We have the data. This type of command-and-control systems where one person is allowed to be smart and everyone else has their ideas shot down and dignity removed results in the worst products, the lowest quality control, the slowest ability to change to new conditions, and makes the least amount of money. This structure only exists because it is the simplest to setup.
And everyone is mystified why cost disease is running rampant. Why government projects are behind schedule, over budget, and don’t work very well. My employer for example has systems that accomplish the same goals for private vs public sector. The public sector ones are crap and every time I attempt to update them slightly I am told not to by the middlemen between the government and us. Meanwhile our private sector machines continue to advance.
Yep, I’m an engineer, just one on the team. We are all doing different stuff. So I give him high level updates based on our OKRs, that way he can properly communicate my progress were it needs to.
There is being in control and being in command. Being in command means you ultimately decide stuff being in control is when you allow no agency. What I typically do is give the people under me their own turf and gradually extended it as they show success.
So, as a manager (by technicality, I’m more of an engineering lead in truth) I see both sides of this. It IS better when everyone can just… Go constructively contribute. I love it. I get to focus on my own work. It is absolutely the way to go. Unfortunately sometimes hiring doesn’t go perfectly. And there are certain people where you have to micromanage them, because otherwise they’re just go to git commit absolute fucking shit, and it’s better to cut that off earlier via micromanagement, then allow it to pollute the repo.
So if your boss is pulling this, I see three options:
They’re just a micromanager, which sucks.
They think you’re a fuckup, and they are actually the fuckup.
They think you are the fuckup, and you are actually the fuckup.
Easy way to tell- is literally everyone on the team getting treated like this? It’s #1.
Are several people that you think are morons treated like this? Are there several people who don’t get treated like this, even the people who don’t stand out as ‘rockstar coders’? You’re the fuckup.
Is everyone except the manager’s special rockstar- even the highly qualified, solid workers- being treated like this? Then the manager is the fuckup.
I’ve fretted for a long time about whether I was the fuck up for "micro-"managing someone on my team but this post makes me realize it really was just them. Marketing not engineering.
They would get really nasty when I would feedback with "you can’t just make your task names “write marketing email” 5 times, you have to specify what the email is about, and for what project, otherwise I can’t check if the email will go out on time.
And also they would go totally off piste - a blog on disaster recovery rigs for data centers came back totally about rebuilding cities after earthquakes, nothing about attacks or power failure or database backups.
I’ve worried myself for a long time that I was micromanaging and I’m a bad person for it, but it really honestly was them.
I was going to say something like this but probably less well written.
I’ve definitely had coworkers that I simply do not trust to commit code without review. And there’s one guy who’s a cool dude and all, but all of his ideas seem to be “let’s throw everything out and do it with a different library/language/paradigm”. And I’m just like no please no.
![Decentralized [Work Chronicles]](https://startrek.website/pictrs/image/20710cd5-69e3-4654-91d4-b63e14461bd4.png){kind=link}
Add comment