If you can program you are likely among the smartest people in the world and can do better at any analytical task than almost anyone else.
If you can program you are likely among the smartest people in the world and can do better at any analytical task than almost anyone else.
That's an awfully strong unsupported statement.
I would like to see a compiler/PL expert or a ML expert take on extending our knowledge of quantum mechanics or cosmology, though, since they’re apparently better at solving analytical problems than everyone else. Maybe Bryan Cantrill or Theo de Raadt can go team up with Stephen Hawking and we can finally explain dark matter conclusively. Programmers were all that was missing, it seems like.
Who takes out your garbage?
This one of prime reasons why young managers with engineering background fail. And why everyone around them concludes that just anyone else would be better, that stereotype is true and nerds are arrogant dicks. It is incredibly frustrating to work with know it all who knows zero about your work, but is utrely convinced that him being smartest makes up for that.
Coincidently, managers and analysts with engineering background without above believe have a chance to be good.
Rule number one. A good manager does no actual work. They rely on others to do work, your job is to empower everyone who works for you to be productive, solve problems and to look to you for help whenever blocked. You are only as good as your subordinates.
Designing a system for humans is NOT an analytical task. It can be supported via analytics, but it's a political task (that requires others to be convinced that it is a good solution. For example, you can raise income levels, but if people get pissed off at inequality, you can't argue your way with numbers. They may or may not take it. And that was my point in the article).
I’m an engineer. I’ve built a 45 person engineering team that shipped dozens of releases of award winning software without ever missing a schedule or compromising quality. There is nothing but analytical tasks for the engineering manager.
1. How do you maximize developer productivity? Motivation? Job satisfaction? How do you help them make technical decisions and plans?
2. What process best allows your specific teams to ship quality releases on time? How much planning overhead is necessary to do so, and how much isn’t benefiting the process or product?
3. How do you make your quality assurance staff most productive at finding and reporting problems? How can they best organize their testing to ensure the most useful/necessary test coverage, and how do they communicate their progress clearly?
4. How well do all these things meet the needs of your first level customer, the product owner?
5. How do you communicate your groups capacities to executives? How do you tell them what can be done, what can’t be done, and what shouldn’t be done?
Your tools, technologies and customer requirements are changing over time. Analysis never ends, you can always get better.
All the things you think are important, aren’t
Now I understand that there exist some people still named engineers that are only preoccupied about how to make a mechanical item solid and light enough to satisfy a requirement, or how to design a really cool and fast hash table. This is still completely in the engineering field, but only constitute a (tiny) part of it. And even then it is dubious to consider they are either not at all preoccupied about how to work efficiently with their peers, or not even subject to that kind of consideration.
Agreed. Though I do not consider managing people to be an "analytical task."
I don't think it is inherent to job. But youngsters without social skills are seen as potential techies even if they are not that great at math or anything really related.
Key rule from Pragmatic Marketing. “Your opinion, while interesting, is irrelevant”.
I'm more than happy to hear a differing opinion. Let me ask you kindly to use your analysis skills and answers a simple question in regards to what's important when managing.
How come there are so few engineers who are CEO's of Fortune 500 companies?
Consider how many dropouts are at fortune 500 lists. Or how many were born into money and power.
I stopped being called an “engineer” after i became a “manager”. 6 years later I became a CEO. And i don’t have a college degree. How would I have been categorized?