Managerial skills are more important or Technical skills
-
No. The skills for the job are most important
Panic, Chaos, Destruction. My work here is done. Drink. Get drunk. Fall over - P O'H OK, I will win to day or my name isn't Ethel Crudacre! - DD Ethel Crudacre I cannot live by bread alone. Bacon and ketchup are needed as well. - Trollslayer Have a bit more patience with newbies. Of course some of them act dumb - they're often *students*, for heaven's sake - Terry Pratchett
-
Technicians are taught to be so, (good) managers are born. :)
Regards, Nish
My technology blog: voidnish.wordpress.com
Does that mean that Technical Managers are taught to be born?
Henry Minute Do not read medical books! You could die of a misprint. - Mark Twain Girl: (staring) "Why do you need an icy cucumber?" “I want to report a fraud. The government is lying to us all.” I wouldn't let CG touch my Abacus! When you're wrestling a gorilla, you don't stop when you're tired, you stop when the gorilla is.
-
Your question is akin to asking "Which is better, a Badger or an Orange?". Without a context it is almost impossible to give a non-facetious answer.
Henry Minute Do not read medical books! You could die of a misprint. - Mark Twain Girl: (staring) "Why do you need an icy cucumber?" “I want to report a fraud. The government is lying to us all.” I wouldn't let CG touch my Abacus! When you're wrestling a gorilla, you don't stop when you're tired, you stop when the gorilla is.
-
or Planet dominating robot building skills? oh, or baconering. Mmmmmmmmm bacon
Curvature of the Mind now with 3D
-
I suppose so, if you're managing a pig farm.
www.software-kinetics.co.uk Wear a hard hat it's under construction
-
Your question is akin to asking "Which is better, a Badger or an Orange?". Without a context it is almost impossible to give a non-facetious answer.
Henry Minute Do not read medical books! You could die of a misprint. - Mark Twain Girl: (staring) "Why do you need an icy cucumber?" “I want to report a fraud. The government is lying to us all.” I wouldn't let CG touch my Abacus! When you're wrestling a gorilla, you don't stop when you're tired, you stop when the gorilla is.
Of course, an Orange Badger is the best by far.
CQ de W5ALT
Walt Fair, Jr., P. E. Comport Computing Specializing in Technical Engineering Software
-
Good question for a Fri! I've discussed this exact question with a lot of people in my career over a number of years (and more than a few beers). I've been in both roles, progressing from entry-level programmer to manager of a 25 person dev & testing team over a 20 year IT (and entrepreneurial consulting) career. Consider this: Would it be easier/faster for a technical person to learn managerial skills OR would it be easier/faster for a manager to learn technical skills. There is a little wiggle room there to account for personality, likes/dislikes, etc. But it's been my experience that it's easier/faster for a technical person to learn and become proficient at managerial skills than the other way around. In general, this is mostly because the managerial skillset is vastly smaller than the technical skillset and changes far less often. Part of this depends on your definition of "management skills." It seems to me that each is a separate breed of people. But it's been my experience that it is easier to impart some critical management skills to tech people than the other way around. Also, by critical management skills I don't mean the specialized ones like finance, accounting, etc. More like people management, budgeting, project management, etc. I would definitely throw in project management skills in with [people] management skills as being critical to anyone wanting to go into "management." Let's take it one step further...what if you had a mentor for both situations? Would that speed up the learning and that person becoming effective? A management mentor will get a tech person to be an effective manager in far less time than a tech person trying to mentor a manager to become a tech person, programmer, tech architect, etc. I've been asked to do the latter a few times and it's never really worked out well for the managerial person. Usually, they get bored or overwhelmed with the skillset they say they want to develop and just drop it. Or they find they really did not need/want the tech skills after all. Also, most tech people have been doing it so long they have developed a set of solid best practices or fundamentals that can only be learned over a long period of time, learning and adjusting from mistakes. That you cannot learn and implement quickly. Happy Friday! John
-
Why would either be more important than the other? I think it has been said but context is what determines it. Take company A which is stocked full of super genius programmers of which none of them could write a proper proposal, or what ever you deem as "Managerial Skills". In that case having Managerial Skills would be highly benneficial. If it was you, your career would likely accelerate because you would fall into the role since no one else is capable. Even if it is not you and you find someone with the skills (over the tech skills), it would be better because the company does better. Vise versa should also be obvisouly true. So you ask which is more important? Well it kind of depends on the day of the week (context). Now if you are meaning to ask about advice on a career path it is personal preference. I recomend doing a DA. Compile all of the skills and tasks of both (or even other professions) into one list. Then score the skills and tasks according to your likes and dislikes. After that you classify a profession and it will tell you your best path. Simple example: Gearding Cats - Ability to be able to heard cats into one place Public Speaking - Ability to speak in front of people Bacon Consumer - Ability to consume large amount of bacon in one sitting Tough Skin - Ability to take a lashing and get back at it Telepathic - Ability to read peoples minds Coercion - Ability to coerce people into doing what you need Then you rate each of these items by what you think you can do or want to do. Then you rate each of the jobs according to what you think they need. Multiply the values and add them up. The job with the largest value is for you:D
Computers have been intelligent for a long time now. It just so happens that the program writers are about as effective as a room full of monkeys trying to crank out a copy of Hamlet.
-
Technicians are taught to be so, (good) managers are born. :)
Regards, Nish
My technology blog: voidnish.wordpress.com
Good managers are good technocrats who have learned social skills, and who haven't forgotten what it was like to be a good technocrat working for a bad manager. Bad managers accumulate and congeal in the halls of prestigious business schools, acquiring life by sucking it from others. Except those who come up the ranks from Accounting or Marketing; they don't need special training to be bad managers.
Will Rogers never met me.
-
Your question is akin to asking "Which is better, a Badger or an Orange?". Without a context it is almost impossible to give a non-facetious answer.
Henry Minute Do not read medical books! You could die of a misprint. - Mark Twain Girl: (staring) "Why do you need an icy cucumber?" “I want to report a fraud. The government is lying to us all.” I wouldn't let CG touch my Abacus! When you're wrestling a gorilla, you don't stop when you're tired, you stop when the gorilla is.
Almost?:confused:
Will Rogers never met me.
-
I've had many bosses tell me that people skills are more Important. funny enough the the people they use as reference Points are never the ones they goto when things are Broken or just Need to be dealt with
Common sense is admitting there is cause and effect and that you can exert some control over what you understand.
-
Why would either be more important than the other? I think it has been said but context is what determines it. Take company A which is stocked full of super genius programmers of which none of them could write a proper proposal, or what ever you deem as "Managerial Skills". In that case having Managerial Skills would be highly benneficial. If it was you, your career would likely accelerate because you would fall into the role since no one else is capable. Even if it is not you and you find someone with the skills (over the tech skills), it would be better because the company does better. Vise versa should also be obvisouly true. So you ask which is more important? Well it kind of depends on the day of the week (context). Now if you are meaning to ask about advice on a career path it is personal preference. I recomend doing a DA. Compile all of the skills and tasks of both (or even other professions) into one list. Then score the skills and tasks according to your likes and dislikes. After that you classify a profession and it will tell you your best path. Simple example: Gearding Cats - Ability to be able to heard cats into one place Public Speaking - Ability to speak in front of people Bacon Consumer - Ability to consume large amount of bacon in one sitting Tough Skin - Ability to take a lashing and get back at it Telepathic - Ability to read peoples minds Coercion - Ability to coerce people into doing what you need Then you rate each of these items by what you think you can do or want to do. Then you rate each of the jobs according to what you think they need. Multiply the values and add them up. The job with the largest value is for you:D
Computers have been intelligent for a long time now. It just so happens that the program writers are about as effective as a room full of monkeys trying to crank out a copy of Hamlet.
I totall agree with you. Both of them are always required for a project to execute sucessfully.
Best Regards, Anantha Marella
-
I've had many bosses tell me that people skills are more Important. funny enough the the people they use as reference Points are never the ones they goto when things are Broken or just Need to be dealt with
Common sense is admitting there is cause and effect and that you can exert some control over what you understand.
I beleive both skills are equally important. However, according to the position you currently hold within the organization structure, either one should be more important than the other. Although, natural leaders/managers are born, a good education and a better training shall make up for certain deficiencies in character. Dante
-
I think the two skills are homeopathic to each other in that if your organization has great technicians who need little supervision, then you do not need a skilled manager. However, if your organization has great technicians then you already have a skilled manager somewhere in your ranks to have hired and trained them, either that or your company pays extremely well to afford such skilled techs. But if your company is like most businesses, you are constantly fighting to aquire cheaper and competent technicians, (much less skilled- who can afford that?). So where do you sink your invesment? Into a skilled manager who can manage and train and motivate mediocrity into excellence. But then you get into the question of cost of the manager. What if you split up the salary for the manager into aquiring more talented technicians? There's the money for that! But then you have nobody in charge and we all know the happy employee is the disciplined employee. Even the employee who does not need to be supervised does need to be rewarded for his efforts. A truely skilled manager can recognise who needs encouragement, who needs training, who needs to be released, and who needs to be promoted. This person can bring success to any business and can be trained in practically any skill, although not to the level of his team. Just enough to know who is there to to what task the best. the best employees in the best positions.
-
I beleive both skills are equally important. However, according to the position you currently hold within the organization structure, either one should be more important than the other. Although, natural leaders/managers are born, a good education and a better training shall make up for certain deficiencies in character. Dante
cambiaso wrote:
education and a better training shall make up for certain deficiencies in character.
I'm not sure I agree with the statement that education can make up for deficiencies in character. Unless you really meant education can make up for deficiencies in knowledge, which would seem way more logical. Your comment s though have provoked a thought, is there a difference between leadership and managing?
Common sense is admitting there is cause and effect and that you can exert some control over what you understand.
-
I would suggest reading Dale Carnegie's "How to Win Friends and Influence People". Therein lies the answer -- assuming you want "success", which, of course, is a relative thing. But the MOST successful people are not the most technical or the smartest, it is the people who have people skills.
============================= I'm a developer, he's a developer, she's a developer, Wouldn't ya like to be a developer too?
-
You are comparing apples to oranges; the jobs are not the same. :)
Nevin House Programmer/Developer
-
Good managers are good technocrats who have learned social skills, and who haven't forgotten what it was like to be a good technocrat working for a bad manager. Bad managers accumulate and congeal in the halls of prestigious business schools, acquiring life by sucking it from others. Except those who come up the ranks from Accounting or Marketing; they don't need special training to be bad managers.
Will Rogers never met me.
Sales, you forgot Sales. While it is rare for this beast to become a manager (except of other Sales people), their life long commitment to lying and never taking responsibility for their actions, make it guaranteed that they will stink as managers (except in their eyes, where they will perceive themselves as saviors of the corporation).
Psychosis at 10 Film at 11 Those who do not remember the past, are doomed to repeat it. Those who do not remember the past, cannot build upon it.
-
cambiaso wrote:
education and a better training shall make up for certain deficiencies in character.
I'm not sure I agree with the statement that education can make up for deficiencies in character. Unless you really meant education can make up for deficiencies in knowledge, which would seem way more logical. Your comment s though have provoked a thought, is there a difference between leadership and managing?
Common sense is admitting there is cause and effect and that you can exert some control over what you understand.
You have a good point. Leadership is inspired or improved through lectures based on historical cases or experiences, which is knowledge. The military system to prepare or improve leaders is a case in point. A fully agree that leaders are born, but they need to be improved and educated. Leaders can become managers. However, managers can or cannot become leaders in a true sense. Yes, managers are leaders in theory. They are being paid to lead us in business or administrative structures, but many became managers in spite of their dislike to be real leaders. They just needed the money, prerogatives and benefits that promotion entitled them. These cases are more common than not and any of us can relate to this every day.
-
You have a good point. Leadership is inspired or improved through lectures based on historical cases or experiences, which is knowledge. The military system to prepare or improve leaders is a case in point. A fully agree that leaders are born, but they need to be improved and educated. Leaders can become managers. However, managers can or cannot become leaders in a true sense. Yes, managers are leaders in theory. They are being paid to lead us in business or administrative structures, but many became managers in spite of their dislike to be real leaders. They just needed the money, prerogatives and benefits that promotion entitled them. These cases are more common than not and any of us can relate to this every day.