

How To Lead Clever People - andrewl
http://business.in.com/article/rotman/how-to-lead-clever-people/28632/1

======
DevX101
The article is based on a compelling premise, but the analysis is often
generic enough to be meaningless and leaves much to be desired.

Most of the do's and don't infographic were either false or obvious. Example,
Do: 'Talk Straight'. Don't: 'Use bull or deceive'. Really? I'm pretty sure
this advice applies to every management position in existence outside of
politics.

I'd like to see an in-depth analysis of why the best engineers go to Google,
but not AOL. I'd like to see more empirical based analysis on how to keep
incredibly smart people to stay at your organization even though they're sharp
enough and confident enough to go out on their own.

It seems he's pushing a book about 'Clever Management'. I haven't read the
book but if this article is any indication it will be one of those 80% filler
business books that you read and walk away feeling like you didn't really
learn anything new or non-obvious.

~~~
smoyer
Where can I get reimbursed for the 90 seconds it took to skim this article? If
the book is at all worthwhile, this is horrible advertising.

------
forkandwait
"Clevers"? Plural, as a noun? Give me a break.

Maybe I missed something in my 3 second skim, but this guy sounds like he just
wants to ride some asinine gimmick like "Seven Habits.." or "The Southbeach
Diet".

Here is my take on managing people, "clevers" and "non-clevers" (stupids?
muggles? non-college?...) Remember that the people you hire are, in fact,
people, rather than cranky forklifts. People need challenge, creativity, and
growth to thrive, though they are often willing trade some time doing
monotonous bullshit if there is a decent tradeoff; if you do have do
monotonous bullshit, make sure they get to some cool stuff that follows from
that. Figure out their "will-to-power" and how they view themselves, and align
your goals with their own.

Remember that even though you went to an Ivy League school and they graduated
from the local junior college, they need the same stuff as you.

"Clevers"?? really? he should be embarassed.

~~~
vii
It is natural to feel challenged and threatened by obviously more intelligent
co-workers and subordinates. Most people probably don't want to work with
someone who thinks they are a superstar, and would prefer just to go home at a
regular time. Those of us who wish to work in an intellectually challenging
environment are probably a minority.

It is unfortunate that the article uses the term 'clever' to make a slightly
unclear differentiation from 'knowledge worker.' Maybe if the term 'innovator'
were selected then the article would be clearer. It would also help to explain
why frequent feedback may be disadvantageous. Managing or harnessing
innovative people is extremely difficult and it is an important subject to
discuss and study.

~~~
forkandwait
I disagree that "those of us who wish to work in an intellectually challenging
environment are ... a minority".

I think what is true is that most people don't have the opportunity to be
truly human at work (challenged, interested, etc) because the current system
doesn't hire _human beings_ , but just "function-fulfillers". Then we get
disappointed when the human beings we hired don't act like simple robots... go
figure ...

(I don't know how true to life the books are, but the Toyota Way series makes
a big point about how important it is to allow -- demand, in fact -- people to
grow and challenge themselves, from the engineers to the production workers.
It is the US unions insistence on highly constrained work rules and job
functions that made Deming hate them, rather than anything to do with wages.)

Also -- nobody wants to work with an arrogant asshole who "thinks they are a
superstar", whether they are "a clever" or "a stupid". But it is only folks
with low self esteem or power trips who willingly surround themselves with
people of less talent themselves.

Knowledge worker? Innovator? -- that could be anyone, including a fry cook at
McDonalds, if it was allowed to them. I have worked some shit, shit jobs, and
I was always struck by how the spread in raw intelligence was about the same
as in my elite private high school (now study skills and entitlement, however,
is something the "non-clevers" just don't have at the moment, but that is a
cultural thing that could be changed, if we cared.)

~~~
vii
It is not sensible to hire people who will become rapidly frustrated at the
function they are delegated to perform unless you have another position to
promote them into. Often you need someone to perform a dull role.

There are plenty of people, even knowledge workers, who are satisfied with a
steady paycheck and a low level of workplace stimulation. Should one force
them to improve? If you do, then they often move on (in my experience). That
is why the distinction brought up between innovators and knowledge workers is
important.

~~~
forkandwait
"Often you need someone to perform a dull role."

If you see your company as a machine in which you and a few select managers
are the controllers, and everyone else is, somewhat literally, just a tool.
This is the subconcious model that permeates our society, for better or for
worse.

"There are plenty of people, even knowledge workers, who are satisfied with a
steady paycheck and a low level of workplace stimulation."

Really? That sounds a lot like somebody in power justifying to themselves why
the other people are not in power -- because they are "satisfied" with their
lot. This is a very, very old trope, including the whole White Man's Burden
thing, etc.

------
hboon
My version of How to lead clever people:

1\. They are clever, remember that.

2\. Remember 1. Stay out of their way, let them do what they are so good at
doing.

3\. Remember 1. Don't try to outsmart them at work. Unless it's not work
related. Have fun there.

4\. Remember 1. Do or help them do what they are not willing to do. Clear the
trash, or hire someone to do it.

5\. Remember 1. Help them do what they are good at. Give them resources.
Remove blockers.

6\. Remember 1. Give them challenges. Nothing bores clever people more than
not feeling challenged by their work (read: their work do not include
politics)

7\. Protect them from politics. They might be good at shielding themselves,
but that's not an effective use of their time. This includes you helping other
teams that don't work with you. If every other team hates yours for performing
and getting all the rewards, this might not make life good for you or your
clever people.

8\. Let them know what you have done for them. Don't brag, but this is a
necessity for human relationships to work out, especially at work.

Edit: typo

~~~
wccrawford
I worked at a company that needed help at a few of these.

4) To save a few $, they made EVERY employee do cleaning duties. Take out the
trash, clean the fridge and microwave, etc. This caused no end of strife, and
couldn't possibly have been worth the little money they saved.

7) Politics were awesome initially, but then the CEO's friend was promoted to
being a manager. After a major screwup, the CEO moved the guilt from the
manager to EVERYONE under him. For not going over his head when he was making
a mistake. The politics were made obvious at that point.

8) I often did NOT know what the company was doing for me behind the scenes. I
only saw the things they failed to do, and had little appreciation for the
things they did. I'm sure they thought they were just keeping me from being
bothered, but they really should have tooted their own horn a bit here.

In the end, these were factors in my leaving, but not the biggest one. Pay was
the biggest. So I'll add to your list:

9\. Pay them appropriately. If you don't, they're clever enough to find
someone who will.

------
porlw
The best way to lead clever people is to clear the way in front of them and
let them follow the path of least resistance. If a "clever" encounters an
obstacle they will devote their energy to working a way around it, so you need
to make sure that the only challenges they encounter are ones you WANT them to
solve.

------
angelbob
From the article: "Don't: give frequent feedback."

Really?

Perhaps they mean, give frequent feedback on what but not on how? I'm not sure
where they were going with this.

------
vl
There is a book for that: Peopleware.

~~~
iqster
Second that. Peopleware should be required reading for anyone in software. I
read it a decade ago and think it is still relevant.

------
michaelochurch
Managing the smartest people isn't impossible "cat herding" and it's not some
obscure science. The trick is to realize how they got smart: by fighting the
system to learn more than they should. They're rule-breakers but they also
have a deep respect for learning, courage, and effort.

Such people need to be mentored, and they need to feel favored (which is
politically messy). If they feel like the people "in charge" are looking out
for them and moving political obstacles out of their way, they'll be loyal. If
they don't feel that way, they'll do what they think will teach them. Remember
how they got smart: fighting the system, breaking rules. Getting an education
by "stealing" it from a boss is natural to them.

------
natasham25
A managers job is to bring the "clever" out of all the people he or she
manages.

------
known
Don't lead them. Administer them.

