Why are engineers loyal to managers but not the other way around?
2 comments
Most managers/entrepreneurs I know absolutely hate firing & laying off people. It's their complete least favorite part of the job.
The difference is that managers are typically under more constraints than engineers, and then entrepreneurs are under both more constraints and more uncertainty than managers. As an engineer, your job is to make the machines do what your boss wants them to do. You may have many technical constraints, but you basically have only one human constraint: what your boss is asking for.
As a manager, your job is to keep the team functioning and keep your boss happy. If your boss says that your budget has been cut by 40%, there's nothing you can do about it, you've gotta let 40% of your people go even if you really like them and they've shown you nothing but loyalty. If you've got a brilliant technical contributor but he's socially abrasive and half your team's threatening to quit if you don't get rid of him, you can fire him or you can lose half your team.
As an entrepreneur, your job is to a.) identify why the company should exist b.) hire the right people and c.) make sure that there's always enough cash in the bank. And if you have to lay people off, it means you fucked up. But you do all three of these things under conditions of extreme uncertainty. Maybe the technical rock star that shined brightly in the coding interviews is a douchebag to women, and you have to fire him so that you don't lose every woman on your team. Maybe you hired in anticipation of growth, so that you don't burn out people, but then the market for your product turned out to be much smaller than you thought. Maybe you hit a recession and your whole sector contracts.
Remember that entrepreneurs are ultimately responsible to customers, and customers show zero loyalty. If a better product comes out, or they hit on hard times, or they change their line of business, they have no obligation to keep paying for your product.
Trust and loyalty absolutely play a big role in the software industry today, but business is a lot more complex than it seems when you come out of college, and you learn quickly that you can't always do what you want.
The difference is that managers are typically under more constraints than engineers, and then entrepreneurs are under both more constraints and more uncertainty than managers. As an engineer, your job is to make the machines do what your boss wants them to do. You may have many technical constraints, but you basically have only one human constraint: what your boss is asking for.
As a manager, your job is to keep the team functioning and keep your boss happy. If your boss says that your budget has been cut by 40%, there's nothing you can do about it, you've gotta let 40% of your people go even if you really like them and they've shown you nothing but loyalty. If you've got a brilliant technical contributor but he's socially abrasive and half your team's threatening to quit if you don't get rid of him, you can fire him or you can lose half your team.
As an entrepreneur, your job is to a.) identify why the company should exist b.) hire the right people and c.) make sure that there's always enough cash in the bank. And if you have to lay people off, it means you fucked up. But you do all three of these things under conditions of extreme uncertainty. Maybe the technical rock star that shined brightly in the coding interviews is a douchebag to women, and you have to fire him so that you don't lose every woman on your team. Maybe you hired in anticipation of growth, so that you don't burn out people, but then the market for your product turned out to be much smaller than you thought. Maybe you hit a recession and your whole sector contracts.
Remember that entrepreneurs are ultimately responsible to customers, and customers show zero loyalty. If a better product comes out, or they hit on hard times, or they change their line of business, they have no obligation to keep paying for your product.
Trust and loyalty absolutely play a big role in the software industry today, but business is a lot more complex than it seems when you come out of college, and you learn quickly that you can't always do what you want.
That's why it is justifiable to treat an engineer as a tool ? And since you brought it up, let's start one on science/engineering solutions vs. management. Obviously you think the later is harder, I disagree.
Forget justifiable - no, it's not justifiable. It is necessary, in many circumstances. There are circumstances where your continued employment with a company will lead to worse consequences for you and everybody else there than if you're let go.
I also didn't say management is harder than engineering, I said "more constrained". I believe that it's harder to be a good manager than a good engineer, but it's harder to be an average engineer than an average manager. And that again comes from constraints: a good manager tries to do right by everybody, while an average manager doesn't care. You have the option of ignoring your constraints in both professions, but an engineer that ignores his constraints won't make any progress at all, while a manager that ignores his constraints can sometimes muddle through until all of his people quit.
I also didn't say management is harder than engineering, I said "more constrained". I believe that it's harder to be a good manager than a good engineer, but it's harder to be an average engineer than an average manager. And that again comes from constraints: a good manager tries to do right by everybody, while an average manager doesn't care. You have the option of ignoring your constraints in both professions, but an engineer that ignores his constraints won't make any progress at all, while a manager that ignores his constraints can sometimes muddle through until all of his people quit.
Seems like managers do things that are not justifiable and get away with it, whereas brunt work is done by engineers. Managers can't be trusted then, because they can get away with it ? So who is to decide if the consequence to let someone go, block raise/bonus is not because of the need of the company but because of the greed of managers ?
In startup world, we not just care but respect engineers :)
Do managers also ask the same when evaluating/firing an employee ? I've seen leads/manager ask difficult questions in interview which they can't answer. After joining the company one realizes leads are lead because they are friends and not because they are good at what they do.
Have you seen managers shown the same care that an employee shows ? Is it the fact that people won't trust an engineer easily ? I've seen engineers spend 5-10 years working like a horse gaining the trust and then the company fires them just like that. Does trust play a role in software industry today ?