Slashdot Mirror
How Do I Manage Seasoned Programmers?
An anonymous reader writes "I have a technology background and worked as a programmer for a few years before slipping over to the dark side. I am now on the business side and have been given responsibility for a small team of Java programmers. While the technology aspect of what my team works on doesn't scare me, I need ideas to make sure the team stays motivated while reporting to me, a business-oriented guy. Perhaps I should mention I am in my early 30s while the majority of the team constitute an older, wiser generation. What advice should I follow to avoid turning into yet another Bill Lumbergh?"
Or admit that the requirements are somewhat in flux and take an iterative approach. There's nothing wrong with building a small chunk of the app all the way through, then expanding it. Depending on the specific app, of course.
"We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
Or no specs at all. The last thing I want as an engineer is someone to come to me with their own solution they want me to implement.
Good software engineers enjoy solving tough problems. So present them with the problems you are trying to solve and let them come up with their own solutions
Beer, wine, whiskey and good food.
Seriously, they're people. You make it sound like you're some exotic zoo keeper and you need to know what to do when they present their glowing red ass.
Why don't you think: "How would I like to be treated?" With respect, open communication, acknowledgment of work done, incentive for above and beyond... and learn who they are.
The fact that you cared enough to ask is a big step.
You don't have to. You are redundant.
Once I was a four stone apology. Now I am two separate gorillas.
Don't tell him that. He'll actually believe it.
Here's what you should actually do: Manage.
Be honest with your team. Tell them what you need and when you need it. Take advice from them on the best way to arrange that. If they're experienced (read that as set in their ways) forcing some oddball paradigm on them will send you permanently to PHB land. They'll never listen to you after that. You'll be regarded as an obstacle rather than a help.
You're herding cats - never forget that. Let them do what they want in the way they want to do it and all should be well. Just make sure they know what your expectations are.
And if you want something Lumbergh-like from them, say so. Then do the unusual thing and say why you want it. Don't just demand status reports from them. Ask for them, tell them you need these reports "because of pressure you're getting from your supervisor about this certain customer, and if we make schedule with this project they will potentially select us for the next project, and that means more revenue for the company."
Talk to them as equals. Explain your concerns to them. NEVER talk down to them or enforce some odd idea that the manager caste is above the programmer caste. You are all equals on a team, sink or swim together.
Do these things, ignore the buzzwords and manager-hype, be their fellow employee and the details will solve themselves. If these guys decide they like you your job will become a thousand times easier. You will always have loyal allies, rather than disgruntled drones.
And best of luck. Don't just be a manager - be a good one.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
Went back to the tech side.
But the management stint wasn't wasted. It did make me realize there is a "bigger picture" that is always mentioned. I'd say the most important thing is to get this across. Tell them there will be decisions made by you, sometimes that you have control over and sometimes not, that won't make a lot of sense at your group's level. If they're your decisions you have some hope of explaining them. If they are decisions made up the chain then give as much information as you have and point out that it made sense to someone at some point and since y'all are all getting a paycheck from the same company then those are the marching orders.
Other than that just work to get your team the things they need. It's their work that will make you look good (or bad) so your job is to make sure they have the tools and time they need to do their jobs. If you give them that then they need to actually do their jobs and you will want to keep them accountable for that. Nothing says bad manager more than someone who ignores the slacker while everyone else is pulling their weight.
$0.02,
-CZ
No that's not flamebait, in fact, it's excellent advice. You can't run a department of advanced programmers the same way that you run a Burger King. Well, you can but you won't have any advanced programmers left if you do. Professionals typically don't enjoy working for someone that doesn't give them the respect that they've earned. Unreasonable timelines designed to drive results for the company will cause your employees to cut corners and deliver an inferior product. When this happens your good employees will no longer feel good about the job they are doing and go find a new one. Good products take time and money. If you want it fast, and cheap it ain't gonna be worth $h!t. Good employees want to work for good companies. It's a simple equation really.
Status reports are a bunch of non-sense. Requiring your employees to file status reports tells me three things. 1) You don't know enough about what they are doing to manage them, 2) how long it should take, and 3) you don't trust them to work as professionals to deliver a quality product. That last part causes resentment, and if you really want good people to work for you then you treat them like good people until they give you a reason to treat them differently. If you don't care about the people that are working for you then just skip the preliminaries and go straight to managing a project full of Indian developers.
I don't believe in karma, I just call it like I see it.
The key to managing people is the same as anything else in life. Treat them with respect and dignity. Remember, "do unto others".
"Nobody shoots anybody in the face unless you're a hit man or a video gamer"- Jack Thompson
I think you just described Micheal from "The Office."
As someone who has been a development team lead (responsible for schedules, explaining budget variances, providing cost estimates etc. to upper management) and a strong developer I would agree with some of what you are saying. However, the one item that I do have a problem with is the written status reports. I know it seems lame to the folks that really are great developers but you also have to contend with people who "think" they are really good developers. If you are having problems with individuals like that, HR and upper management cannot act on just a leads observations. They need documented evidence that either the person is or is not doing their job. Chances are, if the person really is not as good as they think and you need to get them off your team, their status reports will reflect how simple tasks are taking them extremely too long. And the best thing is, it's in their own words! The other benefit is that with the really great developers turning in status reports you have good objective evidence to show to HR types to say, "Look everyone else on the team performs exceptionally well. How can you not agree that this individual is an issue?" Just my 2 cents. Luckily I'm out of the team lead business for now and am having fun just being a dev and designer again :)
I agree on most counts. When you're an ideal manager, your job is to shield your employees from the bullshit from above as much as possible, so they can get their work done as well as possible. That may sometimes require a status report or meeting or something so that you can report to the muckity mucks upstream on what's going on. But it shouldn't be a replacement for involvement with your employees. If you don't know what they're working on and roughly where they are in the task or what problems they're facing, you're doing it wrong.
My blog. Good stuff (when I remember to update it). Read it.
Of course your employees should do what is expected of them, they're being paid to do so. And you're right about the ego!
The point, though, is that requiring silly things of your good people is a sure way to see them leave for something better.
Do you think the quality of your company will not suffer if the highest quality employees leave?
Then treat them with the respect they require, and they will return the favor.
Formal status reports, by the way, definitely fall into the "silly" category, as do daily status meetings. If you want to know what someone is doing, then visit them and ask. You'll find that they're probably eager to tell you all about what they're doing.
So while you had a nice rant there, I wouldn't want to work for you under those circumstances.
Actually, this is closer to the truth for MANY jobs than most managers would want to admit.
In many jobs, the line employee has a better idea of what's going on, and the low-level nitty-gritty details of how to best achieve what has to be done, than the manager. Management of programmers should be about saying "these are the requirements', and NOT adding "and this is how you're going to achieve them". Rather, "These are the requirements; what do you need to make it happen, and how do you propose attacking it?"
After all, as the article says
Too many people think "management" meand "dictate" instead of "collaborate".