Tell me who your enemies are…

October 26, 2009

Beware the gangs of IT. They might not wind up being as mean as street gangs or bands of hooligans but they might put up a decent performance of Nerd Side Story.

When you start your professional path it is only logical that you group with people who tend to think and act like you do, while some people with somewhat opposing worldviews become your natural enemies. All around the world IT shops are the perpetual battleground for traditional enmities that come with the trade. It’s unavoidable and in fact quite necessary because the opposing characteristics of these gangs generally prove useful for the overall goals of the company they work for. I submit to you the ones I’ve experienced firsthand.

Creative vs. Pragmatic

People such as graphic designers are a creative bunch. They constantly bet on the muse for their everyday work and if they can’t they start to feel uneasy. On the other hand, developers are practical people, they like to get their jobs done with as much efficiency as possible and will gladly let go of any flamboyant solutions if a very practical shortcut will do the job. Have you ever seen a user interface devised by a developer? They are only usable by well… other developers.

In the old days it was very common to hear a developer yelling because he or she despised the inconsistency infested, poorly formatted HTML received from the graphic designer who undoubtedly produced it with the graphic view of IDEs such as Dreamweaver. Designers used to not care for HTML standard compliance at all and churned out pieces of unintelligible spaghetti code full of missing close tags (to say the least).

I understand the overall adoption of CSS as not only a developer but a graphic design standard has somewhat proven beneficial for this particular interaction, by setting a common language that facilitates cooperation. Also IDEs have gotten a lot better at identifying non compliance to standards, but this was just an example; you will always find room for argument between such opposing types.

Sales vs. Operations

Until I started working in presales a common phrase I used to hear (and sometimes used) was “How can these idiots have sold this?” After starting my presales management experience the phrase slightly changed to “How can you idiots have sold this?”

It’s a very old and common enmity and yet one of the most explicit symbiotic dependencies. They need each other but don’t really care for each other.  Sales people have a sales goal which more often than not, does not include the outcome of the project execution. Operations on the other hand is in charge of executing within reasonable profit margins, schedule and quality.

A very common misconception is that at the end of the day sales should care about what they sell because their clients will be unhappy if the outcome is bad. More often than not, they just don’t and here’s why:

  1. The project’s end line is so far ahead in the future that it looks like a dot to them.
  2. Sales quotas are usually very cruel and competition is fierce.
  3. The end price for a project is not set by your sales team, it’s usually set by the market (i.e. if someone is willing to bid on a project for the price of a pair of socks, then your sales rep must bid for the price of just one sock)
  4. In order to maintain their good rapport with the client they can always fall back on the fake indignation card when things go to the crapper. “My operations team is not delivering? OH NO!!! I will raise some hell.”
  5. Most times operations has no influence and no real presence during the sales process.
  6. Sales people are compulsive yes-sayers.

Companies stand to benefit from the clash of wills between these two clans if they were to introduce mechanisms that encouraged cooperation:

  1. Bonuses for sales if projects are finished in time and budget.
  2. Penalties for sales when the latter does not occur.
  3. Operations assisting sales in the sales process with an equally strong voice.

Although I’ve seen some pretty decent efforts in that direction I have yet to see these pair working together as a unit.

Security Specialists vs. Everybody

I’d rather shovel guano for a living than be in charge of the network security of a company. These guys have a well deserved bad reputation. They are often ill mannered, unpleasant and generally bad ass to everyone around them. And that is precisely what they need to be. Show me a nice CSO and I’ll show you a company with security issues.

While your average office person does not give a crap about nothing and just wants to come to the office, read their personal mail, blog, tweet, chat via IM, browse Facebook, read the online news, download that tasty Paris Hilton video and oh… yes… get the occasional hour of work done; a good security specialist needs to be able to see the five thousand or so security violations your everyday working habits hold.

As an average Joe you will want to work and be comfortable at your workplace whereas a security specialist will try to maintain a network running and operational for everybody to be able to work comfortably and sometimes that just requires that they be mean to you.

I do not foresee any changes in this particular clash of wills because whenever security has evangelized a flock, new heretics will surface with virus infested pen drives at the ready.

Opposites Construct

The setting of opposing goals will usually result in confrontation between the different factions in IT. However, while the developer will push towards a faster, more efficient user interface, the creative department will make sure that it’s not an eye sore. If done respectfully, through clear channels and with room for balanced opinions, these little everyday battles will result in the benefit of the whole team.

If, on the other hand, a company was to take sides in these disputes by supporting one over the other, no good will come out of it. As an example, check out Microsoft’s product policy. It’s better to get to market presto and then put out a series of annoying service packs and updates than to spend one extra month in the kitchen. It’s greed over quality. And that’s a song more popular than the happy birthday.

Shuje

On my next post I will explain why the chicken went across the road.

Share in FacebookTweet this


Beware your digital footprint

October 15, 2009

The web 2.0 provides an excellent environment for companies to strengthen their brands. You can do it the Jedi way, or you can take a walk on the dark side. But, in keeping with the old Roman adagio: if you live by the sword, make sure you are prepared to die by the sword. The following are a couple of dirty social tricks I stumbled upon that backfired on their perpetrators.

I started a blog, which started the whole world crying. Cosmetics giant Vichy decided to create a blog based on the life experiences of Claire, a regular yet very pretty gal riding the cosmetics snake. This girl boasted somewhat artificial remarks about a particular Vichy product and was soon exposed as a corporate marketing maneuver. Vichy was immediately forced to make damage control and started using real bloggers’ opinions on product tryouts. They had a rough time though and until things straightened out, they were the laughing stock of the blogger community in France, which in case you don’t know, takes blogging pretty darn seriously.

Pimp my review. A mischievous employee of Belkin took it upon his own to start a campaign for promoting Belkin products. The industrious fellow paid 67 cents (USD that is) per positive review and / or recommendation written in Amazon Reviews for Belkin routers. A blogger discovered this and blew the lid off the whole thing. Allegedly Belkin was not aware of the ploy and made several apologies for the attitude of the employee.

The above are hardly isolated examples. I witnessed open video chat sessions with company executives getting massacred by former employees, viral campaigns that re-shaped product roadmaps (remember the Save Windows XP campaign?), Facebook causes bashing on products, etc.

These are all proof that trying to promote your brand via dirty methods can wind up in a terrible blunder, but more so when the medium is both your friend and your foe. Social channels are full duplex and feedback in social media is fast and when bad, merciless; a wrong move can trigger a negative image change reaction that can seriously injure brand and soul.

The rules of engagement in company-consumer relationships have changed dramatically. For the consumer, it’s a wonderful new era. There are a lot of fast reactions to social complaints: refunds, discounts, reparations, apologies, you name it. All sped up as the result of a blog post and the fear of the potential reputation damage they can produce. And I’m talking Amazon size companies here (The Kindle fiasco is still fresh in the collective mind).

For companies, it can also be a very powerful tool, dirty tricks aside. That is why we are now witnessing the re-shaping of marketing, recruiting and communication departments everywhere in order to adapt to the new media, and the arrival of boutique shops that devote themselves to 2.0 brand streaming. My good friends at El viaje de Odiseo are a living example of this.

In order to capitalize on the above it is crucial to be able to take in the criticism, separate the constructive part from the exacerbated berating and do something about it. To those with an open mind and enough humility, social networks, blogs and the like are tremendously powerful tools. To the stubborn and the excessively proud… better grab an umbrella because it’s going to rain blows.

It’s a brave new world out there.

Shuje

On my next post I will explain how becoming a member of a glam rock band stops your hair loss problems. In the meantime I’m open for feedback and receiving pictures of your lady friends. Send them to shuje@holoom.com

Share in FacebookTweet this


Death, taxes and bad managers

October 7, 2009

The title for this post is what I like to call life’s “crap trifecta”; eventually all of us have to endure the three of them. Since I can’t find anything interesting to say regarding death and taxes, let’s focus on bad managers.

Being a manager is not as simple as having the granted power that comes with the title.  I’ve seen and suffered awful managers that got picked for the job just because they were suck ups to upper management or lucky or political or a number of reasons that had nothing to do with being qualified for the job. Don’t get me wrong, a reasonable use of politics and luck are always required, but they cannot be the pillars for career advancement.

On the other hand I’ve seen great leaders become not so good managers. The reason is that leadership is derived from charisma, superb skills in one’s turf, seniority or some other trait that generates peer respect, but not all leaders are cut out for management (i.e. they do not have the people skills, administrative skills, desire, etc.)

The interesting thing is that good leaders do not require a title. While people will not always respect their managers they will always respect a leader.

So, what does it take to be a good manager?

In theory there are three types of management styles:

  1. Autocratic: The decision making lies in the manager.
  2. Democratic: The manager includes the team in the decision making process.
  3. Laissez Faire: The team has complete control over the decision making process.

A very important fact underlying all of the above: No matter how the manager chooses to delegate, he or she is always responsible for the actions of the team.

A good manager switches between management styles according to the situation. The rule of thumb for managers is asking where the expertise to make the decision lies. Is it oneself, the team, or all? Personally I’ve used the following criteria:

  1. For critical decisions or manager appointed tasks such as evaluations, setting of overall goals, career advancement, raises, disciplinary actions and such I use an autocratic approach.
  2. For everyday operative decisions or decisions that will affect the whole team, the best thing to do is be democratic.
  3. For stuff that is so every day that you lost the grip and the team clearly knows more about it than you do – and probably will get twice as affected as you by the outcome – let the team choose what is best (laissez faire)

By using these criteria I found that my style was a blend of approximately 60% democratic, 20% laissez faire and 20% autocratic.

Why this entire preamble when all you are looking for is somewhere to buy a sawed off shotgun to get rid of that bastard boss of yours? Because I believe that for the most part, bad managers are those who have a malfunction in the management style gland.

There are those who follow strictly one style and are dictatorial for the most part. There are those who are completely absent and leave the team meandering without goals or supervision. There are yet others who indeed use a mix of all three styles but make a poor choice as to where they should exercise which.

Some examples of bad management I experienced:

  1. Manager too busy or too careless to even set goals for the team (chronic laissez faire)
  2. Boss setting out to vote on a collective decision then just because the outcome of the vote is not the one he wanted vetoes it (phony democrat)
  3. Manager who won’t listen to anyone’s opinion for any matter (excessive autocrat)
  4. Boss who seemingly lets people work alone but then sneaks in an reads the e-mails his subordinates write (hidden autocrat – micro manager syndrome)
  5. Boss who lets the team make a decision then blames the team for a bad outcome (douche bag)
  6. Sadly a long list of etc.

This theory does not void other potential causes for a bad boss-subordinate relationship (often times “my boss is an idiot” is the only plausible explanation) but the next time you are confronted with a manager you dislike, try to analyze his actions in light of what I posted here. You will find that more often than not, what you don’t like about him lies in his management style. This, in turn, could help you try to modify things a bit.

Shuje

Disclaimer: No managers were harmed during the writing of this post.

On my next post I will show you how playing a Milli Vanilli record backwards uncovers a recipe for brownies. In the meantime if you have bad manager stories to share, or would like to discuss shotgun rentals please post below or contact me at shuje@holoom.com

Share in FacebookTweet this