# Managers Who Have No Experience in the Field They're Managing



## PowerShell (Feb 3, 2013)

So I have started a YouTube channel on Sys Admin stuff called Glorified Help Desk. One thing I notice a lot in IT, is non-technical managers who have never actually done IT work. I talk to other people about this and they say they hear it's common in IT, but not really in what they do. I'll post the video below, but I am wondering if any of you work in an industry where this is common to have managers who have never done your job or are kind of clueless due to inexperience on what goes on from a day-to-day perspective.


----------



## Simpson17866 (Dec 3, 2014)

Let me guess, some smart*** is going to start this off with "American citizen"? 

Let's keep this on topic, OK everybody? Please?


----------



## Warp11 (Jul 13, 2016)

Yes. 
I have worked in various industries (construction; industrial supply) in which my boss had not done my role or was new to the industry altogether. 
These folks had been hired because they have people management skills rather than technical knowledge. It's usually the exception, though.


----------



## PowerShell (Feb 3, 2013)

Simpson17866 said:


> Let me guess, some smart*** is going to start this off with "American citizen"?
> 
> Let's keep this on topic, OK everybody? Please?


Um, no. If it makes you happy, I have a smaller Canadian flag hung up to my right: My Quest for a Canadian Flag - The Impulsive Traveler Guy



SkyRacerX said:


> Yes.
> I have worked in various industries (construction; industrial supply) in which my boss had not done my role or was new to the industry altogether.
> These folks had been hired because they have people management skills rather than technical knowledge. It's usually the exception, though.


So did it actually work out and they were able to manage correctly? I know at my current job we have a project manager who is non-technical but he is one of the best project managers I have ever dealt with. The key is he listens and acts as a go between. He doesn't understand the work we're doing that much but he trusts our estimates of what needs to be done and adjusts the schedule accordingly when things get delayed. The projects actually do go well. He is the exception though.


----------



## SolonsWarning (Jan 2, 2017)

Managers shouldn't need to know how to do the jobs of those who work for them. Their job is to manage which is VERY different than what their underlying jobs are. The skills that make a person a good manager and the skills that make them a good first line employee are very different. Ideally you would have someone who is skilled at both, but the rarity of such people means you can't have that all the time.


----------



## PowerShell (Feb 3, 2013)

SolonsWarning said:


> Managers shouldn't need to know how to do the jobs of those who work for them. Their job is to manage which is VERY different than what their underlying jobs are. The skills that make a person a good manager and the skills that make them a good first line employee are very different. Ideally you would have someone who is skilled at both, but the rarity of such people means you can't have that all the time.


They need to have an idea of what you are doing. It's not so much them being able to jump in and do you job as it is knowing what is going on so they can manage. If a manager has no idea how long it would take to do a given task, how can they allocate resources efficiently? If the manager doesn't know the skills needed for a given task, how do they know if the team can currently complete a project or how can they competently find someone who can do it? In IT, if you assume someone should be able to competently and quickly complete any computer-related task because they are a "computer guy," you're probably going to be in for a rude awakening.


----------



## AriesLilith (Jan 6, 2013)

What are you talking about? "It's just a button" after all. *trigger* XD

Actually there are non technical background managers who can do a great job, the problematic ones are the ones unwilling to listen or understand and only belittles the technical tasks. Because the ones who pay attention and listen can understand that technical tasks are not just hitting keyboards and assembling stuffs, they eventuslly understand that things are not linear and estimates are often just estimates.

On the other hand, usually technical people are too into tech and actually very little into other people, which makes them suck at managing. Real techies might also not enjoy doing project planning and budget stuffs. Not to mention learning skills to deal with clients and superiors.


----------



## PowerShell (Feb 3, 2013)

AriesLilith said:


> What are you talking about? "It's just a button" after all. *trigger* XD
> 
> Actually there are non technical background managers who can do a great job, the problematic ones are the ones unwilling to listen or understand and only belittles the technical tasks. Because the ones who pay attention and listen can understand that technical tasks are not just hitting keyboards and assembling stuffs, they eventuslly understand that things are not linear and estimates are often just estimates.
> 
> On the other hand, usually technical people are too into tech and actually very little into other people, which makes them suck at managing. Real techies might also not enjoy doing project planning and budget stuffs. Not to mention learning skills to deal with clients and superiors.


I agree with everything you are saying here. The non-technical project manager that I've worked with would listen and that's what made the project successful. There are also some other techies who should never be in management moreless even talking to the outside world. I know I'll have some more videos coming up on that.


----------



## PowerShell (Feb 3, 2013)

So this is how a non-technical manager chooses technology:


----------



## Warp11 (Jul 13, 2016)

PowerShell said:


> So did it actually work out and they were able to manage correctly? I know at my current job we have a project manager who is non-technical but he is one of the best project managers I have ever dealt with. The key is he listens and acts as a go between. He doesn't understand the work we're doing that much but he trusts our estimates of what needs to be done and adjusts the schedule accordingly when things get delayed. The projects actually do go well. He is the exception though.


Depends what you mean by manage correctly. How do you envision your position in the workplace hierarchy (if you see one, that is)?
For me, this is a manager who leaves me alone to do my job and supports to remove internal barriers. In return, s/he checks the boxes on whatever it is they need to show their boss (sales #s, performance drivers, strategic this and that, metrics, etc.). This is my current employer relationship and it is working very well. 
I have had the micro-manage, in-your-face, call you every 15 mins to see what you're up to kind of boss. We clashed a few times and it was not a good fit (interestingly enough he was a bit of a technical knowledge type and it was his first time in a leadership position).
It's uncommon to have a highly effective people leader with proficient knowledge of every single function of her direct reports plus the technical knowledge of whatever it is that you are doing (IT, Mfg, Construction, Engineering, Arts, etc). I would consider this the ideal even though the trend has been on "soft" skills for management, less focus on the technical "nuts & bolts" knowledge. I did work for someone like this once and it was great until he moved on for an opportunity. Too bad, there was so much I wanted to learn from him and he was very good at what he did.

This is how I would categorize most ideal to least ideal manager:
1. People skills and tech knowledge (I can look up to this person as a leader and an expert in their field) 
2. People skills and no tech knowledge (I have the tech knowledge, so just get me what I need from above and approve my expenses)
3. No people skills and tech knowledge (Ok, at least I can lean on this person for technical support even if not the best to work for)
4. No people skills and no tech knowledge (Who would work for this person and why are they the boss of someone? Cannot see this lasting long no matter how much you pay me).


----------



## PowerShell (Feb 3, 2013)

SkyRacerX said:


> Depends what you mean by manage correctly. How do you envision your position in the workplace hierarchy (if you see one, that is)?


I see it like a coloring book. Management provides the lines that need to be colored in, but leaves those details to the people that are actually doing the coloring. They know enough about what colors are available and how the person coloring does their job from a high level to know when that person is coloring outside the lines. They also create the lines to make a coherent picture.


----------



## Glitter Polska (Feb 5, 2017)

I concur with the original post. Many times people with advanced degrees in business are put in charge of companies in an industry they know nothing about. While some managerial skills may be universal you really need to learn the ins and outs of your particular industry and even your particular area to be successful long-term. Happy customers and employees make a successful business over time, not the bottom line. Looking only at the bottom line may work for short-term gain, but understanding the specific needs of your customers and employees is important for stability in a business.

My family's business is in real estate investing and development and real estate is what I specifically want a degree in. Knowing the ins and outs of the business and then acquiring experience in it makes one a more qualified leader who can make truly informed decisions. If I was put in charge of a company in an industry I didn't know, I would learn it inside and out first thing. How can you make reasonable deductions and decisions if you are not informed?


----------



## SolonsWarning (Jan 2, 2017)

Glitter Polska said:


> If I was put in charge of a company in an industry I didn't know, I would learn it inside and out first thing. How can you make reasonable deductions and decisions if you are not informed?


No one person can know as much as a whole group of people. It isn't the job of a manager to unilaterally make decisions; it's their job to synthesize all available information to make a decision based on the institutional knowledge and not just their own.


----------



## PowerShell (Feb 3, 2013)

SolonsWarning said:


> No one person can know as much as a whole group of people. It isn't the job of a manager to unilaterally make decisions; it's their job to synthesize all available information to make a decision based on the institutional knowledge and not just their own.


Or if you're uninformed, you just go off of the best sales presentation:


----------



## kdelrey (Feb 5, 2017)

Glitter Polska said:


> I concur with the original post. Many times people with advanced degrees in business are put in charge of companies in an industry they know nothing about. While some managerial skills may be universal you really need to learn the ins and outs of your particular industry and even your particular area to be successful long-term. Happy customers and employees make a successful business over time, not the bottom line. Looking only at the bottom line may work for short-term gain, but understanding the specific needs of your customers and employees is important for stability in a business.
> 
> My family's business is in real estate investing and development and real estate is what I specifically want a degree in. Knowing the ins and outs of the business and then acquiring experience in it makes one a more qualified leader who can make truly informed decisions. If I was put in charge of a company in an industry I didn't know, I would learn it inside and out first thing. How can you make reasonable deductions and decisions if you are not informed?


You don't need to know everything. You assemble a team of people who know more than you. That is what good business people do.


----------



## Glitter Polska (Feb 5, 2017)

kendrickdelrey said:


> You don't need to know everything. You assemble a team of people who know more than you. That is what good business people do.


This echos what @SolonsWarning said and I'm not in total disagreement. If you knew more than the team and could do it yourself you'd be the team, not its manager. I'm not saying you need to be a professor, but have a solid working knowledge of the industry. Lacking it is a good way to be taken advantage of or to inadvertently take advantage of an employee who does more than you realize and possibly lose them. You don't need to be able to do what they do, but you need to understand the basics of what they do. I would always take the industry insider that shows leadership potential over a random manager.


----------



## Grandmaster Yoda (Jan 18, 2014)

Any IT professional needs to learn what the company needs and how it works. If you are in a hospital creating software for that hospital, you need to know how a hospital runs. If you are doing finance, you should have the basics of finance. It's a matter of figuring it out.

Why an IT manager would not know the basics of IT is not understandable. Though in my school, they teach management and communication skills to us. Those are basic necessities in IT. There is something wrong if an IT professional cannot effectively communicate or have the basics of management down either.


----------



## EndsOfTheEarth (Mar 14, 2015)

Happens all the time here. In fact it's becoming standard, as is personality hiring, rather than hiring for experience. A lot of companies have a way they want their departments managed, so they hire someone new to the field or industry in order to teach them this method and then set them loose in a department. Less headaches for the managers above them that way.


----------



## PowerShell (Feb 3, 2013)

kendrickdelrey said:


> You don't need to know everything. You assemble a team of people who know more than you. That is what good business people do.


But you need to know what you don't know and find people who know it. For example, if you don't know how to code in Java and what you want to do requires a Java coder, you need to know this and then find a Java coder to do the work. You have to have enough of a background to know how to assemble the team and get the right people and also coordinate their efforts.


----------



## kdelrey (Feb 5, 2017)

PowerShell said:


> But you need to know what you don't know and find people who know it. For example, if you don't know how to code in Java and what you want to do requires a Java coder, you need to know this and then find a Java coder to do the work. You have to have enough of a background to know how to assemble the team and get the right people and also coordinate their efforts.


Sorry, I was a bit vague in my first post. You do need to have a basic understanding in how the system works, otherwise you're just nothing more than nincompoop. Forgive my over-exaggeration.


----------



## AriesLilith (Jan 6, 2013)

Thing is, a manager doesn't need to know much about each team role's expertise but he or she should at least have a good idea and what they need, what are the geenral hardships and issues and how he or she can help solve it.

For example, a manager experienced in software development should know that estimates are often just estimates and not counted as absolutes. He or she should know about the general problems thst can be encountered and figure out ways to manage and tackle them. Like how to properly align the design/UX team with clients to avoid mismatch of expectations too, and how to deal with that in case it happens.

A manager don't need to know how to write algorithms x or y but should have an idea that it's not "just a button", that it can be hard and sometimes things can be delivered later due to unexpected issues.

Have a manager that has so little idea that belittles hard works is disastrous at best. An IT manager treating engineering like lego assembling play and not paying attention to best practices and all is going to be disastrous.


----------



## Sovereign (Aug 19, 2011)

I think it's been said, but it's not absolutely imperative that a manager have in-depth technical knowledge about the jobs performed by those he or she is managing. By far, the more important factors are based on leadership ability. In-depth knowledge might just make a bad manager more prone to micromanaging, because they know best, after all. Now, click that button THIS way, dammit.

A good manager is a good leader, and a good leader listens and truly attempts to understand the real challenges faced by his or her subordinates. He or she then makes judgment calls, and balances those needs against all the other needs under his or her purview. A good manager finds a way to maximize the equation so as to affect the most positive outcome: essentially solving the most needs using the fewest resources. 

By far the most common downfall among managers that I've had has not been lack of technical knowledge, but ego and inability/unwillingness to communicate effectively those being managed.


----------



## TheGhostAgent (Dec 10, 2015)

As others have brought up, Managers requires different skill sets from people they manage. From technicians to *insert any specialist* that works out in the field. They're managing variables either with the client or implementation of their specialty. What Managers do, is work on human capital/resources. If we ran on the rationale that those who are managed, need to only be managed by those competent specifically in their field. We can do away with a lot of our current structure of management, starting with government.

Now would it help if management also have knowledge and experience in the field of employees that they're managing? Of course. Is it necessary? No. There are just as many shitty managers as there are employees. It comes down to who you get paired up with.


----------



## strawberryLola (Sep 19, 2010)

Peter Principle. 

This is how companies rot from inside out, top bottom. 

Not to mention when these types of management hire relatives, friends, quid pro quo. Codes of ethics get broken and go un-noticed. With nepotism, issues such as sexual harassment get slipped through, and basically the whole environment becomes a mob/mafia, not to mention interracial group tension, discrimination, and reverse discrimination as well as retaliation.

Promoting incompetence has become the new norm "It's not what you know. It's _____ (fill in the blank), Johnny."


----------



## PowerShell (Feb 3, 2013)

strawberryLola said:


> Peter Principle.


In a way I agree because the people are incompetent at their jobs. Sadly they were never competent at lower levels and just got promoted past their competence. They were literally installed originally as incompetent.


----------



## Arzazar Szubrasznikarazar (Apr 9, 2015)

SolonsWarning said:


> Managers shouldn't need to know how to do the jobs of those who work for them. Their job is to manage which is VERY different than what their underlying jobs are. The skills that make a person a good manager and the skills that make them a good first line employee are very different. Ideally you would have someone who is skilled at both, but the rarity of such people means you can't have that all the time.


So, people who manage stuff but their lack of knowledge of field leads to creating mess, are first and foremost incompetent managers?



PowerShell said:


> So did it actually work out and they were able to manage correctly? I know at my current job we have a project manager who is non-technical but he is one of the best project managers I have ever dealt with. The key is he listens and acts as a go between. He doesn't understand the work we're doing that much but he trusts our estimates of what needs to be done and adjusts the schedule accordingly when things get delayed. The projects actually do go well. He is the exception though.


Since a person clueless in your field could manage you correctly, it means he had competences that manager should have. Then the problem is that most of managers in the IT are incompetent managers.
It's not a non-tech person being a manager problem. It's a non-manager person being a manager problem.


----------



## Arzazar Szubrasznikarazar (Apr 9, 2015)

strawberryLola said:


> Peter Principle.
> 
> This is how companies rot from inside out, top bottom.
> 
> ...


It's no longer life. It's hell on earth.


----------

