←back to thread

85 points signa11 | 7 comments | | HN request time: 0.785s | source | bottom
1. jurschreuder ◴[] No.44380753[source]
Software development is the only high-skilled work where people have managers.

Doctors don't have managers. Lawyers don't have managers. Professors don't have managers. Architects don't have managers. Bankers don't have managers.

Engineers should not have managers.

There should just be different levels of engineers.

replies(3): >>44381612 #>>44382448 #>>44385004 #
2. feoren ◴[] No.44381612[source]
> Professors don't have managers.

The dean of their department, and other administrative staff who don't have any clue what they do. Trust me that the clueless sociopathic administrative layer can absolutely interfere with professors' lives. Tenure can protect them somewhat, though.

> Architects don't have managers.

Yes they do. I don't know why you think this.

> Lawyers don't have managers.

They do unless they're partner, which is probably a small percentage of lawyers. A lot of lawyers are in the legal department of a larger company, with managers.

> Doctors don't have managers.

I know less about this but I'll bet there are plenty of hospital administrative staff above them who are sociopaths and get in their way.

> Software development is the only high-skilled work where people have managers.

All forms of engineers have managers: aerospace, civil, environmental, mechanical, etc. Only if they're running their own consultancy do they not, but you could say the same thing about plumbers and electricians. I'd actually wager a higher percentage of architects and engineers have managers than do tradespeople. Whether you have a manager has less to do with your profession, and more to do with whether you run your own business or not. Some professions run their own businesses more often than others, but I don't think engineers and architects are at the top.

3. setr ◴[] No.44382448[source]
with enough people, and a sufficiently high view, all problems are about human-management. This is the case for any subject.

Management is not a product of university MBA programs and power-hungry corporate animals seeking to impose their will on others; it is an inevitably of group labour.

replies(1): >>44396658 #
4. ath3nd ◴[] No.44385004[source]
> Doctors don't have managers

Is that so? Here is an open position: https://www.healthcareers.nhs.uk/explore-roles/management/ro...

> Lawyers don't have managers.

Hmm, we seem to have very different information: https://timeanalyticssoftware.com/what-is-a-law-firm-managin...

> Professors don't have managers

I wonder what do the Dean and Chair at my university do then.

> Architects don't have managers

They do. See https://www.bls.gov/ooh/management/architectural-and-enginee...

> Bankers don't have managers

They do. See this open position: https://nationalcareers.service.gov.uk/job-profiles/bank-man...

> Engineers should not have managers.

I think nobody should have managers, but your examples were so confidently wrong that it's hard to agree with your whole statement. I am on the opinion that any work, no matter whether "high-skilled" or not, doesn't need managers, unless that's just an euphemism for more senior employees that also do the work.

replies(2): >>44387243 #>>44393154 #
5. n4r9 ◴[] No.44387243[source]
I looked at your first two links and it's not really clear whether those roles would be line-managing doctors or lawyers.
6. ycombinatrix ◴[] No.44393154[source]
The managers listed in those open positions are administrative. Doctors don't report to them. Doctors report to another doctor.

The dean & chairperson at your university are not line managers. They are not in the classrooms with teaching professors. They are not in the labs with research professors.

Having someone be in charge of you is not the same as having a line manager. Line managers are down in the trenches with the employees, unlike most of your examples.

7. collingreen ◴[] No.44396658[source]
This is part of the allure of ai to the management class - having a bunch of your team do exactly what you say (I'm not saying it's what AI will do, just that the thing some of them are drooling over) and vastly reducing this coordination problem.

Ironically I think bad managers replacing their teams with AI will be crushed by AI because 1. wtf do they even do and 2. suddenly the work being done correctly is on them with nobody to scapegoat later

I expect, for this reason, we'll see AI stabilize at managers telling their teams they must use AI and then demanding more output but not see entire workforces replaced.