I promised to apologize to Marcel and I am doing it tonight. He posted the following in my comments the other day:
I'm a Ga Tech EE running a medium-high volume third party electronic repair depot. We rely almost exclusively on reverse engineering to document the circuits and systems of the various OEMs whose products we target. We then develop automated test systems to repair an average of 100,000 units annually. The circuits we repair range from simple power supplies to complex multi-layer, multi-processor boards with heavy use of surface mounted components. I personally developed many of the test systems and strategies used in my business back in the 1980s when "test engineering" wasn't even an acknowledged sub-discipline of EE
Hardly an urinal cleaning business. I was wrong. I'll have my crow baked in a nice red sauce. I think I'll open a nice Chianti to drink with it. And what kind of manager is Marcel?
I don't know what "managment type" I am, because as I implied in my prior comment, I don't run my business based on the touchy-feely managment trend of the month. I have 35 hightly skilled engineers and other technical people in my employ, many of whom have been with our company for most of the 25 years we've been in business. I understand the creative/technical mindset, as I'm also a semi-professional musician in the Atlanta area, gigging almost every Friday or Saturday night with my 8 piece show band. Don't assume you know me by a brief comment left in response to what appeared to be a cyber-tantrum. You said yourself that what started the problem between you and your manager was the fact that you showed him up in a sarcastically written memo.
Actually it started long before that. This was just the last in a series of me dealing with his incompetence.
Are you proud of that?
Not necessarily, but it did fix the problem. As I said, I took the bullet for my team. Since my career was all but over I decided I should be the one to clarify the policy.
Is that the approach you would have preferred had the roles been reversed?
Nope. Had the roles been reversed, I would have thanked the IDHU (Incompetent Dickhead User) for bringing the matter to my attention and would have pointed out that our policy was that the users did the testing. I would have also told him that I would have a talk with the Grouchy Old Cripple about the problem. Then, I would have called the Grouchy Old Cripple into my office, after waiting for him to return from the conference he was attending, and asked to hear his side of the story. CDSMŽ (Clueless Dipshit Manager) did not do that. He told the IDHU what it took to get him out of his office, called me up to chew me out and announce a policy change that he later denied. My sarcastic note was not directed at him, but at the IDHU, whom, as I have pointed out, was fired two months later.
I've learned many things in my 25 years of working with people, and the most important thing I've learned is that a person with a bad attitude is a liablility to an organization, regardless of how much they know. My management style is to clearly communicate goals and expectations, make sure that people have the training and tools to do their job, and then get out of their way. I'm a "walk around" manager, in the old Hewlett-Packard style, and detest meetings and conference calls. I expect and reward excellence, and I also protect the positive synergy of the workplace by immediately dealing with substandard performance and bad attitudes. My approach has worked well for me over the years, and I have earned the respect of my employees and industry peers.
Marcel is a Type Y manager. He realizes that he who manages least manages best. Hire good people and get out of their way. He fixes problems and doesn't create them. I would have no problem working for him, and he would have no problems with me. In my over thirty years in corporate America, I have noticed that people respond to the way they are treated. If they are treated like children, they will act like children. When good techies develop bad attitudes, the bad attitudes are usually a result of mismangement.
The best manager I ever worked for managed just like Marcel. He would tell us what needed to get done and get out of our way. The self starters thrived under him. Those that needed direction didn't. If I ran into a brick wall, I could go to him and the problem would get fixed. As I said, that was when I got the most awards and best promotions. I was sorry to see him go.
It's obvious that you are a very accomplished, highly competent individual with a unique and desirable skill set, but I think you're wrong to assume a prima-donna mindset and basically lay down on the job based on the fact that you work for an idiot with whom you don't get along. Hence, my comment. I realize my comment was an over-generalization, and again, I'm sorry to have offended you. Now excuse me, my wife wants me to go clean the toilet in the guest bathroom. ;-)
And Marcel has a sense of humor. I like that in a manager. There was some additional back and forth in the comments where I said that I didn't so much as lay down on the job as I didn't put forth any additional effort, like working long hours or coming in on weekends since there was no incentive to do so. I'm pretty much financially independent and I'm working because I not only want to be financially independent but I want to be comfortably financially independent. SCUBA diving trips and ski trips cost money. I'd like to take up flying again. That ain't cheap.
Didja notice he said he detests meetings and conference calls? The better I get to know this guy the more I like him. The good manager I worked for had about four meetings a year (if even that many), and one of them was the mandatory Affirmative Action Equal Opportunity Meeting. That was before they named that bullshit Diversity (All Hail Diversity!).
I joined my current group after 26 years with TCIDNN (The Company I Dare Not Name). In my first year in this group I attended more meetings than I had in my previous 26 years with TCIDNN. That is entirely too many meetings. I attend two mandatory meetings a week (of which only one is necessary) and one every other week, which is a waste of time. We have a project manager that I have christened the PMICOUM (The Project Manager In Charge Of Useless Meetings). His solution to every probem is the following statement: "We will have to hold a meeting on this." In his mind, no problem is ever solved without a meeting. In an aside, my friend Cindy said I ought to ask my sister to create that statement in needlepoint and give it to the PMICOUM on my last day.
It's not only the quantity of meetings that is excessive, the quality suffers also.
Here are the rules for successful meetings:
1. If a problem can be fixed without a meeting, don't hold one. Duh! You would be surprised at how many people do not realize that fact.
2. If the meeting is scheduled for 2:00 it should start at 2:00. Our Wednesday Inquisition meeting usually starts at 2:10 because the CDSMŽ or the PMICOUM is late. So we have 16 people sitting around in a conference room doing nothing. 16 x 10 = 160. That is almost three manhours of wasted time. And that's not even counting the wasted time after the meeting starts.
3. Every meeting should have an agenda (preferably in writing) and it should be adhered to. No exceptions! Side issues extend the length of a meeting.
4. The meeting should be as short as possible. That's the reason for the agenda. Very little productive work is done in a meeting.
5. The meeting should be kept as small as possible. I have to attend meetings where half the people (including me) do not belong there.
So it turns out that Marcel and I have a lot in common after all. It is no surprise to see why he runs a successful business.
Chomp. Chomp. This crow is actually quite tasty.