As a current AWS employee, you're missing one category. There are managers who succeeded and still are terrible managers, the "Yes" Manager. Someone who does little to uplevel others, micromanages, and drives away talented engineers. These managers align themselves with Directors and VPs by creating a mentor/mentee relationship and only say "yes" to senior and executive leadership. They care about only their next promotion and position. I talk to former team members who have dealt and are dealing with this type of manager. Yet, that manager is still around despite significant turnover. Why? Because of the team members who desire promotion or the carrot at the next vesting date are still accomplishing goals and tasks. There is a ton of in between. Not just Amazing or Terrible.
I find it humorous that I can relate to all 5 of your traits and been told from above, not just below, in consulting roles the alter interpretation.
I find the below-average devs and perhaps managers are the ones who often “misinterpret” the traits, it seems especially a group that is good at BSing and suddenly they can’t BS they turn to complaining if you dive into details. Of course, lots of extremely good people also want a manager out of their way to get work done, so by no means am I saying this is majority of people.
I wonder if there’s a degree of confidence or optimism that weighs how people see the traits?
I think for sure years of experience are a factor, as you've called out. I also think that it's just personalities and how they can clash or complement each other.
In my opinion it's about how they make you feel. If you feel productive and wanting to give your best and get recognition when you do and feel appreciated then that will be a good manager in your view. It's relative like you said at the start how an attribute can be seen as both positive and negative depending on how someone feels.
As a current AWS employee, you're missing one category. There are managers who succeeded and still are terrible managers, the "Yes" Manager. Someone who does little to uplevel others, micromanages, and drives away talented engineers. These managers align themselves with Directors and VPs by creating a mentor/mentee relationship and only say "yes" to senior and executive leadership. They care about only their next promotion and position. I talk to former team members who have dealt and are dealing with this type of manager. Yet, that manager is still around despite significant turnover. Why? Because of the team members who desire promotion or the carrot at the next vesting date are still accomplishing goals and tasks. There is a ton of in between. Not just Amazing or Terrible.
I find it humorous that I can relate to all 5 of your traits and been told from above, not just below, in consulting roles the alter interpretation.
I find the below-average devs and perhaps managers are the ones who often “misinterpret” the traits, it seems especially a group that is good at BSing and suddenly they can’t BS they turn to complaining if you dive into details. Of course, lots of extremely good people also want a manager out of their way to get work done, so by no means am I saying this is majority of people.
I wonder if there’s a degree of confidence or optimism that weighs how people see the traits?
I think for sure years of experience are a factor, as you've called out. I also think that it's just personalities and how they can clash or complement each other.
This is so true! A great manager can make all the difference, but figuring out what makes them great isn’t always clear. Really interesting insights!
In my opinion it's about how they make you feel. If you feel productive and wanting to give your best and get recognition when you do and feel appreciated then that will be a good manager in your view. It's relative like you said at the start how an attribute can be seen as both positive and negative depending on how someone feels.