Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I want to make sure I understand you.

You are working in a team of, say, six. You are working alongside some business folks and helping them make money and support their family. Your boss, let's say, is a nice guy but an old mainframe IT guy who doesn't really grok what kind of things the team is doing.

There is not enough money for all six to work next year, but the company thinks they can pay for four.

You'd rather have a manager make the call, a guy who doesn't know really what the team does or the individual contributions of each member -- than the team? The team, who if push came to shove could probably agree on the four most qualified people to help everybody else in the coming year keep their jobs.

I don't follow this. I think the team is the most qualified, and I think if you care about the value you are creating then the team is also on the hook to make the tough decision. Now how it's made and such? I have no idea. I just know if you care about the work you're doing, the people closest to the work are going to be the most qualified to make businesses/management decisions like that. But maybe I missed it?




> I think if you care about the value you are creating then the team is also on the hook to make the tough decision.

I think if management isn't able to do it then what are they even for? (This is not just a rhetorical device - if I was working at one of those radically-less-management places like Valve then this might be one of the pieces I'd expect to have to pick up). But yes, I want the boss to make the call - he can ask me questions and I'll try to answer them, but I want it to be his decision and his responsibility. Not liking to make that kind of call is part of the reason I've chosen not to go into management (and paid the price financially), after all.


If you have no idea what the team does or who is contributing how much until you're starting to fire people then you aren't really managing anyone. Even if you are completely nontechnical figuring that out should be within your grasp.


I disagree, but my intent was not to argue. I've found it quite common even with developers working side-by-side for there to be a big gap between what they think is going on and what's actually going on. Thanks!


Of course, but if they continue operating that way for a long time it's failed communication. Part of what I'd expect from a decent manager is letting me know if everyone thinks I have an issue while I'm totally oblivious.


Yes. Of course.

Communication failure is the #1 cause of technology project failures.

Communication failure is insidious because there are no warning signs or alarms that it happens. In fact, in most cases, even after the death of a project there is no serious examination of the communication failures that caused it.

I love management. I love being a manager. I love being the guy who is responsible when things go wrong but has nothing to do with things going well.

But technology development has changed that game. It's basically flipped the idea of manager upside down. It will be quite a while for the rest of us to adapt to the change.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: