Are IT bods/contractors smarter than everyone else?

[Ivor Bigun]

I'm afraid you're wrong. I'm a genuine, unashamed idealist who's actually crazy enough to care about what goes on.

You may think that (and good on you) but you should also consider how much you stress the belief that if you improve the "system", you improve everyone's life.

I'm sure you agree with the idea of "you can't make an omelette without breaking eggs"

Where the "problem" lies, is that you fail to see the damage your utopian ideals draw you to. you discount the "broken eggs" along the way.

You should realise that it's these "broken eggs" that ultimately dethrone you along the way - and stop you ever making it to the top.

[Mich the Tester]

You may think that (and good on you) but you should also consider how much you stress the belief that if you improve the "system", you improve everyone's life.

I don't believe you can improve a system to improve people's lives. I believe that if you give capable people the space to improve the way they work then the results of the 'system' will improve. The problem is the idea of an organisation as a system that's designed top-down for a particular task, where it should actually be more the case that the system adapts bottom-up to the needs of it's environment. I'm in danger of getting a bit too abstract here though. The trouble with abstractions is that they can present the world in simple black and white pictures, where actually the truth is a million shades of grey and rather messy and complicated. That's where professional judgment comes in.

[Ivor Bigun]

I don't believe you can improve a system to improve people's lives. I believe that if you give capable people the space to improve the way they work then the results of the 'system' will improve.

This is the first stage of thinking how a manager should be. Its usually thought by those who consider they have hit the buffers of how high they can go. i.e. they "think" that to advance (get more money/power/prestige/gain "worth"), they should be thinking about being managers. BUT, in truth, they don't want to be a manager because they still prefer the "doing" part of IT and are not really "turned on" by being a manger.

The problem is the idea of an organisation as a system that's designed top-down for a particular task, where it should actually be more the case that the system adapts bottom-up to the needs of it's environment.

Again, this is clear "employee" thinking. it is a form of "If I was a manager, this is how I'd improve things for the employee - because I have suffered and I don't want anyone else to"

I'm in danger of getting a bit too abstract here though. The trouble with abstractions is that they can present the world in simple black and white pictures, where actually the truth is a million shades of grey and rather messy and complicated. That's where professional judgment comes in.

Professional judgment is that you are not yet ready for management. Hopefully you now understand why and "adapt" the way you think.
Instead of being "idealistic", you respond to what your managers direct you to do - even if it means "unfairly" sacking the most able in your department.

When you can do that without blinking an eye (maybe even a smile?), then you are ready. However, all this HAS to be done without anyone ever knowing you are thinking like this. i.e. they "think" you are altruistic

[suityou01]

Honest question. Do you think IT people are smarter than most other folk in business?

I don't mean the plodder permies but the switched on top guys and contractors.

Yes. Next question.

[sasguru]

This is the first stage of thinking how a manager should be. Its usually thought by those who consider they have hit the buffers of how high they can go. i.e. they "think" that to advance (get more money/power/prestige/gain "worth"), they should be thinking about being managers. BUT, in truth, they don't want to be a manager because they still prefer the "doing" part of IT and are not really "turned on" by being a manger.


Again, this is clear "employee" thinking. it is a form of "If I was a manager, this is how I'd improve things for the employee - because I have suffered and I don't want anyone else to"



Professional judgment is that you are not yet ready for management. Hopefully you now understand why and "adapt" the way you think.
Instead of being "idealistic", you respond to what your managers direct you to do - even if it means "unfairly" sacking the most able in your department.

When you can do that without blinking an eye (maybe even a smile?), then you are ready. However, all this HAS to be done without anyone ever knowing you are thinking like this. i.e. they "think" you are altruistic

Aren't you missing the point somewhat? Which is that management style you describe has proven not to work?

[scooterscot]

Are IT bods/contractors smarter than everyone else?

If you can assemble IKEA's flat pack furniture you can become an IT contractor. In other words you have demonstrated the ability to care about reading the instructions when others could not. What's so smart about that?

[Drewster]

If you can assemble IKEA's flat pack furniture you can become an IT contractor. In other words you have demonstrated the ability to care about reading the instructions when others could not. What's so smart about that?

Come on Scooter - You are living in cloud cuckoo land....

an IT Contractor reading the manual..... what planet are you on!!

[Ivor Bigun]

Aren't you missing the point somewhat? Which is that management style you describe has proven not to work?

Maybe, I can't possibly comment about the people who've managed you and the teams that you've been involved in.

[minestrone]

The problem is with programming is that your degree is just the starter to 5 years of really hard work training. OK, you can get a role with Crap Gemini but I was very ambitious, I made software development manager for a company after 5 years, but I am still learning every day, reading everyday, 12 years after leaving Uni.

Most jobs you will be trained after 3-4 years, not IT, they keep changing the goalposts, it needs people who can continually learn as they do the job. Many people cannot do that.

[Mich the Tester]

Maybe, I can't possibly comment about the people who've managed you and the teams that you've been involved in.

I think Sasguru has a point here. Obviously, I haven't worked with you so I don't know your approach to management. What I do know is that if my way of doing things takes off, then someday it will become outdated and it's failings will eventually be greater than it's successes, as I feel has happened to the current approach to managing large organisations. It's an evolutionary thing. The trick is to try and identify and keep the strengths of the old approach while bringing in new ideas to address the weaknesses; not easy, but if we don't try, we can be sure we won't succeed.

Central economic planning failed because it didn't allow for adaptive processes but relied too much on the (often corrupted) prescriptions of central committees. Out and out profit seeking has failed because it didn't sufficiently account for the economic, social and political environment in which companies work. Too many bankers thought public anger at huge bonusses didn't matter as long as the profits rolled in; as soon as the profits stopped rolling in, society and the economy took it's revenge.

My way will fail too eventually, and thenit's time for someone with new ideas.