Re: Management wars


Loved these responses, Doc. Thanks.

Comments below...

<docdwarf@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:dgguf1$9po$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> In article <3p04h4F82qb5U1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> Pete Dashwood <dashwood@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>>In the negotiations for it, I had to contact people who have managed me,
>>people who have worked with me and people whom I have managed, and there
>>was
>>required to be a mixture of males and females. They are scattered around
>>the world and it was quite a job.
>
> Quite a job, indeed... I'm usually lucky if the folks on my
> contract-before-last are still at the desks at which I last saw them; I'd
> have no idea how to get in touch with folks.
>
> [snip]

I fnd that quite often people who have been on my team stay in touch with me
long after I have gone. Maybe they hope I might have work for them, maybe
they appreciate me when I'm not there, maybe they remember projects that
were fun to work on (I try to ensure that mine are...). Sometimes personal
friendships are made with people who work as peers or manage me, so these I
obviously am in contact with.

It took me three days of phone calls, emails, and chasing to collect the 8
people I quoted as referees. People move, girls get
married and change their names, senior managers retire...

Here's the mail I circulated to them...

"Hi
You are being contacted because you have worked with me at some time,
survived the experience, and probably are a decent enough person not to
shoot me down in flames...

I am currently negotiating something very important to me, at home in New
Zealand and I need to provide references to people who have worked with me
in the past.

I need to be able to provide people who have managed me (most of them are in
homes for the bewildered), people who have been peers or associates, or
worked with me - like business managers, and people who I have 'managed' (I
use the term loosely, because those of you in this category will know that
you weren't managed, you were simply 'contained' from committing the mayhem
you normally would...). I also need to have both genders (they need to know
I am not likely to harass female colleagues and am not a sexist pig. If you
are a girl who has been harassed by me (I can't think of any, but some of my
life is lost in alcoholic haze...), I would ask you to consider it as a
compliment, or the sins of youth and cut me some slack...:-))

This is very likely going to be the last job I do in this lifetime, so if
you have ever been bought a beer by me, or had help in any form from me, I'm
now calling in a favour.

If you receive this e-mail and would be OK with someone from NZ calling you
to talk about your opinion of me, please respond to this e-mail. I'll
respond individually to those of you who do.

While it would be very improper of me to offer you an incentive in order to
get you to lie about what a great guy I am, I would simply mention in
passing that I live in one of the most beautiful places on Earth, have a
guest room, and am always glad to see old colleagues... :-)

I apologize if you receive this message more than once; my address book may
need updating.

Please help me here if you can; it's very important to me.

Regards,

Pete."
>

I was quite moved by the response.


>>(Fortunately, they were all very supportive, and positive, but
>>it made me
>>think about what I've done right, what I could've done better, and what
>>sort
>>of approaches are most likely to be effective in the upcoming project.)
>
> Fortunately they were all still available!

Well, none of them have died, Doc, but one of them has retired to the
Bahamas... :-)
>
> [snip]
>
>>1. Do I agree at a personal level with the products of this company, and
>>consider them useful or, at the very least, not harmful to the populace,
>>or
>>am I working here simply because I need to make a living, or because it is
>>handy to home, or whatever...?
>
> A variation of Google's 'Don't Be Evil', aye.
>
> [snip]
>
>>Profit to the exclusion of
>>all else, is a bad thing.
>
> Excluding profit, however, can lead to eviction and living on the streets
> in a cardboard box... balance in all things, aye.

"We were evicted from our cardboard box. Had to go and live in't lake..."

I have 'Four Yorkshiremen' performed by John Cleese, Rowan Atkinson, Michael
Palin, and Terry Jones during 'The Secret Policeman's Ball' at Her Majesty's
Theatre in London, 1976. I actually was in the queue to see this live, but
didn't make the cut and was turned away with about 100 other disappointed
comedy fans. Twenty years later I was able to get it on DVD. Sometimes
things work out...


>
>>2. How will working here improve my personal growth?
>
> It will keep me from living in a cardboard box... after that comes
> schooling.

Nah... schooling is for porpoises... If you aint got no porpoise, don't go
to school...
>
> [snip]
>
>>If you have a manager who is 'on your
>>case'
>>and makes life difficult, consider your options. You could quit or get
>>moved
>>to another department, but what happens when the next guy is just as bad?
>>At
>>some stage you are going to need to deal with 'bad' management.
>
> Try combining Schiller's 'Against stupidity the very gods contend in vain'
> with Ellison's 'After hydrogen, stupidity is the most common element in
> the universe.' It's out there, one deals with it and if the concentration
> in a particular area exceeds tolerable levels one changes location.
>

That is certainly one strategy. But it is not the only one. Schiller was
often pessimistic (in fact, 'Ode to Joy' [Freude!] is the only thing of his
I can think of that isn't...), Ellison is probably correct, and it is nicely
expressed, but changing location when the concentration exceeds tolerable
levels is just one way to deal with it. Arguably, lighting a match, finding
a relief valve, or dissolving it with wit, are all possibly better. The best
approach is to make it difficult for the stupidity molecues to congregate in
the first place...


> [snip]
>
>> 1. Never lose your temper in the workplace. If you feel anger rising,
>>walk away. Calm down, then try again.
>
> After I mustered out of the military I promised myself, among other
> things, that unless it is an emergency I will not raise my voice. I've
> extended this to not allowing others to raise their voices to me, as well;
> when such a thing happens I respond 'Sir/Ma'am, there is no need to raise
> your voice to me'... and if the volume does not decrease *then* I walk
> off.
>

I usally observe (in a moderate voice) that the person who yells the loudest
is not necessarily the rightest. I don't walk away. If they don't stop
yelling, I find a punch in the mouth is often effective. :-) (No, not
really, although sometimes it is a tempting option... Just let them scream
until they run out of steam without saying anything, just looking at them,
not being intimidated. Then, when they pause for breath... "I hope you feel
better now. When you are ready to discuss this rationally, we can do that."
Obviously, my behaviour varies depending on the person and the
circumstances, but the principles are to show that you are not intimidated
or affected in any way by displays of temper or threats, and you do not have
to react to someone else's bad behaviour. Just because they lose it, doesn't
mean you have to.


>> 2. Raise issues privately with the person concerned, never in public.
>
> This is contrary to the Standard Management Strategy of 'castigate in
> public, apologise in private'... which I have responded to with 'Please
> make sure to tell me this when there are as many folks around as
> originally.'
>

Hahaha! I've not encountered that one. If I did, I'd respond exactly as you
do...


> (note - I'm usually known as being the quietest, most polite person around
> on a given site... so when others see someone getting 'bent out of shape'
> towards me it usually reflects badly on the one getting bent, eg, 'Didja
> see that? She was shouting at *him*, he's always quiet and calm... what's
> wrong with her?'


Absolutely. See above.

>


>> 3. Don't engage in petty wars (a devastating nuclear attack is OK as
>>long as it is decisive and over quickly :-)).
>
> Petty is in the mind of the beholder... keep in mind the dictum about the
> visciousness of academic politics.
>

Y'mean all those Old Queen academics... ? :-)


>> 4. Listen to what is being said and what isn't being said. Think
>> about
>>it before you act.
>>
>> If you are in a job where your manager is making your life a misery,
>>contact me privately and I'll try and help. IT (particularly, but business
>>in general) will cause conflict. How you deal with it is entirely within
>>your own power, even if, organisationally, you have none...
>
> Conflict can result in Very Good Things... set a flint against a steel and
> the gift of Prometheus results. As Heraclitus put it, 'They do not
> understand, that which is pulling against itsself is held together; such
> is the harmony of the bow and the lyre.'
>

Sure.


>>
>>3. Set yourself daily personal goals. What do I intend to achieve today?
>
> If nothing else, eight hours towards a paycheck... anything beyond that is
> gravy.
>


I can see you're stony ground, Doc :-) but even that is a start...

[snip]
>
>>4. If you get up in the morning and dread going to work, try and isolate
>>why
>>you feel that way, decide if there is anything you can do about it. (If
>>you
>>really can't, and all attempts at discussion have failed, consider other
>>employment. No one
>>should be 'sentenced' to a working life of misery and
>>unhappiness...Besides, you'll just drag others down around you... :-))
>
> Those who have chosen their parents unwisely, thereby not being born into
> independent wealth or a great inheritance, run the risk of not liking
> their jobs... or there are folks out there who get up and say 'Oh boy,
> another eight hours at the fertiliser-plant shoveling manure... aren't I
> *lucky*?' I, personally, am fortunate... the more I say 'I'm having Fun!'
> the more others look at me, slightly concerned, and say 'But... you're
> doing Good Work'; in the USA baseball is the National Passtime and
> complaining about your job comes in second.
>
> When I got my first suit-wearing job lo, those many years ago, my
> co-workers were proud to announce how miserable they were. They cited a
> common example, I'll call him Kneeburt, and would say 'Remember Kneeburt?
> He'd always say 'Now keep in mind... this should be *fun*!' (pause)
> Kneeburt isn't here any more.'
>
> I recall relating this to my Respected Father as a sign of what it takes
> to get ahead in the world and he said 'Not really... think about it.
> These are small circles you work in, if Kneeburt went on to something
> worse don't you think they'd be gloating about it?'
>
> Shortly after that I went the independent consulting route.
>

Your father was a very wise man.


>>
>>5. Decide that you will do the very best you are capable of. It isn't
>>about
>>rewards or status, or acknowledgement (although all of these are nice to
>>have); it is about applying your skill as a professional, to the best of
>>your ability.
>
> See above about avoiding eviction... as many other parts of Life seem to
> be this, too, might be about Balance, in this case balancing delight in
> work, misery from work-related stuff, personal growth and keeping a roof
> over one's and one's childrens' heads.
>

Sure balance is very important. My point is that sometimes the first step
towards changing a bad situation is to change your mind about the situation.
It is amazing the effect attitude can have on oneself and others.
> [snip]
>
>>6. Seek to extend your knowledge.
>
> Ow. This might be seen as telling the Russian Wolfhound 'seek to be like
> the chihuhua' or the Arabian stallion 'seek to be like the Percheron'...

Would that be an extension of knowledge? I don't think so.

There are many things I have knowledge of, but no desire to emulate.


> different folks appear to have different temperments and some people
> appear to be quite happy doing the same thing, over and over and over
> again, in a fashion which would drive others 'around the bend'.
>

I respect their right to do that. They must respect my right not to listen
when they whinge and moan about how awful their job is. I sympathise with
people who are injured, but I have less sympathy for people who shot
themselves in the foot. (I would still try and stop the bleeding... :-)).


> [snip]
>
>>7. Separate work from person. If someone is critical of your work, or
>>doesn't take your advice, don't take it personally. You are no less of a
>>person because someone didn't like something you did.
>
> Unless, of course, the criticism is expressed as 'What kind of idiot would
> write code like this?'

What kind of idiot criticises code at a personal level? The problem is the
code; not the idiot who wrote it. Maybe he will become less of an idiot from
having written this code and seen the trouble it caused.

Many years ago I used to review code and say things like: "You duplicated
some stuff here that probably would be better as a subroutine or performed
code." or "You haven't catered for xxx in this nested if..."

I soon learned that things went much better when I stopped using "you"...
"The code does this...", "The code should..." etc.


>
> (ans: 'One idiot pretends to be able to write code... someone else
> believed, hired him and has kept him on salary for (time); who is the
> greater idiot?')
>

It doesn't matter. The problem is the code.

Let Evangelists and Pyschiatrists deal with the bad people and the idiots...


>>
>>SECTION 2
>>
>>Here are some principles that I think ANYONE WHO MANAGES PEOPLE should
>>consider:
>>
>>1. The most valuable asset that any company has, is the people who work
>>for
>>it.
>
> This is not, in my experience, evidenced by the treatment given them.
> I've turned down contracts because of this... the conversations have gone
> like this:
>
> Pimp: 'They just called, you aced the interview and they want you to start
> tomorrow. Congratulations!'
>
> Me: 'They liked me? That's nice... I didn't like them, I don't want the
> job.'
>
> Pimp: 'WHAT?'
>
> Me: 'Aye.'
>
> Pimp: 'HOW COME?'
>
> Me: 'They could not tell me where I would be sitting.'
>
> Pimp: 'WHAT?!?'
>
> Me: 'Simple... I end every interview with a question of 'could I see where
> I'd be sitting? I like to get a sense of where I'll be spending my
> working hours'... and they didn't know. Now... they're going to be paying
> a lot of money for my work. If the manager said 'I want to spend
> US$200,000 for a color printer - a one-time cost that's readily
> depreciable - one of the questions asked would be 'where are we going to
> put it?' They show that kind of concern for machines but not humans...
> sorry, I don't want the job.'
>

You have probably missed some very good projects by this. I understand your
attitude, but I think it is too hard. Still, it works for you. I have never
interviewed anyone who asked to see where they would be sitting. If they
did, I'd walk them through the bull pen, let them spend a few minutes
chatting to others (without me standing nearby - time for a coffee or rest
stop) and if it was known exactly where they were going to sit, I'd show
them. If it wasn't I'd tell them that. The fact that I could recruit people
for a project and not know where they were going to sit, does not make me a
bad manager and neither does it indicate I care more about machines than
people (I don't...). I DO know they will be accommodated, even if we rented
extra temporary space.


>>The company should invest
>>in its people. That means delivering promised training, encouraging people
>>to do extra curricular studies, and generally supporting and helping
>>people
>>who are trying to improve their skill base, and/or their personal growth.
>
> This has been discussed, at length, and bears no repeating at this time.

Nevertheless, you repeated it, so I have to repeat my viewpoint on it
below... :-)


> The contrary stand is that if you train your people they get more skills,
> if they get more skills they think they are more valuable, if they think
> they are more valuable they'll want more money...

Most people want more money whether they think they are more valuable or
not. Sometimes they are right, and they are being underpaid. I have no
problem at all with people wanting more money and I enjoy giving them ways
in which to get it.

> and that means that you
> not only have to train them but you have to pay them more lest another
> firm hire them away.
>

If you have staff who are not happy in their work, they don't need more
money to be lured away...They'll leave for the same or less.

If you have staff who realise their value is improving, who see themselves
growing and have fun in the workplace, who know they are valued, who have no
problem with coming to work (sickness and absenteeism are minimal), they'll
probably pay you to let them work there... (Four Yorkshiremen, again..) I do
not advocate underpaying people and I don't see it as a contest. If the
company is making profit it can afford to pay people what they're worth. And
it should.

Besides, they generate more profit for you because you trained them. I have
always delivered on staff training and I have never had people leave once
they were trained. In fact, I've never had anyone walk off one of my
projects. I had someone storm out in a fit of rage once and threaten to
quit. Today he is one of the referrees noted above.

It isn't just about job training. It is about personal growth as well.
People get that from meeting challenges they sometimes thought they could
never succeed at, then finding they did succeed (with some help from friends
and colleagues, and yes, <gasp> their manager.). I have had people on
several occasions, when we were celebrating at the end of project party,
say: "I never thought we could do that. It looked impossible to me when we
started. This is fantastic...".

In one place I worked it was not company policy to pay for teambuilding. One
of the Directors (my immediate Boss) was invited to the celebration at end
of project. It was at a very good hotel in the Midlands, and food and wine
(all from NZ) were provided. I paid for it out of my own pocket as a token
of my appreciation for the support the team had given me. This Director saw
the obviously high morale, heard from someone I was paying for the bash, and
picked up the tab without me knowing. The company policy was later changed
(on his recommendation) and project budgets were increased by a small amount
to cover 'rewards and incentives'.

Money and quibbling about it, is something that should not happen in good
corporate cultures. If the Directors have catered lunches, there should be
no objection to this largesse been distributed to the actual workers also.

I remember one company in London where the Directors dined in the staff
canteen. It was common knowledge that this staff canteen was one of the best
restaurants in Euston Road... :-) I used to deliberately schedule meetings
in 'town' so we could have lunch there... Same company had one of the best
corporate cultures I've ever encountered.

Not training people because they will cost more, is just small minded, sad,
corporate culture.

Pete.




.