Ask HN: How could a tech company function without management?
12 comments
Programmer Anarchy is a methodology for when Extreme Programming is not extreme enough or Agile is not agile enough or just because it can work. Fred George [1] is probably its most well known proponent. It's not a gimmick or joke.
A presentation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uk-CF7klLdA
An article: https://martinjeeblog.com/2012/11/20/what-is-programmer-anar...
[1]: https://www.linkedin.com/in/fred-george-5965b5
A presentation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uk-CF7klLdA
An article: https://martinjeeblog.com/2012/11/20/what-is-programmer-anar...
[1]: https://www.linkedin.com/in/fred-george-5965b5
Google tried it, didn't last long [1]. Managers are information hubs - somebody's gotta take in the streams of information from team members, Sr. management, other engineering teams, other departments, customers, random stakeholders, etc. and distill them down, making sure every party has the useful and relevant bits. Without managers everybody has to talk to everybody else ... good luck with that.
[1] https://hbr.org/2013/12/how-google-sold-its-engineers-on-man...
[1] https://hbr.org/2013/12/how-google-sold-its-engineers-on-man...
A 1st layer of management doesn't need to be heavy handed manager types if the employees hired are "managers of one" and can self-direct their work. The "manager of one" wording comes from 37 Signals, read up on how they manage.
Software cannot make sure careers are on track and goals are met. Yes software can track a todo list but career goals are a human activity to coach employees. Imagine someone that is purely working on say mobile apps part of the product set but wants to get some experience on the backend. Thats a conversation since they may not feel comfortable (e.g. an introvert) jumping on backend tasks since that might introduce some conflict with the team. Finding out what motivates a person is a conversation, not a web form.
If you have a small group of people that are self-motivated (aka manager of one) working together on various software projects, what would status reports or time tracking be used for?
Software cannot make sure careers are on track and goals are met. Yes software can track a todo list but career goals are a human activity to coach employees. Imagine someone that is purely working on say mobile apps part of the product set but wants to get some experience on the backend. Thats a conversation since they may not feel comfortable (e.g. an introvert) jumping on backend tasks since that might introduce some conflict with the team. Finding out what motivates a person is a conversation, not a web form.
If you have a small group of people that are self-motivated (aka manager of one) working together on various software projects, what would status reports or time tracking be used for?
Thinking about the things that might need to be in place for a company to function without management:
- Self-organizing and Self-directed employees are often the hardest to find.
- The HR process, when done correctly, allows individuals to join a group to realize their potential that they may not have elsewhere.
- The group's goals would have to be somehow set. I recall Clay Shirky's excellent essay on how a group is it's own worst enemy and can't help but wonder how it might play out in an environment like this.
http://shirky.com/writings/group_enemy.html
- Self-organizing and Self-directed employees are often the hardest to find.
- The HR process, when done correctly, allows individuals to join a group to realize their potential that they may not have elsewhere.
- The group's goals would have to be somehow set. I recall Clay Shirky's excellent essay on how a group is it's own worst enemy and can't help but wonder how it might play out in an environment like this.
http://shirky.com/writings/group_enemy.html
The 1st layer of management is a shock absorber between the senior management and the employees. The senior management doesn't want to solve the employees' problems, they want to see some random shit getting done without having to deal with complains of burned out employees, rules of [whatever business you are in] or even with the laws of physics.
Doubtful. Hiring and firing decisions require domain specific knowledge and day-to-day knowledge of operations. A the third-party company would have to have someone on-site at all times to gauge the needs of the company.
Software could arguably replace status reports and time-tracking, but a compelling incentive system needs to be put in place to encourage this behavior. It's often my experience that people skimp on administrative duties when left to their own devices, including myself.
"Software" at its current manifestation cannot manage career tracks. Machine learning may change.
Senior management level do not have time to deal with employee problems. They generally are tasked with higher order duties, which generally fill their 40 or so hours.
All evidence suggest that the first layer of management is needed.
Software could arguably replace status reports and time-tracking, but a compelling incentive system needs to be put in place to encourage this behavior. It's often my experience that people skimp on administrative duties when left to their own devices, including myself.
"Software" at its current manifestation cannot manage career tracks. Machine learning may change.
Senior management level do not have time to deal with employee problems. They generally are tasked with higher order duties, which generally fill their 40 or so hours.
All evidence suggest that the first layer of management is needed.
Presumably if 10 managers got together to form a company they wouldn't hire a manager.
They probably wouldn't hire a manager, but I'd be surprised if they didn't naturally end up with certain people taking responsibility for particular areas. You've now got a director of sales, or a technical lead, in everything but name.
By keeping it really really small. No larger than one person.
I think the key thing is your team needs to consist of driven, collaborative people. Otherwise, you need managers to either provide direction or to resolve conflicts. If everyone gets on and knows what they're doing in the team's context, then managers don't have much of a role to play!
Maybe look at stable cooperatives like the Mondragon corp.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mondragon_Corporation
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mondragon_Corporation
Some sort of holocracy?
In other words, do we really need that 1st layer of management?