Managing Up Instead of Managing

The number of managers in software development promoted to their level of incompetence (actually beyond it) is pretty high. The “Peter Principle” is alive and well in software development. Most software development managers have reached their level of incompetence without ever using measurements or using quality principles. These managers default to what has worked their entire careers. They default to the behaviors that were rewarded in the past.

Humans always try to maximize their own situations and their own careers. I was asked to provide consulting services in relation to a very large merger between two telecommunications companies. My assessment would be used as part of the criteria to determine which applications would be kept and which would be thrown out. A senior executive VP for one of the telecommunications companies asked me a direct question, and I am certain my response prevented me from doing the assessments. She asked, “You are going to assemble a pretty high powered team of individuals, and they are going to do some good analysis and write a report. How do I know you will not make my applications obsolete and me along with them?” I responded, “It is not about making an application or a person obsolete but helping the organization move forward. If the organization moves forward, there are going to be plenty of jobs, including executive level jobs.” This executive was very charismatic, and this is what got her promoted to her current level. She felt there was less risk in using what worked for her in the past instead of trying something new - in this case - a quantitative approach.

There are a lot of very insecure and defensive software development managers. The way I consult and approach them is totally different than I would a secure person. Now there are some mangers and developers who are complete idiots. I might even go as far as calling them the village idiots or the company idiots. By the way, most people do not like being called an idiot, and I would recommend refraining from calling management or fellow workers idiots. There is a difference between ignorance and being an idiot. Once an ignorant person is informed and educated, he or she does not let their egos get in the way. He or she learns and they correct the problem. On the other hand, an idiot is a person who is not persuaded with facts and figures. Egos prevent them from changing direction and adopting new policies. Generally, the idiots are very insecure and surround themselves with people with even less competent.

Several years ago, before I learned to be more diplomatic, I was a mid-level manager at Sprint Corporation. I was in a meeting with a very senior executive, and I thought, well for a lack of better words, he was an idiot. In one of our many meetings, he said to me, “Overstreet (he could never get my name right), every time I talk, I get the impression you think I am an idiot.” I sat quietly and did not respond. Then he said, “What? you have no response?” So I said, “You’re observant.” Trust me, that one little comment did not help my career.

In many organizations, managing up is rewarded instead of actual managing. Often, there is too much focus on which meetings one attends, how one speaks in the meetings, how much overtime a person works instead of how much actual work is delivered. If quality principles are part of the review process, then it is basically impossible to get promoted without following them. When quality principles are not part of the review process, then individuals are promoted and rewarded for different reasons.

The worse types of managers are those who see a project plan as overhead and would rather manage the project by the seat of their pants. In fact, they see most everything as overhead such as metrics, project plans, documentation; actually the entire process is seen as overhead. It makes me wonder how they are actually managing the project. In actuality, they are not managing at all.

Herman, Peter., and Polivy, Janet. “If at First You Don’t Succeed.” American Psychologist Vol. 37, No. 9 (September 2002):677-689. Bennett, Harve, et al. Star Trek III The Search for Spock. Widescreen DVD collection. Hollywood, Calif: Paramount Pictures, 2002. DeMacro, Tom. Controlling Software Projects, Yourdon Press, New Jersey, 1982. 14 The Peter Principal states, “in a hierarchy every employee tends to rise to his or her level of incompetence.” This idea was first presented by Laurence J. Peter in his book, The Peter Principle, published in 1968.