zpatel

Get a consensus from Engineers if they need another person (any role - Engineer, PM, Architect, Mgr) added to the team. Do not open the position until all Engineers vote a Yes.

I had identified the problem of google information dominance and inefficiency long time back and release a prototype micronest.com/searchly

The solution would be very complex but i had the problem identified..Now working to release an enterprise version inspired by this.

I made an app for 2 older folks (~75) who connected with me over the web. The high level idea and functional spec was provided by them. One of the main reason i helped them was because it was interesting to see someone at their age trying to change the world (a bit) positively through the use of software..

But is that something she will like ?

This is not a sunni shia battle as portrayed by western media.

Per Tim beal (Asia expert), the two Koreas making peace is not something that is in line with western divide and rule policy but washington would not admit the uneasiness about this..interesting perspective.

If one was going to be hired to work on cloud API or some enterprise tool, not sure how this low question would qualify someone as a better software engineer.

15-20 yrs back general app s/w hiring was not about solving algos and puzzles but more about object oriented software and threading etc.

Most of these issues are due to bad mgr/team lead.

well, you are imposing your liberal view on others by imposing uniform civil code which will be modelled possiblt after the majority religion in country (india) ?

That's true.

yeah i guess they have a pessimistic view of security or just do not care if the weapons kill innocents. ?

Thanks for sharing. I wish that instead of building destructive weapons, there was more focus was on building cures for the many diseases and fighting hunger and poverty..

It makes me wonder how folks that work on weapon systems that are used to kill innocents in poor countries like yemen feel..probably much worse than Tesla engineers?

great point..

There were warring states and kingdoms, but not hatred the way sowed by british's divide and conquer.

yes but the weapon systems may be sold or transferred to some countries like Israel/Saudi Arabia eventually.. how would you view their use on protesters or civilians by them or would their be international laws that would prevent such use ?

Agree this is about tech, but then the other parts of the hate speech or misinformation on a community shouldn't be posted here, as it may leave a false impression..

I have yet to meet a muslim man with more than one wife let alone four..Such a lack of understanding of true islamic principles and provisions (and the use of them).

I guess it's over 7-8 decades now that there land was taken away by people from other nationalities, so its high time that its recognized, otherwise International law/human rights are not served well in 21st century..

Well, but they pay the bad manager's "more" too, which is bad !

One more thing, based on the votes for data points/issues, the tool would also provide recommendations.

This tool will basically deal with Product, Delivery and Team aspects:

1. Product Direction

a. Source in Initiatives (road map) , Product stories managed by Product/Project manager, Sr. Manager and Director thus providing inputs on the business aspects and requirements.

b. Tech Lead/Principal/Sr.Engineer provides feedback on 1a.)

2. Delivery Mgmt

a. Stories will be mapped to Features for which the Architecture/Design (done by Sr.Engineers) would be reviewed/voted by team. Override of a technical approach (with justification) can be done by Principal/Sr.Engineer, however, this could be escalated to the Sr. Manager / Director by other team members (anonymously) . Sr.Mgr and Director would also chip in and provide their inputs if required and accordingly lead to a resolution based on data points, pros/cons etc. In this way, conflicts or ego issues can be minimized.

b. Feature will be prioritized by Tech Lead / Sr. Engineer based on comments from team or directly proceed to c)

c)Feature will be assigned to an Engineer for implementation

d)Feature will be verified by QA as well as Business lead/user post deployment or software release

e)Delivery feedback to be provided by the Product manager and Business user, this will be used to provide opportunity for improvement and/or appreciation of the effort (and hence motivation).

Yes, however, we don't have good managers (due to lack of maturity or experience) to fill the job description you laid out. If you take a survey of people leaving teams or companies, you will find that many people leave due to bad managements.

Yes, Sr. Management & Directors add values. Most first level managers are not effective in resolving disputes between Engineers, but rather just take sides with say one of their top coder, although the opinion of that engineer on say an architecture approach may be not be the right way to go..think you get the idea ? There may be many such scenarios or just lack of maturity or decades of management experience that makes such managers ineffective at resolving conflicts, and hence my point is that they are not required to manage Sr. Engineers with 10-15 yrs experience.

Correct, however, Companies will not fire #1 overnight or even understand if they can do that. Through some tooling, these will be rendered as not required (with data points to prove), just like "Architect" jobs have reduced as Sr. Engineers have taken up that part as well.

Agree with you on the value of good manager, however concern is around bad or inexperienced managers which are out there by plenty. Typically the manager becomes a dumping ground for things which should be done by Business/IT Analyst, Product manager, Project Manager and Technical Operations/Support Manager. Once these are addressed properly then what you have got is essentially a Sr Engineer/Tech lead who is entrenched in the code and also knows who is best for the right task with in the team. Some of the other things like larger roadmap and talking to HR can be done by director or Senior managers, so yes I do see some need for managers, my whole point is that there is no need for Junior or Mid level managers for most cases.

Also creating a per team manager role creates more politics and overall bad working environment for good Engineers. I would not have argued this 10 yrs back, but considering the advancements in tools, processes and changes in work culture and attitudes, don't you think its viable to have a great degree of tooling for atleast the first level managers?

This tool would not intentionally play politics or not be improved in short time (like bad behavior or ineffective manager) , and so the employees would trust it more than a bad manager.

Think of it like an "AI Manager", the tool could learn from various scenarios or data points across teams and bring some sort of management consistency.

My main goal is to drive more ownership towards Sr. Engineers so that they deal with a "VirtualManager" tool for micromanagement and some guidance for issue resolution etc, and only as needed with Director or Sr. Manager (for guidance or difficult conflict resolutions).. So the Sr.Engineer gets to be more entrepreneurial (in some way).

So there would still be Directors and Sr. Managers who would outline their vision for the product/teams, which would be further mapped to UseCase scenarios or feature Stories by Product managers.

"The main issue is that bad managers have a strong negative impact and most managers on software projects are bad."

>> precisely this is the main motivation of my Ask, to see that if tooling could reduce (if not eliminate) bad team managers..so basically only Tech lead or Sr.Engineers (who code up to a verifiable percent) would be part of the Engineering team which in turn would be managed by an intelligent "VirtualTeamManager" tool and this tool would be tuned with inputs from Sr.Manager and Director (of that team).

Let me know your thoughts further..