The Journey Upward

Having been through a similar transition, let me provide some miscellaneous thoughts.

1) Problem solving is the same with computers and with people.  The difference is the computer works at your pace; as a manager you have to address problems whether you are (mentally, emotionally) ready or not. 

2) You will become focussed on areas that you may have tended to ignore as a developer; time cards and deadlines are probably two prime examples.  Believe me, there is nothing quite so rewarding as running around to get time cards filled in five minutes before they are due.

3) People will come to you with their problems; you may not feel you have anyone to turn to with your problems.  Try to find another manager to turn to for advice.  You are now at a different level and you cannot confide personnel issues in your staff; that would only create divisions.

4) You will now need to assert your opinion on others; in reality you have little power to do so.  In general, I try to grant as much authority to my staff as possible, but there will be times that you will need to say, "Do it my way.  End of discussion."  After, doing so, however, understand you cannot really force your staff to do anything or do it well.

5) You will need to rely on others who may be less skilled than you are.  You can give advice, but then you have to let go and trust them to do their best.  On occassion, people will fall short.  You need to make them aware of at least some of the consequences without overwhelming them.

 6) As a project manager, you will probably be surprised with the amount time spent dealing with people not on your core development team.  Try to make sure your staff is not short-changed.

I hope this serves as a short list of things to be aware of when moving from development to project management.  I am also certain there are many I did not list.  Good luck!

I Agree - Too Much Trouble

I prefer to have a good set of generalists - those people will pick up any of the work needed to get the job done.  There will always be specialized knwoledge where only a couple of people (or even one person) can do the job, but the specialists should be able to step out of their role and do something else as well.

I would only take on the specialist described above if, one, the task required one developer full time, and two, the other people on the task were not deprived of interesting work to meet the needs of the specialist.  It is really a drag to always have to identify work to specifically keep one person happy.

Offer the specialist the job including all the work you expect him to do.  You may even consider having a written roles and responsibilities document for the specialist to sign.  Then leave the decision up to the specialist.  Offer the work that you have and let him make the decision to accept it all or turn it all down.

Just as a follow up.  I have used the written roles and responsibilities document in the past and it definitely forced the issue of expectations.  It is better to fight the battle now through the R&R document, then to revisit it through out the project.  A couple of pointers:

1) Make sure the developer signs it.  I've had a developer take the document for review, thinking that he could out of signing it.  I kept hounding him for several days until I got the signed document back.

2) Make sure to schedule and plan a review of all items in the R&R document prior to the first milestone.  Manydevelopers will ignore the R&R document and hope the undesireable tasks just go away.

3) Don't play hero.  If someone doesn't do what he agrees to do, make sure he is present at whatever meetings in order to explain why he did not complete his tasks.  Most certainly do not do or reassign his tasks for him.  Do not punish yourself or others for his shortcomings.

4) If on the other hand, the developer has made good faith efforts to do what he agreed to and fell short, then it is up to the PM to take full responsibility.  This is a scheduling issue, not a performance issue.

Good luck! 

I guess the thing I'd find most unreasonable about this idea is the implication that those who are not married are Bad Employees.

Perhaps rather we should say that your value as an employee is inversely proportional to the number of spouses one has had.

To add to above, I would like to tell few things like ;

1. First Case - A Bachelor / Unmarried person ( He or She ).  But His/Her basic family with Parents exist.

          -- Fresher (Just out of College).

             Will need some time to get well into the work atmosphere and to become a good employee.   Also depends  on his Education, Skills, Talent, Friendly circles, Family atmosphere etc. contributes.

          -- With some Work Experience.

              Can do the work depends on his Skill, Education, Talents, Prior Exposure AND his/her MENTAL / PHYSICAL attachment and behaviour with the Inside(in Office) and Outside World - i.e. if he's not maintaining a healthy relationship with co-workers and/or management and also he's disturbed with his Personal problems.  He can be affected and work can suffer.

2.  Second Case - Married Scenario.

              Can do the work depends on his Skill, Education, Talents, Prior Exposure AND his/her MENTAL / PHYSICAL attachment and behaviour with the Inside(in Office) and Outside World - i.e. if he's not maintaining a healthy relationship with co-workers and/or management and also he's disturbed with his Personal problems.  He can be affected and work can suffer.

Outside World also contains his Family members and the circumstances, atmosphere, attitude, duties/responsibilities and various factors can affect positively or vice versa in his work related performances.

It really is more about balance. While the argument that a
?singleton? may be more apt to take risks and change jobs than an employee with
a family sounds reasonable. I have seen many employees who are married or in a
long-term relationship behave in a similar way because they are NOT the sole
wage earner for the household. I guess it all depends on the size of your
mortgage.

It truly is more about social skills and a healthy
work/life balance. The person supporting a family who is a workaholic (running
headlong into burn out, poor judgement, etc.) is more dangerous to an organization (and their family)
than a person leaving a position for other opportunities just because they lack
certain financial ?obligations?.?

I heard of the practice where a person is ?encouraged? to marry, purchase a large house
and have kids as an unspoken condition for making partner. The theory is that
you make a person feel financially trapped and you will retain them AND they
will work harder for you. Personally, I would rather work with people who are
there because they ?want to be? and enjoy what they do instead of working with
a bunch of resentful financial captives.

?

My experience has been that employers love me for being unmarried with no children. Why? Because they know that I am much less likely to not come into work because my children are sick, more likely to be willing to work on a holiday (and the days leading up to it), and I am much more likely to not have a problem with travel. I am also a lot more willing to relocate, without having to wait until summer time and I am less picky about where relocation would take me (bad schools? No problem!).

That being said, I am more likely (and have proven it time and time again) to not put too much emphasis on stability either. It is much easier for me to job hop, particularly because I do not mind relocating. The unmarried vs. "family" employee is really a double edged sword on both sides.

I may note, marital status is not something that they can legally take into account, either... but they will and do anyways.

J.Ja

I think that Duckboxxer has hit the nail on the head.... Values

what are your personal values? intergrity, honesty, accountability, responsibility, personal work and business ethics.

Core values of a person are will not change over a person's life time, if anything, they become stronger and more reliable.  All the other areas mentioned marriage, family, mental stability, heck even what job or career you select changes.

My personal core values, allow me to make decisions and sleep at night, they have also lead to trust amoung the people I work with because they also know these are my values based on the actions I take.

I'm not married, don't have kids, and I'd say I'm an excellent employee.  At least, I've always gotten the highest possible rating on my evaluations, I'm told I do a great job, and if there's something that no one else can fix, they call me in to at least give a different perspective to the problem.

There's little I hate more than people telling me that "Because you don't have a family,  you..."  I've gotten dumped on with extra oncall on holidays, given crappy assignments over weekends, etc...  I have a family.  I have my parents, my brother and his wife, my nephews, and most of all, I have a life.  If there's an assignment that needs to be done, assign the best person for the job.  Don't say, I'd like Fred to do it, but he has kids.  Let's let Jane do it.  She doesn't have a family.  That's a good way to lose a good employee, and a good way to get sued if it's overheard.

Let me provide perspective from the other end of the spectrum.  I am married, have one child, and am slightly closer to my last day working than my first day.  For me, personally, I would say becoming married and having a child have changed me for the better.

First, life is not about absolutes.  There is no "Family = Good Employee", but this does imply that family often makes an employee better.  One of the outcomes of experience is one realizes that there were no complete successes nor complete failures.  Every success had its weak points and every failure had its strong points and often the differences between the two are miniscule.

Second, marriage teaches prioritization and delegation.  Having to balance work life with home life causes one to realize that he cannot do it all and forces one to prioritize what to do.  In my first year of marriage, I learned that I could not suddenly stay late at work one night or suddenly go into the office all weekend.  I had to learn to prioritize what I would do and what I would not do at work.  Without the crutch of being able to just stay a few more hours to be the job done, I was forced to learn to become more efficient at work.  I also learned to negotiate work with my boss, instead of just saying yes to everything.

Third, children teach acceptance of best efforts.  Early in my work life, I was very much a perfectionist.  Few could live up to my personal standards of excellence.  I was also quite unaware how far short of perfection I fell.  When raising children one must learn to accept the  child at his own level of capability.  Crayons scribbled on a piece of paper are far from a masterpiece, but the  joy of the child who has created something all by himself is unmistakable and I have proudly hung such drawings next to my desk.  Likewise, I have learned to accept my staff for their current capabilities, have become understanding of their mistakes, and can enjoy watching them improve their skills.

Being married and having children does not automatically grant these social and work skills, nor does being unmarried and without children ban them.  Being married with children, however, does put an employee in an environment where he is more likely to learn these skills.  It is all about trends and tendencies and also realizing that "truths" about a group (or population in statistics terms) cannot be applied to individuals.

A word to the wise.....

When in an interview, don't mention your family, unless it pertains directly to a question you've been asked. I'm not allowed to take that into account. You should know that.

Don't mention your religion. We aren't allowed to ask and it makes me uncomfortable.Again, you should know that if you are prepared for interviewing (with some small exceptions).

 This has by the way happened to me - candidates who mention their family and their religion, and even ask me my religion and family background/ancestry. It may be acceptable in some cultures but not here(North America). Asking that question didn't offend me as much as show me that the person wasn't acquainted with working in our environment.

I care about job performance. Who you are with, whether its same sex, different sex, makes no difference to me - so long as its not someone you work closely with.

Experience does count, but whats more important is the ability to learn from experience. 

I will admit candidly that younger single employees tend to be more job hopping than older ones. But sometimes thats fine - depends on the job I am staffing.  

James

Based on me, I have to say I became a much more responsible individual when I took on a family (nothing to do with getting married, I still aren't). Whether that made me a better employee however is open to question, what it did do was make me cut down on riskier desicions (ones with bigger potential payoffs !) and ensure I always had a safety net, distraction from current resposnsibilities).

One of my biggest fallings out with management was when one opined that I should consider my work more important than my family. An opinion I could be violently in disagreement with.

Instead of chinning him, I spent a good while lining up another job and then left. So may be if I'd have been young free and single they wouldn't have had to replace someone with 14 years experience in IT in heavy industry in their plant.

Guy was a victim of his own predjudices.

 He was just in it for the money, course his minions had to salute the logo, to show how good he was. Guy was a superb analyst and a good administrator, but his man management skills sucked.

We got along quite well, once he twigged on how badly he'd f'ed up, never aplogised you understand, but he didn't irritate me in that manner again though.

First find out what's in it for him.   How is this project going to benefit him or his department and sell him that portion.   Most people are selfish by nature so you need to exploit his selfishness in pushing your project. 

Well...  It sounds like this guy is less than professional. One thing that is prevalent with our IT guys is the GOD syndrome.  Yes I think he is holding up the project for personal reasons.  Try this approach,  If this new system is as good as you beleive it to be and you are convinced it will revolutionize your business in a positive way   then have someone else take it to the PITA supervisor.   I'm sure is she buys into it and give him a directivbe to get on board he will.