Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
The Almighty Buck Books Media Book Reviews

Managing Einsteins 345

In many workplaces, especially high-tech ones, managers and those they manage are operating on parallel tracks, with different sets of motivations, expectations and rewards. How to keep tech workers happy, given that they likely don't want the same things as their bosses, and certainly would choose different ways to achieve them? The long-suffering Jim Richards submitted this review of Managing Einsteins, a book which attempts to inject some sanity into the situation by clueing managers in on what it is their programmers and other tech workers might actually want in a workplace. Read on for his review.
Managing Einsteins: Leading High-Tech Workers in the Digital Age
author Dr. John M. Ivancevich and Dr. Thomas N. Duening
pages 249
publisher McGraw-Hill
rating 7
reviewer grumpy
ISBN 0-07-137500-7
summary Good information for managers of IT workers

This book doesn't use terms like "nerd" or "geek" to describe IT workers: the authors hold that the stereotype of pocket protectors and coke-bottle glasses just doesn't fit any more. This is a book written for managers, and so the terminology and style (almost) always refers to Einsteins as "your workers," to the point that with the summary at the end states:

Referring to super-intelligent, curious, passionate, often introverted, talented individuals as "geeks" is outdated. Although Einsteins can call colleagues "geeks," it is not appropriate or cool for non-Einsteins to refer to computer, technology, systems or software geniuses as geeks. (page 217)

These are the difficult to work with, yet life-saving employees who can come up with answers when most people don't understand the question.

Several themes run through the book, so it can be summarised in a few simple statements. Many of which (to Einsteins) may seem pretty obvious. The book is written by "Management Professionals," though, so there's hope that managers may actually accept some of its wisdom.

The book is divided into three parts:

  1. Realities of the Twenty-First Century - a brief summary covers the basic themes of the book and introduces the concept of an Einstein, the nature of Einsteins and how they fit into the work environment and the world.

  2. Managing Einsteins: Challenges and Actions - this section, the bulk of the book, covers everything from recruiting Einsteins through to managing them on a daily basis, by paying attention to communication, teams and tribes, remuneration, etiquette and discipline.

  3. Building for the Future - includes humour and fun at work, telecommuting and a final summary.

The book describes IT workers as highly motivated, intelligent (often more intelligent than their managers), introverted, tribal and independent.

The mains themes throughout the book are:

  • Managers should be honest with their workers about the company's successes and failures
  • The point of management is to guide and suggest not to be autocratic (the metaphor of herding cats was used to illustrate this)
  • Let the Einsteins have freedom in work environment (location - there is a whole chapter on telecommuting, hours and style)
  • Einsteins are project-focused, not job-focused
  • They value training and education highly
  • They require a stimulating and fun work place.

The issue of remuneration is covered -- and expanded to include the idea that Einsteins are not solely motivated by money (as sales people may be), and that other considerations should be taken into account (such as training, location, work conditions). Also that the traditional notion of promotion does not always work. An Einstein may not want to become a team leader, or move any higher in the management hierarchy. A manager should be wary of their Einsteins burning out, a temporary demotion or other measure may be in order to take the stress off an Einstein for a while.

The book includes short examples and case studies from various workplaces, and excerpts from newspapers and trade journals to help illustrate points. There are also highlighted points categorised as "Influence Tips," "Black Holes" and "Einstein Wisdom." which emphasise important things, such as:

Managers should be very cautious not to introduce projects that have a low likelihood of getting started. Einsteins abhor routine and crave novel projects. But they abhor being misled and crave honest leadership all the more. In staff meetings, when managers talk about upcoming projects, they should attach a probability of launch along with the projected launch date. The common term for this is "managing expectations." (page 70)

One good description of the nature of how Einsteins work is the concept of flow.

Flow is reported by individuals as a satisfying state they reach when they are completely absorbed in challenging yet achievable projects. (page 54)

Flow is an important concept for managers to understand. Once an Einstein starts a project, and becomes fully involved, there is nothing worse than being pulled off to attend a sales meeting, or other time consuming function. It interrupts the flow.

One pitfall: the book seems to have been started before the tech slump of 2000-2001 really started to dig in. So the book wavers between promoting how IT workers are highly mobile, but also that the job market is not that strong.

The other major shortcoming is the chapter on Etiquette and Manners. Now, I can understand the mannerisms and habits of Einsteins can be a little unpleasant at times, but it begs the question, why would a manager take one of these people out to a client dinner in the first place? If the client needs to meet the tech people to be convinced that a company can do the job, why not at the place of work? Or, take an Einstein who you know you can trust to behave and present well.

As this is the only book at the moment that deals directly with managing this class of workers, also get your manager to read Jon Katz's Geeks. Managing people is no longer about direct, micro-management or process line working. The nature of work has changed with the influence of new technology and so a new way of managing people should also be introduced. These books together will help management, or anyone, understand the mind set and working modes of IT workers.


You can purchase Managing Einsteins from bn.com. Want to see your own review here? Just read the book review guidelines, then use Slashdot's handy submission form.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Managing Einsteins

Comments Filter:
  • Makes sense (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Dead Penis Bird ( 524912 ) on Thursday April 04, 2002 @12:21PM (#3284611) Homepage
    When dealing with highly intelligent employees, it's counter-productive to put them on a regimented schedule, in a cramped cube and expect them to turn out quality work.

    Though I'm not an "Einsein" in the typical sense used in the review, I find that a lot of the ideas presented can apply to people in my field of accounting. It's another highly specialized field requiring a certain type of worker, and a quirky lot at that.
  • by Ars-Fartsica ( 166957 ) on Thursday April 04, 2002 @12:34PM (#3284716)
    And thats the crux of the problem. Often you have to deal with people who are not only immodest about their own abilities, but are often falsely immodest. I cannot begin to tell you how many Valley types think they are precious, irreplacable little snowflakes who wake up every morning knowing something new that us mere mortals simply could never divine.
  • I could use this (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 04, 2002 @12:53PM (#3284841)
    I could use this. I'm in charge of the tech group at work. Given, this is a small company and the tech group just consisted of me up until 4 months ago. Now I've got 3 people under me. I'm always inclusive and I always talk about "us", "we", etc... One day I said something like "Yes, the owner should be able to call on any one of us to perform a given task and we should all be able to do it with no problems." And this one guy pipes up "Yeah, tell me about it. John doesn't seem to trust me, but he has to understand that I'm just as good as you." To understand the irony here, you must understand that he said this despite the fact that every time there is an issue that requires a little bit of critical thinking skills or that is not already spelled out in easy-to-understand steps he comes to me, out of breath and panicking, asking "what do I do now? How does this work? I don't know what to do. Please tell me how to fix this." Even worse on top of that, he takes the credit afterwards. I've been trying to play nice, but I'm going to need to beat him with a cluestick real soon.

    So I guess this whole long story was to validate a need for your book.
  • by David Kennedy ( 128669 ) on Thursday April 04, 2002 @01:03PM (#3284920) Homepage
    Maybe I'm weird. I don't want toys. My list:
    1) Upper quartile pay for my work location and expertise.
    2) Pension scheme.
    3) Health insurance.
    4) Bonuses/options.
    5) No dress code.
    6) Novel and interesting work domain.
    7) Access to powerful development and test machines.
    8) Choice of technologies for projects.
  • Autism and Coding (Score:3, Interesting)

    by oGunner ( 571210 ) on Thursday April 04, 2002 @03:00PM (#3285865)
    I know, Autism is a beneficial trait for getting the bits and bytes right in code. How do you manage these people. How about manageing complexity? This is what "Einsteins" do. Managers of people have to consider the narrow focus and blinders IT folk put on when managing complexity. It requires a bit of a pull and a lot of push to get in and out of context (context used here as diving into the problem, scoping out its bounds and mapping it to code). Temporary Idiot Savant if you will. It is the real programmer who can quickly change levels when asked by marketing, what that new algorithm means to his customers. I've just been dropped into a position that has no management, no real marketing and a unfamiliar product market. Now I have to come up with a product that will make money. I used to be a programmer. Now what am I? I'm not sure, but I enjoy the rollercoaster ride when I think from the level of the customer, through the product features to the architecture to the outsourcing and if I can find time to write the drivers.
  • by ppetrakis ( 51087 ) <peter.petrakis@gmail.com> on Thursday April 04, 2002 @04:10PM (#3286421) Homepage

    work fine in a group, as long as I'm not forced to put up with incompetent idiots, either as cow-orkers or management. I won't slow down my production or tolerate laziness just to avoid hurting the ego of others -- generally I work best when my peers are at least as smart as me, if not smarter. I've had the luck to work with some very bright people, and we work together as a group, and meet our deadlines -- not following the company clock on any given day, but still putting in a solid work week in the end.

    I wouldn't ask you to slow down. What "I" want is to get the job done. I don't care anymore to impress anyone and ego fluffing is not something I care for either. You're here because you can do the job, so get it done. You don't have to wear a tie or nice pants or go to meetings unless I ask you to accompany me.

    They often work ALONE and the work that they do which others depend on go by their clock, not the companys. I work very well with a small team of equally bright people. Some members of my team are morning people, some are not. But at the end of the week, we still get the work done. I contribute much more value to the company than "any compitent engineer". I also am not a morning person, and making me follow a strict 8:30-5:00 schedule might make my manager look good to his superiors, but is only going to hurt my morale and productivity.

    Right, that point doesnt apply to you since you do get it done in the work week which is what most projects are measured by. Look. I understand if someone isn't a morning person and rolls in around 10, but the ones I knew who did that also stayed still 7. They we're also available during the work day as a resource to their colleges. The ones who are unacceptable are the 1PM to 4PM, oh I missed the morning meeting and I knew they wanted me there, correspond by email more than a telephone (from home), are not available as a resource when their colleges need them, and get the job done at the last possible moment because they can (doesnt always mean they got it right). Those are the ones I don't like.

    The worst possible manager is one who is more interested in looking good to his superiors than keeping his direct reports happy. My team has no problems with me starting later in the day and leaving later in the evening... the only people who complain are members of other groups who see me wander in at 10:30 and feel like I have a privilege they are missing. Of course, they go home at 4:30, and never see how late I stay.

    Right see above, as for the the whiners. They'll get the message when they don't get the raise or promotion they 'think' they deserve.

    While the later I can bear and bridge the communication gap to achieve OUR goals because it is worthwhile. The former can take a hike.

    Sounds like you have some problems of your own. There are way too many people in I.T. who are either stupid or lazy, and only put in the minimum amount of effort (plus plenty of sucking up to the boss) to avoid getting fired. This is encouraged by the tolerance of this behavior by management, who see a quiet employee who doesn't make any waves and value them as much or as more as the "Einsteins" who accomplish 10x as much in a given week, but also require a bit more flexibility and perhaps even a few perks every now and then.

    :-), It's not computers, or .com crap , or technology anymore. It's about people and communicating effectivly. The majority of tech guys get any given job because of their tech skills not their people skills. Take the IT example. If the IT tech can solve a customers problem but has 'not' left that situation with that user being a 'better' user than they we're before, Then they have failed. It will happen again and IT will be called upon to fix it AGAIN. Why is this? They are not communicating effectivly with the other end.

    I don't suck up to my bosses. I will be the first one the vigoursly disagree with an authority and ask the hard questions. I am the FIRST one to roll up my sleeves and get into a problem. I lead by example , not lip service. I do not comprimise myself or my integrity nor will I ever comprimise any member of my team to outside influences. I've been accused 'many' times of being former military which isnt true but given my style, I can understand why people may think that.

    Bottom line. Any given 'smart' person can do XYZ faster than a 'plain jane' engineer. My challenge to you is to take that vast intellect of yours that is so effective at solving problems in the tech arena and focus just a portion of it on your communication skills. The results are impressive as they are rewarding when by your hand, Make the people around you better at what they do. Which in turn will make the group more effective and efficient.

    It's called teaching and someday when I've had enough of the industry. My title will have the words "Prof." instead of "Engineer".

    Peter

  • by John Murdoch ( 102085 ) on Thursday April 04, 2002 @04:29PM (#3286577) Homepage Journal
    Now, I can understand the mannerisms and habits of Einsteins can be a little unpleasant at times, but it begs the question, why would a manager take one of these people out to a client dinner in the first place? If the client needs to meet the tech people to be convinced that a company can do the job, why not at the place of work?

    That statement makes sense. Which proves something:

    You will never make it in sales.

    Sales people are full of, well, effluvium. And there is always a point at which your sales guys rise to the level in the organization where they need to make deals with other sales guys at that level in another organization. Both sets of uber-sales guys know that they're all sales guys--and thus full of effluvium. In consequence, the other guys recognize that your sales guys' presentation on your hot new technology is, well, effluvium.

    No effluvium, really...
    Faced with a customer who knows you are full of effluvium, what can you do? You bring the tech folks along. You don't sponsor a meeting where our techs meet with your techs (or even better, a Quake death match LAN party where our clan cruelly destroys your avatars and every morsel of self-respect you may have fooled yourself into...well, maybe that's not such a great idea). The idea is that your techs impress the daylights out of their uber-sales guys--who, being full of effluvium, are easily impressed.

    That's how I ended up playing golf, once...
    Being a 4-H leader, I view the game of golf as a waste of good pasture land [eventingusa.com]. I was at a client's, installing a new application on their servers, when the company president dragged me into his office, picked out a golf shirt, and told me we were going to Pensacola, Florida to "do a little bidness." Right then.

    I ended up doing an off-the-cuff presentation on the new product, with commentary on some of the features of the database schema and our techniques for automatically updating pricing. Based on the blank stares from the audience I doubt they understood one word in twenty. "But thass all raht," said the client, "in fact, that was kinda the point." To thank me for this, he subjected me to 18 holes of golf at some allegedly-exclusive golf course with all the sales types I'd been lecturing. Who, of course, knew how to play golf. The fact that I clearly did not seemed to further establish my technical credentials.

    Learn from this, young Jedi...
    Don't try to understand sales people. They are clannish, socially disfunctional, and have a tribal suspicion of outsiders.

  • by ComputerSlicer23 ( 516509 ) on Thursday April 04, 2002 @04:34PM (#3286626)
    You had "prima dona"s, not Einstiens. There is a difference. I'm not an Einstien, but I have worked with some of them. I worked with a couple of guys briefly in the past. They worked odd hours, and they worked a ton.

    At times they were unpleasent to be around, but they could get the work done. They told customers the God's honest truth every last time. So they didn't get to work with customers any more. The two guys formed the core of a 30 person company. Pretty much everybody else there was to support the business of collecting the money and organizing requests for new development. That was it.

    They worked 90 hours a week when needed. They didn't miss deadlines. They made star trek jokes, and weird references to esoteric math problems.

    There is a difference between somebody who has jacked with technology, and a small crew of people who can get the work done on time everytime. The reason they were so incredibly valuable, was they avoided the single largest time consumer of developers. Communication, go read the mythical man month by Fred Brooks.

    Working alone is a huge boon. Working with people who are highly focused and like to work along is quite a trick. Once you get good at it is extremely efficient. The couple of guys I saw working together would divide up the work and run off and work without much in the way of communication for a week at a time. They agreed on the fundamental interactions between the seperate parts, met that interface, the rest were details. They work alone because they don't need to communicate.

    Most work is actually done alone, with infrequent reports. If communication skills are a problem, there is a problem. Your spending too much time communicating, more then likely. Great technical people don't communicate much inside the technical group because they shouldn't have to in a good group. They don't communicate with people outside the group because they consider the rest of us boring. Getting together in a big meeting to discuss progress is a waste of time. Having a manager who walks around and discusses individual progress is the way that is done. Having a meeting if they aren't getting it done to regroup in relatively dire situation is a good idea.

    Having discussions with poeple who are lying about progress is a good idea. Firing people who continue to lie about performance, yep should do that. The best technical people never ever lie, no need to, they have valuable skills and understand that lying is a cardnial sin that will hurt thier professional reputation. All you have to do is ask, are you making progress. You'll have your answer, if they lie, fire them on the spot. If they don't make work on the assigned tasks, fire them, they aren't professionals.

    Motivate them by giving them projects interesting projects. Give the multiple projects to work switch between if they are all boring, just to get a change of pace. Meet infrequently to discuss high level goals. Ensure the techincal lead is somebody who can bridge the gaps between the Engineering side, and the rest of the group. Make sure the lead does bi-weekly rounds, and keeps you informed of problems. The internals of a good Engineering department isn't something most people would like if they saw it. Just like I wouldn't eat sausage ever again if I saw how it got made.

    Sounds like you had some bad employees who thought very highly of themselves. You probably had a couple of Einstien's and didn't know it. Not all of them are incapable of communicating. Quirky people who work odd hours aren't bad if they make progress and do the work.

    The rest of them are slackers trying to pass themselves off as hard workers... Uhh, welcome to management. You get that if you work in an IT department all the way down to your local fast food place. Prima Dona's are a dime a dozen, Einstien's are a diamond in the rough. Keep the valuable stones return the high matiences low volume employess.

    If you're secretary is a slacker, probably not much of a deal. If the guy who watches the database that is the heart of your company, is a slacker you have problems.

  • by Cyno ( 85911 ) on Thursday April 04, 2002 @05:55PM (#3287140) Journal

    That's a cool question. Being an asshole, geek, whatever, not an einstein, though, I'd like to answer. I expect a manager to provide me with the general direction the company wants to take, screen sensitive communications problems from my foul mouth, and get on my case when I'm slacking off. My current manager does an excellent job of this.

    But I'm also curious what is expected of a project oriented geek. The proper question for any geek to ask in such an interview is "What do you want from me?" I find that most companies don't know how to manage their resources, their employees. I often find there are a lot of brilliant people that are not being asked for their input reguarding important corporate decisions. I tend to think that most of the problems companies have stem from a lack of internal open communication. Often because upper management either doesn't enjoy talking with rude foul mouth techs, like me, or they think they know everything and have no need to seek advice. I don't know. I feel like management outsources half their solutions, half the time. Anyone care to comment?

    Working in a large corporation I find that most of the people I work with and talk to directly are good hard-working people who want to work with you through projects and make the office environment enjoyable. But it seems like upper management is cut-off from the rest of the company and reality, sometimes. But maybe that's just my perception, since I think I could run it better myself... and I think that is why someone needed to write a book called managing einsteins. Not because they are hard to work with, but because they have had a lot of experience and think they know something about how businesses actually work. The real question is "Do techs realisticly understand business?"

Genetics explains why you look like your father, and if you don't, why you should.

Working...