
How do you manage a team of geeks? - edent
https://thelab.o2.com/2013/01/how-do-you-manage/
======
radicalbyte
Replace "geek" with "highly sought after, intelligent and talented employees"
and you'll be closer to the truth.

The reason developers are "hard" to manage is that they're in demand, so they
don't have to put up with bad or abusive management.

That said.. I'd recommend reading Team Geek
(<http://shop.oreilly.com/product/0636920018025.do>) if you have any ambition
to move into a management or leadership role.

~~~
simonswords82
IMO the reason developers are "hard" to manage has nothing to do with the fact
that they're in demand - fortunately most developers aren't that fickle.

There are numerous reasons why developers are difficult to manage. One of the
main reasons is because by and large they are introverts. They therefore don't
communicate well with other people at all times.

Also - let's face it - the work developers do isn't always easy to understand
and quantify; as opposed to say building a house where the inputs/outputs are
clearly visible. I can't imagine being a non-techie and trying to manage a
team of developers would be at all fun.

Source: I own and run a software development company and have employed and
contracted with dozens of developers.

~~~
seivan
Have you thought that maybe you pay so bad, that those are the kind of
developers you get to be around, and therefore build judgement and assume they
are introverts, or don't properly communicate?

Social HR huh? Yeah.

~~~
simonswords82
Interesting point but unfortunately you're off the mark - we use pay ladders
for our team, very similar to those Joel Spolsky applies at FogCreek. We keep
one eye on the .Net market to ensure our pay scales are aligned with market
rates, so pay isn't the issue.

~~~
seivan
Hah .NET coders. Yeah I got ya.

------
jeremyx
This article, (and many others), has a tone that some people ("geeks" in this
case) are like another species of human origin that only the most skilled
manager has learned to tame.

According to this article, they hate bureaucracy, filling out time-sheets and
want flexible working hours. I guess I'm a geek in need of special management.

Who really believes this crap?

~~~
car54whereareu
Show me someone who likes filling out time sheets, wants inflexible working
hours, loves bureaucracy, and respects authority more than ideas. I don't know
anyone like that, so I must only know geeks.

~~~
marcosdumay
I know some three of four people like that.

~~~
car54whereareu
Who?

------
UK-AL
I hate this tone. Geeks want what everybody wants, respect, recognition,
autonomy, progression, money.

Its just that geeks are more likely to stand up to a manager (They respect
ideas, and knowledge, not authority)if they don't like the way something is
done, rather than be meek. Thus have a reputation for being difficult to
control.

~~~
majelix
> Its just that geeks are more likely to stand up to a manager (They respect
> ideas, not authority)

How much of this is inherit in "geeks" and how much is just because we're
lucky enough to be in one of the strongest job markets around? Many people
would be ecstatic to have the problem of recruiter spam.

~~~
himanshuchanda
I guess its not about the job market. Geeks are more of creators and artists.
They dont bother much of the hierarchies and luckily the hierarchies too dont
have an issue because they deliver.

Its just that whose in more power. In the factory age it was the sales man. In
the tech age its the geek

~~~
victorhn
I think we all are wired to bother about hierarchies, it's just that among
"geeks" the perceived rank has to be more about actual substance and real
acomplishment, compared with "normal" hierarchies where the differentiator is
about who is the more social, political person even when often the person has
no substance nor real acomplishment.

------
konradb
I have to say I'm not normally one to post here, and I dislike posting
negatively, but this isn't a submission I've enjoyed.

We're all a bunch of human beings. People are complex and have varied fears,
motivations, and delusions - and they act accordingly. Whatever role they play
in a company.

Someone who has the role called 'manager' in an organisation who interacts
with other people who have a role called 'developer' has the task of
interacting with a bunch of human beings, and that is often difficult. It is
made more difficult when they all decide it is in their interests to devote
their time to creating something complex. That's a fine area about which we
can talk about ways to improve.

However this 'geek' moniker, while all lighthearted, puts distance between
people. It makes the article, to me, seem partly about the author
(telegraphing the distance he puts between him and others in a relationship he
possibly sees as being based around 'power') and partly about his message.
I'll be happy if I've gone overboard in my interpretation though!

------
djhworld
I think giving geeks a quiet space to work in with little distractions is the
most important aspect.

Most companies fail at doing this though, usually offices are geared towards
the extrovert, so huge sprawling open plan desks with people coming/going all
the time.

An ideal solution would be everyone gets their own office, a practical
solution would be to provide laptops and allow remote working or the option to
work anywhere in the building with carefully designed areas to that are quiet
and comfortable.

Most corporates don't understand this though and just put everyone on a
desk/cubicle in a huge room with 80 others and blindly hope some productivity
will happen

------
kds
Well, maybe the way Danny Ocean (George Cloony) manages his team in Ocean's
Twelve (the movie) - tight team, clear plan, known desirable end-result, exact
subtasks and timing, confidence in the experts' abilities (proven before).. A
sense of common purpose, unity, and perhaps friendship helps also.

~~~
dsr_
And having a scriptwriter who can ensure a great outcome for you, that's a
definite plus.

------
columbo
2009:
[http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9137708/Opinion_The_u...](http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9137708/Opinion_The_unspoken_truth_about_managing_geeks)

1999: <http://blog.calevans.com/nerd-herding/>

1980:
[http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=Mp8rAAAAIBAJ&sjid=S...](http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=Mp8rAAAAIBAJ&sjid=SvwFAAAAIBAJ&pg=5054,4061727&hl=en)

------
famousactress
This is probably a tangent, but can we use a better word than "manage"? I
honestly think the vocabulary continues to inform our expectations of the job
that needs doing here, and I'd suggest that in cases like groups of talented
engineers the needs isn't one of authority or "management". Something closer
to "facilitator" is a more appropriate description of the real need.

~~~
gsharm
Communicator

------
codeonfire
I think many professions have to put up with the condescending and patronizing
bullshit that this article reveals. This is exactly why tech corps are ruined.
A few business grads get into the top and convince the company that anyone who
has to think to do their jobs is infantile. It's quite sickening but is a
natural part of the death of a corporation.

------
ballard
Weekly Skype team calls against the current milestone & scheduled 1:1s.

Mockingbird for web wireframes, fluidui for mobile.

FlowDock for devops and support: tickets (jira), commits (git), builds
(jenkins) and releases. FD is way better than HipChat/Campfire due to threads
and tags. (Try looking in HipChat for a real 24x7 multiperson support incident
with some admin password for some random box 80 hours ago. GFL!) It also rocks
for support because of the group inbox. And, it can be used by PR people (in a
different flow) since it does RSS and twitter.

JIRA + Greenhopper for features/milestones, Redmine/Chili works too. (Gitlab
looks neat.)

IRC for informal chats.

------
fasouto
"[...]especially if they have been told that other people have looked at the
problem and couldn’t find a solution!"

There's too much ego in our profession, we have to get rid of it. I hate when
a client says: "You have to implement a real time video compression algorithm
of 100K LOC in brainfuck. This shouldn't take a lot of time for a talented
developer like you"

In my head it sounds like: "I think you are stupid and I'm using your ego to
get a better/cheaper/faster result"

------
ksmiley
I've been on the wrong end of #4 a couple of times. My boss' opinion of what
is "interesting and really challenging" rarely coincides with my own opinion.
By this criteria, "make me a Facebook" or "solve the bin packing problem in
linear time" would be perfect tasks! And yet I can't imagine many developers
jumping for joy when assigned to them.

------
treerock
"Remove as much bureaucracy from their working day as possible, they hate
doing it, are not very good at it and will spend more time trying to figure
out ways of either getting around the tasks or automating them than it would
take to actually do it in the first place."

In most other professions there are secretaries to do this kind of thing.

~~~
cail
I agree with this but it shows an even bigger problem in my mind. It seems to
me that the author has decided that employees attempting to automate
bureaucratic tasks is worse than just doing it himself. This seems like a
wildly inefficient way to manage. Maybe I'm missing something though.

For example, regarding the time sheets, if I could write a quick script that
automates the process of filling it out (correctly) in three hours and it
would have taken me twenty minutes to fill it out by hand, what's the problem?
after only nine weeks I have earned back that three hours in productive time.
If I were to distribute it to the entire team of fifteen people and they each
take a similar amount of time to fill out the sheets then we are already
ahead.

------
mrlyc
> the golden rule of “manage how you’d like to [be] managed” still applies

I tried that. It lasted about ten minutes. I then changed to managing people
how they would like to be managed. That was much more successful.

------
meaty
If it's O2/Telefonica (which it is), then they manage them fucking terribly
and deliver shitty products that fall over and leave people in dire shit
regularly.

Not only that, they stereotype and patronise them terribly.

~~~
treerock
I think I've spotted why.

"We’re an innovation team, powered by O2. We were set up in January 2011 to
test new ideas & concepts fast, in an open environment...We create prototypes,
iterate and pivot where necessary, building alpha and beta products to test
with user groups with the goal of adding value for our customers."

They've got the PHB working for them.

<https://thelab.o2.com/who-we-are/>

<http://www.dilbert.com/2013-01-09/>

------
shanellem
Honestly, I think these rules apply to most employees, not just geeks. But
there are some great tips here!

------
contingencies
Two words: continuous integration.

<http://www.scribd.com/doc/120792448/Continuous-Integration>

(I drew these notes up the other day)

PS. Since you appear to be the UK O2, I would add: pay people the same or less
but let them work remotely from a more comfortable and healthy environment.
Maximum reduction of bureaucracy? Removal of physical environment.

~~~
contingencies
Why did this get downvoted?

------
wildranter
Give 'em beer or pot, and a spec. :)

PS: I'll be hiring this year; if you don't have anything against what's
written here send me your resume (email on profile).

~~~
codeonfire
Wait, don't you need some dummies to manage those people? Better offer some
hookers and blow as well. If you need warm bodies that like beer and pot,
college hiring season is starting.

~~~
wildranter
I figure won't be sending your resume. Your loss ;)

