October 10, 2009 at 1:03 pm
Comments posted to this topic are about the item Manager of One
October 12, 2009 at 2:39 am
I have worked at several investment management firms with supposedly high-level technology teams.
However, I found that IT managers, as opposed to the business people, are actually very uncomfortable with a developer who is self-motivated and does "not need a manager".
Independent thinking was not appreciated. They also did not like the fact that I might provide a solution to a user, who may be a fund manager and whose time is very expensive, without going through the bureaucratic approval process. ( I would get the approval of both the business manager and and my immediate boss, and I never allowed any side project to interfere with whatever the main work was. )
My attempts to introduce both multi-dimensional databases and data warehousing were only accepted when business users put pressure on the IT management.
A friend, who has been central to innovation of the XML messaging in the financial world and is a leader on the ISO committee, was forced out of the company.
I simply left 2 years ago.
October 12, 2009 at 2:50 am
Sad to say but there is an element of truth to the last post, Sometimes you have to be very careful on how you act within a team, working out what is acceptable practise and how you fit in, can be very time consuming and stressful. Some managers like the invisible employee, as in the work gets done but they have no involvement or interaction with you. and others have the desire to micro-manage you. It is naive to think that been a free thinker and doing what you consider to be best practise, will endear you to management. Managers like to follow rules and like to be in control, out of the box thinking or actions that do not confirm are not really tolerated. You will find that more in financial companies or where either there are strict controls in place by people who do not understand the technology or where the internal politics are extremly cutthroat. As steve has mentioned, being able to manage your own time is good but I am cynical enough to realise that it only works when it benefits the manager that you are working for.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[highlight]Recommended Articles on How to help us help you and[/highlight]
[highlight]solve commonly asked questions[/highlight]
Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help by Jeff Moden[/url]
Managing Transaction Logs by Gail Shaw[/url]
How to post Performance problems by Gail Shaw[/url]
Help, my database is corrupt. Now what? by Gail Shaw[/url]
October 12, 2009 at 6:59 am
Many employment ads will list terms such as self-starter but they will also list that you must be able to work in a team. One who is really a self-starter will find a team environment very stressful.
I agree with the first two posts. I have found that very few organizations truly want someone who is an independent self-starter. That type of individual is a threat to management. I am in an organization where I can be a semi-self-starter but I am constrained by the realities of budget, time, and project priority.
October 12, 2009 at 7:48 am
Very interesting responses. I have to say that I haven't necessarily had that experience, but I can see your points. There are definitely managers that worry they would be out of a job with a self-starter.
Note, however, that self-starter doesn't mean that you do things without direction or in your own manner. It just means that you manage your own communications and someone else doesn't have to track you down to be sure you're working with customers or getting things done.
October 12, 2009 at 8:02 am
Steve Jones - Editor (10/12/2009)
Very interesting responses. I have to say that I haven't necessarily had that experience, but I can see your points. There are definitely managers that worry they would be out of a job with a self-starter.Note, however, that self-starter doesn't mean that you do things without direction or in your own manner. It just means that you manage your own communications and someone else doesn't have to track you down to be sure you're working with customers or getting things done.
How does that differ from what has been said already?. so your saying a self-starter is someone who manages their own communcations, so basically someone who minds their own business and gets on with stuff not important enough to warrant a managers attention.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[highlight]Recommended Articles on How to help us help you and[/highlight]
[highlight]solve commonly asked questions[/highlight]
Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help by Jeff Moden[/url]
Managing Transaction Logs by Gail Shaw[/url]
How to post Performance problems by Gail Shaw[/url]
Help, my database is corrupt. Now what? by Gail Shaw[/url]
October 12, 2009 at 10:05 am
Doing what you think is the best practice, or implementing something independently doesn't necessarily mean you are managing yourself. Managing yourself includes communication with your boss and appraising them of status.
October 12, 2009 at 10:39 am
skjoldtc (10/12/2009)
Many employment ads will list terms such as self-starter but they will also list that you must be able to work in a team. One who is really a self-starter will find a team environment very stressful.I agree with the first two posts. I have found that very few organizations truly want someone who is an independent self-starter. That type of individual is a threat to management. I am in an organization where I can be a semi-self-starter but I am constrained by the realities of budget, time, and project priority.
I think you can be both a self-starter and a team player. I think of someone like that as one with natural or developed leadership skills, who not only motivates him/herself but also lights a fire under team members and can recognize good ideas from team members.
October 12, 2009 at 11:05 am
As a manager of other technology professionals, I want to hire self-starters, the kind of people whom Joel Spolsky describes as "smart people who get things done." If I don't have to micromanage people, then I am more productive.
October 12, 2009 at 11:36 am
"Managing yourself includes communication with your boss and appraising them of status"
From the 1st poster :
I did all that very conscientiously, but my experience was that IT mgt. still did not feel that I was sufficiently under their control. They could not stand it that I spoke with business people directly to understand their problems and that I was not dependent on the mgt. to identify and "explain" problems that needed to be solved.
It was the business people themselves who told me that they more or less forced mgt. to allow to continue to help them.
October 12, 2009 at 3:52 pm
There seems to be an idea that the qualities of 'self starting' and 'team playing' are opposite ends of the same dimension. I would argue that are independent of each other. Self starting is all about motivation, and arguably anyone will be a self starter given the right reasons/environment. On the other hand being a team player is more about people skills, being agreeable and communicative and so on.
October 13, 2009 at 7:14 am
One of the toughest things about hiring people is that you want someone who is motivated and to some degree a self-starter, but you also want a team player - a person not out to prove themselves somehow "better" than everyone else, but someone who is willing to share their knowledge in understandable terms, and better the entire staff with their presence and input. These kind of people are extremely hard to find.
Some self-starters are too "lone wolf" to make it on our team. We don't hire rock stars and the team concept is highly advocated in our entire organization. Others are too much into the "keys to the kingdom" philosophy where they have great knowledge but they use it to "protect" their positions rather than educate and improve the overall team. These people don't last here, and some who have come through only slowed down the work load by over-protecting their percieved "domains".
I don't agree that a person's blog is any factor at all. In fact, on the occasions where someone has interviewed and directed me to their blog, I ignore it entirely. Why? #1, how do I know the writing on a person's blog is in fact their thoughts? Yes, I know its a shock, but much of the content on the web in total is either baloney, someone else's work, or pie-in-the-sky. #2, I know people who write very well but cannot tie their own shoes. A blog tells me nothing about how a person will mesh in the real work-a-day world. #3, If a person is dedicating time to write blogs, what AREN'T they getting done? Blogging to me, in general, is great for journalists - otherwise its a large waste of time. If that's where someone is putting their time, why?
If you want to be a real manager of one, find a good place to work, and be part of the team. Its fairly simple.
October 13, 2009 at 8:46 am
skjoldtc (10/12/2009)
Many employment ads will list terms such as self-starter but they will also list that you must be able to work in a team. One who is really a self-starter will find a team environment very stressful.I agree with the first two posts. I have found that very few organizations truly want someone who is an independent self-starter. That type of individual is a threat to management. I am in an organization where I can be a semi-self-starter but I am constrained by the realities of budget, time, and project priority.
I really don't thing these things are mutually exclusive. You can be a self-starter and a good team worker. As a matter of fact, it's easier to work with a team of self-starters as long as they communicate to each other.
"The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood"
- Theodore Roosevelt
Author of:
SQL Server Execution Plans
SQL Server Query Performance Tuning
October 13, 2009 at 8:50 am
blandry (10/13/2009)
One of the toughest things about hiring people is that you want someone who is motivated and to some degree a self-starter, but you also want a team player - a person not out to prove themselves somehow "better" than everyone else, but someone who is willing to share their knowledge in understandable terms, and better the entire staff with their presence and input. These kind of people are extremely hard to find.Some self-starters are too "lone wolf" to make it on our team. We don't hire rock stars and the team concept is highly advocated in our entire organization. Others are too much into the "keys to the kingdom" philosophy where they have great knowledge but they use it to "protect" their positions rather than educate and improve the overall team. These people don't last here, and some who have come through only slowed down the work load by over-protecting their percieved "domains".
I don't agree that a person's blog is any factor at all. In fact, on the occasions where someone has interviewed and directed me to their blog, I ignore it entirely. Why? #1, how do I know the writing on a person's blog is in fact their thoughts? Yes, I know its a shock, but much of the content on the web in total is either baloney, someone else's work, or pie-in-the-sky. #2, I know people who write very well but cannot tie their own shoes. A blog tells me nothing about how a person will mesh in the real work-a-day world. #3, If a person is dedicating time to write blogs, what AREN'T they getting done? Blogging to me, in general, is great for journalists - otherwise its a large waste of time. If that's where someone is putting their time, why?
If you want to be a real manager of one, find a good place to work, and be part of the team. Its fairly simple.
That's an interesting point of view, and I wouldn't suggest you put too much weight on a blog, but to put no weight on it at all seems like you're missing out on a source of information about that person that will help you understand how they'll fit into the team. If nothing else, you might find their blog full of complaints about how much they hate all their co-workers or what have. Useful information for hiring someone.
"The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood"
- Theodore Roosevelt
Author of:
SQL Server Execution Plans
SQL Server Query Performance Tuning
October 13, 2009 at 12:25 pm
I think you're missing out by ignoring blogs as well. First, if it's not their writing, I think you'll see that in the interview. What they put on their blog won't match their communication in an interview.
Second, I disagree that much of what is written is "baloney". It's often a person's thoughts, attitudes, and communication skills. If they communicate well on the blog, you'd expect that in an interview, and more importantly, when emailing/documenting in the company. If they don't do it well, you're aware of it, and if they are a good person to hire, you know what they should focus on and can help them.
Blogging is a good way for someone to release some of their thoughts, unload theid mind and better understand what they've been working on. It's like a journal from decades ago. Do you think people that kept journals, many company leaders, government leaders, etc. were wasting their time by writing? If someone is writing down their experiences, thoughts, and ideas instead of watching TV, do you somehow penalize them?
Not to say that all bloggers are accurate, and there are plenty that plagiarize, but I think most people write about their own careers on a career blog.
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 14 (of 14 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply