Interviewing Your Future Boss? 447
crimethinker asks: "I am an embedded systems engineer for a small division of a large company. Up to now, we have managed to get by with little more than a 'team lead' position, but as our division grows, they are looking to hire a full-on engineering manager. I was one of the candidates, with my current boss's favorable recommendation, but I withdrew my resume when they told me the job was all paper and schedules; I'd never touch code or hardware again. Now the VP has a 'short list' of candidates, and has invited me to be one of the interviewers. Yes, you read that correctly: I will be interviewing the person who will become my boss. So, I put the question to you, Slashdot: what questions should I ask my prospective boss?"
Hawaiian Shirt Friday? (Score:5, Insightful)
Ask more about Life, less about Tech. (Score:5, Insightful)
Since you were a candidate yourself and withdrew, you have probably already figured out that your new boss is unlikely to be your equal in engineering.
But that's not her job anyway.
You should ask things about leadership philosophy, their personal goals in management, their ideas about telecommuting,
about how they balance their work and "real" lives.
Remember that if you are a good engineer, your boss works for you as much as the other way around (unless your boss is the Big Boss of course).
Try to figure out how much you would enjoy having this person around, and how helpful they are likely to be in clearing the way
for you to do your best work.
Use no buzzwords.
Thats my style, and it's worked well so far. I've interviewed about half my bosses and haven't had a bad one in 8 years.
Good question... (Score:2, Insightful)
Ask him about his life outside work (Score:5, Insightful)
I would... (Score:5, Insightful)
Also there is probably going to be some resentment when the boss realizes that you were the first choice (if they do not already).
Engineer or Manager? (Score:2, Insightful)
Mmmmm. Donuts. (Score:5, Insightful)
On the other hand, if you want to ask *good* questions, think about what topics you and your current boss deal with, and ask about those questions. If it's a management job, then think about what managers can be bad at. Ask about their previous management history (are they a good leader?), ask about how well they understand the technology (are they the quentessential pointy hair?), and ask about how they view the postion from the point of view of being the interface between the techs and the upper management (are they there to keep you down, or to make things go smoothly?).
Also, think about what might happen a year or five down the line that will piss you off, and ask questions relating to that.
Here's a few... (Score:5, Insightful)
Number one way to motivate an unproductive employee.
How well can you estimate time and set project schedules. (You know this can't be done exactly... if he doesn't know, you don't want him)
Why did he lose (or leave) his or her last job? (Double check on this one... it's IMPORTANT)
How many of their former employees will want to follow them to this job?
Annual reviews? Good or bad? How are they done? A form or "free form"?
Do hours worked matter or is getting the job done more important?
Comp time or bonuses (or anything) to make up for overtime needed at deadlines?
Pertinent questions (Score:5, Insightful)
Did you like Office Space?
Oh yeah, have you read The Mythical Man Month?
Re:My question (Score:3, Insightful)
Management Style (Score:5, Insightful)
A good manager:
1. Fights for her people with upper mgmt.
2. Gets her people the resources they need to do their job.
3. Gets the hell out of the way.
Put another way:
1. You know he will be there when you need something.
2. Otherwise, you'd never know he was there.
These are the traits you're looking for.
important question (Score:3, Insightful)
(this is not a troll! it's an honest question!)
Re:Ask more about Life, less about Tech. (Score:4, Insightful)
get someone you relate to (Score:3, Insightful)
On the other hand, if you guys are all workaholics who spend every daylight minute at the office and you hire a guy that prefers a tight, 8-5 schedule you'll naturally have some tension and frustration when it gets crunch time and he chooses to go home at 5 every day. He may get twice as much work done as everyone else in a shorter period of time but that doesn't seem to matter at midnight to a grouchy, sleep-deprived developer.
I think this is exactly wrong. (Score:4, Insightful)
Tech will be -part- of this person's job, but only part, since they will be managing the business side of things.
Probably more important is the question "can us engineers work with this person?"
Re:Good question... Seriously. (Score:5, Insightful)
Remember, the Prospective Boss is in the management business and not in the geek business.
The person seeking advice here seems to have already decided against a career in the management business.
It is in the manager's interest for that tech person to go as far as possible - as long as it's not into management over his/her head.
I once had a boss who would waffle endlessly on that subject because she really needed me working for her. The best she could honestly offer was "if I climb high enough you can come with me."
Then I got another boss who realized that my success would reflect well on him, and he was extremely supportive. I eventually moved on, and he moved up, and indeed my success did reflect well on him, just as his did on me.
A good Prospective Boss will have a thorough and thoughful answer ready for the question you propose.
Re:I think this is exactly wrong. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I would... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Don't ask job related stuff (Score:4, Insightful)
That's right, don't ask anything job related because the most effective boss will be your buddy, and not really need to know anything about the job at hand. Who cares if he doesn't know a widget from a thingamajob, if he's your buddy, all will be fine. As long as nobody's feelings are hurt, it doesn't matter if the whole company goes down the crapper.
Re:from a I/O psychology point of view... (Score:5, Insightful)
So, I'm glad you're not my manager, because I think you'd suck at it.
There's a difference between a team leader and a manager.
Re:Hawaiian Shirt Friday? (Score:5, Insightful)
His answer will reveal much about his leadership ability.
Re:Ask more about Life, less about Tech. (Score:3, Insightful)
Troller.
I've had four female bosses in various jobs, two of which were in technical fields. Although I recognize that my empirical evidence isn't going to be the universal norm, I found that women are better to work under for these reasons: They're more apt to be direct when they have a gripe, instead of "backstabbing" or manipulating the system to make you look bad. They're more organized. Most importantly, they don't promote incompetents based on feelings of fraternity.
Let me explain that last point in more detail. Career women don't seem to form work relationships like men. They appear to be more objective about their workers' performance than do men. Whereas a male boss would keep around a gang of idiots just because they talk sports / play golf / go to the bar together after work. Don't get me wrong, it's great to be one of the Fraternal Brothers, but I don't talk sports / play golf / go to bars after work.
if you've never been a manager... (Score:2, Insightful)
I get the impression you've never held the title of manager, possibly never conducted (or participated) from the hiring side of an interview. (Apologies if I've misinterpreted.) Remember, the candidate with whom you speak wants a job that consists of zero coding and lots of paper pushing. Already you can't relate to him or her on that level. Further, it sounds like this person is going to have hiring/firing/raise authority over you. With these things in mind I think it would be best to have you sit in on the interviews but not conduct them. Leave that to HR or to the hiring manager. Your presence will allow you to provide excellent information to the candidate: how the department is currently run, what your department needs to grow, how a manager might provide for those things. Really, just use the time to ensure he or she is not a PHB.
"What is the last book you read?" (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Have you ever hired anyone before? (Score:3, Insightful)
That doesn't seem fair. Why discount a person's experience just because it wasn't in the context of a professional position? If they're doing it on their own time, it means (1) they really care about it and (2) they can teach themselves, as opposed to having to be hand-held through everything.
I think you would short-change me if you refused to consider what I've accomplished on my own time. A relatively small part of my knowledge and skills come from professional work.
Oh, and don't forget to ask the guy (Score:3, Insightful)
Also, ask about his education. It is my firm belief that non-technical people simply can't effectively manage technical people, and the best managers grow from the very bottom.
If he STARTED as a manager and/or he does NOT have technical education at all, the decision is "no hire".
Institutional memory. (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm not sure how old you are, but if you're approaching 50, you should be worried about being shitcanned and replaced by 2 jr. engineers fresh out of school, each making half your salary.
Whether such a replacement is a good idea or not is dependent upon the circumstances, but repeated purging of senior engineers for junior ones leads to engineering departments that repeatedly blunder into the mistakes of the past.
Ironically, if you're in that 45+ age range, you've probably just given up your best chance both to save your paycheck and to propagate institutional memory. Once you pass 50, you'll probably never get another engineering job should you lose your current one - you'll be too expensive to hire compared to someone a few years out of school (not to mention less attractive - physical appearance has been shown to be a major factor in hiring decisions).
The sad truth about engineering is that you can't do it forever. At some point, you have to step up to management or else you'll find yourself jettisoned at some point with no hope of finding another good-paying job. I've watched my father's career arc and seen a lot of his colleagues fall by the wayside (and through the cracks) because they didn't understand this reality. He's now on the cusp of retirement and is one of the last survivors from his generation of engineers at his company because he was willing to make that move to management.
Having removed yourself from consideration for this managerial role, it's in your interest for whoever's coming in to have an understanding of the importance of striking a balance between cost efficiency in terms of dollars-per-head and the importance of retaining experienced people (e.g. you) who are capable of larnin' them youngsters who will be coming in as your division grows.
Just my $0.02
-Isaac
Depends on your company's management style... (Score:1, Insightful)
If the company functions by management only defining the org structure and letting decisions be made by the people closest to the problem, then I would try to seek someone who has come up the ranks, understands the technology and has been in your shoes. They will more likely take on the role of an enabler.
One of the worst situtations is when your manager's style conflicts with that of the company, because it almost always affects the ability of the worker bees to function.
Also, I personally would avoid someone who previously had an upper management position (even with a smaller company). In my experience, I have never seen a manager who previously had big picture responsibilities adjust very well to refocusing on enabling operational needs.
Re:from a I/O psychology point of view... (Score:5, Insightful)
The best IT project manager I ever had was a sociology major with no technology background whatsoever. To his credit, he did try to understand to some degree the technology we worked with on our projects: computers, networking, programming languages, databases... not because he wanted to do our work, but because he wanted to understand it.
Team Player? (Score:1, Insightful)
If they say someone who has lunch and dinner with the team and attends all the meetings, blah blah blah, they're out.
If they say someone who doesn't point fingers, fixes problems and moves on, they're in.
-hadohk
A good answer to a tough but fair question... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Good question... Seriously. (Score:3, Insightful)
Here are a few... (Score:5, Insightful)
Hard-core geeky types are often introverted and not what most managers are accustomed to see. Some are arrogant prima-donnas, some self-effacing, some look and smell like long-haul truckers. Many are violently independent. How will the candidate deal with this motley group and get them to work together?
Two competing vendors are trying to sell you a product. How do you choose between them? This question can help answer who the candidate trusts. Does he/she speak to his group first, soliciting their opinions or does he exclude his team from the process.
Whose job is more important, the manager's or the employee's? If he says the employees he's very likely pandering for acceptance. If he says the manager's then he may quickly drop useful members of the team.
What is a TPS report? The bigger question is how pedantic is the manager? Can he bend the rules or break them in order to get something accomplished. Does he understand the reasons for a paperwork process but is willing to forego them based on his judgment.
The building is on fire! What do you do? Start timing him immediately and look at a stopwatch as you ask. This can show how well he performs under the slight pressure of a fake emergency. Does he wilt? Does he get the employees to safety first or is his first reaction to grab the backup tapes? Which one is more important to you?
IT and 'Grunt' views on management (Score:2, Insightful)
'Grunts' and IT staff in particular seem to hold one of two differing views on what a good manager should be.
The first school of thought holds that any good manager needs to be able to completely understand every minute aspect of a job in their area. On top of that they must be able to do the rest of their 'management' work.
The second school of thought views managers and their job as being fundamentally different from being technical. Thus a good manager needs skills that have little bearing on their ability to follow the finer points of a technical discussion. These management skills often are based on being good in dealing with people and time.
Looking over the questions posed here reveals this distinction rather well. They range from focusing solely on the manager being able to do your job, through a spectrum, to the manager having no clue about your job.
Depending on your view of management will colour which questions you choose. However, in my experience, someone who is sharp enough to be a good manager has the people and time skills to be a good manager, can pick up the technical side of things. A technical person without good people and time skills seems to have more trouble picking up the people and time skills.
Ultimately it boils down to who you think would make the better manager: the person getting high-score in Quake, or the person getting high-score in StarCraft.
Been There (Score:3, Insightful)
- Ensure you know what the hiring (one-over) manager is looking for. Is the priority training? Project management? Team development? Process improvement? I'm sure you have things you want in your manager, but make sure you know what The Company is looking for.
- As with any interview, ensure that you have the candidate provide you with concrete examples given for your questions. Bad question: Tell me about your management philosophy. Good question: Give me an example of a time when The Company's needs and the employee's needs were at odds and how you handled it. (For example an employee wants vacation but their project was late.)
- Be ready to have a manager that your feedback was "no" on become your manager. It happened to me.
- Pretty obvious: Make a good impression! This person may soon be your boss!
Re:from a I/O psychology point of view... (Score:3, Insightful)
Absolutely! One of the best bosses I ever had was a guy who made a point of hiring people who were smarter than he and then letting them do the job he knew they could do.
Technical background (Score:4, Insightful)
My biggest frustration with my current managers is that they don't have the slightest clue what my work entails, from a technical perspective. While I do appreciate the need for people to shift papers around, keep clients off your back, etc. etc., it does not help if you have to cope with unrealistic expectations and don't get equipped (hardware, training,...) to properly cope with ever-changing job demands. My ideal boss would be one who moved up from a similar position than what I'm doing now.
But then again, as you yourself pointed out, not everybody wants to move from coding to admin - and I'd definitely also ask why he made the move. Might be interesting....
Yeah, I've got a couple of questions ready about my prospective bossed if (when - probably sooner than later) I ever sit in a job interview again and they get to the "you got any questions?" point.
First question "Why a manager" (Score:5, Insightful)
If you are the natural team leader then its unlikely the team will listen ot the manager anyway, they'll listen to you. So don't hire yourself a manager, hire yourself an assistant. Someone who goes to meetings for you, plans schedules for you and lets you get on with the real job. That doesn't have to be someone who is in charge of or controlling what you do but someone who enjoys doing the bits you don't and you can work alongside.
So many IT companies seem to screw this up. Good project managers are great people to have but they don't have to be in charge.
Question #1: Can we check your references? (Score:4, Insightful)
So be careful. The guy who seems fine during the interview may turn out to have serious flaws as a manager. Unless you do your homework, you'll never have the opportunity to spot these flaws until they manifest themselves on the job -- at your company.
The only people who have first-hand, long-term knowledge about the candidate's on-the-job performance are the people he has worked with before. Talk to them! Ask your candidate if you may speak with his references. If you get a No response, that ought to be a warning sign. If he doesn't trust his own references, why should you trust him?
But don't stop there. Say that you would like to, if at all possible, speak with the people he has managed on previous jobs. Say that you would also like to speak with the people who managed him. Ask if he can arrange it. Even if he can't because it might jeopardize his current position, the way the candidate responds can tell you a lot.
Good managers are worth their weight in gold. Bad managers can destroy projects and drive away your most talented employees. Thus when hiring managers, be discriminating. Do your homework. Check the references.
Slightly dated, but still contains some pearls (Score:2, Insightful)
From: Brian Bartholomew
Subject: Questions for prospective employers
In a healthy job interview, information flows both ways. Some employers have written tests for interviewees. Candidates may get the same win even if they don't present an actual list of test questions on paper. These are blunt questions at any time, as they directly question management's competence. They are incredibly rude at a job interview because you flaunt the respect you should be showing to a potential new employer. Nevertheless you will be much happier finding out these answers before you are on the payroll. And remember, twenty minutes logged into the potential employer's system reveals more truth than an arbitrary amount of interviewing. Ask your interviewer to sit down with you in front of a machine and go through their new-user information together with you. You drive and ask questions.
How will you evaluate my job performance?
Exactly how many people have the root password?
I feel I've hit a technical glass ceiling where any further growth will occur due to political skill, not engineering skill. Introduce me to computing employees who are paid to remain technical.
What is the name of the person with budgetary authority who will approve my purchase recommendations? What is their spending limit?
Are you paying me to treat symptoms or to avoid problems?
Who were the previous System Administrators? May I speak with them?
Approximately what percentage of the total cost of software ownership do you spend in the initial purchase?
When the computers are working, they make us ___ $/hr.
When the computers are broken, they cost us ___ $/hr.
We spend a grand total of ___ $/hr in computer support.
What percentage of your programmers use revision control software?
What level are you at in the SEI Process Maturity Model?
How many interfaces do you have on your IP network?
How many interfaces do you have on your non-IP network?
Our computer equipment cost us $___ new, and we could sell it today for $___.
We have ___ UNIX users and ___ UNIX System Administrators.
How many boxes will I have authority over?
What is the median number of 3 hour uninterrupted blocks of total single-task concentration that your SAs get each week?
When a user requests a feature that isn't in the budget, what is the name of the person who tells them "no"?
How many SAs do you send to the USENIX ___, LISA ___, and InterOp ___ conferences each year?
When a disk fills up, do you usually buy another disk or delete something? How many partitions do you have which are at this moment more than 90% full?
What percentage of your hosts are configured as testbeds on separate networks so that you can routinely experiment and regression test new system software?
What is the throughput in bytes per second of your direct Internet connection? Describe your firewall.
What percentage of your help desk people use a trouble ticket system?
Is quality the top priority in your company? If so, describe several instances when schedules slipped because someone felt the quality was too low.
Summarize your written computing growth plans and their budgets for the next few years.
my experience hiring my boss (Score:5, Insightful)
The first time, when there were problems with one manager, I proposed that my department (network security) be managed by the guy who ran NetEng, who was a friend and an all around great guy. I just said: who has a light-handed management style, who has the credibility to back me if management is thinking of doing something stupid, and can be a technical resource?
I used those same criteria to select my next boss. I was given only two candidates for a Directory of Network Security position. One was a fairly laid back, older gentlemen with an easygoing attitude, some technical aptitude (although he couldn't do the engineering work, but he had clearly done things in the arena in the past), and a clear idea of challenges we faced. The other candidate was ex-law enforcement, and his answer to most technical questions was, "I like to surround myself with good people so I have resources to tap for questions like that". He was stiff, formal, and projected a great deal of confidence... that didn't seem justified. He showed competence only with physical security issues (cameras, guards, etc), which was part of the job but not the important part to me (since I only did the network side).
The first guy had *real world* experience. He'd founded and flopped a security company that sold an evaluated hardened multi-level secure firewall... one that cost in the 6 figures to get and get installed and was generally only bought by a few governments.
I pulled heavily for the first guy, and he was the best boss I've had -- the best I can imagine. He was respectful, tried to shield us from management making illogical or impossible demands, and after several years, quit the company rather than allow bad management to wreck our group. (well, they still wrecked us, but he left rather than be party to it)
Based on this experience, I'd recommend you look for:
* Someone who was once technical. No matter that they aren't, but they should show the sort of aptitude and experience that indicates they did what you do or something equivalent
* Someone who is laid back and 'real'. If they say anything about Moving Your Cheese, about management synergy, about "marketing the group", about "having a first-rate team" or other management-isms that you cringe to hear, then RUN don't walk from that candidate.
* Someone who is not afraid of their management. One reason I liked our boss was he was on the tail end of his career -- he was in his 50s, and instead of being desperately clingy, he was ready to take a bullet for the team. He never really had to; he was so well thought of that even when they said our team was being taken from him because he wouldn't budge, they offered him another job (which goes to show how stalwart he was; he quit just as a disincentive for them to go through with it). Maybe he was just a strong person and it had nothing to do with age.
* Someone you actually get along with. 50% or more of an interview is checking that a candidate fits the corporate culture. Having a manager who buys into your group's culture is key; this guy never batted an eye when we stuck a couch and a playstation in one room for chill out breaks.
Good luck.
Why the stereotyping? (Score:2, Insightful)
As long as you keep stereotyping people based on sex, race, hair color etc, you're doing nothing but shooting yourself in the foot. People are good or bad at whatever because of their unique personalities, nothing more.
-hadohk
Re:Why the stereotyping? (Score:3, Insightful)
Like I said, my opinion is based on empirical evidence; I've worked under male bosses, I've worked under female bosses. Based on my life experience, I prefer female. This may change in the future, but it's my opinion that cultural norms will have to change (and stay that way) as well.
Re:What is your style? (Score:3, Insightful)
In my experience, the best bosses are those who lead by example. If everyone is required to drink red tea while working, then they're the ones who get big clear mugs and have double servings. Nothing inspires more, IMO.
Management Style (Score:3, Insightful)
The one thing I absolutely could not and still cannot stand in a manager is if they try to tell me how to do my job. I expect my manager to give me tasks to do and its up to me to figure out how to perform them. I don't expect them to set up my daily calendar. Unfortunately, some people want to manage at too low a level. This has applied as much to some of the managers I otherwise got along with as to some that I thought were absolute jerks. Be wary of any candidate you talk to who is too much into the details of how you do what you caurrentyly do. You don't want someone critiquing you on your mouse click technique.
Re:Resubmit your resume (Score:2, Insightful)
If I had to put a finger on the biggest problem with business today, it's the fact that management is treated as an aristocracy, rather than what it is: another specialty.
Transferring a good engineer to management makes no more sense than transferring a good salesman to engineering. "Fred, you're our best salesman
But because of this concept of management as aristocracy, something which is embedded in our culture from hundreds of years ago in England when the people running the show really were the aristocracy, a transfer from some specialty like engineering or sales to the specialty of management is considered to be a promotion, like being knighted. Managers, being the aristocracy, get more perks, fancier offices, and of course higher pay than any of the people they are managing. Why should a manager have a more comfortable chair than his secretary, for instance?
Management is a specialty. Some people are good at it, some aren't. Just like engineering or sales or fixing the plumbing. When more companies realize this, and start treating management as just another specialty, not an aristocracy, then productivity will not be choked by PHB's the way it is today.
Manager as assistant (Score:5, Insightful)
I lived this experience.
I was the "lead developer" for many projects at a consulting company. We had several customers that required much personal attention that had no impact on the projects, so I asked my boss (the VP) to hire someone to take the phone calls, make appearances at "strategic" meetings, and handle the paperwork I hated. We gave this person the title "Project Manager" (PM), but the development team still expected my leadership.
We introduced the PM to our customers. He said some silly buzzword filled comments ("Joint Application Development") that added even more meetings, but that was fine as long as none of the techies (including me) had to go to them.
Everything was great until we started a new project. Everybody had the same titles, but the PM decided that as "manager", he should be the top of the chain-of-command. The first time he tried to give me orders, I explained his purpose. The second time, I had the VP explain his purpose. The third time, we transferred him to the Microsoft group.
I have had several great managers (and just hired one of them to work for my new company.) A great manager acts as a filter between the techies and the customers. He protects the time of the techies. He stays out of design and development, but can offer a non-techie perspective when asked.
This only applies if you have a great lead developer. I know of one group that fires programmers with leadership skills. The manager is a non-techie, but knows how to coordinate development with mediocre developers. Adding a hotshot guru programmer would disrupt his system. (He works for a large bureaucratic company where speed is not a priority.)
Re:"What is your opinion on.. (Score:5, Insightful)
So if you're the boss you'd fire anyone sleeping at work?
Have you ever worked with programmers?
Programming isn't just typing code, you need to design solutions... and that could be just like painting or writing a book, you need to be inspired, creative, "in the zone"...
A 30 minutes nap could be the difference between an hour worth of coding, and half a day worth of uninspired coding; at the right/wrong time that nap could, at a large enough project, be worth days or even works.
Why does it matter to you if people are sleeping or awake, as long as they're getting the job done?
Re:from a I/O psychology point of view... (Score:4, Insightful)
That's so true. I'm reminded of one of the most touching scenes in The West Wing (seris 1, episode 12, "He Shall From Time To Time"):
President Bartlet: If anything happens... You got a best friend?
Secretary of Agriculture: Yes, sir.
President Bartlet: Is he smarter than you?
Secretary of Agriculture: [Laughs] Yes, sir.
President Bartlet: Would you trust him with your life?
Secretary of Agriculture: Yes, sir.
President Bartlet: That's your chief of staff.
I'm a huge fan of that series for many reasons, but the way they sometimes make a point like this so clearly and accurately is definitely one of them.
Management technology balance (Score:4, Insightful)
The manager of an engineering team has two jobs:
So you want to understand how good he is going to be at these things. Sound him out on the organisation by asking some open ended questions about how to manage projects. Like,
Finally, some general advice on interviewing. Remember that you are there to listen and evaluate. The candidate should be doing most of the talking. I've been in "interviews" which mostly consisted of a lecture by the interviewer. Avoid steering the candidate towards the right answer. Your purpose is not to get them to agree with you, its to find out what they know. Do challenge their views (even when you agree with them) to understand their depth of knowledge. If they start to flounder, just let them. Look for enough technical knowledge to hold an intelligent conversation with you, but then concentrate on people skills.
Paul.
Re:"What is your opinion on.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Just do a search on
Some bosses thinks that if they are forcing people to do the things that they perceive as "work" then that will result in more work being done, but that just isn't true.
Sure, at some places that might be true, but being a good boss isn't about forcing people, it's about understanding them and helping them do a good job.
And... sure... you might get more code written... but have you ever considered that if you tried to be a nice guy, maybe allowed a lil bit of powernapping for those that want to try that, maybe bought some fruit for a midafternoonbreak and just listened more to them... that then you might get fewer lines of code that does more with less resources, and that you'd get that within the same, or less, time?
Happy workers are better workers...
Damn good answer (Score:3, Insightful)
The way I usually say it is that my manager is my interface to the rest of the company, who gets me the resources I need to do my job while moderating the demands on my time.
Re:Manager as assistant (Score:2, Insightful)
Compatibility, Rationality, Honesty (Score:4, Insightful)
One good question for assessing this:
- What do you see as the role for an IT manager?
Wrong Answer 1: To tell the IT employees what upper management has told me needs to be done, when to do it, how to do it, and the amount of time in which it needs to be done. (the wrongness of this should be self evident)
Wrong Answer 2: To tell upper management what my employees have told me can be done, when it will get done, how it will be done, and how long it will take. (this may sound right at first, but they are either lying to you to kiss your ass, or they do not understand management)
Correct Answer: An IT manager acts as an intermediary between upper management and the IT labour force. He or she should, when talking with upper management, promote the technical solutions presented by the technical experts on the team. He or she should also, when working with the team, promote the value of satisfying the customer by striving to acheive the goals set by upper management. (honest, rational, and compatible with any dedicated employee)
On the compatibility front, one note in response to some of the other postings: You shouldn't see it as a requirement for your manager to have an outside life and understand that you have one also. In this you should seek compatibility with your view of the world. If you like working 80 hour weeks, you should seek a manager who will work 80 hour weeks. There's nothing wrong with being a workaholic, if that's your thing. If that is your thing, you'll want to look for a manager who appreciates workaholism. I say this because I am presently a bachelor workaholic who is working at a company where workaholism is significantly undervalued. In the future I will settle down and start a family, but for now I would be happier working somewhere where 80 hour weeks beget large raises. It is good to be a dedicated family man. It is also good to be a career focused soldier. Each is good in the right context.
Re:Ask more about Life, less about Tech. (Score:4, Insightful)
Asking personal questions in a professional interview is unprofessional and, depending on the content (and location), can be illegal. You're not hiring a best buddie or a whore. Whether or not you would "hang out" together should not be part of the equation. You want the person who can best do the job and do it with a professional attitude -- which means a neutrality and distance that makes YOUR personal attributes as irrelevant to them as theirs should be to you.
By opening the pandoras box of private minutiae, you run the risk of bringing information to the table that identifies a person as a member of a protected class. For instance, where I live, in addition to the normal bits outlined by the US-EEOC, political affiliation and sexual orientation are protected. Asking "so, what do you do on the weekends" might result in "I go to Log Cabin Republican meetings after Temple." Great, now if you pass that person up, you've got a discrimination trifecta. A company I work for was very happy to find out my political affiliation. Fortunately for me, it's the same as 100% of the company. Unfortunately for them, they're RIPE for a lawsuit as a result. Even if you don't care, you don't want to know because once you know, you're open to accusations of bias.
But, legal risk-aversion shouldn't be your primary reason for keeping your nose out of the personal details of a potential co-worker. It's just basic professional etiquette. If it's not business, it's none of yours, capisce?
Re:vacation...? (Score:2, Insightful)
One question I have used that really has had some interesting results is "[h]ow would you rate your fit for this job on a scale from 1 to 10?" As a follow-up, ask "[w]hat would it take for you to move up one point?"
If they answer this question '10,' it makes the follow-up pretty uncomfortable, but you can always not ask it. If we've had a person who answers '10' and couldn't answer some of the questions we asked or were way off, it really seems to show that they don't have much self-awareness or are very overconfident. It could be that they're jut overselling, but in our organization, that's bad.
If they answer the second question, it's a good idea to see if they recognize the same limitations you see with your other interview questions. This can also spur some other interview questions, if some of the answers are enlightening. If there are some gaps between what you see and what they mention, it could spell trouble for professional growth.
Our organization has a high percentage of Macintosh computers, and we had a candidate who answered that she was a '10' for the position we were hiring. The problem was that she had no Mac experience and hadn't been able to answer any of the serveral Mac-specific questions we asked. It's one thing to sell yourself, but quite another to oversell to the point that it looks like you're blind to your own flaws. We've used it for three rounds of interviews for three positions (about fifteen interviews total), and it's almost always provided us with very interesting results.
ask him for his rule book (Score:2, Insightful)
One teacher was the ultimate hippy.
He was easy going and gave little homework.
The other was a military spit and polish guy
who wore a tie. He laid down the law the first
day of class and gave us tons of homework.
I found out the hippie gave grades based on
how much he liked you, not what you did. The
other guy told you exactly what was expected of
you. If you did what he told you your grade was
assured.
The moral of this story is your boss should know
exactly what he expects from you, and be able
to communicate that clearly to you. If he can't
your performance is subjective and you're twisting
in the wind. Ask your boss to tell you his rules.
If he doesn't know what they are, RUN!
A good manager (Score:4, Insightful)
Moral Justice (Score:3, Insightful)
Once when I was complaining to anyone who would listen, about the moral injustice of known-but-unacknowledged shortcomings in an internal tool, BH gave me a coupon for a free pastry+coffee at the IBM cafeteria, noting how hard I had worked on the particular project. No one else saw the coupon, he only spent about 2 mins. The moral injustice was not righted, yet I worked twice as hard after that and never forgot the gesture.
The way I usually say it is that my manager is my interface to the rest of the company, who gets me the resources I need to do my job while moderating the demands on my time.
Yes. When a manager does this with backbone, the loyalty engendered is priceless.
Re:Don't ask job related stuff (Score:2, Insightful)
Error Correction (Score:3, Insightful)
2. Firewalls filter (not stop) overt politics, not employee grapevines.
3. Negotiate resources for employees to do their job, sustainably.
4. Advertise employee success.
Sorry my good managers reminded you of bad ones.
Re:Important Question (Score:3, Insightful)
Maybe a department secretary, not a boss (Score:3, Insightful)
Look at the original post - the guy doesn't want to be management because he'd become a full-time paper-pusher.
What if his company hired a department administrator to handle the paperwork, and made him boss tech? I suspect this would be a far better use of resources, especially since the administrator would not get paid anywhere near as much as a programmer or engineer.
At one point I told my wife she'd be the perfect "office mom" for a tech company. She would, too. She's good at handling admin details and remembering things like birthdays, knows how to shop for things like hotel and airline deals and is good at setting up events, and would never let the place run out of vital supplies or let the timesheets get behind. Not only that, but from hanging around with my friends, she's used to dealing with what we might politely call "unusual people."
A group of engineers or programmers with an "office mom" like Debbie around -- and she's old enough to be mother to the typical under-30 programmer -- would certainly be enough more productive with her there to justify a secretary-level salary.
Debbie's not looking, but there are plenty of women (and men) who don't mind handling paperwork and making others' jobs easier, and are happy to work for a modest wage as long as they are treated with a little respect.
Too often, bosses end up buried in paperwork and don't have time for strategic planning or doing their other *real* work. No wonder so many tear at their hair until it has points!
I suspect that bringing back secretaries instead of trying to automate the visible parts of their jobs would be a good move for many companies, although I doubt that many are likely to take this wise step.
Re:My question (Score:3, Insightful)
As far as the /. question, would you really want to have a boss that gets after you for your present practices? If the boss doesn't understand the importance of a little bit external social interaction, like slashdot, then they probably won't understand other significant things in your culture.
Re:Supervisor Duty (Score:3, Insightful)
Deflect criticism
Pass on praise
Run interference when necessary.
Yup, he was a great boss!