Conference quark::human_relations-v1

    Rik,
    
    do you know what direction this company as a whole is moving in?
    Can you deduce from that knowledge what you should be doing to
    best help this company get there? If the answer is 'yes', then
    you don't need a boss. But 99.999... percent of the people would
    answer 'no'. This is the reason why organizations exist, and why
    some people delegate to other people. Not every boss is perfect
    at delegating, but the world would be a lot worse off if there
    were no bosses.
    
    -Dave (who hopes he's never asked to be a boss)

    Delegating serves the purpose of completing a task, but does not
    assure or regulate the potential success of that task.  A delegator
    will direct you to 'complete this task by such and such a date',
    a manager will instruct you to do the same and then provide his
    managment skills to assure the greatest possible success.
    
    A good manager acknowleges the skills of his/her workers and allows
    them to exercise those skills.  A technician is not expected to
    be a crakerjack manager, so allows themselves to be managed by those
    who are.  (yes, yes all this assumes a 'good' manager).
    
    One of the most enjoyable managers I've ever worked for (and the
    most effective, as he had a competent work force) new the capabilities
    of his crew.  He knew that he didn't have all the answers, maybe
    none of them, but his crew did.  He also knew that he was very
    effective at guiding (managing) them to success.  So, as a leader, he
    adopted the philosophy of allowing his team to set the direction
    and he would then jump in front and lead them in that very direction.
    
    jim
    
    

i like the answers in .1 and .4....
    and basically agree with them....
    so.....    
       ===========
    how many noters
    1. prefer a delegating manager?
    2. prefer a managing manager?
    3. consider themselves delegators (ers?)
    4. consider themselves managers?

    =======
    re: .3
    thanks for replying, dave, but i think you didn't understand
    the question...
    your answer doesn't seem to fit the question in .0

    but i could be wrong...
    i've been wrong before...
    

    
    re:.6
    "rik, are you saying...etc"
    ok...what i've said so far....
    
    in .0 i said....
    	"what's the difference between  *delegating* and *managing*?
    I phrased this in the form of a question. I have my own ideas and opinions
    on this but i didn't give them. I was looking for the opinions of
    others on this subject.
    
    In .5 i said i agree with your .1 and someone elses .4....
    I also said that i didn't think that .3 was really an answer to
    the question in .0. 	.3 seemed to be saying "we need bosses".
    I did not ask "do we need bosses?" in .0
    I asked "what is the difference between *delegating* and *managing*?

    and then you, in .6 said
    "rik, i'm confused...are you saying that being a managing manager
    and a delegating manager are mutually exclusive?"
    
    so i went back and re-read all the replies...
    
    nope.
    i didn't say that.
    didn't even imply it as far as i can tell....
    
    and i agree with you that delegating is one facet of managing...
    but i've been in and out of dec for 18 years and SOME people
    BOSS too much and MANAGE too little. Some people DELEGATE too
    much and MANAGE too little. Some people become managers for the
    purposes of acquiring status, power and money and many of these
    people are not really good managers regardless of how well they
    get the job done. Fortunately there are many people in management
    positions who manage AND delegate in acceptable (to me?) levels.
    
    There are people in my group (fortunately i don't work for them)
    who are DELEGATORS (who probably rue the civil war) and NOT managers.
    But i'm sure that in their own minds they are good at what they
    do and do it properly.
    
    In .5 you probably assumed i was assuming that all managers
    are either one or the other (manager or delegator). I think some
    people are mostly one or the other but i realize that most people
    are a mixture of both and both are probably mutually exclusive.
    
    and....delegating is, indeed, considered a part of managing...
    but they are not necessarily *mutually exclusive*. I was a manager
    for about 9 months (5 people) and did not delegate a thing!
    I managed to present eveything that needed to be done to the group
    and we all discussed how the work was to be done, when it was to
    be done and who was to do!
    

    Re: .7
    
    Sigh.
    
    1.  There is no rule that says "Thou shalt address only the question
    raised in the original note."  People wander all around the local
    mental territory.  Trying to herd them along a particular path will
    meet with limited success.
    
    2.  Readers detect not only what you say, but what you imply.  Your
    notes seem to strongly imply a particular agenda.  HR readers, being
    a perceptive lot, have picked up on that and some have moved beyond
    what you explicitly said.  Herding them back to a literal reading
    of your words will be about as successful as herding them along
    a particular line of thought.
    
    Now then, as to managers:  They're people, too.  Therefore, quality
    will be mixed.  This is inherent to any profession.  Which leaves me
    wondering about the purpose behind your note.  Are you looking for
    confirmation of your belief that the quality of managers covers
    a wide spectrum?  Are you trying to determine where the average
    Digital manager falls on the spectrum?  Are you trying to determine
    what makes a good manager or a bad manager?  Are you attempting
    to debate that managers who do not delegate are the best kind? 
    Do you want to start a note for anecdotes about managers?

    re .7, rik-
    
    > and i agree with you that delegating is one facet of managing...
    
    Third opinion; delegation is merely another method in the successful
    manager's toolkit.  Like any other technique or tool in the kit,
    it won't work in all cases.  The manager must mix and match the
    toolkit with the people in the unit, to meet the goals of the unit.
    The skillful manager knows which tool to use, how to use it, and
    when it is appropriate.
    
    >                                                    I was a manager
    > for about 9 months (5 people) and did not delegate a thing!
    > I managed to present eveything that needed to be done to the group
    > and we all discussed how the work was to be done, when it was to
    > be done and who was to do!
                                                                       
    So, you chose to surrender one of your tools to the dustbin.  For
    whatever your reasons, perhaps you don't like that particular method,
    perhaps your past experience with it has been disagreeable (anyone
    ever teach managers how to delegate appropriately?), it doesn't
    matter; you were a successful manager (I presume) with your own
    chosen methods of working with your group.  Hey, great, I'm not
    second-guessing your choice of the methods you used in that situation.
    
    I've had the opportunity to work with good, bad, and great managers,
    some of whom had great skills in using that method we're discussing.
    I, personally, think your original question (asking the difference
    between delegating [technique] and managing [role]) confused the
    issue; you were comparing apples and oranges, so to speak.  Blame
    not the tool when the manager applies it incorrectly.
    
    DougO

    An interesting topic; hopefully we'll all give each other the
    latitude to express, explore, and, perhaps, gain some insights.
    I could use a little help here, rik - do you feel it's important
    to focus more closely on the original questions?  While I tend to
    agree (with .8) that it's o.k. to look outside the strict bounds
    of base notes questions, I also feel that it's fair for a base-note 
    author to request that tangental discussions be picked up in other
    notes (and for others to grant that request).  Any preferences,
    rik?
    
    Steve
    

    Delegating is a way of assigning tasks.
    
    Managing is the follow through to get it done. It is also the support
    needed by the person doing the task. A good manager will help his/her
    people to complete the task not just wait for them to fail.
    
    Sue

    
    re: .8
    i see...
    you THINK i must be implying something even though what you THINK
    i MUST BE implying is not in writing so therefore i MUST be
    implying it....
    
    and yes, i recognize that notes wander from the original topic
    and certainly accept this....
    
    please, mr chelsea, don't use that tone of sigh on me....ok?
    
    in fact....i was not stating that she only address the question
    raised in .0...for your information....(sigh) she had suggested
    that i was making an inferrence that i was not making and i
    told her so....i never said that she nor anyone could deviate
    from the original...
    	i was only asking that she not accuse me of having said
    something or inferred something that i didn't say or infer...
    
    
    
    

    Re: .13
    
    >you THINK i must be implying something even though what you THINK
    >i MUST BE implying is not in writing so therefore i MUST be
    >implying it....
    
    Of course.  If it were flat-out stated in writing, it wouldn't be an
    implication.  I think plenty of things.  I think you're annoyed
    with me, even though you haven't flat-out stated it.
    
    >i was not stating that she only address the question raised in .0
    
    I was thinking of your response to .3; I don't know if that was
    a 'she' since it's hard to tell sometimes ....
    
    Anyway, this leaves the less objectionable part of my note and someone
    else's note entirely unanswered.  So -- what kind of discussion
    were you looking for when you started this topic?
    
    Re: .14
    
    Oh, you weren't on the mailing list?  Sorry .....

    
    Ability is what will get you to the top if the boss has no daughter.
    
    The only time it's safe to tell the boss where to get off is when he
    falls asleep on the bus.
    
    Watch the man who says he's the boss at home. He may lie about other
    things too.
    
    Pity the boss. He has to come in early to see who comes in late.
    
    Nothing makes a man the boss of his house like living alone.
    
                                       RM

>                        <<< Note 609.16 by ACE::MOORE >>>
>                             -< Quotes on Bosses >-



	Perhaps you should change the title to "Quotes on Male Bosses".



	Or perhaps there aren't any female bosses out there????



	k

    Perhaps you yourself should not assume that he was speaking of males. 
    Maybe, just maybe he was speaking from the oh not so PC concept that
    "he" means he/she?....nawwwwwwww   It wouldn't be as fun then....
    
    
    Or maybe these are quotes that his boss, now get this, A MALE, might
    have made?  Chill out will you?  not all males are out to get the femms
    de la femms ya know.  it might have been an honest boo boo, or even
    that it was quotes from his male boss.  GESH!
    

> <<< Note 609.18 by CONURE::MARTIN "GUN-CONTROL=Holding it with both hands" >>>


	Oh, chill out yourself.


	You just can't stand it, can ya...when ANYONE points out a
	sexist statement.....

	of course, it never occured to you that my comment was supposed
	to be slightly funny.


	Can't see the forest for the blindness of the trees, perhaps?


	Egads....chill, man.

	k

To be honest, quotes of and by themselves are a poor substitute for
an actual opinion.

				Steve

    Just to drag this rathole even further...

    Sexism can go both ways.  I can argue that two of the quotes (the
    suggestions that women have exclusive control of the household) were
    sexist AGAINST men.  Of course, if I had made that argument, readers
    would consider me overly-sensitive, and they would be right.
    
    I believe those quotes should be taken as light-hearted humor.  That's
    all.
    
       - Larry

>    Perhaps you yourself should not assume that he was speaking of males. 
>	I find Kath's supposition far more credible than yours.  
    
    Of course you do!  And why wouldnt you? 
    
    >Anyway,
     >	if these are direct quotes from his male boss, then his male
      >	boss was saying sexist things.  If they are paraphrases, then
      >	they're paraphrased in a sexist way.  (What's the difference,
      >	really?)

    Simply put, says you..... I was giving the guy the bennie, obviously
    you and the likes do not.  Typical.
    
	Maybe - get this - Kath hit it right on the button?  Why does that
	prospect scare you so much?

    RE: Kathy
    
    Yea, sure.. I am the one that "cant stand" it.  uhhuh...  yea, sure.

>	Kath, your personal name is sexist.  Did you notice?


	It depends whether you know the reference or not.

	It's a line from a song....I believe it was written about
	a real occurance, so, in a sense, it's not sexist (because it
	doesn't directly refer to "all" milkmen).

	Then again, without knowing the reference, I can see how you
	can conclude that.


	kathy

>>>>>SELECT::GALLUP "Drunken milkmen, driving drunk"

	>>>It's a line from a song....I believe it was written about	a real
occurance, so, in a sense, it's not sexist (because it	doesn't directly refer
to "all" milkmen).

So, you're just picking on "drunken" milkmen, eh?

Ain't somebody going to say, "Value their differences?"

-db

    Thats different db.....
    

    Drunken milkmen are a threat to anyone driving on the same road
    they are.  Death could happen at anytime to innocent people (as the
    quoted song goes on to talk about a family of four dead at the hand
    of the drunken milkman).


    Women, by virtue of simply BEING women, do not offer the same sort
    of threat.


    BUt, go ahead and make the analogy if you wish............but it looks
    rather silly and apparent.

	kathy

Could we please get back to the base note topic?  Thanks.

			Steve

    
    ... back to the point; 
    
    I submit that more than two primary types of 'managers' to consider:
    
    1- Delegators   (Do this, Do that, GoFer This, Report on That.)
    2- Managers
    3- Leaders
    
    To put it in a tongue_in_cheek fashion, I think that we have very few
    leaders, not only in DEC, but in American business today.  These are
    the visionaries... the ones who have the wherewithall to see and set
    a direction.
    
    We have an overload of managers.  Some are nothing more than
    delegators, others understand the direction of the leaders and manage
    their resources towards a common goal.
    
    For some odd reason, a lot of delegators get promoted to managers!
    
    The only kind of manager that I find inspirational is the "leader."
    If I'm doing my job correctly, I can manage myself and delegate
    responsibility without being a delegator. ("")  I'm just surprised that
    we tend to see so much delegation and managing, but not much leading.
    
    There's a story that exemplifies the attitudes inherent in each:  That
    of the workers hacking their way with machetes through thick jungle.
    They are the do-ers, the producers, and they work well to cut through
    the mess.
    
    The Managers stand behind them, sharpening the machetes for the
    workers, holding seminars in how to more efficiently cut through jungle
    growth, and telling the workers to cut more to the left, more to the
    right.
    
    While the Leader, way behind and very high up in a tree surveys the
    land around them and yells down "Wrongggggg Jungllllle!"
    
    While the Managers yell back "So what? We're making progress!"
    
    Sound familiar?
    
    Bob

    Gee Bob... you been to my last department recently????
    
    
    ;-)
    Skip