Let me work-2
The previous part was somewhat emotional and pretentious. This is deliberate, since the purpose of the article was not to discuss the problem, but rather to give food for thought, to delineate the scope of the question. And now, I would like to talk about the issue raised in more detail and closer to reality.
So, IT specialists can be divided into IT-Tajik and IT-artists. Stereotypical thinking tells us that the first are hard workers who do what they say, something that is required of them by someone who understands the business process and counts money. The latter do not necessarily work for the benefit of the company and investors, preferring interesting tasks, to the detriment of their real value for the company. They do not like routine, and routine is what the customer needs. Below I will prove that this is a mistake.
To begin with, let's look at typical roles in a typical IT company. Usually, simply, there are 3 levels. If there are 2, then this is either a very small company or a very stupid one. So:
1. Programmers - real performers, workhorses, those who actually do the work, write the code, support and maintain the project
2. Management is those. director, PM, producer, marketing, etc., that is, people who carry out direct project management, setting tasks, planning, etc.
3. The customer is the one who gives money, provides the budget, and the main thing is the one who wants to make a profit. This is the main person, precisely because of whom in general all this fuss.
')
It is perfectly clear who is in charge here, this is of course the Customer. All processes occurring in the company should, one way or another, bring him a profit. This is the basis, this is what it all works for. And any person in the company should understand that all his actions should be aimed at one single goal - making money for the Customer.
It would seem, IT-Tajiks - the best option. But let's think about why IT-Tajiks work? They work for their salary. They are ready to do whatever they say, just to get paid. If the management burns “it is necessary”, “Jamshut” answers “is”! Is it important for this Jamshut whether the customer will receive a profit or not? Yes, he can understand some kind of gyrus that the customer’s profit allows him to pay a salary, and therefore, the customer’s profit is of course important. On the other hand, well, he goes bankrupt, do not worry, you can find a new job. Yes, and whether the customer will raise the salary, if his profit grows? Does he even notice your merit? Is the game worth the candle? Even if Dzhamshut manages to think this idea through to the end, the answer is likely to be “No.” Therefore, this dude will never do something that goes beyond the tasks set by the management, even if he sees that this will directly or indirectly bring profit to the Customer .
But worst of all, when IT-Tajiks go to the next level. As I wrote in the previous essay , this happens regularly. They are patient and diligent, such seemingly ideal for a management position. But this is another misconception. Because the level changes, the responsibility and the range of tasks change, but the goals do not change. And the goal as before - to get paid. A record in the labor already allows us to hope that there are great chances of finding a job at the same level. Controversial? Do you think the manager is interested in the profit of the customer? No, the maximum in which he is interested is to keep the customer on a starvation ration, that is, whatever the profit would be, but not very large. What would he, on the one hand, was as if pleased, on the other that not very happy. This makes sense, but about everything in order.
It is clear that for the Customer the ultimate goal is profit, but among other things, the Customer wants to:
1.Tasks performed quickly
2. The work was done qualitatively.
3. Any new tasks quickly fell into the plan, and were carried out in the shortest possible time.
But is this consistent with the goals of the management that emerged from IT-Tajiks? Not!
1. The management does not need to perform tasks quickly, because the longer the project lasts, the more times it will be possible to go to the cashier. A new project may not appear, or it will be paid not so much, and it may be more difficult (you will have to work), and starting a new project is always more difficult than continuing the old one. It is beneficial for the manager to convince the customer that the project cannot go faster, that the programmers are stupid, that the plans change too often, and so on. All that would slow down the project by any means. This is not fiction. I worked in the same company, and it happened when we really sat with the whole team, and tried to stretch the three-month plan for six months. The same thing happened in other companies, when the project was specially reworked several times to stretch the time and get as many monthly bonuses as possible.
2. Management does not need more quality, for the reasons described above. The more mistakes, the longer the project lasts. The presence of errors on the one hand allows the customer to show the complexity of the project, on the other hand, to keep the programmers on a short bridle, telling them that they have hands-hooks, and the customer that programmers are to blame for everything. There should not be too many errors, but a certain level is necessary. But not only mistakes are a quality issue. Some of the product quality problems are related to speed, usability, design, flexibility. All this is not necessary for management. This is extra work, for which they will pay so much. Many of the improvements will simply not be visible to the customer. If they are introduced, he will bring him additional profit, but it cannot be proved that these profits were the result of the work of management. Therefore, it is enough for the management to keep the quality bar at the level of “satisfactory”. Above it makes no sense.
3. Oh, this is probably the most nourishing "feeder" for management. Whether they realize it or not, it is. The manager seeks to convince the customer that making changes is a very time-consuming process. That tasks must be set in advance, and plans are granite monoliths that do not tolerate changes. Managers even write thick TZ, and carry them to the Customer for signing. And if a new task arrives, this is another reason to stretch the project. If you are a Customer, do not believe the manager’s sour face when you start talking about a new task that was missing from the plan. He disguises his joy in such a way that the project can be stretched a little more :)
In fact, this is only a brief overview. In general, almost always, the goals of management and the customer are completely opposite. Same classical scheme. Someone gives a budget, and someone “masters” it. Take a look around, in Russia it is everywhere! And the market sector is no exception. There are the same bureaucrats, they just are not used to considering them from this position. Lazy sticking. Sawing various budgets is an ancient Russian national fun!
What to do? Exit to unjustly branded IT-artists. Recall the difference - the Tajiks work for a salary, the artists - for the idea, for the result. The best award to the artist will not be money for his picture, but his own satisfaction with the result, the admiration of viewers at exhibitions and critics in professional journals, as well as the memory of descendants. If he manages to sell the hack, it will not cause him much satisfaction. The same with the IT-artist. The result is important for him, it is important for him that someone comes up and says “wow, you have completed such a difficult task, and not a single bug!”
As such, they remain in leadership positions. And these are exactly what a good customer needs, because his goals and the goals of IT artists are similar. The points:
1. Management consisting of IT-artists seeks to perform any task as quickly as possible. Firstly, they are most afraid of the routine, and the task must be completed before it becomes a routine. The project itself, if it is sluggish, can get bored, because management seeks to make the project more dynamic, so that it develops quickly, new tasks appear faster. Thus, the project will never bother anyone, and labor productivity will not fall. Secondly, the IT-artist is not afraid of new projects, and on the contrary, he is happy with the completion of any project, and even in record lines. After all, this is a reason for pride, a reason to tell everyone how quickly and efficiently we have completed such a complex project.
2. Artists do not like routine. And editing bugs is a routine. Because the natural desire - not to allow bugs. Becoming a boss, this feeling remains. If IT-Tajiks, no matter what the task of working, if only the money was paid, the IT-artist will avoid any bugs in any way, and correct them as quickly as possible. And there is no pleasure for management to break all plans, to delay the project. Postpone new tasks for the sake of what could not be done. Their priority is always the speed and dynamics of the project. Bugs are the brakes of the project. Therefore, the work will be aimed at creating conditions in which the number of errors will be minimal. For example, it initially sets tasks intelligently, trying to take into account possible problems, or implement unit testing.
3. As I wrote above, the dynamics of the project is the main thing. Therefore, making changes is not evil, it is good. But in order that constant revisions of plans would not really become a problem, it is necessary to correctly deliver the work, the process of making changes to the plan, the distribution and redistribution of tasks. To do this, you need to work, and this is another incentive for the management consisting of artists. Instead of suggesting to the customer that changeability is harmful, they will spend efforts on putting the work in such a way that making changes does not harm the project. This is another interesting task! It's so exciting, and how much fun it will be when everything works out!
In general, all creative people are ambitious. This means that they all strive to do so, that would get praise. Their goal is to do any task in such a way that they can boast of results to their colleagues for Friday beer. And that would hear enthusiastic cries of "well, you're cool dude." And the top of bliss is to receive praise from the customer, to hit him with the early implementation of the task, a rational proposal, a well-organized work in the department, and a well-coordinated work. All that will bring a good mood to the customer, will bring it to the IT-artist.
Because exactly the Customer is the main critic of his picture.
Of course, two extreme cases are considered, probably there are some middle options. Although this is the case when there is no gradual graduation, at least I have not noticed a single semi-artist or semi-Tajik. These are like two poles, and positive charges tend to one pole, and negative to another.
IT-Tajiks are probably not bad, and certainly inevitable. They are the majority, they will always be, and we must be able to use them for their intended purpose. But never, in any case, they should not be allowed into management. Measuring inefficiency is always extremely difficult. The customer will think that everything is going well, but this will never be the case, because they will always have different goals. And if it seems to the customer that the release of the first version in half a year is a good result, this does not at all mean that the same work could not be completed in 3 months . Everything is relative, but in the IT industry it is very rare when it is possible to choose a point of observation relative to which one could objectively assess progress. And therefore the minimum that can be done is to make up a management of people whose goals coincide with yours.
PS I apologize for the metaphor used by the Tajiks. I have nothing against this nation. Such a comparison just seemed very successful, because no one will say that they come here to work because of their love for Russia)))
So, IT specialists can be divided into IT-Tajik and IT-artists. Stereotypical thinking tells us that the first are hard workers who do what they say, something that is required of them by someone who understands the business process and counts money. The latter do not necessarily work for the benefit of the company and investors, preferring interesting tasks, to the detriment of their real value for the company. They do not like routine, and routine is what the customer needs. Below I will prove that this is a mistake.
To begin with, let's look at typical roles in a typical IT company. Usually, simply, there are 3 levels. If there are 2, then this is either a very small company or a very stupid one. So:
1. Programmers - real performers, workhorses, those who actually do the work, write the code, support and maintain the project
2. Management is those. director, PM, producer, marketing, etc., that is, people who carry out direct project management, setting tasks, planning, etc.
3. The customer is the one who gives money, provides the budget, and the main thing is the one who wants to make a profit. This is the main person, precisely because of whom in general all this fuss.
')
It is perfectly clear who is in charge here, this is of course the Customer. All processes occurring in the company should, one way or another, bring him a profit. This is the basis, this is what it all works for. And any person in the company should understand that all his actions should be aimed at one single goal - making money for the Customer.
It would seem, IT-Tajiks - the best option. But let's think about why IT-Tajiks work? They work for their salary. They are ready to do whatever they say, just to get paid. If the management burns “it is necessary”, “Jamshut” answers “is”! Is it important for this Jamshut whether the customer will receive a profit or not? Yes, he can understand some kind of gyrus that the customer’s profit allows him to pay a salary, and therefore, the customer’s profit is of course important. On the other hand, well, he goes bankrupt, do not worry, you can find a new job. Yes, and whether the customer will raise the salary, if his profit grows? Does he even notice your merit? Is the game worth the candle? Even if Dzhamshut manages to think this idea through to the end, the answer is likely to be “No.” Therefore, this dude will never do something that goes beyond the tasks set by the management, even if he sees that this will directly or indirectly bring profit to the Customer .
But worst of all, when IT-Tajiks go to the next level. As I wrote in the previous essay , this happens regularly. They are patient and diligent, such seemingly ideal for a management position. But this is another misconception. Because the level changes, the responsibility and the range of tasks change, but the goals do not change. And the goal as before - to get paid. A record in the labor already allows us to hope that there are great chances of finding a job at the same level. Controversial? Do you think the manager is interested in the profit of the customer? No, the maximum in which he is interested is to keep the customer on a starvation ration, that is, whatever the profit would be, but not very large. What would he, on the one hand, was as if pleased, on the other that not very happy. This makes sense, but about everything in order.
It is clear that for the Customer the ultimate goal is profit, but among other things, the Customer wants to:
1.Tasks performed quickly
2. The work was done qualitatively.
3. Any new tasks quickly fell into the plan, and were carried out in the shortest possible time.
But is this consistent with the goals of the management that emerged from IT-Tajiks? Not!
1. The management does not need to perform tasks quickly, because the longer the project lasts, the more times it will be possible to go to the cashier. A new project may not appear, or it will be paid not so much, and it may be more difficult (you will have to work), and starting a new project is always more difficult than continuing the old one. It is beneficial for the manager to convince the customer that the project cannot go faster, that the programmers are stupid, that the plans change too often, and so on. All that would slow down the project by any means. This is not fiction. I worked in the same company, and it happened when we really sat with the whole team, and tried to stretch the three-month plan for six months. The same thing happened in other companies, when the project was specially reworked several times to stretch the time and get as many monthly bonuses as possible.
2. Management does not need more quality, for the reasons described above. The more mistakes, the longer the project lasts. The presence of errors on the one hand allows the customer to show the complexity of the project, on the other hand, to keep the programmers on a short bridle, telling them that they have hands-hooks, and the customer that programmers are to blame for everything. There should not be too many errors, but a certain level is necessary. But not only mistakes are a quality issue. Some of the product quality problems are related to speed, usability, design, flexibility. All this is not necessary for management. This is extra work, for which they will pay so much. Many of the improvements will simply not be visible to the customer. If they are introduced, he will bring him additional profit, but it cannot be proved that these profits were the result of the work of management. Therefore, it is enough for the management to keep the quality bar at the level of “satisfactory”. Above it makes no sense.
3. Oh, this is probably the most nourishing "feeder" for management. Whether they realize it or not, it is. The manager seeks to convince the customer that making changes is a very time-consuming process. That tasks must be set in advance, and plans are granite monoliths that do not tolerate changes. Managers even write thick TZ, and carry them to the Customer for signing. And if a new task arrives, this is another reason to stretch the project. If you are a Customer, do not believe the manager’s sour face when you start talking about a new task that was missing from the plan. He disguises his joy in such a way that the project can be stretched a little more :)
In fact, this is only a brief overview. In general, almost always, the goals of management and the customer are completely opposite. Same classical scheme. Someone gives a budget, and someone “masters” it. Take a look around, in Russia it is everywhere! And the market sector is no exception. There are the same bureaucrats, they just are not used to considering them from this position. Lazy sticking. Sawing various budgets is an ancient Russian national fun!
What to do? Exit to unjustly branded IT-artists. Recall the difference - the Tajiks work for a salary, the artists - for the idea, for the result. The best award to the artist will not be money for his picture, but his own satisfaction with the result, the admiration of viewers at exhibitions and critics in professional journals, as well as the memory of descendants. If he manages to sell the hack, it will not cause him much satisfaction. The same with the IT-artist. The result is important for him, it is important for him that someone comes up and says “wow, you have completed such a difficult task, and not a single bug!”
As such, they remain in leadership positions. And these are exactly what a good customer needs, because his goals and the goals of IT artists are similar. The points:
1. Management consisting of IT-artists seeks to perform any task as quickly as possible. Firstly, they are most afraid of the routine, and the task must be completed before it becomes a routine. The project itself, if it is sluggish, can get bored, because management seeks to make the project more dynamic, so that it develops quickly, new tasks appear faster. Thus, the project will never bother anyone, and labor productivity will not fall. Secondly, the IT-artist is not afraid of new projects, and on the contrary, he is happy with the completion of any project, and even in record lines. After all, this is a reason for pride, a reason to tell everyone how quickly and efficiently we have completed such a complex project.
2. Artists do not like routine. And editing bugs is a routine. Because the natural desire - not to allow bugs. Becoming a boss, this feeling remains. If IT-Tajiks, no matter what the task of working, if only the money was paid, the IT-artist will avoid any bugs in any way, and correct them as quickly as possible. And there is no pleasure for management to break all plans, to delay the project. Postpone new tasks for the sake of what could not be done. Their priority is always the speed and dynamics of the project. Bugs are the brakes of the project. Therefore, the work will be aimed at creating conditions in which the number of errors will be minimal. For example, it initially sets tasks intelligently, trying to take into account possible problems, or implement unit testing.
3. As I wrote above, the dynamics of the project is the main thing. Therefore, making changes is not evil, it is good. But in order that constant revisions of plans would not really become a problem, it is necessary to correctly deliver the work, the process of making changes to the plan, the distribution and redistribution of tasks. To do this, you need to work, and this is another incentive for the management consisting of artists. Instead of suggesting to the customer that changeability is harmful, they will spend efforts on putting the work in such a way that making changes does not harm the project. This is another interesting task! It's so exciting, and how much fun it will be when everything works out!
In general, all creative people are ambitious. This means that they all strive to do so, that would get praise. Their goal is to do any task in such a way that they can boast of results to their colleagues for Friday beer. And that would hear enthusiastic cries of "well, you're cool dude." And the top of bliss is to receive praise from the customer, to hit him with the early implementation of the task, a rational proposal, a well-organized work in the department, and a well-coordinated work. All that will bring a good mood to the customer, will bring it to the IT-artist.
Because exactly the Customer is the main critic of his picture.
Of course, two extreme cases are considered, probably there are some middle options. Although this is the case when there is no gradual graduation, at least I have not noticed a single semi-artist or semi-Tajik. These are like two poles, and positive charges tend to one pole, and negative to another.
IT-Tajiks are probably not bad, and certainly inevitable. They are the majority, they will always be, and we must be able to use them for their intended purpose. But never, in any case, they should not be allowed into management. Measuring inefficiency is always extremely difficult. The customer will think that everything is going well, but this will never be the case, because they will always have different goals. And if it seems to the customer that the release of the first version in half a year is a good result, this does not at all mean that the same work could not be completed in 3 months . Everything is relative, but in the IT industry it is very rare when it is possible to choose a point of observation relative to which one could objectively assess progress. And therefore the minimum that can be done is to make up a management of people whose goals coincide with yours.
PS I apologize for the metaphor used by the Tajiks. I have nothing against this nation. Such a comparison just seemed very successful, because no one will say that they come here to work because of their love for Russia)))
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/61972/
All Articles