Slashdot Mirror
Dealing With an Authoritarian Management Style In IT?
A New Cog asks: "My software development group, including my manager, was moved recently under another bigger group with different style of management. The new objective for the group is to 'speak as one person', meaning that the reasons behind management decisions are well understood and technical information is well communicated. At first, it seemed to be a very good thing to do. In reality, it was just a disguised authoritarian method of imposing information censorship and making sure there is no opposition within. We used to cooperate openly with each other and people from other groups, exchanging opinions and ideas, but after few schooling sessions in front of the bigger group, everyone is now quietly doing what they are told. Now, there is less and less satisfaction from the work I do. Is this just a sign of maturing organization and transitional pain is a necessary side effect in order to have a better future, or is this a sign of things to come. I feel that no true creativity is going to happen in place where motivation and productivity are affected by frustration and threat of loosing one's job? I like my job, but what can I do now in order to keep my satisfaction with it?"
Might I suggest the BOFH?
At least they haven't stopped you posting on slashdot ... yet.
As a management style, there will be two likely outcomes. One, it will actually succeed and bring positive things to the business - this will be a Good Thing. Probably more likely, your department will make some enormous mistakes because of the supression of internal debate and be reorganised.. in which case you need to make sure that you're out of the frame, or else this will be a very Bad Thing.
Don't forget the ultimate sanction - if the place sucks, leave.
Never email donotemail@WeAreSpammers.com
Pick up a cheap used copy of The Cluetrain Manifesto and leave it on the manager's desk.
If that fails, leave. Information hoarding doesn't work.
GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
Usually it is just the sign of the management style of your manager. The recommendations I could make is to first have an upto date resume. Second, every time you send recommendations and analysis to your manager, do it via email. Third, every time your manager talks to you, send him or her an email with a synopsis of what was discussed and thanking them for their time. Fourth, ask yourself if it is worth it. Finally, read Winning, every person who works in a corporate enterprize needs to read this.
In God we trust, all others require data.
Working for the Bush administration, are we?
It was a joke! When you give me that look it was a joke.
Quit
Personally, whenever I've been in your situation, I self destruct.
Adios, goodbye, see ya later, so long and thanks for all the fish.
Life is too short to work in a job where you have to compromise whatever gives you joy.
Creativity is your most valuable asset and some company out there is not only going to recognize and encourage it, but reward it.
I'd have to say it's time for you to look for more fertile ground.
I don't want to give advice about your particular situation without knowing more about it, but -- presenting a single position to the outside and allowing internal debate aren't contradictory. When a decision is made to not do things your way, not publically undercutting the plan is professionalism, not censorship. It's when you can't question things internally that there's something badly broken.
What I'm listening to now on Pandora...
I really do not know how large organizations in the United States survive in the new global economy where emerging markets have businesses that aren't making themselves in the traditional molds (one might argue they aren't surviving, but I digress).
Your situation is indicative of most departments in large US organizations. "Don't rock the boat."; "Just do your work."; "We can't give *them* that info, they might look better than *us*." Those are all sentiments that are most likely not spoken, but implied in daily interactions with management. I don't believe it's due to malice. I truly belive it's managers being afraid to look "stupid" in front of others.
If you try to stand out in the crowd and continue open dialogues, collaboration and information dissemination you'll garner the support and respect of your peers, but you will not advance much beyond your current position. You stand more to lose by not speaking up (the whole department will be outsourced due to lack of productivity) than you do by being a leader (you are unlikely to get axed for attempting to make things better...lawyers would have a field day with your case).
Sadly, there is little satisfaction in IT jobs in large organizations these days. You'll need to go find a small company or derive work enjoyment from non-employment activities.
That's probably not what you wanted to hear, but unless there's a "miracle post" in this topic with a real, attainable solution, I suspect you'll get many similar replies.
Mind the gap...
Buy a few copies of "Peoplware" and leave them on strategic desks.
sudo ergo sum
Ah, the case of the migrating question marks.
As for "loosing" your job, you should be happy if things loosen up at your job, so why are you worried about it?
Some people have claimed that is my style when I'm just trying to avoid whole projects springing up that are taking the wrong direction and doing the wrong thing. "Speaking as one person" helps make sure projects actaully meet the needs of the user community.
The user community is very sensitive to change. If one of the admins sets up something "special" for an end user, what are some of the things that can go wrong?
If one of my admins sets up a rogue FTP site "to help a user" then when I find out it's not secure and shut it down, I have to deal with dissatified end user. Then, sometimes, the admin (and the user) will turn around and call me the heavy.
But let's say I leave it up and make sure that admin secures it. Then a whole culture springs up around this FTP site when the server isn't really suitable for the purpose (no redundency, etc). These people ignore, or maybe are ignorant of our corporate HTTP file transfer site which is purpose built for five 9s of file transfer uptime. When the FTP site goes down, everybody loses. I do, my admins do, and most of all, the end-users do.
So basically, I can be a hard ass about admins running around doing their own thing. But have the admins bothered to think about why that is? I know it's a fun part of IT to play and be creative. I highly value very creative people on my staff. But at least come to management and make sure your creativity doesn't conflict with another objective. Try to understand the conflict. Use your creativity a little more to make sure your project can avoid the conflict ("hey boss, why don't we just put FTP services on the HTTP file transfer server?"). Then guess what? We're all "speaking as one voice" but you get your creativity too.
Policy is different than the 'speaking with one voice'. If there is a policy about how FTP is setup, that should be sufficient, unless a signifigant number of clients (or signifigant clients) want something else. I would hope that you are in touch with your admins and your userbase, to make sure that the best course is taken.
Sometimes, customers want something configured to be broken, or their misunderstanding of how the tools work make them DEMAND something be setup wrong, insecure, or improper. I would hope that you would evaluate those issues with your admins (and customer service people).
(When I was an admin at an ISP, my boss said "make. people. stop. calling." Prolly the best customer service/admin instructions I've ever had from any boss in 10 years.)
Zhrodague.net - I do projects and stuff too.
Managers set the tone of an organization. Either you like your job enough to stay, or you don't. One of the benefits of a not-too-sucky-job is that you can look for something better, and be picky about what you choose.
Envy my 5 digit Slashdot User ID!
It's hard to tell, from the limited amount you're able to post here, which case applies. It may be productive to suggest a conversation with the group and management to try to clarify this, if you can figure out a non-confrontational way of suggesting that. (Just the reaction to such a suggestion might tell you quite a bit.)
The first objective is a reasonable one; perhaps it's just the approach or implementation that's ham-fisted. If you think that's the case, then perhaps you and your co-workers can come up with some ideas that will help toward the objective.
On the other hand, if this is a classic "information is power" political strategy, then you basically have to evaluate whether the good points of staying with the group you like outweigh the bad points of working for a jerk. (Do keep in mind, though, that jerks sometimes don't last -- keep your head down.)
It's a sign of things to come. Start putting feelers out for another job already. Take it from someone who has learned this the hard way...
It took me quite some time to realize it, but basically -- you're a worker. You get paid to produce something, and the manager gets paid to control what you do, and very often, how you do it.
As IT has become more of an integral part of operations for more companies, they've shifted how they handle it. No longer is it a "results-only" department with a wide margin for error, since IT has such an impact on the bottom line. The net effect is that many companies no longer accept the risk of maverick actions by their IT staff.
The owner of my company got some complaints from sales staff about their sales database being offline, because they could not effectively sell (a tech had changed the memory allocations on the server to try to speed up other software on the same server). The immediate consequence? The owner ripped into the CFO, who ripped into the IT manager, who ripped into the consaulting firm who provided the techs, who fired the tech. The long-term effect? IT is now ruled by an iron hand.
EVERY task is now reviewed by the IT manager before the ticket gets handled. The ticket is forwarded to the appropriate tech, who proposes a solution. The IT manager then reviews, signs off, and returns for execution. Anything more complicated than setting up an email address also has to be approved by the CFO.
Is it elegant and cost-effective? No.
Does it minimize the risk of catastrophic or very expensive failures? Yes.
In short, my answer to you is that you need to change roles if you want autonomy. Work for yourself, or consult for small firms through an agency or consulting firm.
If you stay in the same role, then welcome to corporate America... best of luck.
"Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
What's "moving cheese"? If it's a management fad, no doubt I'm going to hear about it and live it sometime in the next few years. A heads-up would be truly helpful.
Hey, real value from Slashdot. Or at least anti-anti-value.
The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
When did William Shatner do a stint in the ISP business?
The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
- Join a trade union.
- Wait statutory 24 hours.
- Order your "Strike In a Box" pack. This contains everything you need to organise an effective industrial dispute:
- 200 blank ballot forms seeking approval for industrial action
- 200 pre-crossed ballot forms approving industrial action
- 20 assorted placards
- 2 loud-hailers
- CD of protest chants, songs and slogans (incl. "Maggie Thatcher Has One, Ian McGregor Is One" and "Jingle Bells, Jingle Bells, Jingle All the Way, I'd Sooner Be a Picket Than a Scab on Christmas Day")
- 200 matching song sheets
- 1 Easy-Light Brazier
- 500m. "Official Picket Line - Do Not Cross" tape
- 1 Order form for additional items incl. extra ballot forms, flying pickets (available by the coachload) &c.
- 1 voucher for support from local Socialist Worker
- Go on strike
- Claim strike pay
NB. You must become a member of a Trade Union at least 24 hours in advance of any industrial action. You will not be eligible for strike pay unless a ballot has been conducted and voted in favour of action. A picket line is not official unless a brazier is kept alight at all times.Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
It's never good to put bottlenecks in the communications process. If the manager wants everything funnelled through him, then funnel EVERYTHING through him, including service tickets, requirements, information inquiries, etc. He'll eventually get tired of playing traffic cop.
Also, if it's causing enough grief that you're no longer able to enjoy your job, it would be best for you to find another one. I see no gain in staying in a job you don't like.
It's good to use your head, but not as a battering ram.
You're just noticing a trend that's been going on for a little while now. IT has evolved into a service that most companies can't do business without. If you lose e-mail or your website goes down these days, you're pretty much out of business until it gets fixed. Accordingly, IT is being folded into the same kind of authoritarian rule that the rest of the business experiences. It's the same reason all the metrics and outsourcing have become so popular...upper management can't judge progress without measurements because they don't see what happens every day.
IT's natural progression has been something like this:
- 60s, 70s and 80s -- BOFH era. Computer guys were scary nerd types, no one wanted to deal with them; they just kept the reports flowing and the paychecks printed.
- Early 90s -- Transition era. PCs have fully caught on, and computer guys are starting to lose their grip on all things IT.
- Late 90s -- "Free for all" era. Technology at all costs. IT departments were often allowed to run rampant.
- 2000s -- Recession mode, massive IT staff and spending cuts. At the same time, IT is now absolutely essential, and increasingly visible on mamagement's radar.
Truth is, we have to get used to it. IT needs to be run more like an engineering discipline anyway.
sounds like the place i left a few months back because i was sick of how things were being managed. now i have a job i actually look forward to while i'm having my breakfast. colleagues that are just normal human beings.
regardless of how "normal" the situation you describe might be, chances are, if it bothers you, you'll be happier somewhere else.
oh, and it's not normal. it's bloody stupid. happy employees work better. that's the very first rule of sucessful management.
There's far too much of that authoritarian crap going on. Working conditions have historically only been improved through industrial action. Management is a very very important part of the working conditions, especially in IT and R&D departments and/or roles. Consider how much your manager(s) can interfere with the work that you are there to do? That's how important proper management is.
Get in the union, already. Why? I'll give you a reason: union lawyers. These people specialize in employment-related law and offer their services to members of the union for free; that's what the union uses a part of your fees to pay. If you aren't in the union, then which lawyer can you afford to go to when (and not if; needing a lawyer's opinion is inevitable if you're at a company for more than six months) things go sour?
"But I don't want to pay". Well, shit. Over here union membership fees are capped by the unions themselves. Mine is a few cents over 31 EUR per month, the limit. Considering the union's unemployment fund and its benefits for when things go seriously south, that's like a fly farting in the desert. (31 EUR also buys you 31 separately bought 0,33l bottles of rather nice beer, two weeks of food supplies (tops) if you cook your own, or a third of a night's drinks at an ordinary downtown Helsinki bar.) The price is definitely not too high.
It's too bad your place is like that. But fret not, while it is somewhat common, it isn't the norm. Out of all my friends working in technology, only one has a job vaguely resembling this.
I am really starting to loathe my own company, and will be leaving soon. But as much as I don't like them, stifling legitimate expression is not one of their sins. It wasn't for lack of trying. This is a US division of a German company, and I get this attitude from most of the German executives. But we don't stand for it. We let our professional opinions be known, and it has never been counted against us. Pure negativity is frowned on, but legitimate opinions and expressions are encouraged. Sometimes <gasp> they will even heed our professional advice!
A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
It is not the sign of a maturing organization. It is the sign of the managers in the larger group consolidating their power. Has this bit of organizational idiocy been committed to paper as being offical policy? It is not in the interest of the larger organization, no matter how it has been spun as being for the greater good.
That is the nature of the problem that you have. Despite the edicts from the 'larger group' there are things that can do keep your satisfaction. Continue to network with people in other departments but only in an informal context. If asked for information in your department let them know what the offical position of the managers are. Do not complain but stick to the facts.
If queries come to you and others in your group via email about work and information that your shared previously unfettered, reply that any queries have to be directed to whomever the gatekeeper is. Check with your immediate supvervisor about the exact wording so that you do not unintentionally violate any of the gag orders.
It is a CYA situation. When doing your work and you hit an informational roadblock that would of been easily taken care of by alternate communication, email the gatekeeper and request the information and of course cc your supervisor. Try and be proactive by requesting the information before you need it, but be detailed in the questions that you need answered and by whom and when you need the information by. Encourage your coworkers to do likewise.
Review and update your C.V. and consider opprotunities that are presented. Enjoy your life outside of work. Consider starting up a personal project at home that challenges and engages you.
Research is what I doing when I don't know what I am doing - Werner von Braun
They're trying to force you to "buy into" the company's values. Study what management wants all you can. Then if you have something to contribute to their goals (including discussing about the company's goals), raise them with your manager. If he/she is actually interested in the company and not just in saving face, they'll listen to you. If they're just about prideful self-advancement, you may want to consider working elsewhere. "If the gold rusts, what will happen to the iron?" - Chaucer
Sounds like the start of the slippery slope that most small companies transitioning up tend to do.. It's a symptom of insecure (and thus poor) management.
There _is_ a hard balance between 'too much information' interfering with a group's concentration, vs. the kind of open communication that is constructive and can lead to 'your chocolate is in my peanut butter' serendipity moments.
Good, confident management will define expectations for work within and outside the group. It has the confidence of the group to be the point of contact for official communications with other groups. It has the confidence to not worry about informal communications outside the group. It has the confidence to know when it's wrong (for changing circumstances, mistaken assumptions, etc) and change course, and give credit where credit is due. A great manager has great people who do great things, and gets credit by giving it appropriately.
If a company undercuts that, that company is ultimately fucked, unless it has a monopoly.
Have you seen "Office Space"?
"It's not that I'm lazy, it's that I just don't CARE."
signat-url: http://www2.potsdam.edu/dctm/prescor/signat-url.h
I've been fortunate enough to never have had to work in a seriously disfunctional workplace. However, from what I've read, the best way to combat this sort of management style (or at least to avoid getting shafted when they start handing out blame) is to make sure you have everything in writing and then make sure you have a complete set of copies.
Every time you have some objection to a decision, inform the manager of this in writing as a memo or email. If your company has some kind of system that automatically archives all project-related communication, that's ideal. But every time the manager asks you to do something that you consider a bad idea, you should make sure that there are records of
Remember to be polite and clear. Your intent should be to inform the manager of potential pitfalls with this decision, not to criticize. Any sort of rudeness will get you fingered as a malcontent and not a team player and it's vital that you come across as a perfect little cog in these records.
Finally, make sure you have your own copies of all of this communication and that you them it at home, out of reach of any possible after-hours doctoring.
Disclaimer: I've never yet had to do this, but I've read about it on USENET. Your mileage may vary.
Boss: Ray, I'm sorry to have to tell you this... but you missed a whole week's work.
Ray: But I can 'splain.
Boss: No, Ray - no 'splanations necessary. It's your drinking. It's got out of control. Let's face it, Ray - you're a girl-drink drunk. We've got to let you go.
Ray: Tsk!
Russell: But you know, Ray, I can't help feeling responsible for your condition. But then, I can't help not caring. It's who I am! And I refuse to apologize for it. NOW GET OUT OF MY OFFICE before you start throwing up... little fruity things!
Ray: Fine! But you know, you're not the only cardboard packaging company in town!
Boss: Yes we are, Ray.
Ray: [surprised] Oh? Oh well...
We need to know exactly what they are doing. At least tell us what you mean by "information censorship" as this term is new to me. Do they censor technical information or is the database filtered for dirty words?
I18N == Intergalacticization
www.cluetrain.com/book/index.html
enjoy!
If in addition to being authoritarian, your higher-ups are stupid as well then do EVERYTHING EXACTLY like they tell you do to it. Document thoroughly and always be sure lines such as "TPS reports filed in quadruplicate as per J. Bossly's policy expressed in policy meeting of 3-2-06". Don't complain or whinge in this documentation. Simply make it clear that you were doing as you were told and who told you do it. It may not help but if a total asshole is making a mess of your department then chances are he's pissing off a bigger fish than he is. Hand those bigger fish every weapon they can use. You'll be fine because you were doing as your management instructed.
Also, keep whinging to co-workers to a minimum or non-existent. Smile brightly and act as though things are just peachy. Don't hand others weapons to use on YOU.
If none of this helps start quietly lining up another job; preferably at a smaller organization. Most management tomfoolery is a function of bureaucracy and bureaucracy is a function of size. Unless you yourself have pull then there is very little you can do when the management gets cute ideas.
Are you my senior? You sound like my PM...
We have the same problem of authoritarian management (unsurprisingly, our manager is a diehard religious nut and Dubya fan). Our company is a purely top-down organizational model -- just like any socialist bureaucracy, and just like most corporations actually. Nobody likes it, nobody's happy with it, and the supposed benefits of planning and organization that come with such an organizational model have yet to materialize outside the main development areas (and even there, we fall behind other major multinationals in our level of process/procedural standards).
But, people stay because it's a job in an industry that few people actually *want* to work in, which keeps management in check and prevents us from working 80+ hours/week like game developers do.
It's like working as a janitor or a horse fluffer or a biology teacher in Kansas -- the job sucks, but the stability of the company and/or pay and/or benefits and/or our own inability to compete for more-desireable jobs keeps us where we are...
(I'm a regular posting as an AC for obvious reasons.)
1) Grow up
2) you are getting paid, cash the fucking check and quit whining
WAH.