Conference 7.286::digital

    Re .0
    
    You've certainly fared better than I....in 6-1/2 years I've had 
    5 managers and 4 have been disasters.  I've learned more about
    "management by negative example" (ie:  how NOT to treat people)
    since I've been with this company than in my entire working career.
    
    Some groups have a tendency to promote good individual contributor 
    performers into line management positions as a reward and expect them
    to sink of swim...without giving them the training and guidance they
    need.  Maybe what I've been exposed to is a result of that practice
    and the folks (such as yourself) not seeing management problems work
    in organizations that actually do career development, provide training
    and mentoring/support....just a thought.

    Seven managers in eighteen years! That's not fair!
    
    I've had five in the last six years, in the same department.
    
    No comment.
    
     

    I'll agree that there are a lot of very good managers out there, I'm
    not sure I agree or disagree about the majority of managers being good. 
    It seems like most managers are bad when you have a bad manager, but
    when you do have a good manager, as I do now, then you can be a little
    more objective.
    
    I think DEC has made, and continues, a mistake in how some people are
    made managers.  Too many times I have seen an excellent engineer and a
    generally good guy become a lousy manager.  I have seen some good
    managers come thsi way too.  In most cases the person is promoted into
    a managers position with little or no training.  If there is a problem
    then your told, "you have to be more understanding, he/she was never a
    manager before".  Why should I be understanding if they are doing the
    wrong thing by me or anyone else.  That's like telling a drowning man 
    to be understanding, the life guard never swam before so you'll have to
    wait till he gets there.
    
    It seems when a manager is bad they are really bad.  I agree that the
    company needs to find a better way to evaluate managers so they can
    remove bad managers before they destroy to many good careers.
    

    Couldn't agree more that extensive, formal training should be
    absolutely required.  There should also be a provision for
    failing the training.  The person get's sent back, and the appropriate
    manager is informed person is not qualified and can't be promoted.
    Some psychological profiling should also be required to filter out
    the real nut-cakes.
    
    But, none of this solves the problem of senior management incompetence,
    which I believe is the real root of most of the evil.
    
    BTW, I'm not talking about Cost Center Management training.  That's
    merely an administrative task.  There are plenty of FA's around to
    help a new manager over any hurdles there.

    A couple of years ago, I read an article about the management schools
    in Japan. Sounded more like Green Beret training, very punishing
    physically, emotionally and mentally. 
    
    Those that failed the tests were out for good. Every aspect of
    manangement was covered, not just the academics like in our
    universities. Real life stuff on what it takes to be great. 
    
    Not that I agree with the "robot like" work ethic of their country, it
    just sound interesting.

    Please read note 1225 for a suggestion of how we *should* be rating
    managers.
    
    I have had many managers, some excellent, some mediocre, and one who was
    the devil incarnated. She used psychological warfare against me for my
    forcing a product technology shift that turned out to be essential -
    but that she opposed, which was undoubtedly very embarrassing to her.
    
    This is indeed the problem: there is no accurate measure of the worth
    and accomplishments of managers, other than shipping products on time.
    No measure of the empowerment of the people under them, no measure of
    the quality of the product, no measure of anything worth measuring.
    So it's a crap-shoot whether your manager is good or bad...
    
    							Jon Campbell

    
    Counting both full-time managers and temporary "acting" managers,
    in the last 42 months, I have now arrived at numbers 16 and 17
    (they're double-teaming me now! ;-] )
    
    The only SURE way to blow out the bureaucracy that protects bad
    managers is to decentralize authority; i.e., all "group" members either
    get "a say" in who gets to be the manager/leader, or gets total
    authority to select, equal vote to all, including the manager/leader up
    the line having but one vote, PLUS
    
    all group members having the right to do both appraisals on the leader
    of the group plus take a regularly scheduled vote of confidence, which
    if negative and not corrected, results in said leader moving to
    individual contributor slot if a second negative vote of confidence.
    
    In my opinion, any other method can be "worked around" by professional
    bureaucrats and exploitive individuals seeking upward mobility for
    position, power and money, doing so at the expense of groups and
    employees below, plus those laterally, and usually also at the expense
    even of the entire corporation.  The manifestation of such
    self-centered individuals is both the lack of demonstrated leadership
    plus the unwillingness to incur ANY change unless it comes DOWN only
    from above, thus pre-approved, or is "thought of" by said manager.  All
    else entails risk that such a person would never take, believing it
    better "to look good" than to take any action on intuitive changes that
    might jeopardize "one's career" which includes "making commitments" and
    standing on one's beliefs and values, which is why you seldom see
    managers putting their opinions in writing, like here in VAXnotes.
    

re: .3

>    I've had five in the last six years, in the same department.
    
>    No comment.
    
I can do that one in, I've had 4 managers in a year and a half and
in the same dept. also.

I have no further comment either...

- George     

    I think the problem is not really whether we are replete with good or
    bad managers.
    
    The real problem is that our culture has grown to the stage that all
    managers feel that they also have to be leaders. Both Drucker and
    Peters have written on this point. But the bottom line is that it is a
    extremely rare individual who has the attributes to be both a leader
    NAD a manager.
    
    Therefore, what happens is that our "managers" try to make all the
    decisions, strategy, direction setting, etc. They end up going to all
    of the "senior management" woods meetings, strategy sessions, big
    customer meetings, etc.
    
    And the people who really should be doing these things are left as
    "churn-it-out" grunts, who have to write the presentations and develop
    the proposals, generally in a semi-vacuum of dribbled-down information.
    
    In other words, the people who are closest to the work and understand
    it best, are not allowed to be leaders, or to really affect the
    directions. 
    
    And that leads to immense frustration.
    
    Ray
    

    The manager I have had the past 9 months is the best manager I have had
    in my 17 years in data communications.  We are currently going through
    another reorg in my organization and SHE BETTER STAY.

>>Note 1224.3
> Note 1224.9 

>>    I've had five in the last six years, in the same department.
    
>I can do that one in, I've had 4 managers in a year and a half and
>in the same dept. also.
    
    5 managers in 3 years, same department.
    
>>    No comment.
    
>I have no further comment either...

    Ditto.
    
               

    RE: 1224.12
    
    When I was in MRO I had 6 managers in 2 years, same function, some
    Re-org.  Guess who wrote my review??  What review??
    
    
    Dave

    I think maybe part (or all?) of the problem is starting to surface
    here.  I can't believe the number of managers people have had in
    relatively short periods of time.
    
    I wonder how bad the situation really is?

	Calculate 
    
    		Number of years in DEC
                ----------------------  = Managerial Turnover
    		  Number of managers
    
    
    I forecast the following kinds of numbers:
    
    
    	by type of business unit:
    
    		Manufacturing Plants   -  2 
    		Product Engineering    -  1.5
    		Engineering Services   -  3
		Sales Offices          -  0.8
    		Administration	       -  3
    
    	by employee level
    
    		Direct Labor	       -  4
		Secretary	       -  4
    		Supervisory	       -  2
    		Junior Professional    -  1.5
    		Line Manager           -  1.5
    		Plant Manager          -  1.5 
    		Senior Professional    -  3
    		Group Manager          -  3
    		Vice President         -  5    		

    And let's not forget entire chains of commands which change! Remember
    the stories of: I have the same job, Ken has the same job, everyone
    else in-between has changed since last year?

    I can't quite match the numbers posted in here, thank god. In almost-
    to-the-day six years I've (only) had:

     -	4 *distinctly* different jobs, both manager and non-manager,
    	about 6 if I include major shifts

     -	9 different managers (7 *distinctly* different people :-)


    /petes

    I got to thinking about the lists of managers/years of service that have
    been given here.  If I, as an IC, must commit to a position for two years
    before being allowed to move, how do the managers move so often??  Is there
    a double standard???

    It would seem to me that, if managers are moved around because of re-orgs,
    the IC's should be releaved of their two year commitments also.  Would this
    help get people out from under bad managers?

    Lee G.

    What a surprise!  I guess my group (Technical Languages and
    Environments) is unusually stable.
    
    Since I came in 1982, we have had three group managers, and
    the current group manager was part of the group in 1982--she's
    been promoted up from within. That's three in eight years.
    The manager next up has been Bill Keating the whole time, I
    believe.  Up from there it's varied a bit, of course...
    
    At the supervisory level things have been a bit less stable:
    I've had five (or is it six?) in that time.
    
    Is this typical of Engineering?
    
    			-John Bishop

Well,  for what its worth, in 12 years I've had 22 managers (it took a while
to list them and I can't remember all their names). What became obvious to was 
that the turnover rate is getting quicker - some of my first managers lasted
a couple of years (ie reviews) each, now its a change every few months... 

Jc

	My first 2 years here I had 5 management changes (supervisior
	3 times and manager who I reported to twice) at which time I
	decided to try to find a stable group and have had 4 managers
	with 3 supervisors sprinkled here and there in the past 7 years.

	I wouldn't even bother counting the supervisors (since I usually
	only reported to them for about 4 months and then directly to
	the manager) but I really like my present supervisor and don't
	plan on letting go of her any time soon.

	It is usually the next level up in management that I have seen
	bad managers, and that is not good.  How can you make changes if
	the person who should be leading the way is the hurdle you need
	to get around.

	_peggy