, isn't going to be able to know or do everything that his staff does. As a manager resposible for all system development in my company, I understand development and technology. Could I write programs or install an OS or DBMS? Probably given enough time to read the manuals and research the products. Would I be very good at it? Definitely not. Could I get it done on time? No way. Can I ask my staff the right questions to determine if they are the right people? Absolutely.

More importantly, I provide my staff with leadership. I help them understand the company's objectives and the importance of their work in relationship to those objectives. I help them understand how their work and effort fits into a biger picutre. I make sure that they are developing in their careers.

On the other side, I work with my management peers and other associates to determine what technology we need to implement and why. I help them understand what my staff does and why it is important to the organization.

Sure, I have lot of administrative tasks, but they are not the priorities.

A manager does not need to be able to do everthing every staff member does. Certainly, they do not need to do those things on their own. But, they must understand how to focus, challenge and encourage each

by epepke

You sound like a thoughtful person and could be a very good manager. I like to test my hypotheses, though. If you are willing, I'd like to ask you a question.

Can you tell me the difference between a trivial, easy, difficult, or massive change to a system?

Here are some examples:

1) A client needs larger letters due to a vision problem.

2) A system needs to work with another database from a different vendor.

3) A small ad needs to be added to a web site.

by Member 21930322

I think what is most worrying here is the subconscious belief that to be a good manager is to immerse yourself in your topic for many years and rise to the top through technical know-how. A manager is a career and a vocation in it's own right and not something you just pick up.

You don't become a good manager just by doing the job of the staff you now supervise for many years. If that was the case all technical staff could be managers.

The negation of management as a skilled vocation in it's own right is a serious undervaluation of the role of a manager. A good manager can get results no matter what his technical skill is because his main source is his staff.

If they are not skilled then he must motivate them and get the right training; if he does not know the answers then all he has to do is listen to his staff that do. If he does not have the skills then he delegates to those with the correct strengths.

Being a manager is about bringing a cohesion to a group of people without which macro decisions may never be made appropriately.

For that to happen you must learn the art of management which is a distinct set of skills in it's own right and no technical person can ever achieve this without first taking the time out to think and learn those skills.

M Downey
Associate Member of the Institute of Management

by epepke

I'm not sure what whose subconscious says about anything. However, my conscious tells me that the question is about how much *technical* skill an IT manager has, not how much managerial skill an IT manager has.

Of course management is a skill. I don't think anyone thinks it isn't. I don't hear people saying that an IT manager should not know anything about management. I do hear people, mostly managers, say an IT manager should not know anything about IT.

For example, you say "a good manager can get results no matter what his technical skill is because his main source is his staff." This is an astonishing claim, if you really mean it.

It may work for a McDonalds, a bank, an auto plant, a construction company, or a bookkeeping firm, although I'm not even certain of these.

It will not work for a hospital, a group of experimental physicists, a kitchen at a good restaurant, the Catholic Church, or an IT department that does development. People have tried, and they fail.
There's no point in even going into the reasons why this is until it is possible to overcome this managerial conceit.

by lakhini

I really couldn't agree more. We had someone brought over from our Accounting Department to be a "project manager" for our Helpdesk and he eventually became the Helpdesk manager. However, he really didn't, and still doesn't, have the knowledge to pull it off. His staff has to carry him, and who are they supposed to go to when they are feeling overwhelmed?

by shanghai sam

How absurd that anyone should be foolish enough to believe that an IT manager (middle level or otherwise) should be expected to know the intricacies of all their staff is handling on a day to day basis. I manage a Network Services department that handles the LAN, WAN, NOS, Software Distribution, Messaging, the list goes on and on for the entire corporation. Is anyone really foolish enough to believe I would even have the time to learn the ins and outs of all of these technologies (especially considering they change on an almost daily basis?). When would I find the time for: Employee Development (appraisals, development plans, hiring, etc), oversee Network related Corporate Projects (that in turn my staff does the detailed work for), manageall my budget centers and in turn their respective budgets, etc?

Here's the deal... I have technical staff that perform a function similar to a ship helmsman's - keep the ship running and on course. Pilots of the ship they may be, but captains they are not. Ever read the adage ... 'The man who knows HOW will always have a job. The man who knows why will always be his boss.' ? Management SHOULD be an abstraction well beyond technical competence. A skilled manager often ponders not just how something "can" be done, but also whether something "should" be done ... two very different questions indeed.

My guess is that a lot of these people who believe a manager should know everything about everything are either those in the trenches that have ill will to some manager they have or have had, or who really don't have a grasp on what a true manager's role really should be. I have seen several instances where staff has confused tact with ignorance when they had no idea what a manager was actually doing and then complained that the manager wasn't doing their job. Ridiculous!

Jeff Sabin

by epepke

I couldn't have come up with a better analogy. Yes, like a ship. Steady, controlled progress. Go a little faster? Put on more steam. In other words, linear.

It works great for putting machines in people's offices, wiring them up, installing software, keeping the network growing, getting things repaired, even running the help desk. All of the cheeseburger tasks.

And then you run it on a nontrivial software development project, and all of a sudden, each and every one of those linear assumptions FAIL. And you get between 30% and 80% of all software projects that cannot be saved no matter what you do, with the rest generally arriving way over budget taking way too long and shipping with way too many defects.

And the reason for that is that the captain of the ship, not ever having been in the trenches, doesn't know any better. He doesn't understand why, for example, adding resources to a late project makes it later, because it isn't part of his world. It happens anyway, but he knows he's a True Manager and is doing All the Right Things.

by shanghai sam

Question 1: What would the AICPA (American Institute of Certified Public Accountants) would do if one of the Big 5 accounting firms put a CNE/MCSE in charge of a $50 million audit project?
Answer 1: Shut down the project. At the very least, the AICPA wouldn't stand behind the audit.

Question 2: What happens when a Manager (a manager is a manager, right?) with no technical background (other than having email) is put in charge of the IT department?
Answer 2: The staff will shut downthe department. Since the staff will have little to no respect for a "People" manager, nothing other than the normal routine will get accomplished. It will take the staff about 3 seconds to figure out they can give the "People" manager the snowjobof his life.

But IT departments are given managers that are nothing more than bookkeepers all the time. Because the "Bottom Line" is what counts in Corporate America. Sure the bookkeeper can (and will) cut material costs, but project costs willskyrocket due to missed deadlines, and department morale will plummet.

An IT manager must have a tech background to be able to follow along with project updates and converse intelligently with the staff. But ALL managers need to be able to mangage people. All managers should be able "help out" in a crisis. Help when needed in the day-to-day tasks, and otherwise keep out of the way and do the managerial thing.

I came up through the ranks, starting as a programmer, team lead, location supervisor, and now an IT manager. The biggest problem I've had is giving up the day-to-day tasks I enjoy - application testing and pilot groups, help desk calls (yes I actually enjoy taking some), etc. But, because I have come up through the ranks, mystaff respects my ideas when I present them and does not hesitate to come to me when they are having problems, whether it is technical, non-technical work related, or personal.

by michelle m.

The old saying, You must lead by example. The greatest resource I have is my IT manager. I come to her with all sorts of issues and her expertise allows me to grow as a network administrator. She is the first to say she needs help with some of the technologies and finds the right answer. Why? Because she knows where to look. After so many years in the data industry, she can make decisions because she knows both sides of her job.

by veetel

Most managers I've been involved with in my last job hadn't seen the technical football since kickoff. Their omnipotent powers extended into the realm of DOS operating systems and 16 bit apps. They had to actually get up to change the TV channel.
A truly competent manager is one who is current in the latest technology and experienced enough to make informed recommendations and decisions.
How many of us had to make a solution work that was totally inadequate in design, scope, and function. And now, we can defer all decisions to IBM because they outsourced those bumbling bozos in IT that couldn't make management's IT solutions work as promised.

by shanghai sam

Instead of reading everyone's comments I am going to base mine on experience...
I CHOOSE FOR A TECHNICAL IT MANAGER !!!
I had both technical and non-technical IT managers. The non-technical have been by far the worse in regards to IT or technicalprojects. It is because they are ignorance of what is truly needed to make the project work efficiently and effectiviely.
DO THEY HAVE TO KNOW ONLY THE BASICS?
An IT manager must know the basics at the minimum; and should know more [but not in all things]. The IT manager does not need to know all aspects; but must have a good conceptual [not expert or minimum] idea how the IT operations work.
SHOULD THEY BE VERY KNOWLEDGEABLE ABOUT THEIR TEAM TASKS?
No, but more than vaguely aware, the ITmanager needs to have a good conceptual grasp of the tasks being performed; and query the staff were it believes it needs assistance in either training or support to achieve project goals.
SHOULD BE INVOLVED IN DAILY ACTIVITIES AND HOW DEEP?
Even for non-technical managers, a good manager does not get involved with day-to-day activities. Excluding emergencies, it is rare for "Good" managers to become deeply involved with any task of an IT staff, unless they are performing that task. If the IT staff member needs help then appropriate action should be taken [whether counseling how to do the process, help find a solution, or get other staff members involved that can assist...].
DEEP ENOUGH TO DO IT ON HIS OWN?
Again, good managers let their people do the work, and not micromanage. If the mamager is capable, he can do the task, but SHOULD NOT, because [barring EMERGENCIES] he is the manager and has the staff to do the tasks [supposedly...].
PROVIDE TECHNICAL GUIDANCE TO STAFF OR JUST KNOW CONCEPT ON WHAT STAFF DOES?
Depending on how technical the manager is, and how new the IT staff recruit is, determines if, at all, the Manager gave technical guidance. G

by manxgato

Instead of reading everyone's comments I am going to base mine on experience...

I CHOOSE FOR A TECHNICAL IT MANAGER !!!
I had both technical and non-technical IT managers. The non-technical have been by far the worse in regards to IT or technical projects. It is because they are ignorance of what is truly needed to make the project work efficiently and effectiviely.

DO THEY HAVE TO KNOW ONLY THE BASICS?
An IT manager must know the basics at the minimum; and should know more [but not in all things]. The IT manager does not need to know all aspects; but must have a good conceptual [not expert or minimum] idea how the IT operations work.

SHOULD THEY BE VERY KNOWLEDGEABLE ABOUT THEIR TEAM TASKS?
No, but more than vaguely aware, the IT manager needs to have a good conceptual grasp of the tasks being performed; and query the staff were it believes it needs assistance in either training or support to achieve project goals.

SHOULD BE INVOLVED IN DAILY ACTIVITIES AND HOW DEEP?
Even for non-technical managers, a good manager does not get involved with day-to-day activities. Excluding emergencies, it is rare for "Good" managers to become deeply involved with any task of an IT staff, unless they are performing that task.If the IT staff member needs help then appropriate action should be taken [whether counseling how to do the process, help find a solution, or get other staff members involved that can assist...].

DEEP ENOUGH TO DO IT ON HIS OWN?
Again, good managers let their people do the work, and not micromanage. If the mamager is capable, he can do the task, but SHOULD NOT, because [barring EMERGENCIES] he is the manager and has the staff to do the tasks [supposedly...].

PROVIDE TECHNICAL GUIDANCE TO STAFF OR JUST KNOW CONCEPT ON WHAT STAFF DOES?
Depending on how technical the manager is, and how new the IT staff recruit is, determines if, at all, the Manager gave technical

by manxgato

Instead of reading everyone's comments I am going to base mine on experience...

I CHOOSE FOR A TECHNICAL IT MANAGER !!!
I had both technical and non-technical IT managers. The non-technical have been by far the worse in regards to IT or technical projects. It is because they are ignorance of what is truly needed to make the project work efficiently and effectiviely.

DO THEY HAVE TO KNOW ONLY THE BASICS?
An IT manager must know the basics at the minimum; and should know more [but not in all things]. The IT manager does not need to know all aspects; but must have a good conceptual [not expert or minimum] idea how the IT operations work.

SHOULD THEY BE VERY KNOWLEDGEABLE ABOUT THEIR TEAM TASKS?
No, but more than vaguely aware, the IT manager needs to have a good conceptual grasp of the tasks being performed; and query the staff were it believes it needs assistance in either training or support to achieve project goals.

by manxgato

Instead of reading everyone's comments I am going to base mine on experience...

I CHOOSE FOR A TECHNICAL IT MANAGER !!!
I had both technical and non-technical IT managers. The non-technical have been by far the worse in regards to IT or technical projects. It is because they are ignorance of what is truly needed to make the project work efficiently and effectiviely.

DO THEY HAVE TO KNOW ONLY THE BASICS?
An IT manager must know the basics at the minimum; and should know more [but not in all things]. The IT manager does not need to know all aspects; but must have a good conceptual [not expert or minimum] idea how the IT operations work.

SHOULD THEY BE VERY KNOWLEDGEABLE ABOUT THEIR TEAM TASKS?
No, but more than vaguely aware, the IT manager needs to have a good conceptual grasp of the tasks being performed; and query the staff were it believes it needs assistance in either training or support to achieve project goals.

by manxgato

SHOULD BE INVOLVED IN DAILY ACTIVITIES AND HOW DEEP?
Even for non-technical managers, a good manager does not get involved with day-to-day activities. Excluding emergencies, it is rare for "Good" managers to become deeply involved with any task ofan IT staff, unless they are performing that task. If the IT staff member needs help then appropriate action should be taken [whether counseling how to do the process, help find a solution, or get other staff members involved that can assist...].
DEEP ENOUGH TO DO IT ON HIS OWN?
Again, good managers let their people do the work, and not micromanage. If the mamager is capable, he can do the task, but SHOULD NOT, because [barring EMERGENCIES] he is the manager and has the staff to do the tasks [supposedly...].

PROVIDE TECHNICAL GUIDANCE TO STAFF OR JUST KNOW CONCEPT ON WHAT STAFF DOES?
Depending on how technical the manager is, and how new the IT staff recruit is, determines if, at all, the Manager gave technical guidance. Generally, the Manager should not give technical guidance but offer or manage ways to provide education or materials to enhance the staff's technical abilities or meet their needs.
The manager must have more than just a concept of what the IT staff does. He must have a good conceptual idea of what functions are being performed, who can do them, and what can be done in the future.

by manxgato

ALSO WHY I CHOOSE TO HAVE TECHNICAL MANGERS:
I had one bad technical manager at Martin Marietta. The rest were good. They knew their limits; and yet encouraged us to expand ours. Good technical managers are what coporations need on technical projects.

I had non-technical managers on projects, and I could not wait to leave. I had a manager that came from IBM who was non-technical {even IBM can make mistakes, they were bound to have a lemon...}.

That manager was clueless to operations. That manager micro-managed things he did not understand. He ordered people to perform functions to the detriment of the system. His attempts at guidance were useless, if not harmful, to the operations.
The project was a year ahead; but when thisIT manager came aboard the project lost ground and caused the project to be months behind when I left.
His lack of support towards techies and his creation of a large admin characterized his lack of understanding of center operations. The IT staff became demoralized that most left immediately. The project that began as a shining success failed miserably at the end.

Many projects that failed this way were caused by non-technical managers. The cost overrruns went into the millions on multimillion dollar projects because of poor management. I see constantly were non-technical executives or managers with a little [but not good] conceptual knowledge caused devastating losses for business.

I prefer working with management willing to achieve the business goals they state. When I work on technical projects, I want a manger who is at least understands the technical with a good [not basic] concept of the endeavor; and knows to let his people get the work done and support their efforts or give them the big picture so they can figure {as a group who can accomplish what (with whatever assistance they need)}.

by rices

I have been an IT manager for some time and have come up throught the rank of being on the bottom. This has only enhanced my ability to help the people around me and the people that I manage. If I did not have the technical background that I do, Ithink I would have fallen on my face as the industry needs people that can do more than one task at one time. I have people that have been in the industry for many years, some even longer than I have. With their experience, if them come to me withan issue that I do not have any insight into, or even know what they are talking about, they will simply stop coming to me. I'm not there to teach them, I am there to give them direction, and be the person that wnat to come to for any problem. I have had very bad managers in the past, and all of them were non-technical. I can not express this enough YOU NEED TO BE TECHNICAL IN THESE DAYS AND THE FIELDS OUT THERE. If you can maintain the technical with the People management, you will be a manager of managers and the one person in the company that people enjoy going to.

by epepke

I already posted about linear thinking, and now we're seeing the zero-sum game. I think there's a pattern here.

by cscampbell23

I believe that it is best that the manager have some idea of what is going on. It only becomes a problem when they try to supercede the judgement or recommend pointless solutions to problems. Let the people you hire to be technical be technical aslong as they are performing what the job calls for.

by dds-jak

I think it depends very much on the situation and the type of organisation (both the Company and the composition of the IT department). I inherited a department that had consultants and non-tech managers earlier. The company felt the IT department was not contributing. So I had to change that image. I split the department into Services, Application development and processes. The first two require tech knowledge, the last requres business process knowledge. The IT manager has to know enough of all three to make them work together. Since I know that in future we may not get managers who can handle all three - I need to create intermediate supervisors who can. And give all three a shot at the top job if they can go across the boundaries they normally set for themselves else the company will fill the slot from outside.
The company tends to take the services and development for granted and judges the department by the business process acumen displayed. In the past, this was provided by expensive consultants. Now we ship talented IT people to handle key distribution, sales jobs where IT skills help in the actual job. So IT becomes a training job for people wanting to succeed in the business.
In summary - an IT manager does need techskills to bridge the requirement of IT services, application development and business processes but the degree of skills will depend on the organisation.
dds-jak

by shanghai sam

Because of trends and industry development IT Managers must be professional enough to know detailed things, even to work out in the field if necessary. As managers they have to be able to explain in simple average terms to upper staff what his (her)team does and to communicate what the cost/benefit of his administration is. So, what and why make this people precious and rare?
Most upper staff still has a wrong conception of technical labor and sees it as a lab or hands-on the job work, but itis not only that in IT fields. Most upper staff still sees the term professional in opposition to technical and in a well amount of senior respectful heads rely the idea of technical being of lesser importance in comparison with administrative or regular knowledge. Managers had very specific tasks that usually were not of blue-collar incumbency in the past. We are still suffering that inheritance of the Industrial Revolution.
That might have been in the previous millennia but today the new trend is Corporate Resource Management and one has to move with the need of the industry. Fortunately, CRM, as a consequence of the boom of communications by the end of the 70?s, has shown the importance and relevance of tech in all fields, and especially in IT & Communications, as today Internet experience has shown. It is a proven fact all and every career, classical or technical, does have to see with communications, computers and ?technical stuff? that some days ago did not to. And so happens to management.
To make a long story short, there is still a long way to go before tech breaks up with old squared way of administrative thinking. Otherwise, why should we be discussing what is evident.

by shanghai sam

Interesting discussion with some very polarized opinions. I would say that describing the position clearly will answer the question of "how technical". It will also answer other questions about requirements for people skills, financial skills, project management skills, team skills, individual strengths and the list may go on and on. It is difficult to clearly define the answer without clearly defining the problem. The level of tech skills required is only one aspect of the "IT Managment" position. Sometimes the most important aspect, sometimes not.

by shanghai sam

I can't help but wonder what the organizations requirements are for an IT Manager. I would expect different organizations to have different needs.

Some organizations that already have an excellent technical team may require strong leadership. Others with less experienced teams might require someone with a stronger technical background.

After reading all your posts, I've found that most of you have had similar experiences. The answer will vary from one situation to the next.

I have heard of situations where incredible IT Managers were hired with virtually no technical skills. The first thing they did was to bring in someone with incredible technical skills that they could trust. Working together they were able to do many wonderful things, each doing what each did best.

Should it always be that way? Of course not. This was but one of many highly successful teams. In a truly successful IT teams, you will need both managerial skills and technical skills. Where you get them is irrelevant as long as you can have them work together. Of course it also depends on the size of your IT department. In a large organization, you may also find that one IT Manager just isn't enough.

Now for my personal opinion. I feel that the original question contained insufficient information to be able to provide a proper answer. Additional information is required such as a description of the organization, its IT department and its needs and expectations of the IT Manager's role. Either way, you will need both. It's all a matter of how you divvy it all up.

I would therefore suggest that the ideal solution is where the IT Manager is at least reasonably technical and the workers have at least some basic understanding of management issues. Working and communicating together will go a long way to creating great IT teams.

Michael Milette