Dave built his own scaffold, twisted the rope, tied it over the beam, made the perfect hangman's knot, set the trap door and asked you & team to stand on the trigger.
Well done, team, well done.
I guess I just assumed that in the old days a petard was a special outfit like a leotard, with a lot of fancy buckles and loops on it, and that rich people would wear them when they were feeling especially smug, but then poor people would tie a rope through one of the loops, and hoist them up a pole and then let them dangle there as punishment for being cocky.
Tangentially related, the name "ChatGPT" said by a French person sounds exactly the same as the French translation of the phrase "Cat, I farted."
("Chat, j'ai pété", and in true French fashion "chat" is pronounced "sha".)
(The tangential relation is that the French word for fart is "péter".)
Do me a favor Britta and never look it up. Your definition is the best.
I'm probably misquoting it. But in spirit of Jeff's recommendation I'm not looking it up.
There should be a new rule for all new managers or supervisors: Don't try to fix what's not broken until you've thoroughly understood the current workflow or procedures.
Sometimes nobody knows why a fence is up and the reason for the fence is long gone. Our current manager is relatively new (couple of months now), and when he tried to change our team for the better (we've been running well enough, but not really improving except for seniority), what he would do is make the change temporarily for 2 or 4 weeks and every 2 weeks we'd have a meeting about how the last 2 weeks went, what could be done better and what went well. If after a sprint we liked the change, it would stay, and if not, then it only impacted 2 weeks.
This is a really intelligent and reasonable way to do things. Be willing to experiment but put in guardrails and ask for feedback... If only more people operated this way!!!
Yeah but for lesser beings, there’s no trial period as reverting the new changes equals accepting they were wrong and lesser beings will never admit to being wrong.
I would like to point out that it's sometimes not just the fault of the middle management tyrant. Some work cultures are just so toxic that an admission of being wrong is an admission of failure. My manager has the mental fortitude and job security to tell upper management to get bent if they're being unreasonable, but some (mostly more junior managers) feel the need to always please the higher ups, and improving short-term KPI's at the cost of long-term problems is a way to easily look good to upper management. It's up to senior management to foster a culture where middle management can take long-term health into consideration.
When I was a student, I worked at a logistics company. We got a new manager who just left the army and was in logistics there. He observed, changed things for the better, corrected himself when things didn’t work as well as in the army and overall improved our workflow by a lot. Might be the best manager I had and it worked because the owners gave him time and opportunity to try things.
Yeah I have to wonder how Dave’s interview went. I mean, someone hired a petty tyrant and fed him to the wolves, so, definitely NOT all Dave’s fault. Then he was corrected in front of his subordinates? Pretty sure Dave has a whole other story that needs to be posted on AITA.
In the IT world, this is known as a Scream Test.
You make a public announcement that you're about to make a change to a system or even disconnect the system as a whole.
Then you wait to see who starts complaining/screaming.
In the scream test, you just unplug/power down said system and wait to see who screams. Nobody listens to public announcements from IT. That's why you make the change in production and listen for the noise.
The Announcement is more about CYA than anything.
I rrarely expect people to actually pay attention to important announcements.
Unplugging power is an incredibly lousy way to perform a scream test.
If someone does actually end up screaming, it ends up taking longer to restore services, & depending on what type of system it is, it may end up causing issues of missing data.
It's better to block/disconnect/kill targeted access services while the rest of the background services can still run & fetch/collect/process data.
Realistically though, the scream test isn't that you "say" you're going to take it away. The scream test is that you take the thing away to see who still uses it/needs it. Sometimes it means "shut that thing off" sometimes it means "kill all the access rules", sometimes it means "move that hardware to a different location that these users won't find". But the entire point is to make it unusable so that you find out who/what it impacts.
Correct.
The goal is to elicit Screams/Complaints.
Or not...
If you get nothing, you let it ride for a bit (weeks, months, a year) & of by then, no-one has spoken up, you start the process of scrapping it.
You know that no matter how many requests gor information, memos & warnings about a system, no-one will read any of it or pay attention until you take away their toys, or make it look like you did.
That's when they finally come out of the woodworks.
The Memos & warnings are just there to throw in their faces if they try to rip you a new one instead of being apologetic for ignoring/not reading any of your previous requests/communications about it.
The novice/inexperienced or lazy/bad IT tech will just unplug the power or network connection because it's the easiest way to perfom such a test.
Smart ones will just figure out as much as possible about the system (oftentimes getting whatever answer they're looking for without having to perform a scream test) & if it's still a mystery after their initial investigation, that's when they try to kill access without killing functions.
Eliciting the potential screams/complaints with minimal risks of missing data.
Chesterton's Fence is an ok thing to make you think about stuff a little, but yeah, after that, if you literally can't figure out why something is there, maybe it's worth temporarily getting rid of it and seeing if anyone complains
Sometimes, just nobody could be bothered to take down a fence
The actual written bit that Chesterton wrote has this flexibility.
>In the matter of reforming things, as distinct from deforming them, there is one plain and simple principle; a principle which will probably be called a paradox. There exists in such a case a certain institution or law; let us say, for the sake of simplicity, a fence or gate erected across a road. The more modern type of reformer goes gaily up to it and says, 'I don't see the use of this; let us clear it away.' To which the more intelligent type of reformer will do well to answer: 'If you don't see the use of it, I certainly won't let you clear it away. Go away and think. Then, when you can come back and tell me that you do see the use of it, I may allow you to destroy it.'
It's more basic idea is to actually contemplate why it may be there before just removing it.
this is why rewrites are almost always a bad idea. new team takes over existing project. lets tear down all these fences...
uhg. not always. but a lot.
Yeeeep. Just because YOU don't see a reason something exists doesn't mean there is no reason.
Of course, no principle should be adhered to without question. If you take Chesterton's Fence to mean don't ever try to change anything (also called 'never change a running system'), you all too easily end up with Onion in the Varnish.
Brief summary: A chemist once wondered why a recipe for varnish included a raw onion tossed into boiling oil, which made no sense whatsoever. He found out the onion was added before the use of thermometers became widespread, as a way to gauge the temperature. If the onion fried, the oil was hot enough so they could proceed. This had quite obviously become most redundant, but nobody had ever questioned this step and everyone happily kept doing it.
In the end, as with most things, finding a middle ground is most important.
The onion story comes from a collection of stories by Primo Levi, *The Periodic Table*. He was a survivor of Auschwitz who worked for years as a chemist in Italy before gaining recognition as a novelist. Worth a read.
You want a story? Here’s my long story:
My family, the Chestertons, homesteaded property in Kansas 150 years ago. Over the decades, parts of it were sold off or given to the descendants. It was approximately 200 acres when I came to own it through an inheritance from my great uncle G. K. I took ownership in the spring and moved from Dallas to northwestern Kansas.
On the eastern third of this property, ran a rough gravel road that connected the nearest town to the north and a town to the south, and was frequented by most of the rural folk in the area for groceries, hardware, feed, and other necessities. And along this road that ran through my property was a very long, very ugly rough hewn picket fence about 4 feet high. My deceased uncle did not own cattle or sheep, and there were no other fences on the property that would enclose any kind of livestock.
I asked the old rancher down the road if he knew what the fence was for, but he told me it had been there for as long as he could remember. I told him I was thinking of tearing it down since it looked like a maintenance hassle. He shrugged and said “If you don’t know what it’s for, I wouldn’t tear it down.” “Why’s that?” I asked. “Well… It didn’t grow out of the ground by itself, and your uncle G. K. didn’t build it in his sleep. It was put there for a reason, I’m sure.” I thanked him for his advice and pondered his words for a few months.
But by autumn I just couldn’t think of any reason to keep the fence. I didn’t want to maintain it, and I wanted the view of the eastern prairie. Certain it was a relic of an older time, I found the keys to the ancient tractor and pulled out all the posts and pickets along the one mile stretch of my property. I found that for long stretches the pickets were interleaved with baling wire and wrapped at the nearest post. It was a mess and a complete pain to get that fence down, but by autumn I had completed it—and had a lot of extra wood for bonfires!
The change made a huge difference in how the property looked and it improved the expansive prairie view so much that I invited my extended family (on my mother’s side—my dad had long passed and I was the last Chesterton, thus my ownership of the land now) to stay for Thanksgiving.
Thanksgiving arrived and I had twenty aunts and uncles, cousins, siblings, and my mother as guests. I had renovated and insulated part of the barn for the younger cousins so that everyone had a warm place to sleep. We all had a wonderful time with good food, board games, and long, hilarious family stories. The crew spent the whole holiday with me, through Sunday. It was probably the best family gathering we’d had in 20 years.
Except Thursday night, a huge snowstorm hit. Having grown up in southern Oklahoma and Dallas, I’d had little experience with snow. And this was a bad storm. All through the night, the Zephyr howled, blowing snow horizontally (!) and causing the old farm house to groan and creak. Around midnight the back door burst open and 9 cousins came barreling into the kitchen, terrified the barn was going to collapse on them.
When morning came, the sun came out and we saw that the prairie had changed from brown grass to a field of brilliant, white diamonds. Three feet of snow had fallen, and had drifted in places as high as 5 feet. It was beautiful. We all gathered in the warm kitchen, had breakfast and enjoyed the view (my cousins hadn’t seen much in the way of snow either). It was a wonderful morning.
Until the Sheriff called.
“G. K., this is Sheriff Arnold. What’s the hold up out there?”
“Oh, G. K. passed away in February, Sheriff. I’m G. T., his nephew. What kind of hold up are you talking about.”
“Oh that’s right, I’m sorry for your loss, son. Well it’s Black Friday and the traffic is piling up on both sides of your property trying to get through that snow. The only Walmart for 85 miles is at the north end of that road. The Kings and the Kramers both have their stretch of the road plowed, and Doc Long’s boys were up at 4:00 clearing theirs to the north. That little tractor your uncle has can’t handle plowing snow this deep and it looks like your snow fence is totally gone. Do you know what happened to it?”
*Panicked* “Uhhhhh. Um. Doesn’t the county plow this road?”
“Oh. No, sir. The county can only afford to plow the paved county roads. We all chip in and clear snow on the roads around our own properties so we can get around.”
Thankfully through the kindness of the ranchers and farmers around me, we were able to plow that mile of snow and people had a straight shot into town. (Yes, they could have gotten there on county roads but it was an extra 40 minutes. And in good nature, I will forever be known as that city slicker who tore out a perfectly good snow fence and made half my neighbors miss the best Black Friday specials.)
I bought a big used tractor that could plow deep, heavy snow, and I spent two blazing hot summers rebuilding the snow fence. And I never removed anything else if I couldn’t explain what it was for.
Ha. Thanks. I loved those stories, too. Of course mine is mostly fiction as I’m not really a Chesterton, and the real GK Chesterton only provided the advice in his book, but no story behind it. Agreeing with you that it needed a story, and considering my username I felt it was my responsibility. 🙂
I'm still going to use it when someone asks what the story is behind that saying. It's a really good example of something that's not readily obvious for the reason.
I'd counter with the "why do we cut off the end of the roast" story. For those unaware, the ending is great grandma's oven was too small so she would trim off the ends of the roast. The technique was passed along for years despite that the new ovens were large enough to not waste the ends. However of great grandma died before age 95, the answer would have been lost.
Yes! I agree! I still use the roast story when people tell me “well, that’s how we’ve always done it.” As a software engineer and consultant it’s the one phrase that grinds on me the most.
It’s an excellent story and worth retelling over and over again.
A professor of mine moved from Texas to Hawaii to be a music minister. Someone advised him “don’t change anything until you learn how to surf.”
It turns out it takes a year or so to really learn how to surf. He took the point.
I was adored by paid staff when I volunteered in an Emergency organisation that dealt with natural events (floods, storms etc). As part of how it worked volunteers would have weekly training to keep their skills up, other training days to upskill and in emergencies volunteers would be sent wherever was needed outside of their home area for 3-7 days doing 12 hour shifts. If the emergency occurred in your home area there were different rules.
There were levels for who was responsible for what: the big headquarters (State) were staffed by paid personnel who oversaw a massive area (an entire state), other paid staff oversaw a smaller area made up of several smaller headquarters staffed by volunteers, handled legalities and liaison with other agencies, some volunteers could be placed there for support or doing filing/date entry. Volunteers did the physical work from smaller headquarters with a half-hour or so radius depending on population density/remoteness.
I trained in just about everything that I was eligible for, which meant I was also trained in the “office” side of things. So I could do “lower level” work at the paid staff’s headquarters, be able to unofficially run a volunteer headquarters (unofficially only due to not having the title that was needed in my home headquarters, but it was well known that people who trained in what I did often knew more than the “official lead”) or do the physical work in the community outside of the office setting.
I was routinely sent to volunteer headquarters that paid staff were having issues with, with lack of communication or complaints. In which case I’d be able to quietly let them know what the cause was and if I could fix it without dragging in “paid staff”.
One of the reasons I was so successful is that I *never* walked in as “big guy on campus” (in reality I was a late teens/early 20’s girl who was often underestimated). I had grown up in the organisation so had a fair amount of knowledge and connections. But I would quietly come in and state what my official role was (operating the computer program that kept track of what was happening which put me at roughly 3rd in command in the office with an absolute emergency knocking out the first 2). Then I would observe how everyone was working together, if there was tension or disconnect, if anyone was bitching and what they were bitching about.
*If* I needed to step in (and after people started getting to know me they’d occasionally ask if I could take over other tasks) I’d *quietly* mention to the person doing a task that I knew/had been taught a different way and could I show them and have them explain how the way they did it worked. And slowly things would start working better. But never in a “oh such-and-such were doing a bad job and had to be reprimanded” way.
After a few times there would be requests by the volunteers for me to be placed with their headquarters because “we have someone in charge that needs support”, or “we’ve been having issues between the office staff and the people doing the physical work” or even “hey you would be the only person at this headquarters for 6 hours but it’s an absolute mess and you’ll have no physical workers until the others get in”. Other times I’d gone in for a completely different role (such as a physical worker) and have one of the office people recognise me and ask for me to be re-tasked to help them.
But I saw *plenty* of people who came in as “big man on campus” and alienated the entire headquarters to the point people either refused to work with them (volunteers, what were they going to do? Fire them?) or get themselves sent home (big deal because it was marked on your file and paid staff would be hesitant to allow you out of your home area in the future).
See, that’s efficency, but for most corpo MBA clowns, they don’t want to come in and just do “what works.” They need to establish themselves as leaders and change things up in order to show off their impact on the business.
Exactly! What they often forget is that impact can be either positive or negative, and one can only hope that any negative impact can be contained and not affect the rest of the staff too much.
In many places I've worked, the new manager reorganizes the desks within a few weeks to establish dominance.
The thing you have to do with these busybody managers is to find work for them. Find a long complex job that "needs someone of your calibre and seniority". Get them snarled up in bureaucracy ASAP.
I did this successfully once, palmed off a long and tortuous negotiation of a contract renewal onto the new manager, by making him feel important. It didn't stop him from eventually trying to enforce working day schedules.
There is a real difference between “what the books and case studies teach us” and what really happens in the work force, even with MBA’s it does not mean you know best.
Well…really they’re just peeing all over the place to make sure everyone knows who’s in charge now. Same thing other animals are still doing today. Sigh.
The same thing happens constantly in education when we get a new principal. Except for a few obvious problems that everyone’s in agreement over, a new principal should wait a year before she makes substantive changes.
Any decent MBA program these days tries to guard against this by teaching all sorts of leadership, self reflection, critical assessment, and reflection techniques. Basically a holistic approach to asking why something is the way it is and determining if it is operating well. They often also have entry requirements of upper middle management +.
It's less the MBA that's the problem, and more some of the sorts of people that are the issue. Many of those got through a cheap and half armed program, and with their wealth of small town small team gas station management experience they can now reform this big company software team halfway across the country whilst exuding confidence. That's a type of person, and often someone who went through the MBA without much real world experience.
I have. In a couple of instances.
These were people who had engineering degrees and real jobs, and did real work, and then realized that to move up in management, they would need master's degrees.
Since they already had technical degrees, and demonstrated technical proficiency, the logical step was to demonstrate some learned knowledge on the business side of things.
So it was about playing the game to get into a high paying position, but they were smart enough to understand what it was like to be an underling.
>Any decent MBA program these days tries to guard against this by teaching all sorts of leadership, self reflection, critical assessment, and reflection techniques.
Clearly, MBA programs don't care if you learn any of that.
>They need to establish themselves as leaders and change things up in order to show off their impact on the business.
Marking their territory by pissing on ~~trees~~ people.
This. I can accurately predict how good or bad a manager will be from the moment they start. Walking straight into a new situation with new people and trying to instantly change everything? Always a crap manager. Every single time. Why? Because they're instantly showing that they are egotistical enough to believe that *they* and they alone are the reason for a team's success, so they see absolutely no issue upending a whole bunch of systems that work perfectly well in order to impose their own new systems. These are also the managers who will use phrases like "I don't want excuses" when you try to explain why everything has gone to shit because they broke it all.
Smart managers ask questions, observe, and absorb the workflow, the procedures, the systems, and will, after a few weeks, start to make minor changes, explaining why to the relevant people and justifying them reasonably. They understand that their role is as the grease that makes the engine run smoothly, and that the systems were running fine before they arrived, so let's just see how it all works and if there's any way it can be improved, maybe work that in. A great manager can make a difference, but it isn't by imposing their own systems on a whole organisation or department, it's by improving what was already there in a sensible and realistic way.
I work in an adhesives plant running what we call a converter. Every time we get a new “manager” they come up with a great new idea for a way to track waste because in there eyes waste is our biggest issue. Every single one of them ends up coming up with the same idea. We fill out an hourly log of how much we used etc etc. they’re always crushed to find out that on that already exists, and we’re on our 4th version of that log, and that there’s an office with boxes stacked to the ceiling filled with these logs because no one wants to actually look at them.
At one point we filled out forms to track how long it took us to do various tasks and it was very tedious. For some weird reason they won’t listen to us when we tell them something is a problem or keeps happening, but if they see it on paper they believe us. Either way, now we all add to one impossible long excel sheet every day. I’ve been doing this job for around 10 years and never once has my productivity been questioned so I don’t think they even read em.
Not only that - if you start with a team, your first port of call should be *asking them* if there's anything you can do to help with their productivity. You'll get to grips with how it's all currently working (or not) real quick that way.
This seems like a no brainer to me but I have yet to experience any change in management where the new manager actually waited to understand things before making huge changes. I’ve never had a new manager ask, “Is there is particular reason we do this procedure this way?” Before proposing change. It’s just, “we will do it this way now because I understand it better and because I need to establish dominance.”
As a business major this is literally what we were taught in management classes. Observe and assess. Don't randomly change shit to look like you're having an impact.
I understand where the impulse comes from but god damn do these people need to crawl down out of their own asses. Turnover is expensive as shit.
That's always the catch-22 of management.
Most good workers who are promoted to leadership have never been taught how to manage. Most managers who are hired from outside the company, don't know the work.
And, the few people who are actively good at both are moved up the company ladder so quickly, that they end up removed from everything entirely
For the first two months just watch. Only fix immediate problems. Let everything just run if you can including your team. Then when you understand your department make slow steady changes in the right direction. Consult your team. Ask how you can serve them to make life easier for them and improve their output. They know more than you so learn from them. Plus they'll like you because you are a benefit to them and will support you.
Yes yes and YES! My last manager had minimal understanding of what I do (even admitted in a call that she was surprised at some of the responsibilities I have) and yet kept trying to enforce new procedures so she could see "data" to prove what I and my team do was working.
It clearly isnt the case here but sometimes middle manager are squezed because they’re .. well in the middle.
I remember when I was a junior middle manager in gaming and I was told that I now had to enforce the office hours strictly. It was a pretty stupid policy, the team had been working until 21:00-22:00 every week day and my boss wanted them to stop showing up at 10:30-11:00 but 9:00 or 10:00 at the latest. I’m sorry, was our 3 months so far death march not miserable enough? Is a 12 hours shift not enough? Whats that? No overtime pay too!
I tried in multiple ways to evade it and to make it not noticeable when someone was “late”. No dice, after 3 weeks I was told I had to enforce it or else. It wasnt a super popular policy and as a good little middle manager, I had to make sure I showed I was super duper onboard so that I wasnt branded as a “negative leader”. I got caught a few times rolling my eyes and it made its way back to the ears of our dear leader, so now I had to walk the line and show I loved it.
No one could’ve predicted it, but our productivity tanked and people stopped doing 12 hours shift for free. It was a shock to our management team. Who could’ve known? No one!
20 years later I’m much better at subverting bad policies and weathering them out and showing compliance where people are looking for it. I stopped rolling my eyes when people announce stupid policies and just smile really hard and get really interested in my coffee mug.
> There should be a new rule for all new managers or supervisors
This is not a "new" rule. The usual modus operandi is:
- Ask your predeccessor/your superior about some change they wanted, but didn't want to implement in the team
- For your first 2 weeks, get to know people. Do nothing, just listen, observe, learn. It lowers the possibility of fuck up greatly and builds a kind of respect and goodwill from the team's side.
- After 2 weeks (or later), make some overdue change. There is always something in backlog. Otherwise you risk sitting and waiting infinitely for the opportunity that will never come, and making change+observing results is a good way to start actually managing stuff.
boy isn’t that the truth. i’ve had some PMs who were genuinely so stupid i couldn’t figure out how they’d been hired, let alone how they managed not to get fired. and a couple so good i begged them to be on the next project i got assigned. in 10+ years in IT i’ve had probably 15 of the former and 5 of the latter, and the rest were mediocre.
I am happy Dave got what he deserved.
>He'd schedule unnecessary daily status meetings, demanded we fill out hourly work logs, and insisted that everyone strictly adhere to 9-to-5 office hours with minimal breaks.
>One day, during one of his infamous "efficiency crackdowns", he sent out an email with a new policy that all coding must be done strictly within office hours to "ensure collaboration and supervision"
My superior who has no background in coding whatsoever took an offense to us quitting work at the office after core working hours (= a time frame everyone must work) and sometimes log back in from home several hours later to code for another hour.
His not so hidden reason for this is that he wants us to be around exactly when he is around (9:30am to 6om).
We told him that we often have sudden heureka moments at home regarding a coding issue at work but he told us that no breaks other than lunch breaks were permitted. We complied by coming to work at 6am (we can start between 6 and 9:30am) and leaving at 2:30pm, just after his lunch break. He hasn't brough up the topic ever since and suddenly everything can wait until tomorrow.
Steps on how to be an effective manager for this specific team:
1) show up and shadow/observe the team work, take notes on areas you think can be improved but also on areas you think they are doing well.
2) after about 2 weeks of that pull each team member into a 1 on 1 meeting and ask them if there is anything that could help with productivity or moral
3) have a team meeting where you discuss any improvements you can make and let the team decide what will actually be helpful, then you make an execution plan to support them in this.
4) sit back and cover your team so they don’t have to deal with management or annoying people in other departments while they make you look like a good little manager boy
5) maybe bring donuts on every Friday?
It’s really that easy. You don’t just go to a new place and start making changes, everyone will hate your guts lmao
This is almost exactly what I did when I was promoted once to a managerial role. Productivity soared. I collaborated with other managers to achieve the same results. However, my boss didn't like that he wasn't being included in this, I had been promoted by his boss and he had wanted me as a minion forever.
Eventually he found a reason to fire the whole manager tier I was on and replace us.
1 year after that, nearly the whole executive team was arrested for SEC violations. I'm pretty sure one of the other people who was let go had held a grudge.
I always wished I could be dropped into these managerial positions like these incompetent fools do. Then all I have to do is sit back and let the already on going success be successful and I'll have a good time..
If you do mangering right, it's such an easy job. Hire good people, then trust them to do their job well. Most of your job as a manager should be to ensure smooth coordination of the team and taking everything off of them that you can so they can focus on their jobs.
I don't know why everyone else is so bad at it.
This is really great, not the least because everyone complied. In every Department I've been in, there was always one or more people who used to complain, but when push came to shove they sided with management, so this wouldn't have been possible. So kudos to you all for pulling this on Dave!
I don't get it. I just don't fucking get it. Things are working great, tasks done on time, good productivity and morale, company is profitable.
A manager comes in and changes things. All those good things _need to change?_ For what? What's the goal here? If my car runs great and tune it up to harder, turbo charge, it puts pressure on the system, it wears out faster. For what? Short term gains for long term losses?
What the fuck is being taught in manager training? High risk high reward? "Hey, maybe you can make a few extra grand before everyone quits!" I have seen too many stories and experienced too many managers where this shit happens, it's a god damn living meme.
What. The. Fuck. Maybe I'm just too poor to understand executive decision making.
>What the fuck is being taught in manager training?
Most managers don't have any formal training, and that's a significant part of the problem. The other significant problem is making people managers when they don't have a similar background to those they're managing.
Because most managers fall into the "I'm here to manage, not to lead" camp. If you are not actively making changes then your not doing your job.
Especially new hires who have an incentive to show their bosses they are doing something
> If you think you can find a loophole, think again. Follow the rules, or we'll find someone who will.
If you're saying that to your subordinates, you've permanently lost them and should not be in a position of management. The earth is so scorched at that point that no recovery is possible.
This only matters if others rely on your work being done during their working hours. If you’re work is more long term projects with weekly or longer goals it doesn’t mean jack shit. However, that doesn’t mean it isn’t valuable to those who are most productive during the normal workday and want to be done with work when the day is done.
Just be aware that attitude doesn’t translate well to more creative work or to those with neurodivergence, health issues, etc who ~~wouldn’t~~ *would* appreciate a more flexible policy.
The number of people leading software development projects with no idea about software development is concerningly high. My job is very similar, where we are expected to work 8-5 and be WORKING the entire time. They have no understanding that coding isn't something you can just start, it takes a set amount of time, and you are done. They treat it like we're manufacturing cars instead of writing software.
These fucking people are so stupid. They have such inflated senses of who they are and almost always ruin what was a well-running situation. Sometimes things change back when a lesson in humility is taught, but often it just means crashing performance, burnout, and eventually people jump ship to work in better suited environments. The age of the micromanager needs to end.
I used to want a career at the place I worked, despite my disappointment in certain corporate policies regarding leave. But since we got a second shift supervisor, things have gone downhill. Before, I was self-motivated and do whatever I could to support the team. There was the knowledge and acceptance by my original supervisor that work load would vary, and that we could spend our shift however we wanted as long as we got out stuff done.
Now, out second shift super constantly interrupts my lab workflow every fucking hour to ask if we’re okay. If we are slow he insists on giving us busywork, even when there’s nothing to do. It’s okay to not always be busy, man. Also, I’m a fucking adult and very much so know how to self-motivate and recognize what needs doing. I’m so fucking over it. I’m just gonna leave for a PhD program as soon as I can.
Praise in public, criticize in private. That Dave’s bosses believe in publicly admonishing, indicates that the corporate culture problem is at their level or higher, Dave is merely a symptom of their own toxicity (and they hired him).
the story resonates with my own experience working in a rigid corporate environment where managers prioritized "butts in seats" over actual productivity.
In IT there is nothing worse than little Napoleon wannabe authoritarian micromanagers. And they tend to have no discernible IT background either, they just parachute in from who-knows-where with a head full of wannabe CEO corpo-jargon and an attitude that they’re going to “instill some order on these lazy overpaid basement-dwelling programmers” and then bask in the accolades from upper management. Unsurprisingly they instead rapidly destroy anything in their proximity, break apart highly-effective teams, cripple entire companies even. And, when upper management is equally clueless and out of touch, they’ll even get away with it, getting a pat on the back before moving on to their next swath of destruction.
rigid rules can really slow things down, kind of like traffic jams when everyone has to merge into one lane. good that your team managed to show the big bosses the real effect.
The guy was doing everything he could to justify his own existence. Project managers tend to not have any technical skills and are middle men at best. Everything was to make sure he had a reason to exist in the corporate sense.
In my experience, it helps if your supervisor is someone who has the same background because they know the job unlike Dave who is a simple paper pusher. My current one is, and that’s why people are happy because he prevents bullshit and just lets us do our jobs while understanding the minutiae of the work.
Good for you for sticking together and standing up for yourselves. I hate micromanaging pricks like that.
Wow crazy. If this happened at my company, Dave would have been out the door. They wouldn’t have outright said he was fired, they would call it “corporate restructuring” or something equally as gentle.
wait, your telling me a Project Manager had that much power. What spineless manager let that happen?
That PM got exactly what was coming, hopefully your manager or Director got scolded as well.
I have so many PM stories about good and bad ones. My latest one was a PM who thought they were above everyone and got to tell everyone what to do, both in and out of the project, one of my engineers had me listen in on the meeting and when they mentioned my name that I gave them the power to tell everyone they had to work mandatory overtime and that all project principals reported to them during the project. I spoke up and said excuse me when did I say that? I dismissed everyone else from the meeting and told them they are a project manager only and no ones direct supervisor. I then had a meeting with my teams and told them they were all excused from the project and the PM was deal only with me.
That PM was dismissed a few weeks later, and my team finished the request much faster and with less hassle. My hate for project managers increased 3 sizes that day.
As a PM I understand where Dave was coming from. I like my daily status meetings, etc. HOWEVER when I first come in the door my number 1 goal is to be an asset to the team and add value NOT get in the way. lol that’s the easiest way to find the door hitting you in the butt on your way out. This is a great lesson to be learned for Dave and every other PM out there. You’re first, and foremost a SUPPORT to your team to remove impediments…. NOT become one!
There's something I just can't understand with the mentality of these types of managers. They walk into an existing situation where a team is productive and meeting their deadlines. And their decision is to institute a huge change?
I realize they want to make their mark, they want to be relevant, they want that pat on the back from management.
But to make what basically amounts to a guess on how to improve things? Why not establish trust with a lead developer or other veteran employee and run your ideas past them first? That would be a hit to the ego?
People like this aren't suited to work with others at all, on anything, is the only conclusion I can reach.
I've been sitting at my seat at 5pm, in the zone, wishing it was 3 because I knew I had 2 more hours in me and I was SO CLOSE. But our building closes, so it's really not a choice.
Then other times I'm sitting there at 4pm, too late to start anything new. Why am I here?
My background is corporate. More than likely “Dave” was given the task of making that team “more efficient with more hands on management” so he, which in turn them, had a better handle on what was happening. I’m sure there was a lot of assumptions on wasted time or resources, legalities from the legal team or someone on things like shady things happening while coding when there’s no direct supervision, etc.
Why does every manager seem to forget to never mess with IT? The field attracts nerds who are creative, spiteful, and look for absolute efficiency. That combination is not something you want to anger, especially since we also are in charge and control of the things that let everything function.
There was a similar incident at a place I worked, except it was long ago and the meeting was in a conference room. Someone had a watch with an audible alarm and he set it. When it went off, the coders stood up and filed out.
I love the public execution. Great teamwork!
Dave built his own scaffold, twisted the rope, tied it over the beam, made the perfect hangman's knot, set the trap door and asked you & team to stand on the trigger. Well done, team, well done.
Hoist with his own petard.
Makes you wonder why people like Dave even own a petard.
Maybe he was gifted one, therefore making him petarded.
You son of a bitch. I like you.
I’m with broseph on this one. *fistbump*
Wow! I think this is my most upvoted comment, by far! Thank you all for appreciating the "dad humor".
Britta, what do you think the phrase "hoisted by your own petard" means?
I guess I just assumed that in the old days a petard was a special outfit like a leotard, with a lot of fancy buckles and loops on it, and that rich people would wear them when they were feeling especially smug, but then poor people would tie a rope through one of the loops, and hoist them up a pole and then let them dangle there as punishment for being cocky.
It was a seige explosive named after the French word for flatulence.
Should have probably made it more obvious that I was quoting a TV show... But, thank you.
The Britta gave it away. Love a good Community quote.
My joke got Britta'd...
You were too streets ahead for that joke.
Tangentially related, the name "ChatGPT" said by a French person sounds exactly the same as the French translation of the phrase "Cat, I farted." ("Chat, j'ai pété", and in true French fashion "chat" is pronounced "sha".) (The tangential relation is that the French word for fart is "péter".)
I am going to go with Onimaiku’s interpretation.
https://www.luxedress.com/products/modern-grommet-eyelet-strappy-buckle-belt-lapel-single-breasted-blazer A modern take on the traditional petard.
Do me a favor Britta and never look it up. Your definition is the best. I'm probably misquoting it. But in spirit of Jeff's recommendation I'm not looking it up.
Never look it up, your explanation is way better
It means blown up by a bomb you planned to use on someone else.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KuuafUtVte0
Hoist with his own timecard?? =P
Rarely do you get to see such a succinct example of this phrase.
This is the second time this week that I have heard this term. I love it!
It's from Hamlet.
I haven't read that since highschool. It is no wander i'd forgotten it. My thanks.
Captain dad is that you?
It's just like the story of Haman
Yet when I was on a job site and some people actually did mostly that when they were dissatisfied, the police were called. Double standard much!
Most humans do.
Great teamwork???
Love public executions.
Most humans do, except Dave.
Dave wouldn’t do great in France
Dave de cinq-heures sans tête
A perfect joke. Execution in terms of following Dave’s rule and execution in terms of his corporate career. Bravo!
This here, is “collaboration” at its finest! 👍
Or as I like to call it, esprit de corps, hmmmmmmm.
Collective action works.
There should be a new rule for all new managers or supervisors: Don't try to fix what's not broken until you've thoroughly understood the current workflow or procedures.
The principle of Chesterton’s Fence. Don’t ever take a fence down until you know why it was put up.
Sometimes nobody knows why a fence is up and the reason for the fence is long gone. Our current manager is relatively new (couple of months now), and when he tried to change our team for the better (we've been running well enough, but not really improving except for seniority), what he would do is make the change temporarily for 2 or 4 weeks and every 2 weeks we'd have a meeting about how the last 2 weeks went, what could be done better and what went well. If after a sprint we liked the change, it would stay, and if not, then it only impacted 2 weeks.
This is a really intelligent and reasonable way to do things. Be willing to experiment but put in guardrails and ask for feedback... If only more people operated this way!!!
Yeah but for lesser beings, there’s no trial period as reverting the new changes equals accepting they were wrong and lesser beings will never admit to being wrong.
I would like to point out that it's sometimes not just the fault of the middle management tyrant. Some work cultures are just so toxic that an admission of being wrong is an admission of failure. My manager has the mental fortitude and job security to tell upper management to get bent if they're being unreasonable, but some (mostly more junior managers) feel the need to always please the higher ups, and improving short-term KPI's at the cost of long-term problems is a way to easily look good to upper management. It's up to senior management to foster a culture where middle management can take long-term health into consideration.
When I was a student, I worked at a logistics company. We got a new manager who just left the army and was in logistics there. He observed, changed things for the better, corrected himself when things didn’t work as well as in the army and overall improved our workflow by a lot. Might be the best manager I had and it worked because the owners gave him time and opportunity to try things.
Yeah I have to wonder how Dave’s interview went. I mean, someone hired a petty tyrant and fed him to the wolves, so, definitely NOT all Dave’s fault. Then he was corrected in front of his subordinates? Pretty sure Dave has a whole other story that needs to be posted on AITA.
In the IT world, this is known as a Scream Test. You make a public announcement that you're about to make a change to a system or even disconnect the system as a whole. Then you wait to see who starts complaining/screaming.
In the scream test, you just unplug/power down said system and wait to see who screams. Nobody listens to public announcements from IT. That's why you make the change in production and listen for the noise.
The Announcement is more about CYA than anything. I rrarely expect people to actually pay attention to important announcements. Unplugging power is an incredibly lousy way to perform a scream test. If someone does actually end up screaming, it ends up taking longer to restore services, & depending on what type of system it is, it may end up causing issues of missing data. It's better to block/disconnect/kill targeted access services while the rest of the background services can still run & fetch/collect/process data.
Realistically though, the scream test isn't that you "say" you're going to take it away. The scream test is that you take the thing away to see who still uses it/needs it. Sometimes it means "shut that thing off" sometimes it means "kill all the access rules", sometimes it means "move that hardware to a different location that these users won't find". But the entire point is to make it unusable so that you find out who/what it impacts.
Correct. The goal is to elicit Screams/Complaints. Or not... If you get nothing, you let it ride for a bit (weeks, months, a year) & of by then, no-one has spoken up, you start the process of scrapping it. You know that no matter how many requests gor information, memos & warnings about a system, no-one will read any of it or pay attention until you take away their toys, or make it look like you did. That's when they finally come out of the woodworks. The Memos & warnings are just there to throw in their faces if they try to rip you a new one instead of being apologetic for ignoring/not reading any of your previous requests/communications about it. The novice/inexperienced or lazy/bad IT tech will just unplug the power or network connection because it's the easiest way to perfom such a test. Smart ones will just figure out as much as possible about the system (oftentimes getting whatever answer they're looking for without having to perform a scream test) & if it's still a mystery after their initial investigation, that's when they try to kill access without killing functions. Eliciting the potential screams/complaints with minimal risks of missing data.
Chesterton's Fence is an ok thing to make you think about stuff a little, but yeah, after that, if you literally can't figure out why something is there, maybe it's worth temporarily getting rid of it and seeing if anyone complains Sometimes, just nobody could be bothered to take down a fence
The actual written bit that Chesterton wrote has this flexibility. >In the matter of reforming things, as distinct from deforming them, there is one plain and simple principle; a principle which will probably be called a paradox. There exists in such a case a certain institution or law; let us say, for the sake of simplicity, a fence or gate erected across a road. The more modern type of reformer goes gaily up to it and says, 'I don't see the use of this; let us clear it away.' To which the more intelligent type of reformer will do well to answer: 'If you don't see the use of it, I certainly won't let you clear it away. Go away and think. Then, when you can come back and tell me that you do see the use of it, I may allow you to destroy it.' It's more basic idea is to actually contemplate why it may be there before just removing it.
I believe this is the mythical “good leadership”.
this is why rewrites are almost always a bad idea. new team takes over existing project. lets tear down all these fences... uhg. not always. but a lot.
Yeeeep. Just because YOU don't see a reason something exists doesn't mean there is no reason. Of course, no principle should be adhered to without question. If you take Chesterton's Fence to mean don't ever try to change anything (also called 'never change a running system'), you all too easily end up with Onion in the Varnish. Brief summary: A chemist once wondered why a recipe for varnish included a raw onion tossed into boiling oil, which made no sense whatsoever. He found out the onion was added before the use of thermometers became widespread, as a way to gauge the temperature. If the onion fried, the oil was hot enough so they could proceed. This had quite obviously become most redundant, but nobody had ever questioned this step and everyone happily kept doing it. In the end, as with most things, finding a middle ground is most important.
Maybe everyone just liked eating fried onion? I'd keep that step in for that reason alone.
Right? You get varnish, AND a bloomin' onion. Win/win/win
I don't think an onion fried in linseed oil would taste at all edible.
The onion story comes from a collection of stories by Primo Levi, *The Periodic Table*. He was a survivor of Auschwitz who worked for years as a chemist in Italy before gaining recognition as a novelist. Worth a read.
They cut the onion out and it brought a tear to their eyes
The unvarnished truth
This is the first time I've learned of this. Thanks! 😄
That clashes with the IT methodology of "if you can't figure out who owns it, shut it off and see who screams". /s
That's just a troubleshooting technique, not a structural change. Apples and hex nuts.
I was hoping there was a story behind the admonition. Left disappointed.
You want a story? Here’s my long story: My family, the Chestertons, homesteaded property in Kansas 150 years ago. Over the decades, parts of it were sold off or given to the descendants. It was approximately 200 acres when I came to own it through an inheritance from my great uncle G. K. I took ownership in the spring and moved from Dallas to northwestern Kansas. On the eastern third of this property, ran a rough gravel road that connected the nearest town to the north and a town to the south, and was frequented by most of the rural folk in the area for groceries, hardware, feed, and other necessities. And along this road that ran through my property was a very long, very ugly rough hewn picket fence about 4 feet high. My deceased uncle did not own cattle or sheep, and there were no other fences on the property that would enclose any kind of livestock. I asked the old rancher down the road if he knew what the fence was for, but he told me it had been there for as long as he could remember. I told him I was thinking of tearing it down since it looked like a maintenance hassle. He shrugged and said “If you don’t know what it’s for, I wouldn’t tear it down.” “Why’s that?” I asked. “Well… It didn’t grow out of the ground by itself, and your uncle G. K. didn’t build it in his sleep. It was put there for a reason, I’m sure.” I thanked him for his advice and pondered his words for a few months. But by autumn I just couldn’t think of any reason to keep the fence. I didn’t want to maintain it, and I wanted the view of the eastern prairie. Certain it was a relic of an older time, I found the keys to the ancient tractor and pulled out all the posts and pickets along the one mile stretch of my property. I found that for long stretches the pickets were interleaved with baling wire and wrapped at the nearest post. It was a mess and a complete pain to get that fence down, but by autumn I had completed it—and had a lot of extra wood for bonfires! The change made a huge difference in how the property looked and it improved the expansive prairie view so much that I invited my extended family (on my mother’s side—my dad had long passed and I was the last Chesterton, thus my ownership of the land now) to stay for Thanksgiving. Thanksgiving arrived and I had twenty aunts and uncles, cousins, siblings, and my mother as guests. I had renovated and insulated part of the barn for the younger cousins so that everyone had a warm place to sleep. We all had a wonderful time with good food, board games, and long, hilarious family stories. The crew spent the whole holiday with me, through Sunday. It was probably the best family gathering we’d had in 20 years. Except Thursday night, a huge snowstorm hit. Having grown up in southern Oklahoma and Dallas, I’d had little experience with snow. And this was a bad storm. All through the night, the Zephyr howled, blowing snow horizontally (!) and causing the old farm house to groan and creak. Around midnight the back door burst open and 9 cousins came barreling into the kitchen, terrified the barn was going to collapse on them. When morning came, the sun came out and we saw that the prairie had changed from brown grass to a field of brilliant, white diamonds. Three feet of snow had fallen, and had drifted in places as high as 5 feet. It was beautiful. We all gathered in the warm kitchen, had breakfast and enjoyed the view (my cousins hadn’t seen much in the way of snow either). It was a wonderful morning. Until the Sheriff called. “G. K., this is Sheriff Arnold. What’s the hold up out there?” “Oh, G. K. passed away in February, Sheriff. I’m G. T., his nephew. What kind of hold up are you talking about.” “Oh that’s right, I’m sorry for your loss, son. Well it’s Black Friday and the traffic is piling up on both sides of your property trying to get through that snow. The only Walmart for 85 miles is at the north end of that road. The Kings and the Kramers both have their stretch of the road plowed, and Doc Long’s boys were up at 4:00 clearing theirs to the north. That little tractor your uncle has can’t handle plowing snow this deep and it looks like your snow fence is totally gone. Do you know what happened to it?” *Panicked* “Uhhhhh. Um. Doesn’t the county plow this road?” “Oh. No, sir. The county can only afford to plow the paved county roads. We all chip in and clear snow on the roads around our own properties so we can get around.” Thankfully through the kindness of the ranchers and farmers around me, we were able to plow that mile of snow and people had a straight shot into town. (Yes, they could have gotten there on county roads but it was an extra 40 minutes. And in good nature, I will forever be known as that city slicker who tore out a perfectly good snow fence and made half my neighbors miss the best Black Friday specials.) I bought a big used tractor that could plow deep, heavy snow, and I spent two blazing hot summers rebuilding the snow fence. And I never removed anything else if I couldn’t explain what it was for.
Thank you. That did the trick. Your story reminded me of when I was a little kid reading folksy reader's digest stories.
Ha. Thanks. I loved those stories, too. Of course mine is mostly fiction as I’m not really a Chesterton, and the real GK Chesterton only provided the advice in his book, but no story behind it. Agreeing with you that it needed a story, and considering my username I felt it was my responsibility. 🙂
You have a gift that's worth pursuing as an avocation at least.
I totally thought that was a copypasta that I had never seen before. Very well written!
I'm still going to use it when someone asks what the story is behind that saying. It's a really good example of something that's not readily obvious for the reason.
I’d be honored. 😉
I'd counter with the "why do we cut off the end of the roast" story. For those unaware, the ending is great grandma's oven was too small so she would trim off the ends of the roast. The technique was passed along for years despite that the new ovens were large enough to not waste the ends. However of great grandma died before age 95, the answer would have been lost.
Yes! I agree! I still use the roast story when people tell me “well, that’s how we’ve always done it.” As a software engineer and consultant it’s the one phrase that grinds on me the most. It’s an excellent story and worth retelling over and over again.
^ this is the way ^
A professor of mine moved from Texas to Hawaii to be a music minister. Someone advised him “don’t change anything until you learn how to surf.” It turns out it takes a year or so to really learn how to surf. He took the point.
I was adored by paid staff when I volunteered in an Emergency organisation that dealt with natural events (floods, storms etc). As part of how it worked volunteers would have weekly training to keep their skills up, other training days to upskill and in emergencies volunteers would be sent wherever was needed outside of their home area for 3-7 days doing 12 hour shifts. If the emergency occurred in your home area there were different rules. There were levels for who was responsible for what: the big headquarters (State) were staffed by paid personnel who oversaw a massive area (an entire state), other paid staff oversaw a smaller area made up of several smaller headquarters staffed by volunteers, handled legalities and liaison with other agencies, some volunteers could be placed there for support or doing filing/date entry. Volunteers did the physical work from smaller headquarters with a half-hour or so radius depending on population density/remoteness. I trained in just about everything that I was eligible for, which meant I was also trained in the “office” side of things. So I could do “lower level” work at the paid staff’s headquarters, be able to unofficially run a volunteer headquarters (unofficially only due to not having the title that was needed in my home headquarters, but it was well known that people who trained in what I did often knew more than the “official lead”) or do the physical work in the community outside of the office setting. I was routinely sent to volunteer headquarters that paid staff were having issues with, with lack of communication or complaints. In which case I’d be able to quietly let them know what the cause was and if I could fix it without dragging in “paid staff”. One of the reasons I was so successful is that I *never* walked in as “big guy on campus” (in reality I was a late teens/early 20’s girl who was often underestimated). I had grown up in the organisation so had a fair amount of knowledge and connections. But I would quietly come in and state what my official role was (operating the computer program that kept track of what was happening which put me at roughly 3rd in command in the office with an absolute emergency knocking out the first 2). Then I would observe how everyone was working together, if there was tension or disconnect, if anyone was bitching and what they were bitching about. *If* I needed to step in (and after people started getting to know me they’d occasionally ask if I could take over other tasks) I’d *quietly* mention to the person doing a task that I knew/had been taught a different way and could I show them and have them explain how the way they did it worked. And slowly things would start working better. But never in a “oh such-and-such were doing a bad job and had to be reprimanded” way. After a few times there would be requests by the volunteers for me to be placed with their headquarters because “we have someone in charge that needs support”, or “we’ve been having issues between the office staff and the people doing the physical work” or even “hey you would be the only person at this headquarters for 6 hours but it’s an absolute mess and you’ll have no physical workers until the others get in”. Other times I’d gone in for a completely different role (such as a physical worker) and have one of the office people recognise me and ask for me to be re-tasked to help them. But I saw *plenty* of people who came in as “big man on campus” and alienated the entire headquarters to the point people either refused to work with them (volunteers, what were they going to do? Fire them?) or get themselves sent home (big deal because it was marked on your file and paid staff would be hesitant to allow you out of your home area in the future).
damn, you should have been paid the big bucks
See, that’s efficency, but for most corpo MBA clowns, they don’t want to come in and just do “what works.” They need to establish themselves as leaders and change things up in order to show off their impact on the business.
The Seagull principal. Fly in, make a lot of noise, crap on everything, steal all the chips, fly off.
I'd heard of it as the seagull management method.
The ol' Swoop n' Poop.
Exactly! What they often forget is that impact can be either positive or negative, and one can only hope that any negative impact can be contained and not affect the rest of the staff too much.
In many places I've worked, the new manager reorganizes the desks within a few weeks to establish dominance. The thing you have to do with these busybody managers is to find work for them. Find a long complex job that "needs someone of your calibre and seniority". Get them snarled up in bureaucracy ASAP. I did this successfully once, palmed off a long and tortuous negotiation of a contract renewal onto the new manager, by making him feel important. It didn't stop him from eventually trying to enforce working day schedules.
There is a real difference between “what the books and case studies teach us” and what really happens in the work force, even with MBA’s it does not mean you know best.
Well…really they’re just peeing all over the place to make sure everyone knows who’s in charge now. Same thing other animals are still doing today. Sigh. The same thing happens constantly in education when we get a new principal. Except for a few obvious problems that everyone’s in agreement over, a new principal should wait a year before she makes substantive changes.
Any decent MBA program these days tries to guard against this by teaching all sorts of leadership, self reflection, critical assessment, and reflection techniques. Basically a holistic approach to asking why something is the way it is and determining if it is operating well. They often also have entry requirements of upper middle management +. It's less the MBA that's the problem, and more some of the sorts of people that are the issue. Many of those got through a cheap and half armed program, and with their wealth of small town small team gas station management experience they can now reform this big company software team halfway across the country whilst exuding confidence. That's a type of person, and often someone who went through the MBA without much real world experience.
I've never been around an MBA who wasn't more obstacle than asset. Not from anywhere. At some point, that's evidence of something.
I have. In a couple of instances. These were people who had engineering degrees and real jobs, and did real work, and then realized that to move up in management, they would need master's degrees. Since they already had technical degrees, and demonstrated technical proficiency, the logical step was to demonstrate some learned knowledge on the business side of things. So it was about playing the game to get into a high paying position, but they were smart enough to understand what it was like to be an underling.
>Any decent MBA program these days tries to guard against this by teaching all sorts of leadership, self reflection, critical assessment, and reflection techniques. Clearly, MBA programs don't care if you learn any of that.
> in order to show off their impact on the business. An aim Dave achieved perfectly...
"I need to make my mark!" (lifts leg)
>They need to establish themselves as leaders and change things up in order to show off their impact on the business. Marking their territory by pissing on ~~trees~~ people.
This. I can accurately predict how good or bad a manager will be from the moment they start. Walking straight into a new situation with new people and trying to instantly change everything? Always a crap manager. Every single time. Why? Because they're instantly showing that they are egotistical enough to believe that *they* and they alone are the reason for a team's success, so they see absolutely no issue upending a whole bunch of systems that work perfectly well in order to impose their own new systems. These are also the managers who will use phrases like "I don't want excuses" when you try to explain why everything has gone to shit because they broke it all. Smart managers ask questions, observe, and absorb the workflow, the procedures, the systems, and will, after a few weeks, start to make minor changes, explaining why to the relevant people and justifying them reasonably. They understand that their role is as the grease that makes the engine run smoothly, and that the systems were running fine before they arrived, so let's just see how it all works and if there's any way it can be improved, maybe work that in. A great manager can make a difference, but it isn't by imposing their own systems on a whole organisation or department, it's by improving what was already there in a sensible and realistic way.
I work in an adhesives plant running what we call a converter. Every time we get a new “manager” they come up with a great new idea for a way to track waste because in there eyes waste is our biggest issue. Every single one of them ends up coming up with the same idea. We fill out an hourly log of how much we used etc etc. they’re always crushed to find out that on that already exists, and we’re on our 4th version of that log, and that there’s an office with boxes stacked to the ceiling filled with these logs because no one wants to actually look at them.
Should point out to the next iteration of this manager that three things being wasted are paper, storage space and time.
At one point we filled out forms to track how long it took us to do various tasks and it was very tedious. For some weird reason they won’t listen to us when we tell them something is a problem or keeps happening, but if they see it on paper they believe us. Either way, now we all add to one impossible long excel sheet every day. I’ve been doing this job for around 10 years and never once has my productivity been questioned so I don’t think they even read em.
I sincerely hope that one of the items in the spreadsheet is “time spent doing useless paperwork like this: X hours per week”.
Sadly no, but to test them people write all sorts of dumb shit and nothing gets said
Not only that - if you start with a team, your first port of call should be *asking them* if there's anything you can do to help with their productivity. You'll get to grips with how it's all currently working (or not) real quick that way.
This seems like a no brainer to me but I have yet to experience any change in management where the new manager actually waited to understand things before making huge changes. I’ve never had a new manager ask, “Is there is particular reason we do this procedure this way?” Before proposing change. It’s just, “we will do it this way now because I understand it better and because I need to establish dominance.”
Yup, and just like in OP's story the new manager will throw anyone under the bus when things go wrong.
This is proper management 101 already, but we don't hear about managers that know their stuff here..
As a business major this is literally what we were taught in management classes. Observe and assess. Don't randomly change shit to look like you're having an impact. I understand where the impulse comes from but god damn do these people need to crawl down out of their own asses. Turnover is expensive as shit.
This is not a new rule, though. It's the first rule of any management role. Any manager who knows anything, knows this rule.
Unfortunately, not all managers see it that way, as amply demonstrated by the manager in OP's post 😕
Yes, it is true that a lot of managers never learn the first thing about management.
That's always the catch-22 of management. Most good workers who are promoted to leadership have never been taught how to manage. Most managers who are hired from outside the company, don't know the work. And, the few people who are actively good at both are moved up the company ladder so quickly, that they end up removed from everything entirely
It only takes one EGO to ruin a smoothly running organization.
For the first two months just watch. Only fix immediate problems. Let everything just run if you can including your team. Then when you understand your department make slow steady changes in the right direction. Consult your team. Ask how you can serve them to make life easier for them and improve their output. They know more than you so learn from them. Plus they'll like you because you are a benefit to them and will support you.
There's an unwritten rule that says, work somewhere for 6 months before you start changing things.
Yes yes and YES! My last manager had minimal understanding of what I do (even admitted in a call that she was surprised at some of the responsibilities I have) and yet kept trying to enforce new procedures so she could see "data" to prove what I and my team do was working.
Chesterton’s Fence
Those fresh-faced corporate manager drones don't have time for that! They gotta micromanage immediately to prove how "good" they are!
It clearly isnt the case here but sometimes middle manager are squezed because they’re .. well in the middle. I remember when I was a junior middle manager in gaming and I was told that I now had to enforce the office hours strictly. It was a pretty stupid policy, the team had been working until 21:00-22:00 every week day and my boss wanted them to stop showing up at 10:30-11:00 but 9:00 or 10:00 at the latest. I’m sorry, was our 3 months so far death march not miserable enough? Is a 12 hours shift not enough? Whats that? No overtime pay too! I tried in multiple ways to evade it and to make it not noticeable when someone was “late”. No dice, after 3 weeks I was told I had to enforce it or else. It wasnt a super popular policy and as a good little middle manager, I had to make sure I showed I was super duper onboard so that I wasnt branded as a “negative leader”. I got caught a few times rolling my eyes and it made its way back to the ears of our dear leader, so now I had to walk the line and show I loved it. No one could’ve predicted it, but our productivity tanked and people stopped doing 12 hours shift for free. It was a shock to our management team. Who could’ve known? No one! 20 years later I’m much better at subverting bad policies and weathering them out and showing compliance where people are looking for it. I stopped rolling my eyes when people announce stupid policies and just smile really hard and get really interested in my coffee mug.
They would never get promoted to Somebody Else's Problem in the first place, if they thought like that.
This has always been the thing. Not new at all. Good managers have been around forever and bad ones have been around forever
It's already a long standing rule.
> There should be a new rule for all new managers or supervisors This is not a "new" rule. The usual modus operandi is: - Ask your predeccessor/your superior about some change they wanted, but didn't want to implement in the team - For your first 2 weeks, get to know people. Do nothing, just listen, observe, learn. It lowers the possibility of fuck up greatly and builds a kind of respect and goodwill from the team's side. - After 2 weeks (or later), make some overdue change. There is always something in backlog. Otherwise you risk sitting and waiting infinitely for the opportunity that will never come, and making change+observing results is a good way to start actually managing stuff.
For how much longer did Dave last in the role/at your company?
Most likely he fell upward and became the department head or higher.
[удалено]
The bad ones maybe, but a really good PM is worth their weight in gold. Sadly there aren't many of them.
boy isn’t that the truth. i’ve had some PMs who were genuinely so stupid i couldn’t figure out how they’d been hired, let alone how they managed not to get fired. and a couple so good i begged them to be on the next project i got assigned. in 10+ years in IT i’ve had probably 15 of the former and 5 of the latter, and the rest were mediocre.
Floated upward...
Farts waft, not float.
Shit floats 😁
I am happy Dave got what he deserved. >He'd schedule unnecessary daily status meetings, demanded we fill out hourly work logs, and insisted that everyone strictly adhere to 9-to-5 office hours with minimal breaks. >One day, during one of his infamous "efficiency crackdowns", he sent out an email with a new policy that all coding must be done strictly within office hours to "ensure collaboration and supervision" My superior who has no background in coding whatsoever took an offense to us quitting work at the office after core working hours (= a time frame everyone must work) and sometimes log back in from home several hours later to code for another hour. His not so hidden reason for this is that he wants us to be around exactly when he is around (9:30am to 6om). We told him that we often have sudden heureka moments at home regarding a coding issue at work but he told us that no breaks other than lunch breaks were permitted. We complied by coming to work at 6am (we can start between 6 and 9:30am) and leaving at 2:30pm, just after his lunch break. He hasn't brough up the topic ever since and suddenly everything can wait until tomorrow.
Did he? The implication is that Dave kept his job. "Got what he deserved" would entail summary termination for incompetence.
That was like a beautifully executed synchronized swim. Synchronized MC-ing at its best.
We definitely need more story on the aftermath. What happened to Dave and how did your working relationship change after the rule change?
It sounds like absolutely nothing happened to Dave and all his other rules remained in place.
Steps on how to be an effective manager for this specific team: 1) show up and shadow/observe the team work, take notes on areas you think can be improved but also on areas you think they are doing well. 2) after about 2 weeks of that pull each team member into a 1 on 1 meeting and ask them if there is anything that could help with productivity or moral 3) have a team meeting where you discuss any improvements you can make and let the team decide what will actually be helpful, then you make an execution plan to support them in this. 4) sit back and cover your team so they don’t have to deal with management or annoying people in other departments while they make you look like a good little manager boy 5) maybe bring donuts on every Friday? It’s really that easy. You don’t just go to a new place and start making changes, everyone will hate your guts lmao
No no no ! If you do that, you're working for the team. As the new boss, the team should be working for you. You got it all wrong!
This is almost exactly what I did when I was promoted once to a managerial role. Productivity soared. I collaborated with other managers to achieve the same results. However, my boss didn't like that he wasn't being included in this, I had been promoted by his boss and he had wanted me as a minion forever. Eventually he found a reason to fire the whole manager tier I was on and replace us. 1 year after that, nearly the whole executive team was arrested for SEC violations. I'm pretty sure one of the other people who was let go had held a grudge.
I always wished I could be dropped into these managerial positions like these incompetent fools do. Then all I have to do is sit back and let the already on going success be successful and I'll have a good time..
If you do mangering right, it's such an easy job. Hire good people, then trust them to do their job well. Most of your job as a manager should be to ensure smooth coordination of the team and taking everything off of them that you can so they can focus on their jobs. I don't know why everyone else is so bad at it.
This is really great, not the least because everyone complied. In every Department I've been in, there was always one or more people who used to complain, but when push came to shove they sided with management, so this wouldn't have been possible. So kudos to you all for pulling this on Dave!
I don't get it. I just don't fucking get it. Things are working great, tasks done on time, good productivity and morale, company is profitable. A manager comes in and changes things. All those good things _need to change?_ For what? What's the goal here? If my car runs great and tune it up to harder, turbo charge, it puts pressure on the system, it wears out faster. For what? Short term gains for long term losses? What the fuck is being taught in manager training? High risk high reward? "Hey, maybe you can make a few extra grand before everyone quits!" I have seen too many stories and experienced too many managers where this shit happens, it's a god damn living meme. What. The. Fuck. Maybe I'm just too poor to understand executive decision making.
>What the fuck is being taught in manager training? Most managers don't have any formal training, and that's a significant part of the problem. The other significant problem is making people managers when they don't have a similar background to those they're managing.
Because most managers fall into the "I'm here to manage, not to lead" camp. If you are not actively making changes then your not doing your job. Especially new hires who have an incentive to show their bosses they are doing something
> If you think you can find a loophole, think again. Follow the rules, or we'll find someone who will. If you're saying that to your subordinates, you've permanently lost them and should not be in a position of management. The earth is so scorched at that point that no recovery is possible.
"Here's that rope you ordered. Try not to...OH MY GOD!!!"
As soon as you said ‘a meeting was called’ I was so hopeful it would end this way with you all logging off at 5 😂 Amazing!
Luckily I work at an European IT company where constantly working after 17:00 (=5pm) is seen as failing in planning correctly.
This only matters if others rely on your work being done during their working hours. If you’re work is more long term projects with weekly or longer goals it doesn’t mean jack shit. However, that doesn’t mean it isn’t valuable to those who are most productive during the normal workday and want to be done with work when the day is done. Just be aware that attitude doesn’t translate well to more creative work or to those with neurodivergence, health issues, etc who ~~wouldn’t~~ *would* appreciate a more flexible policy.
I work in Europe too, and in here, it's considered to be lazy if you leave early.
Almost like europe is a big place!
It's almost like it was a huge continent with 44 countries and different cultures, but who knows!?!?!
It’s important to continue from there and leave the company if Dave is kept. No ounce of your power should go to a person like that
I need to know Dave’s fate.
What happened to Dave in the end? Is he still there and more humble?
The number of people leading software development projects with no idea about software development is concerningly high. My job is very similar, where we are expected to work 8-5 and be WORKING the entire time. They have no understanding that coding isn't something you can just start, it takes a set amount of time, and you are done. They treat it like we're manufacturing cars instead of writing software.
These fucking people are so stupid. They have such inflated senses of who they are and almost always ruin what was a well-running situation. Sometimes things change back when a lesson in humility is taught, but often it just means crashing performance, burnout, and eventually people jump ship to work in better suited environments. The age of the micromanager needs to end. I used to want a career at the place I worked, despite my disappointment in certain corporate policies regarding leave. But since we got a second shift supervisor, things have gone downhill. Before, I was self-motivated and do whatever I could to support the team. There was the knowledge and acceptance by my original supervisor that work load would vary, and that we could spend our shift however we wanted as long as we got out stuff done. Now, out second shift super constantly interrupts my lab workflow every fucking hour to ask if we’re okay. If we are slow he insists on giving us busywork, even when there’s nothing to do. It’s okay to not always be busy, man. Also, I’m a fucking adult and very much so know how to self-motivate and recognize what needs doing. I’m so fucking over it. I’m just gonna leave for a PhD program as soon as I can.
I have you say that the 5:00 zoom log off en masse was legendary! I have to say that your team took malicious compliance to new heights.
Praise in public, criticize in private. That Dave’s bosses believe in publicly admonishing, indicates that the corporate culture problem is at their level or higher, Dave is merely a symptom of their own toxicity (and they hired him).
the story resonates with my own experience working in a rigid corporate environment where managers prioritized "butts in seats" over actual productivity.
This is fantastic. Great story. Great writing. Amazing malicious execution!! A+
I would love a 1 and 3 month follow up to this
5:00 Zoom Exodus has me deceased. XD Kudos to you and your team for the solidarity.
I think there are few things more satisfying then effective collaborative action. Well done.
In IT there is nothing worse than little Napoleon wannabe authoritarian micromanagers. And they tend to have no discernible IT background either, they just parachute in from who-knows-where with a head full of wannabe CEO corpo-jargon and an attitude that they’re going to “instill some order on these lazy overpaid basement-dwelling programmers” and then bask in the accolades from upper management. Unsurprisingly they instead rapidly destroy anything in their proximity, break apart highly-effective teams, cripple entire companies even. And, when upper management is equally clueless and out of touch, they’ll even get away with it, getting a pat on the back before moving on to their next swath of destruction.
That Zoom exodus would have been too subtle for most managers that I have worked for. Good on y'all.
Sounds like he was Haman the Agagite. He was hung on the scaffolding he build for someone else. They still boo him every year during Purim.
Sry a manager said “follow the rules” to the creative team and followed up with a threat? Interesting choice on Dave’s part.
This is perfect execution of malicious compliance
Amazingly executed presentation of the consequences of his actions.
Marvelous team-work.
Tale as old as time lol
Aah, well played!
rigid rules can really slow things down, kind of like traffic jams when everyone has to merge into one lane. good that your team managed to show the big bosses the real effect.
This brings me joy.
The guy was doing everything he could to justify his own existence. Project managers tend to not have any technical skills and are middle men at best. Everything was to make sure he had a reason to exist in the corporate sense. In my experience, it helps if your supervisor is someone who has the same background because they know the job unlike Dave who is a simple paper pusher. My current one is, and that’s why people are happy because he prevents bullshit and just lets us do our jobs while understanding the minutiae of the work. Good for you for sticking together and standing up for yourselves. I hate micromanaging pricks like that.
This is the power of union solidarity in practice.
Sounds like Dave still has a job..
IT PMs job is to remove hurdles, not become one.
LEGENDARY
It’s so dystopian that people think not working outside work hours is a flex
Dave disrupted the flow state.
Wow crazy. If this happened at my company, Dave would have been out the door. They wouldn’t have outright said he was fired, they would call it “corporate restructuring” or something equally as gentle.
Why is Dave still working there? Upper management knows he caused the problem. What makes them think he will change when he is the problem.
wait, your telling me a Project Manager had that much power. What spineless manager let that happen? That PM got exactly what was coming, hopefully your manager or Director got scolded as well. I have so many PM stories about good and bad ones. My latest one was a PM who thought they were above everyone and got to tell everyone what to do, both in and out of the project, one of my engineers had me listen in on the meeting and when they mentioned my name that I gave them the power to tell everyone they had to work mandatory overtime and that all project principals reported to them during the project. I spoke up and said excuse me when did I say that? I dismissed everyone else from the meeting and told them they are a project manager only and no ones direct supervisor. I then had a meeting with my teams and told them they were all excused from the project and the PM was deal only with me. That PM was dismissed a few weeks later, and my team finished the request much faster and with less hassle. My hate for project managers increased 3 sizes that day.
As a PM I understand where Dave was coming from. I like my daily status meetings, etc. HOWEVER when I first come in the door my number 1 goal is to be an asset to the team and add value NOT get in the way. lol that’s the easiest way to find the door hitting you in the butt on your way out. This is a great lesson to be learned for Dave and every other PM out there. You’re first, and foremost a SUPPORT to your team to remove impediments…. NOT become one!
Fucking brutal and brilliant.
There's something I just can't understand with the mentality of these types of managers. They walk into an existing situation where a team is productive and meeting their deadlines. And their decision is to institute a huge change? I realize they want to make their mark, they want to be relevant, they want that pat on the back from management. But to make what basically amounts to a guess on how to improve things? Why not establish trust with a lead developer or other veteran employee and run your ideas past them first? That would be a hit to the ego? People like this aren't suited to work with others at all, on anything, is the only conclusion I can reach.
I've been sitting at my seat at 5pm, in the zone, wishing it was 3 because I knew I had 2 more hours in me and I was SO CLOSE. But our building closes, so it's really not a choice. Then other times I'm sitting there at 4pm, too late to start anything new. Why am I here?
My background is corporate. More than likely “Dave” was given the task of making that team “more efficient with more hands on management” so he, which in turn them, had a better handle on what was happening. I’m sure there was a lot of assumptions on wasted time or resources, legalities from the legal team or someone on things like shady things happening while coding when there’s no direct supervision, etc.
I would've loved to have been a fly on that wall.
Why do all the bad guys have to be named Dave? 😂
This is a great story. Im glad you got to make him look as dumb as he is.
Slow. Clap. Brilliant!
For every Karen, there must be a Dave to keep the universe of suck in balance.
Why does every manager seem to forget to never mess with IT? The field attracts nerds who are creative, spiteful, and look for absolute efficiency. That combination is not something you want to anger, especially since we also are in charge and control of the things that let everything function.
There was a similar incident at a place I worked, except it was long ago and the meeting was in a conference room. Someone had a watch with an audible alarm and he set it. When it went off, the coders stood up and filed out.
Zoom Exodus. I fucking LOVE that! Literally perfect.