The World’s Leading Microsoft .NET Magazine
   
 
timstall

Donate Today!

Search Box

 

Calendar

««Mar 2010»»
SMTWTFS
  12
3
456
7
8
9
10
111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28293031

My RSS Feeds








Mailing List

Most Popular Tags

                                                           

Why a manager may not want you to learn

posted Friday, 3 July 2009

I'm a huge advocate of learning. And it's natural for devs to want to pick up new stuff. However, many devs don't realize that they may report to a manager that actually wants to prevent them from learning new things - even on their own personal time. I think this type of manager is rare. However, it's good to be aware in case a manager is (perhaps unintentionally) "sabotaging" your learning.

I hesitated about writing this post lest it seem to cynical or jaded, but it's worth discussing as developers should be aware of such things. Note that there is not one specific person/event/incident that I have in mind, but rather glimpses of things over the last 10 years.

  • Their control - They may want to be in control, and you learning new things that they don't know takes away from their control.
    • They may want to understand the entire architecture themselves. It's sort of a "not built here" applied to a personal level - "If I don't already know it, it must not be necessary."
    • They may not want to learn the new stuff themselves. If you're a tech manager, and all your devs learn the next wave of technologies, it pressures you to learn the new wave as well, else you look obsolete.
    • They don't want you exposing their mistakes. Say a senior developer wrote a bad messaging framework. As long as no other employee has a clue about messaging, no one knows that they made a bad mistake.
    • They want you to "suffer" just like they did. Often new techs make it easier to do something, and rather than have the easy way out, you should do it the original way so you "understand what's really going on". Think using assembly language or C++ instead of a higher-level language like C#.
  • It doesn't support the immediate work
    • They may think it's a waste of time - "We've already invested in this architecture, we don't need anything else." Even though it's your own time, they'd rather you spend overtime on "useful features", like copying and pasting tedious code.
    • It competes with your day job - If you're researching some cool XNA technology, which is a lot more fun than the drudgery of some bad architecture, it may compete. Suppose you work at home, it might "distract" you.
    • It may be misapplied. New stuff is risky, and could be buggy or applied incorrectly - which would hurt the project.
    • Their afraid that "smart" developers are hard to manage. Smart developers can sometimes be total egomaniacs to work with (because they think they're so smart), and management may not want to even think about dealing with that.
  • You may leave
    • You may outgrow your company and leave-  If your company is stuck in the dark ages, they may want to keep everyone's technical skills "in the dark" as well, lest an employee "see the light" and leave.
    • It makes your more marketable, and you may leave. If you're stuck with some niche technology on an obsolete framework, you aren't very marketable and hence can't get another job, and hence your boss has tremendous control over you.

Examples of how a manager might unintentionally discourage a developer from learning:

  • Financially reject anything (like buying new books or tools or paying for a class)
  • Undermine your confidence ("Why would you need that") or question your motives.
  • Deny you resources, such as preventing you from installing anything on your machine (open source code, tools, etc...)
  • Never affirm new learning or innovation. They tell you "good job" for getting that feature done, but won't affirm picking up new technologies.
  • Never provide their software engineers with a continuing-education plan. Ask yourself, how do developers go "to the next level" in your team? Does management help them?

It's sad, but some companies are structured where it's not in the manager's best interests for the employees to "wise up". The managers want hard-working, honest people who are easy to manage, but they don't want to deal with innovation or smart developers.

LINK: Does your Project encourage learning

tags:    

links: digg this    technorati    




1. Kurt left...
Saturday, 4 July 2009 2:36 pm :: http://kurtschroeder.com/feed/KESCode.as

All the possibilities are valid and, as you know, I experienced some of these recently. However, I think you may have missed an issue that is not directly germane to the topic of learning issues in the work place. A manager has a life apart from the work place. We all strive to not let our personal lives interfere with work, but this is much easier when that life is going well. When a person faces a crisis it may tend to exaggerate some of the insecurities you noted. In reference to the “experience” I noted above, I knew my supervisor had some of those inclinations, but when I first worked with him he kept them in check to the point where they were tolerable. When we worked together again a little over a year later he was facing a personal crisis. I was not unsympathetic, but it’s easier to be understanding when one’s bad behavior is not directed at you. The most wise lesson I received from any counseling class was the following; “Just because someone is really hurting does not mean they have the right to crap all over you.” My experience was made worse by upper management’s lack of concern regarding one of their key employees. I am referring to my supervisor not me. If they had intervened correctly I believe the situation would have changed. For the record they did intervene, but it was in the form of threats. This made the situation worse by causing him to feel less secure. I made a serious error in how I handled the situation. I should have stood up for myself more than I did. Having gone to upper management with the issue, I earned a reprimand for not going through channels! At that point I gave up and tried to live with it. Big mistake; the problem just got worse till I got fired. This I think was more to appease my supervisor than to solve a real issue on my part. It was a rare set of circumstances that required a normally unwise response. I should have just drawn a line in the sand to at least maintain myself respect. I made the decision to quit, but got fired 3 days before I had the chance to give notice.


2. Kurt left...
Saturday, 4 July 2009 3:08 pm :: http://kurtschroeder.com/feed/KESCode.as

In fairness i feel it's very important to note that recently my former supervisor apologized for his behavior. I was surprised and appreciated the gesture. I do wish him well, but i must confess I am not hoping for another opportunity to work with him.


3. Drew left...
Sunday, 5 July 2009 7:54 pm

I think I've been that boss before but I saw things in a different way.

Have you ever had an employee who claimed to have learned about how to do everything under the sun in languages X and Y in his spare time but who couldn't seem to get the job done in the languages everyone coded in at work? I have. I don't believe in discouraging learning either on the job or off. And I absolutely encourage learning on the job. That said, I expect everyone to be able to accomplish their actual work, too. And in whatever "blessed" languages and technologies are used by everyone else if possible.

Also, diving deeply into HR-speak here, it should be a manager's/mentor's job to help employees grow their careers. I can certainly see where a manager might advise people toward outside projects that would build on the skill bases they're also using at work. Not only would that help the individual employees, but it means they're better at their jobs. Win-win! Note: I think this point applies much less with more senior engineers because they already have a solid bunch of related skills and need to stretch themselves more outside their tech comfort zones to keep learning.

I completely agree that there are some bad boss behaviors in a lot of places. Maybe I'm a perpetrator myself, but I honestly try not to be. I think there are other motivations than the ones you've mentioned here and I don't think they're all inherently evil or controlling.


4. Drew left...
Sunday, 5 July 2009 8:24 pm

"Preview comment" is apparently broken. Sorry about the strange formatting of that previous reply.


5. Kurt left...
Monday, 6 July 2009 7:50 am

Drew, with respect, going on the evidence contained in your comment, I don’t agree. I doubt you were one of those bosses. It seems, again going on content, you were doing a manager’s job. In my experience both for me and others I’ve managed, the most difficult task for a creative, talented developer is resisting the temptation to be overly creative. However, there are times when this is not the issue and a developer just can’t seem to get anything done regardless of what language they decide to use. This is very different that having a boss sabotage productivity or advancement. I’ve been in the business long enough to see most of the negative games bosses or coworkers can play. It was almost comical when my supervisor had me create a ridiculously detailed specification for a minor internal project. Upon review he told me to add items that were already in there. He finally gave up after hearing me say for the fourth time; “It’s in there…” I knew exactly what he was doing. I just could not understand why. I agree with you bad boss behavior is out there and I’m guilty of that too. The type of boss noted here in the article is in my experience uncommon, but exists. Again, respectfully, and stating that I believe you would be good to work with, other motivations here mean other priorities. The priorities you hint at have less to do with inhibiting a workers personal development than with just getting the job done so we can pay the bills.