Slashdot Mirror
Interviewing Your Future Boss?
crimethinker asks: "I am an embedded systems engineer for a small division of a large company. Up to now, we have managed to get by with little more than a 'team lead' position, but as our division grows, they are looking to hire a full-on engineering manager. I was one of the candidates, with my current boss's favorable recommendation, but I withdrew my resume when they told me the job was all paper and schedules; I'd never touch code or hardware again. Now the VP has a 'short list' of candidates, and has invited me to be one of the interviewers. Yes, you read that correctly: I will be interviewing the person who will become my boss. So, I put the question to you, Slashdot: what questions should I ask my prospective boss?"
I'd ask him what sort of ideas he'd have to improving employee morale/productivity. If all he can come up with is "Casual Friday" or other similarly benighted schemes, give 'im the boot.
Simple Machines in Higher Dimensions
You should ask your prospective boss about things that will affect your happiness with their "boss-ing."
Since you were a candidate yourself and withdrew, you have probably already figured out that your new boss is unlikely to be your equal in engineering.
But that's not her job anyway.
You should ask things about leadership philosophy, their personal goals in management, their ideas about telecommuting,
about how they balance their work and "real" lives.
Remember that if you are a good engineer, your boss works for you as much as the other way around (unless your boss is the Big Boss of course).
Try to figure out how much you would enjoy having this person around, and how helpful they are likely to be in clearing the way
for you to do your best work.
Use no buzzwords.
Thats my style, and it's worked well so far. I've interviewed about half my bosses and haven't had a bad one in 8 years.
This Like That - fun with words!
Seriously, see what he/she likes to do outside of work. You don't want someone who is a total workaholic who will expect you to put in 80+ hrs/wk if that's not your bag.
I would start looking for a new job. You can only move up or out they say.
Also there is probably going to be some resentment when the boss realizes that you were the first choice (if they do not already).
Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
"What is your position on the free coffee and donuts issue?"
On the other hand, if you want to ask *good* questions, think about what topics you and your current boss deal with, and ask about those questions. If it's a management job, then think about what managers can be bad at. Ask about their previous management history (are they a good leader?), ask about how well they understand the technology (are they the quentessential pointy hair?), and ask about how they view the postion from the point of view of being the interface between the techs and the upper management (are they there to keep you down, or to make things go smoothly?).
Also, think about what might happen a year or five down the line that will piss you off, and ask questions relating to that.
Narrative
Number one way to motivate an unproductive employee.
How well can you estimate time and set project schedules. (You know this can't be done exactly... if he doesn't know, you don't want him)
Why did he lose (or leave) his or her last job? (Double check on this one... it's IMPORTANT)
How many of their former employees will want to follow them to this job?
Annual reviews? Good or bad? How are they done? A form or "free form"?
Do hours worked matter or is getting the job done more important?
Comp time or bonuses (or anything) to make up for overtime needed at deadlines?
Agile Artisans
Do you read Dilbert?
Did you like Office Space?
Oh yeah, have you read The Mythical Man Month?
The perfect sig is a lot like silence, only louder
You, no doubt, have an idea what constitutes a good manager. If you don't, here's my opinion:
A good manager:
1. Fights for her people with upper mgmt.
2. Gets her people the resources they need to do their job.
3. Gets the hell out of the way.
Put another way:
1. You know he will be there when you need something.
2. Otherwise, you'd never know he was there.
These are the traits you're looking for.
You have violated Robot's Rules of Order and will be asked to leave the future immediately.
That might strike some people as ironic or too bold, but it's actually an excellent question.
Remember, the Prospective Boss is in the management business and not in the geek business.
The person seeking advice here seems to have already decided against a career in the management business.
It is in the manager's interest for that tech person to go as far as possible - as long as it's not into management over his/her head.
I once had a boss who would waffle endlessly on that subject because she really needed me working for her. The best she could honestly offer was "if I climb high enough you can come with me."
Then I got another boss who realized that my success would reflect well on him, and he was extremely supportive. I eventually moved on, and he moved up, and indeed my success did reflect well on him, just as his did on me.
A good Prospective Boss will have a thorough and thoughful answer ready for the question you propose.
This Like That - fun with words!
That was my point about that a high score doesn't identify a winner as much as low scores on this test identify losers. The management types will be able to test the management side of things, which is why this person needs to focus on making sure the successful candidate has a minimal level of tech knowledge.
I'll get modded troll/flamebait for this, but it needs to be said.
That's right, don't ask anything job related because the most effective boss will be your buddy, and not really need to know anything about the job at hand. Who cares if he doesn't know a widget from a thingamajob, if he's your buddy, all will be fine. As long as nobody's feelings are hurt, it doesn't matter if the whole company goes down the crapper.
The previous has been a secret message to my comrades.
If I'm a manager, and I can't manage people who are smarter and more capable than I am, that I am the organizational bottleneck. It is imperative to be able to work with people who are smarter than you are.
So, I'm glad you're not my manager, because I think you'd suck at it.
There's a difference between a team leader and a manager.
Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
I've used that question when I interview people, and it's illuminating to hear the responses. This gives you a bit of insight to their personality and interests, and if you have them tell you about that book and what they liked about it you begin to get more insight. Remember, the key to having a good boss is finding someone you will get along well with. To do that, you need to know their personality. Besides, it's always interesting to throw an off-the-wall question at someone and see how they respond. In my experience, the best interviews become more like long conversations on a wide-ranging number of subjects. When it ceases to be question-answer and more like story-anecdote, you have a great interview going on. That's when you get the measure of the person and their personality.
You should ask him how he feels about institutional memory.
I'm not sure how old you are, but if you're approaching 50, you should be worried about being shitcanned and replaced by 2 jr. engineers fresh out of school, each making half your salary.
Whether such a replacement is a good idea or not is dependent upon the circumstances, but repeated purging of senior engineers for junior ones leads to engineering departments that repeatedly blunder into the mistakes of the past.
Ironically, if you're in that 45+ age range, you've probably just given up your best chance both to save your paycheck and to propagate institutional memory. Once you pass 50, you'll probably never get another engineering job should you lose your current one - you'll be too expensive to hire compared to someone a few years out of school (not to mention less attractive - physical appearance has been shown to be a major factor in hiring decisions).
The sad truth about engineering is that you can't do it forever. At some point, you have to step up to management or else you'll find yourself jettisoned at some point with no hope of finding another good-paying job. I've watched my father's career arc and seen a lot of his colleagues fall by the wayside (and through the cracks) because they didn't understand this reality. He's now on the cusp of retirement and is one of the last survivors from his generation of engineers at his company because he was willing to make that move to management.
Having removed yourself from consideration for this managerial role, it's in your interest for whoever's coming in to have an understanding of the importance of striking a balance between cost efficiency in terms of dollars-per-head and the importance of retaining experienced people (e.g. you) who are capable of larnin' them youngsters who will be coming in as your division grows.
Just my $0.02
-Isaac
I am not a lawyer, and this is not legal advice. For Entertainment Purposes Only.
The best IT project manager I ever had was a sociology major with no technology background whatsoever. To his credit, he did try to understand to some degree the technology we worked with on our projects: computers, networking, programming languages, databases... not because he wanted to do our work, but because he wanted to understand it.
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
Many people believe that a good manager need not know the nuts and bolts of what the subordinates do. After all, a manager is hired to manage, not code or administer systems. Plus a manager that is very technical will have that urge to jump in himself (or herself). On the other hand, we are all familiar with the clueless manager that sets impossible deadlines or purchases technology based upon some salesman's pitch. So a technically clueless manager can be as bad. Ask the candidate what they think of this. How much should a technical manager know about the technology?
Hard-core geeky types are often introverted and not what most managers are accustomed to see. Some are arrogant prima-donnas, some self-effacing, some look and smell like long-haul truckers. Many are violently independent. How will the candidate deal with this motley group and get them to work together?
Two competing vendors are trying to sell you a product. How do you choose between them? This question can help answer who the candidate trusts. Does he/she speak to his group first, soliciting their opinions or does he exclude his team from the process.
Whose job is more important, the manager's or the employee's? If he says the employees he's very likely pandering for acceptance. If he says the manager's then he may quickly drop useful members of the team.
What is a TPS report? The bigger question is how pedantic is the manager? Can he bend the rules or break them in order to get something accomplished. Does he understand the reasons for a paperwork process but is willing to forego them based on his judgment.
The building is on fire! What do you do? Start timing him immediately and look at a stopwatch as you ask. This can show how well he performs under the slight pressure of a fake emergency. Does he wilt? Does he get the employees to safety first or is his first reaction to grab the backup tapes? Which one is more important to you?
Seriously - when was the last time a footballer got promoted from the team to do the paperwork, how many CEO's secretaries outrank the CEO.
If you are the natural team leader then its unlikely the team will listen ot the manager anyway, they'll listen to you. So don't hire yourself a manager, hire yourself an assistant. Someone who goes to meetings for you, plans schedules for you and lets you get on with the real job. That doesn't have to be someone who is in charge of or controlling what you do but someone who enjoys doing the bits you don't and you can work alongside.
So many IT companies seem to screw this up. Good project managers are great people to have but they don't have to be in charge.
I spent 5 years working as a network security architect at Exodus Communications, in the heydey before they grew themselves into bankruptcy. I had the pleasure of getting my own boss hired twice.
The first time, when there were problems with one manager, I proposed that my department (network security) be managed by the guy who ran NetEng, who was a friend and an all around great guy. I just said: who has a light-handed management style, who has the credibility to back me if management is thinking of doing something stupid, and can be a technical resource?
I used those same criteria to select my next boss. I was given only two candidates for a Directory of Network Security position. One was a fairly laid back, older gentlemen with an easygoing attitude, some technical aptitude (although he couldn't do the engineering work, but he had clearly done things in the arena in the past), and a clear idea of challenges we faced. The other candidate was ex-law enforcement, and his answer to most technical questions was, "I like to surround myself with good people so I have resources to tap for questions like that". He was stiff, formal, and projected a great deal of confidence... that didn't seem justified. He showed competence only with physical security issues (cameras, guards, etc), which was part of the job but not the important part to me (since I only did the network side).
The first guy had *real world* experience. He'd founded and flopped a security company that sold an evaluated hardened multi-level secure firewall... one that cost in the 6 figures to get and get installed and was generally only bought by a few governments.
I pulled heavily for the first guy, and he was the best boss I've had -- the best I can imagine. He was respectful, tried to shield us from management making illogical or impossible demands, and after several years, quit the company rather than allow bad management to wreck our group. (well, they still wrecked us, but he left rather than be party to it)
Based on this experience, I'd recommend you look for:
* Someone who was once technical. No matter that they aren't, but they should show the sort of aptitude and experience that indicates they did what you do or something equivalent
* Someone who is laid back and 'real'. If they say anything about Moving Your Cheese, about management synergy, about "marketing the group", about "having a first-rate team" or other management-isms that you cringe to hear, then RUN don't walk from that candidate.
* Someone who is not afraid of their management. One reason I liked our boss was he was on the tail end of his career -- he was in his 50s, and instead of being desperately clingy, he was ready to take a bullet for the team. He never really had to; he was so well thought of that even when they said our team was being taken from him because he wouldn't budge, they offered him another job (which goes to show how stalwart he was; he quit just as a disincentive for them to go through with it). Maybe he was just a strong person and it had nothing to do with age.
* Someone you actually get along with. 50% or more of an interview is checking that a candidate fits the corporate culture. Having a manager who buys into your group's culture is key; this guy never batted an eye when we stuck a couch and a playstation in one room for chill out breaks.
Good luck.
If you are the natural team leader then its unlikely the team will listen ot the manager anyway, they'll listen to you. So don't hire yourself a manager, hire yourself an assistant. Someone who goes to meetings for you, plans schedules for you and lets you get on with the real job. That doesn't have to be someone who is in charge of or controlling what you do but someone who enjoys doing the bits you don't and you can work alongside.
I lived this experience.
I was the "lead developer" for many projects at a consulting company. We had several customers that required much personal attention that had no impact on the projects, so I asked my boss (the VP) to hire someone to take the phone calls, make appearances at "strategic" meetings, and handle the paperwork I hated. We gave this person the title "Project Manager" (PM), but the development team still expected my leadership.
We introduced the PM to our customers. He said some silly buzzword filled comments ("Joint Application Development") that added even more meetings, but that was fine as long as none of the techies (including me) had to go to them.
Everything was great until we started a new project. Everybody had the same titles, but the PM decided that as "manager", he should be the top of the chain-of-command. The first time he tried to give me orders, I explained his purpose. The second time, I had the VP explain his purpose. The third time, we transferred him to the Microsoft group.
I have had several great managers (and just hired one of them to work for my new company.) A great manager acts as a filter between the techies and the customers. He protects the time of the techies. He stays out of design and development, but can offer a non-techie perspective when asked.
This only applies if you have a great lead developer. I know of one group that fires programmers with leadership skills. The manager is a non-techie, but knows how to coordinate development with mediocre developers. Adding a hotshot guru programmer would disrupt his system. (He works for a large bureaucratic company where speed is not a priority.)
I spend my life entertaining my brain.
Now that's a joke...
So if you're the boss you'd fire anyone sleeping at work?
Have you ever worked with programmers?
Programming isn't just typing code, you need to design solutions... and that could be just like painting or writing a book, you need to be inspired, creative, "in the zone"...
A 30 minutes nap could be the difference between an hour worth of coding, and half a day worth of uninspired coding; at the right/wrong time that nap could, at a large enough project, be worth days or even works.
Why does it matter to you if people are sleeping or awake, as long as they're getting the job done?
perl -e'print$_{$_} for sort%_=`lynx -dump svanstrom.com/t`'
Thanks for proving to us that it is important to ask your future boss the right questions (before he's hired).
/. and/or google and you'll find that powernapping can give amazing results for some people, and results is what matters.
Just do a search on
Some bosses thinks that if they are forcing people to do the things that they perceive as "work" then that will result in more work being done, but that just isn't true.
Sure, at some places that might be true, but being a good boss isn't about forcing people, it's about understanding them and helping them do a good job.
And... sure... you might get more code written... but have you ever considered that if you tried to be a nice guy, maybe allowed a lil bit of powernapping for those that want to try that, maybe bought some fruit for a midafternoonbreak and just listened more to them... that then you might get fewer lines of code that does more with less resources, and that you'd get that within the same, or less, time?
Happy workers are better workers...
perl -e'print$_{$_} for sort%_=`lynx -dump svanstrom.com/t`'