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?"
If I hired you, would you agree not to fire me?
Can I have next week off?
Naptime?"
"Will you give me hell about reading Slashdot all day?"
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
"Is your daughter hot and available?"
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!
What are my career prospects under you?
Due to lack of disk space this user has been discontinued
How much of a pay raise would you give me latet for a favorable reccomendation now?
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.
The correct answer here is to give me a raise.
I've hit Karma 50 and gotten a Score:5, Troll... I win!
Ask about the shows he/she likes, what he/she reads, what they like to do. Try to find the person you get along the best with. If you 2 are friends it feels less akward to have a boss which you hired because you will have mutual respect for one another. Also, friends don't fire friends ;). If they are uptight and have no social skills I would stear clear.
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
Pantless mondays?
"To face death, that's nothing much. But to feel really stupid when you die, well, that would be insufferable."
Are you an Engineer who wants to be a Manager or a Manager?
Look around. The company let the last secretary for your engineering group retire 5 years ago. You have been doing all the ordering and tracking. A manager of a development group attends all the planning meetings but he or she must also be the clerk and secretary for the group. You do not need to know how the company has changed the PO approval process. Leave that up to the manager.
It's fairly clear that the reason you've been invited to take part in the interview is because you "know your stuff" inside out, more so than anybody who is two levels above you. Therefore, your portion of the interview competition should be to judge how much the candidates know about the exact technologies you're working with.
I'd come up with a list of 10 to 20 buzzwords that you use in your everyday conversations and e-mails, but keep that list secret from the candidates. See how many of those words each canadidate mentions in proper context as they talk with you and the other interviewers.
The point of this exercise isn't so much as to hire the high-scorer like it's a video game, but so that you can have a reason to veto somebody who is talking in generalizations but can't come up with the terms for what you actually do. Basically, your whole point is to eliminate anybody who is likely to become a PHB character if given the job because they don't know what you do.
Keeping this strictly from what I know as fact, rather than inject my own opinions on what to ask. The MOST reliable indicator of how a person will perform in a job is their intelligence. Don't assume they are smart based on their resume, usually standard tests should suffice, or ask him to write some code for you on the machines you work on. I think it should be necessary that your boss is capable of doing your job, if not as well as you can.
"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 ask this person the same things as anyone else:
-Ask them if they understand the nature/scope of the job
-Ask them to describe relevant experience (professional, not futzing around on their own time)
-Ask them to describe any characteristics/attributes that make them a good choice for this job
-Ask them how they would handle any particular circumstances you either expect your operation to encounter, or some that you have encountered in the past that could have used some good leadership
-Etc.
Basicallly, when interviewing, you really only need to concern yourself with KSAs - knowledge, skills and abilities. Note that interpersonal communication and team skills are VERY critical KSAs. I value them more than actual technical or academic skills - those can be taught. The former, not as easily.
I sat on the committee that hired my current supervisor. She turned out to be one of the better administrator's we've had...
There exists no way of exchanging information without making judgments. --Bene Gesserit Axiom
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.
but it sounds like the perfect opportunity to find a boss who works for you, not the other way around.
What I mean is, the Engineering Manager, say, is there to make sure the department is doing what the company needs.. but equally, there to make sure the company is providing the engineers with the resources and environment needed to do their jobs. Disciplinary action aside, a good manager in a position like that should almost NEVER have to exert authority over his staff, becuase the staff already do their job properly.. he's just there to deal with situations where a tiebreaker is needed, and to keep an extra focus on where the company really wants to go. Most of his work should be the other way around... going up the chain of command to get the staff what they need, and properly communicate how things are going to the rest of management.
This is not a technical interview if it is a VP job - make sure they know they business.
Why should we hire you in the first place?
(this is not a troll! it's an honest question!)
main(0)
Consider questions like:
a) describe a situation in the past when you felt you successfully reformed a poor-performing subordinate
a) describe a situation in the past when you felt you successfully communicated expectations with staff
a) describe a situation in the past when you felt you successfully motivated staff using incentives/rewards
Your goal is to try to get an idea of what it would be like to work for this person under good and bad circumstances.
I would definately want to know what is the boss's stile of management.
...
... a hands-on type of coach who wants to know day-to-day what you are working on and when are you going to have it completed.
... the hands-off type who enables you to guide your projects and assign completion dates, etc. while always being available for manegement-specific questions.
... a good team-lead?
... going to take the team out for lunch once or twice a year to bond?
Is he/she
A good manager IMHO lets their employees guide their own careers while providing targeted guidance.
When I become an Evil Overlord: My ventilation ducts will be too small to crawl through.
What would you do for a Klondike Bar?
It's important that you try to find someone you relate to. They don't necessarily need to have the same interests you do, but should have a similar lifestyle. For example, if many of your team members have a wife and kids at home, try to find someone in the same situation. He'll understand the value of sticking to a focused 8-5 schedule and will better understand your needs to stay at home with the kids when they are sick, to have your weekends free to spend time with your family, etc.
On the other hand, if you guys are all workaholics who spend every daylight minute at the office and you hire a guy that prefers a tight, 8-5 schedule you'll naturally have some tension and frustration when it gets crunch time and he chooses to go home at 5 every day. He may get twice as much work done as everyone else in a shorter period of time but that doesn't seem to matter at midnight to a grouchy, sleep-deprived developer.
You probably already realize this but make sure this guy understands computers. Ask him general questions to make sure he understands the general technology behind the projects (make sure he has a little geek in him). But most importantly make sure to ask him questions that you claim are easy and he should know but are anything but, see how he handles these situations. If he's starts trying to BS that's definate bad news, you want a boss who will admit when he's outside of his experience and is willing to listen to the advice of his subordinates.
I stole this Sig
Tech will be -part- of this person's job, but only part, since they will be managing the business side of things.
Probably more important is the question "can us engineers work with this person?"
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!
Have you now or ever in the past had pointy hair?
Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
I think one of the most important properties of a boss is Trust. Trust is at least two dimensional. To trust a boss they must be competent in their roll and they must have your best interests in mind. I think any questions about their experince and skills for the tasks they must perform are important. Secondly, you have to figure out if they care about you and your success.
I would suggest the book Topgrading by Bradford Smart as a good reference for asking the right questions and asking them in several ways to correlate results. Interviewing should be a lot like taking a survey. Best to ask the same thing several times for verification.
As one of the short listed candidates I would like to thank all those who submitted questions. I now feel very confident I can blitz this interview. Thanks again.
PS crimethinker, prepare to be sacked for lack of imagination.
Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
What truth?
There is no dupe
The last company I was at, I arrived only shortly after the VP of IT. (The company had maybe 20 people.) I liked him. His basic attitude was that he was the representative of the IT team to the CEO, and his job was to work with us to see that stuff got done and to keep the CEO away from us. He had his problems, like having a new great idea for where that stupid bug I was trying to track down might be every frickin' day, but I respected him for his "bottom up" style. He was our representative and leader, not our "boss".
Of course, the CEO didn't like that, which is, I believe, why he was fired about a month and a half after I got there. The CEO wanted a yes-man mouth piece who would see to it that we were broken into generating the response numbers he wanted, not tell him what the rest of us knew full well, that his interpretation of the numbers was asinine and counter-productive.
(I lasted about another month after that before I was canned as well. Wheee!)
Before you interview ANYONE, speak to your upper management and make sure you and they are on the same page about what you're looking for. What you want is someone who will go to bat for you and keep upper management and customers out of your way. The CEO may want the same, or he may be looking for someone he can give a directive to who will then crack the whip on the rest of you to do it. If you don't figure that out now, you're going to only scare away potential good managers and the person you get will be so torn and confused that they won't be able to do a good job for anyone.
--GrouchoMarx
Card-carrying member of the EFF, FSF, and ACLU. Are you?
... ask for references? I.e. people both who he as worked for, as well as people who have worked for him?
If he's not willing to give such references, especially of the second kind, that's an answer as well.
Stupidity is mis-underestimated.
I get the impression you've never held the title of manager, possibly never conducted (or participated) from the hiring side of an interview. (Apologies if I've misinterpreted.) Remember, the candidate with whom you speak wants a job that consists of zero coding and lots of paper pushing. Already you can't relate to him or her on that level. Further, it sounds like this person is going to have hiring/firing/raise authority over you. With these things in mind I think it would be best to have you sit in on the interviews but not conduct them. Leave that to HR or to the hiring manager. Your presence will allow you to provide excellent information to the candidate: how the department is currently run, what your department needs to grow, how a manager might provide for those things. Really, just use the time to ensure he or she is not a PHB.
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.
Tell him you just can't feel comfortable in an office environment in which drug or alcohol use is winked at. (Mylanta, Scope, Viagra may *sound* like silly street names, but they're a very really threat to the American way of life, as well as to germs, impotence, and acid reflux disease.)
Also, point out that as part of the terms of your employment, you'll be be able to quit at will, and will be periodically inspecting his desk drawers and email. For safety, etc.
About where he started in his career. If he comes from the very bottom and understands the job of his direct and indirect reports a little bit he will not drive you guys crazy with unreasonable expectations.
Also, ask about his education. It is my firm belief that non-technical people simply can't effectively manage technical people, and the best managers grow from the very bottom.
If he STARTED as a manager and/or he does NOT have technical education at all, the decision is "no hire".
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.
While the naptime comment is funny, there is some validity in asking similar questions.
Breakthroughs in better ways to do things often present themselves during what is often considered "unproductive" uses of time like coffee breaks, a short walk across the company campus or even a brief nap. If those types of activities help you work better it's definitely worth asking about.
You should also ask the candidates to describe their leadership styles and management styles, and to provide concrete examples of how they have applied them in the past.
Ask how they deal with problems with personnel and projects. There is no such thing as a project or company without problems.
ask them to show you a picture of spouse and family. if-
#1: they are average looking or above and their spouse looks bloody awful (was nice once but having kids/stress/drinking beer has killed their looks) or has 6 kids who look like little shits
or
#2: they are average looking and the spouse is fantastic looking (for male candidates - the wife is a 'trophy wife')
steer clear. workaholic alert. in #1 they want to stay as far away from them as possible. in #2 they need to continue to bring home the big bucks to fund the lifestyle to keep the spouse interested.
awful to say but this is true, it took me years to understand this. find somebody with a balanced home life so they don't want to be at work 24x7
he/she needs to knwo how to allow you to do your job.
he/she needs to trust your experience
he/she needs to knwo how to address issues with upper managent, perferable without you knowing there ever were issues.
he/she needs to be able to learn the industry relationship with vendors.
If you say "I need part xys234", they ned to get you that part quickly, and as inexoensively as possible. That do not need to know what how it works. By the time they aroder, they should now what it does, but not in a technical way.
You do not want someone who is going to try and use there technical expertise to 'get you something better'. which happens very often when geek move into managment.
he/she should care about you getting done what and when you say something will be done.
Thay do HAVE to trust your experience.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
...is always "I don't know" (with the usually unsaid corollary of "I'll find out") rather than making up bullshit.
I'd just like to also attach my approval to your statements. A boss that's more technically oriented than management oriented 1) isn't going to be so great on the management side of things (he's got to be good with upper management and clients as well), and 2) I find that managers with some technical experience try to steer the project according to their opinion. This second point is really important, especially when the boss doesn't have enough knowledge of your team's constraints, and makes things go haywire by trying to micromanage your team, or by changing specifications on the fly. Likewise, if he's overly technical in a good way (to you or your team), he may not connect well with the Big Cs or the clients; Also a very bad situation.
Fred
"A fool and his freedom are soon parted"
-RMS
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?
I had to get my milk and cookies to settle down and write this.
'Grunts' and IT staff in particular seem to hold one of two differing views on what a good manager should be.
The first school of thought holds that any good manager needs to be able to completely understand every minute aspect of a job in their area. On top of that they must be able to do the rest of their 'management' work.
The second school of thought views managers and their job as being fundamentally different from being technical. Thus a good manager needs skills that have little bearing on their ability to follow the finer points of a technical discussion. These management skills often are based on being good in dealing with people and time.
Looking over the questions posed here reveals this distinction rather well. They range from focusing solely on the manager being able to do your job, through a spectrum, to the manager having no clue about your job.
Depending on your view of management will colour which questions you choose. However, in my experience, someone who is sharp enough to be a good manager has the people and time skills to be a good manager, can pick up the technical side of things. A technical person without good people and time skills seems to have more trouble picking up the people and time skills.
Ultimately it boils down to who you think would make the better manager: the person getting high-score in Quake, or the person getting high-score in StarCraft.
1. Admit when he doesn't know something 2. Restate what he is told without distorting it too much.
I've been in your position before and having survived a few suggestions.
- Ensure you know what the hiring (one-over) manager is looking for. Is the priority training? Project management? Team development? Process improvement? I'm sure you have things you want in your manager, but make sure you know what The Company is looking for.
- As with any interview, ensure that you have the candidate provide you with concrete examples given for your questions. Bad question: Tell me about your management philosophy. Good question: Give me an example of a time when The Company's needs and the employee's needs were at odds and how you handled it. (For example an employee wants vacation but their project was late.)
- Be ready to have a manager that your feedback was "no" on become your manager. It happened to me.
- Pretty obvious: Make a good impression! This person may soon be your boss!
Paul Barth
The one consistent thing I have observed in all my bosses who were good to work for, and all those who were dreadful, was that the good ones had children.
This means that they:
1. Have a life outside of work, and will understand that you do to.
2. They are used to dealing with illogical childish tantrums, and so will be well able to deal with upper management and the marketing department without it affecting you - and they will resist behaving that way themselves.
3. Will understand if you have to do occasionally weird hours if you have children of your own, without putting you on the no-promotions shit-list.
I manage a group of 11 engineers with varying projects in a medium size company.
Managing schedules and pushing papers and pencils, yes, this is a lot of the manager's job. But there's also strategy, technical direction, mentorship, hiring (and eventually firing), and more influence at the higher levels as the company grows.
That might not be what they tell you, but that's what it inevitably becomes if you're a manager that has any influence at all -- and being promoted internally, that's most likely what you'll get.
Having experience with all of those things and being accountable for them rather than being a guy who merely chimes in, hey that really rounds out your resume. Building software and product isn't all about writing code; here's your opportunity to find out about how the rest of it happens.
In the worst case, you decide you don't like it. Big deal. No one said you had to do the same job forever.
The great thing is that since you'd be the manager and hence, ultimately be in charge of the schedule, you can schedule yourself to contribute some code here and some code there. That's exactly what I do:
1. Give myself interesting things to do.
2. Keep the sub-project limited in scope.
3. Try and stay off the critical path.
Being a manager doesn't mean you can't be technical; it just means that your primary responsibility is to your people and not to the code.
My biggest frustration with my current managers is that they don't have the slightest clue what my work entails, from a technical perspective. While I do appreciate the need for people to shift papers around, keep clients off your back, etc. etc., it does not help if you have to cope with unrealistic expectations and don't get equipped (hardware, training,...) to properly cope with ever-changing job demands. My ideal boss would be one who moved up from a similar position than what I'm doing now.
But then again, as you yourself pointed out, not everybody wants to move from coding to admin - and I'd definitely also ask why he made the move. Might be interesting....
Yeah, I've got a couple of questions ready about my prospective bossed if (when - probably sooner than later) I ever sit in a job interview again and they get to the "you got any questions?" point.
Free, as in your money being freed from the confines of your account.
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.
So be careful. The guy who seems fine during the interview may turn out to have serious flaws as a manager. Unless you do your homework, you'll never have the opportunity to spot these flaws until they manifest themselves on the job -- at your company.
The only people who have first-hand, long-term knowledge about the candidate's on-the-job performance are the people he has worked with before. Talk to them! Ask your candidate if you may speak with his references. If you get a No response, that ought to be a warning sign. If he doesn't trust his own references, why should you trust him?
But don't stop there. Say that you would like to, if at all possible, speak with the people he has managed on previous jobs. Say that you would also like to speak with the people who managed him. Ask if he can arrange it. Even if he can't because it might jeopardize his current position, the way the candidate responds can tell you a lot.
Good managers are worth their weight in gold. Bad managers can destroy projects and drive away your most talented employees. Thus when hiring managers, be discriminating. Do your homework. Check the references.
Easy, automatic testing for Perl.
Date: Fri, 13 May 1994 00:20:46 -0400
From: Brian Bartholomew
Subject: Questions for prospective employers
In a healthy job interview, information flows both ways. Some employers have written tests for interviewees. Candidates may get the same win even if they don't present an actual list of test questions on paper. These are blunt questions at any time, as they directly question management's competence. They are incredibly rude at a job interview because you flaunt the respect you should be showing to a potential new employer. Nevertheless you will be much happier finding out these answers before you are on the payroll. And remember, twenty minutes logged into the potential employer's system reveals more truth than an arbitrary amount of interviewing. Ask your interviewer to sit down with you in front of a machine and go through their new-user information together with you. You drive and ask questions.
How will you evaluate my job performance?
Exactly how many people have the root password?
I feel I've hit a technical glass ceiling where any further growth will occur due to political skill, not engineering skill. Introduce me to computing employees who are paid to remain technical.
What is the name of the person with budgetary authority who will approve my purchase recommendations? What is their spending limit?
Are you paying me to treat symptoms or to avoid problems?
Who were the previous System Administrators? May I speak with them?
Approximately what percentage of the total cost of software ownership do you spend in the initial purchase?
When the computers are working, they make us ___ $/hr.
When the computers are broken, they cost us ___ $/hr.
We spend a grand total of ___ $/hr in computer support.
What percentage of your programmers use revision control software?
What level are you at in the SEI Process Maturity Model?
How many interfaces do you have on your IP network?
How many interfaces do you have on your non-IP network?
Our computer equipment cost us $___ new, and we could sell it today for $___.
We have ___ UNIX users and ___ UNIX System Administrators.
How many boxes will I have authority over?
What is the median number of 3 hour uninterrupted blocks of total single-task concentration that your SAs get each week?
When a user requests a feature that isn't in the budget, what is the name of the person who tells them "no"?
How many SAs do you send to the USENIX ___, LISA ___, and InterOp ___ conferences each year?
When a disk fills up, do you usually buy another disk or delete something? How many partitions do you have which are at this moment more than 90% full?
What percentage of your hosts are configured as testbeds on separate networks so that you can routinely experiment and regression test new system software?
What is the throughput in bytes per second of your direct Internet connection? Describe your firewall.
What percentage of your help desk people use a trouble ticket system?
Is quality the top priority in your company? If so, describe several instances when schedules slipped because someone felt the quality was too low.
Summarize your written computing growth plans and their budgets for the next few years.
One was great, one was a disaster. Make sure you go out to lunch or something of the sort. See what kind of a guy or girl the candidate is and if you'd want to have lunch with that person. By that, you'll discover how you get along and how you can work together separating the BS from the actual productive work.
The bad experience, I didn't approve. However, he was hired on due to politics and recommendations from the CTO at the time. The personality conflicts became brutal and almost ended up in a bloody mess - literally.
That said, I cannot state questions for you to ask. But I will let you know, you canNOT ask personal questions regarding their family, etc.
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.
I've had upwards of 10 different managers (yes I changed jobs a lot) both male and female. My experience shows that sex has nothing to do with it. Some male managers are bad, some good, some female managers are bad, some good.
As long as you keep stereotyping people based on sex, race, hair color etc, you're doing nothing but shooting yourself in the foot. People are good or bad at whatever because of their unique personalities, nothing more.
-hadohk
I've worked for quite a few different people over the last 20+ years. Based on how their career went, some were good at management; some were not. One reason I got out of a management career track was I realized that the perception of how well these folks were doing was more important than to their career than their actual results. I found that I could get along with most people as long as they perceived me as contributing to their success.
The one thing I absolutely could not and still cannot stand in a manager is if they try to tell me how to do my job. I expect my manager to give me tasks to do and its up to me to figure out how to perform them. I don't expect them to set up my daily calendar. Unfortunately, some people want to manage at too low a level. This has applied as much to some of the managers I otherwise got along with as to some that I thought were absolute jerks. Be wary of any candidate you talk to who is too much into the details of how you do what you caurrentyly do. You don't want someone critiquing you on your mouse click technique.
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither safety nor liberty.
Ben
Why should a top-notch engineer, lucky enough to be doing something for a living that he really enjoys, want to become an average manager, trying to find time to do something he enjoys as a hobby?
... you really know how to sell our widgets ... so we're promoting you to Widget Engineer to design new widgets. Joe is our top maintenance guy, he can fix anything in this building almost by looking at it, so he'll be getting your old job over in Sales." Ludicrous, isn't it? Salesmen and engineers and plumbers have different skill sets, even different ways of thinking. Likewise, managers have different skill sets and different ways of thinking too.
If I had to put a finger on the biggest problem with business today, it's the fact that management is treated as an aristocracy, rather than what it is: another specialty.
Transferring a good engineer to management makes no more sense than transferring a good salesman to engineering. "Fred, you're our best salesman
But because of this concept of management as aristocracy, something which is embedded in our culture from hundreds of years ago in England when the people running the show really were the aristocracy, a transfer from some specialty like engineering or sales to the specialty of management is considered to be a promotion, like being knighted. Managers, being the aristocracy, get more perks, fancier offices, and of course higher pay than any of the people they are managing. Why should a manager have a more comfortable chair than his secretary, for instance?
Management is a specialty. Some people are good at it, some aren't. Just like engineering or sales or fixing the plumbing. When more companies realize this, and start treating management as just another specialty, not an aristocracy, then productivity will not be choked by PHB's the way it is today.
1. Inspire growth.
2. Firewall politics.
3. Negotiate resources.
4. Advertise results.
Depends on whether you want continuous low-power output or periodic high-power output separated by recovery intervals. With the right duty cycle, you can pump amps of current through an LED that would otherwise fry instantly. Chances are good that an offshore worker can underprice your low-power role.
Managers have a simply defined job.
They will allocate resources to the team. Determine priorities. Provide the direction to the team. Be your defender/face to other departments.
If they don't understand the technical details they might not allocate resources well, be it money, headcout etc.
If they don't know what you are doing, when people complain they will not be able to defend you, and might take on the view that you are not doing your job.
Myself I like the technical stuff, but as I work, I do more directing and discussing and liason work. I'm realizing this is very important than the technical work I was doing before. I might have been very strong at it, but I'm adding more value at the more managerial side.
I understand people think managers don't do anything, but wouldn't your group and the company be in general better off having a capable manager? If that just happens to be me, so be it.
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.
"Are you just a Slashdot trend follower, or someone unique?"
... than one of us who have been working here for a while who might otherwise be promoted?
Openly or covertly, the boss will eventually have to answer this question to people potentially bitter that they have been unfairly denied the opportunity for promotion.
Start Running Better Polls
The manager of an engineering team has two jobs:
So you want to understand how good he is going to be at these things. Sound him out on the organisation by asking some open ended questions about how to manage projects. Like,
Finally, some general advice on interviewing. Remember that you are there to listen and evaluate. The candidate should be doing most of the talking. I've been in "interviews" which mostly consisted of a lecture by the interviewer. Avoid steering the candidate towards the right answer. Your purpose is not to get them to agree with you, its to find out what they know. Do challenge their views (even when you agree with them) to understand their depth of knowledge. If they start to flounder, just let them. Look for enough technical knowledge to hold an intelligent conversation with you, but then concentrate on people skills.
Paul.
You are lost in a twisty maze of little standards, all different.
If he say's "What's Slashdot?", he's out.
If he says he only lurks, or posts AC, he still could be worth hiring.
If he gives you a user ID, great! Now go find out if he's cool, a 1337 h4x0r, or a troll.
But why is the rum gone?
Well done. It is amazing how many technical people think their boss needs to be a technical expert. As your list demonstrates, he/she/it does not have to be able to do your or my job at all.
The way I usually say it is that my manager is my interface to the rest of the company, who gets me the resources I need to do my job while moderating the demands on my time.
You should be looking for someone whose view of management is not only compatible with your own desires of being managed, but who also will be a successful manager in the eyes of upper management. They must be sufficiently aware of the dual role they perform, and have rational views of how to perform that role. Most importantly, they should be honest with you about what they intend to do - if they spin you in the interview, they will spin you down the road.
One good question for assessing this:
- What do you see as the role for an IT manager?
Wrong Answer 1: To tell the IT employees what upper management has told me needs to be done, when to do it, how to do it, and the amount of time in which it needs to be done. (the wrongness of this should be self evident)
Wrong Answer 2: To tell upper management what my employees have told me can be done, when it will get done, how it will be done, and how long it will take. (this may sound right at first, but they are either lying to you to kiss your ass, or they do not understand management)
Correct Answer: An IT manager acts as an intermediary between upper management and the IT labour force. He or she should, when talking with upper management, promote the technical solutions presented by the technical experts on the team. He or she should also, when working with the team, promote the value of satisfying the customer by striving to acheive the goals set by upper management. (honest, rational, and compatible with any dedicated employee)
On the compatibility front, one note in response to some of the other postings: You shouldn't see it as a requirement for your manager to have an outside life and understand that you have one also. In this you should seek compatibility with your view of the world. If you like working 80 hour weeks, you should seek a manager who will work 80 hour weeks. There's nothing wrong with being a workaholic, if that's your thing. If that is your thing, you'll want to look for a manager who appreciates workaholism. I say this because I am presently a bachelor workaholic who is working at a company where workaholism is significantly undervalued. In the future I will settle down and start a family, but for now I would be happier working somewhere where 80 hour weeks beget large raises. It is good to be a dedicated family man. It is also good to be a career focused soldier. Each is good in the right context.
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
I had two teachers in college.
One teacher was the ultimate hippy.
He was easy going and gave little homework.
The other was a military spit and polish guy
who wore a tie. He laid down the law the first
day of class and gave us tons of homework.
I found out the hippie gave grades based on
how much he liked you, not what you did. The
other guy told you exactly what was expected of
you. If you did what he told you your grade was
assured.
The moral of this story is your boss should know
exactly what he expects from you, and be able
to communicate that clearly to you. If he can't
your performance is subjective and you're twisting
in the wind. Ask your boss to tell you his rules.
If he doesn't know what they are, RUN!
-- Programming with boost is like building a house with lego. It's a cool but I wouldn't want to live in it
- Represents the team to upper management.
- Shields team members from politics.
- Does not micromanage.
- Trusts members of the team to get their job done. (this may be the most important one)
- Provides advice when asked.
- Works with teammembers to help them achieve their personal goals.
- Does not request long hours unless the team suggests it.
- Understands group dynamics, who can work best with whome.
- Understands (of course) the project.
- Defines realistic goals and deadlines (after conferring with the teammembers)
- Does not work on technical issues, unless asked by team.
- Knows how to motivate different types of people.
- Knows when to delegate.
I'm architect in my team and always interview new candidates for the manager positions (my bosses).It does not matter if you are interviewing a prospective colleague, subordinate, or superior; the objective is the same. Will this person add, or subtract, from this company. The best candidate adds the most.
The best interviews, as far as I am concerned, do not follow a strict Q&A format, but flow, and develop, as a natural conversation would. In essence, the interview should feel natural, not forced.
Should you proceed with you own application? This is tricky and depends so much on your organisation and their ethos. How hurt would you feel if your organisation chooses an outsider instead of you? If you would feel terribly hurt then perhaps not applying is the best option. If, however, you trust your employer to find a good candidate for the position then perhaps you should still apply. You may not get the job but, because you trust your employer to get a good person, you should not feel too disappointed if another candidate is hired since, by definition, you trust your employer to do the right thing.
Note that by better I only mean better in the current set of circumstances. You may not be the best person for the job right now. You may be too focussed on the technical details; you may lack an interest in the big picture; you may prefer to hone your technical skills before moving into a management speciality. However, none of this precludes your from being the ideal candidate several months (or years) down the road. As we develop, our interests and focus change. You may be technically focussed now but may be looking for a big picture position later on.
In my case, I rose to the grand title of Technical Manager because, in part, I wanted to have more influence in the products' direction and be able to present my ideas at a higher level in the company. I have to admit that the team management aspects were not top-most in my mind. My team knew what it had to do, and how to do it. It did not need me to direct them on a day-to-day basis. It did, however, need an advocate for ideas on how to improve our products (we were an RTOS & development tools company) and how to reduce the complaints from the field.
The question you should ask youself is; why do you want to be the engineering manager? There is nothing wrong in saying that you want more money, no matter what others might say. There is nothing wrong in saying that the job title means a lot to you. There is nothing wrong in saying that you want to make sure senior management doesn't screw things up when they add an engineering manager. But, there is a lot wrong with not being honest in why you want the position; both with yourself, and others. Know thyself
I have hired my boss, so to speak, a few times. The biggest thing i keep in mind is that I am >nothandle engineers.
As far as interviewing techniques, the 'behavioral interview' has alway been good for me - it gives me a good feel on how people react to unconventional situations.
Thanks. In the twelve years I've been consulting since 3yEE/1yCS sans degree, I've had nine managers. Most were good. Two were not. The first was the best, at that time the youngest-ever manager at IBM Toronto Manufacturing, BH.
Once when I was complaining to anyone who would listen, about the moral injustice of known-but-unacknowledged shortcomings in an internal tool, BH gave me a coupon for a free pastry+coffee at the IBM cafeteria, noting how hard I had worked on the particular project. No one else saw the coupon, he only spent about 2 mins. The moral injustice was not righted, yet I worked twice as hard after that and never forgot the gesture.
The way I usually say it is that my manager is my interface to the rest of the company, who gets me the resources I need to do my job while moderating the demands on my time.
Yes. When a manager does this with backbone, the loyalty engendered is priceless.
I'm an engineer outside the IT industry, so I hope this applies.
There is no "boss." There's only someone who allows you to do your job, and sometimes directs you as to what your job is. A micromanager, for example, isn't your boss -- that's someone who's doing you job, which isn't his job. A good boss is an enabler. He may download porno all day. Or he may go to meetings that aren't worth your time (he'll be able to tell you in five minutes that which took two hours to discuss).
A boss isn't a co-worker nor a friend. He's a partner.
--Jim (me)
Example - freshly employed manager of a non-destructive testing section, coming in so the head technician can go out more and make money for the company. He was unfortunately full of bullshit, full of politics (wanted to become my boss in another section as well) and not willing to learn about the basics required to arrange schedules (actually put it as an advantage that he was no "pedjudiced" by knowing anything about the industry - this is after four months in the job). A big project came up due to the companies reputation - the client was willing to pay almost whatever was asked. Large amounts of radiography where carried out, which has to be done when no-one is about to absorb the (in this case) gamma radiation - so it had to be done at night when not much was happening on site and people could stay out of the area without slowing down the project too much.
This wasn't taking into account, the guy paniced and tried to get everyone to work at reduced rates (he had to put on more people) and without overtime despite the fact that he was employing everyone available in the geogrphical area that had the qualifications and couldn't afford to piss them off too much (so intervention had to come in from above to stop everyone quitting). He also turned away other work in a contemptous way to long standing clients during the duration, even when the schedule had people available (eg. we don't need work from your company, we've got a big project from company X). Needless to say, the big project ran at a huge loss, the other clients never came back so there was no work, a lot of staff were laid off, and eventually the useless manager and his boss were sacked. The head technician (after he was re-hired) got as many clients back and staff back as he could, and other portions of the company kept things afloat. A few questions would have saved jobs, and would have given that manager a chance to work in that industry a bit longer.
The manager has to know enough about a technical disipline to allow those who work for him to function. They need to know that without software component X no work can get out the door, or that the accountants 3GHz machine is too much and the 166MHz machine used to do the builds is not enough. They also need to act as a bridge between the farmer mentality (technical skills -eg. times to plant or specific coding algorithms) and the barbarian mentalily (just buy or steal things as a solution to every problem), and fend off barbarians so their farmers can produce stuff for the company.
1. Sell the project he's already been told will grow his stock options the fastest.
2. Obfuscate political factors that would inspire you to get a better job with better pay elsewhere.
3. Badger, wheedle, cajole, or guilt you into overcommitting yourself because that looks so much better on his Gantt charts.
4. Praise his own accomplishments while belittling the misguided, lame efforts of his competitors.
Thankfully it's been a long time since I've been around of those managers, but they do leave an impression on you.
1. Growth of employee.
2. Firewalls filter (not stop) overt politics, not employee grapevines.
3. Negotiate resources for employees to do their job, sustainably.
4. Advertise employee success.
Sorry my good managers reminded you of bad ones.
Call them admin assistants or office managers or whatever, but I believe every engineering or programming group should have a "detail person" (what the Army calls a "company clerk") to handle things like expense reports, travel reservations, filling out purchase orders, and the 200,000 other items that need to be done but take away from productive time.
Look at the original post - the guy doesn't want to be management because he'd become a full-time paper-pusher.
What if his company hired a department administrator to handle the paperwork, and made him boss tech? I suspect this would be a far better use of resources, especially since the administrator would not get paid anywhere near as much as a programmer or engineer.
At one point I told my wife she'd be the perfect "office mom" for a tech company. She would, too. She's good at handling admin details and remembering things like birthdays, knows how to shop for things like hotel and airline deals and is good at setting up events, and would never let the place run out of vital supplies or let the timesheets get behind. Not only that, but from hanging around with my friends, she's used to dealing with what we might politely call "unusual people."
A group of engineers or programmers with an "office mom" like Debbie around -- and she's old enough to be mother to the typical under-30 programmer -- would certainly be enough more productive with her there to justify a secretary-level salary.
Debbie's not looking, but there are plenty of women (and men) who don't mind handling paperwork and making others' jobs easier, and are happy to work for a modest wage as long as they are treated with a little respect.
Too often, bosses end up buried in paperwork and don't have time for strategic planning or doing their other *real* work. No wonder so many tear at their hair until it has points!
I suspect that bringing back secretaries instead of trying to automate the visible parts of their jobs would be a good move for many companies, although I doubt that many are likely to take this wise step.