| Author |
Message |
Jim Thomas
Guest
|
 Posted:
Fri Dec 09, 2005 5:16 pm Post subject:
Re: Question for Engineers in the Private Sector; What to do |
|
|
Tim Wescott wrote:
| Quote: | To some extent I think it's a misinterpretation of the book "The Peter
Principal", where the writer found it interesting that people floated up
to their level of incompetence. Now we think that we're supposed to
select the most incompetent member of the team to be manager, and if you
need someone to manage managers, well...
|
Actually, this modification of the Peter Principal was put forth by
Scott Adams and dubbed "The Dilbert Principal."
--
Jim Thomas Principal Applications Engineer Bittware, Inc
jthomas@bittware.com http://www.bittware.com (603) 226-0404 x536
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Rune Allnor
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Dec 13, 2005 9:15 am Post subject:
Re: Question for Engineers in the Private Sector; What to do |
|
|
John E. Hadstate wrote:
| Quote: | jjlindula@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1133926362.623331.309010@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Hello, I have a question that is off the topic from the
newsgroup but
I want to get responses from engineers. I would like to
know how
engineers in the private sector deal with engineering
co-workers who
are ineffective, troubled or un-cooperative? I work for
the government
and what generally happens is that engineer is assigned
collateral
duties rather than engineering tasks, or you promote the
individual to
another position and then hire a replacement. I don't have
any clue
what would happen in the private sector, would they do the
same, or
just fire the individual? Sorry for the off-the-wall
question, but I
would appreciate any comments.
After serving 25 years in the private sector (Fortune 100
company), I don't think there are any hard-and-fast answers
to your question. I have seen people "carried" for years
and years, then terminated by being offered early
retirement. I have seen competent people marginalized-out
because their managers were incapable of adapting to new
technologies. (Marginalizing a competent engineer is a
politically-risky but often effective way of getting him to
leave voluntarily.) There was a much higher tolerance for
incompetence than for "rocking the boat". During the last 5
years I was with them, "go along to get along" was really
the order of the day.
I hasten to point out that this approach was disasterous
from a business perspective: the company that I helped build
was first spun off by its German parent, then looted, and
finally put out of business by competition from Mexico (that
I helped develop). It's part of the circle of life, and
proof that there is a God, after all ;-)
|
This was a very interesting thread. My own experience from
Norwegian public institutions, is that no one leaves for no
other reasons than retirement. There are the occational
firing due to embezzlement(?), but never because of
inefficiency or anything like that. Well, there is one
excempt, more on that below.
In the private sector, the main tradition is that the people who
were hired last are the first to go. I don't think it is formally
included in the laws governing the economy, but it is such a
strong tradition it is a de facto law.
So all the companies that hired in the boom of the late 60s and
early 70s are now in deep trouble, since their main workforce are
getting into retirement, and they have no recruitment base.
It's near christmas, so I will not get even remotely close to
recruitment practices for management. Suffice it to say that
the Norwegien "operational body for air traffic" (the government
department that runs the airports and air traffic control) just fired
a manager only three weeks after he enetered the job. The reason
was his lack of competence and experience in air traffic at all,
and that he found it impossible to cooperate with his employees,
who are responsible for air traffic safety.
I don't know if him being fired was due to any sort of incompetence
or inefficiency; I suspect most of it was due to the Norwegian
equivalent of the FAA raising an eyebrow over somebody without
relevant experience being appointed to this type of position.
Even the FAA may have played a part, for all I know. There were
reports in the press of the EU equivalent of the FAA "reviewing the
standards of Norwegian air traffic control" after this guy was
appointed
and the reactions in his staff was known.
The Director of the air traffic control authority was on the news
yesterday saying something I did not make much sense of, but that
apparently was based on the philosophy that "a manager can lead,
without knowing anything about his/her business."
I have never understood those kinds of claims.
Rune |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jerry Avins
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Dec 13, 2005 5:16 pm Post subject:
Re: Question for Engineers in the Private Sector; What to do |
|
|
Rune Allnor wrote:
...
| Quote: | The Director of the air traffic control authority was on the news
yesterday saying something I did not make much sense of, but that
apparently was based on the philosophy that "a manager can lead,
without knowing anything about his/her business."
I have never understood those kinds of claims.
|
Have you read "The General" by C. S. Forester (of "Hornblower" fame)?
Jerry
--
Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get.
ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Everett M. Greene
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Dec 13, 2005 6:52 pm Post subject:
Re: Question for Engineers in the Private Sector; What to do |
|
|
"Rune Allnor" <allnor@tele.ntnu.no> writes:
[snip]
| Quote: | This was a very interesting thread. My own experience from
Norwegian public institutions, is that no one leaves for no
other reasons than retirement. There are the occational
firing due to embezzlement(?), but never because of
inefficiency or anything like that. Well, there is one
excempt, more on that below.
In the private sector, the main tradition is that the people who
were hired last are the first to go. I don't think it is formally
included in the laws governing the economy, but it is such a
strong tradition it is a de facto law.
So all the companies that hired in the boom of the late 60s and
early 70s are now in deep trouble, since their main workforce are
getting into retirement, and they have no recruitment base.
It's near christmas, so I will not get even remotely close to
recruitment practices for management. Suffice it to say that
the Norwegien "operational body for air traffic" (the government
department that runs the airports and air traffic control) just fired
a manager only three weeks after he enetered the job. The reason
was his lack of competence and experience in air traffic at all,
and that he found it impossible to cooperate with his employees,
who are responsible for air traffic safety.
I don't know if him being fired was due to any sort of incompetence
or inefficiency; I suspect most of it was due to the Norwegian
equivalent of the FAA raising an eyebrow over somebody without
relevant experience being appointed to this type of position.
Even the FAA may have played a part, for all I know. There were
reports in the press of the EU equivalent of the FAA "reviewing the
standards of Norwegian air traffic control" after this guy was
appointed and the reactions in his staff was known.
The Director of the air traffic control authority was on the news
yesterday saying something I did not make much sense of, but that
apparently was based on the philosophy that "a manager can lead,
without knowing anything about his/her business."
I have never understood those kinds of claims.
|
The Harvard Business School reportedly teaches (taught?) that
a manager could do so by simply understanding the numbers --
experience and knowledge of the business being managed not
required or needed. How the manager is supposed to be able
to set policy, manage the personnel, etc. without any idea of
what the business is about is beyond me. Of course, we've seen
numerous U.S. businesses go down the tubes...
It's easy to understand people getting aroused by someone with
no relevant experience being in charge of a life-critical
operation such as air traffic control. Of course, a bottom-line
manager can greatly reduce ATC costs by grounding all the
airplanes. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rune Allnor
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Dec 19, 2005 5:15 pm Post subject:
Re: Question for Engineers in the Private Sector; What to do |
|
|
Jerry Avins wrote:
| Quote: | Rune Allnor wrote:
...
The Director of the air traffic control authority was on the news
yesterday saying something I did not make much sense of, but that
apparently was based on the philosophy that "a manager can lead,
without knowing anything about his/her business."
I have never understood those kinds of claims.
Have you read "The General" by C. S. Forester (of "Hornblower" fame)?
|
No, I have not. I did read most of the Hornblower books, though.
There was one story where the captain had turned mad and
obviously was not fit to run neither ship nor crew. Not quite the same
thing, but those guys were able to save ship and crew by making their
own decisions "in the name of the captain" after he fell victim to
what may or may not have been an accident (the author, cleverly
never quite revealed what really had happened to the captain).
Rune |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rune Allnor
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Dec 19, 2005 5:16 pm Post subject:
Re: Question for Engineers in the Private Sector; What to do |
|
|
Everett M. Greene wrote:
| Quote: | "Rune Allnor" <allnor@tele.ntnu.no> writes:
[snip]
This was a very interesting thread. My own experience from
Norwegian public institutions, is that no one leaves for no
other reasons than retirement. There are the occational
firing due to embezzlement(?), but never because of
inefficiency or anything like that. Well, there is one
excempt, more on that below.
In the private sector, the main tradition is that the people who
were hired last are the first to go. I don't think it is formally
included in the laws governing the economy, but it is such a
strong tradition it is a de facto law.
So all the companies that hired in the boom of the late 60s and
early 70s are now in deep trouble, since their main workforce are
getting into retirement, and they have no recruitment base.
It's near christmas, so I will not get even remotely close to
recruitment practices for management. Suffice it to say that
the Norwegien "operational body for air traffic" (the government
department that runs the airports and air traffic control) just fired
a manager only three weeks after he enetered the job. The reason
was his lack of competence and experience in air traffic at all,
and that he found it impossible to cooperate with his employees,
who are responsible for air traffic safety.
I don't know if him being fired was due to any sort of incompetence
or inefficiency; I suspect most of it was due to the Norwegian
equivalent of the FAA raising an eyebrow over somebody without
relevant experience being appointed to this type of position.
Even the FAA may have played a part, for all I know. There were
reports in the press of the EU equivalent of the FAA "reviewing the
standards of Norwegian air traffic control" after this guy was
appointed and the reactions in his staff was known.
The Director of the air traffic control authority was on the news
yesterday saying something I did not make much sense of, but that
apparently was based on the philosophy that "a manager can lead,
without knowing anything about his/her business."
I have never understood those kinds of claims.
The Harvard Business School reportedly teaches (taught?) that
a manager could do so by simply understanding the numbers --
experience and knowledge of the business being managed not
required or needed. How the manager is supposed to be able
to set policy, manage the personnel, etc. without any idea of
what the business is about is beyond me. Of course, we've seen
numerous U.S. businesses go down the tubes...
|
Well, somebody once said that "nothing seems impossible to the
incompetent."
| Quote: | It's easy to understand people getting aroused by someone with
no relevant experience being in charge of a life-critical
operation such as air traffic control. Of course, a bottom-line
manager can greatly reduce ATC costs by grounding all the
airplanes.
|
That's what is happening. The ATC operations were separated out
from government organizations to a commercial company to ""reduce
ATC operations costs." So the cut back on the number of air traffic
controllers, close airports, do all kinds of things to cut at the
expenses
side of the balance sheet. Maybe all that is necessary, I don't know,
but the way it is implemented leaves little confidence with the public.
People don't get their holidays, due to cancelled flights. No one
reimburse the losses, and the ATC company can not be held
accountable, either by passengers or airliners. Add to the mixture
that the former director of the ATC company required the staff to
use any pending holiday now in December, at the main traffic peak,
and it is easy to understand why she had to leave last week.
Not that it will help much, the ATC system will only work when the
ATC company is held economically liable for any damages to
airliners or passengers. Unless one pays for the damage of *not*
having a working national air traffic, the obvious way to save
money is to shut the whole thing down.
Rune |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Everett M. Greene
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Dec 20, 2005 6:54 pm Post subject:
Re: Question for Engineers in the Private Sector; What to do |
|
|
"Rune Allnor" <allnor@tele.ntnu.no> writes:
| Quote: | Everett M. Greene wrote:
"Rune Allnor" <allnor@tele.ntnu.no> writes:
[snip]
It's easy to understand people getting aroused by someone with
no relevant experience being in charge of a life-critical
operation such as air traffic control. Of course, a bottom-line
manager can greatly reduce ATC costs by grounding all the
airplanes.
That's what is happening. The ATC operations were separated out
from government organizations to a commercial company to ""reduce
ATC operations costs." So the cut back on the number of air traffic
controllers, close airports, do all kinds of things to cut at the
expenses
side of the balance sheet. Maybe all that is necessary, I don't know,
but the way it is implemented leaves little confidence with the public.
People don't get their holidays, due to cancelled flights. No one
reimburse the losses, and the ATC company can not be held
accountable, either by passengers or airliners. Add to the mixture
that the former director of the ATC company required the staff to
use any pending holiday now in December, at the main traffic peak,
and it is easy to understand why she had to leave last week.
|
Maybe the postal services should take note of this cost-saving
step. Instead of adding people for the Christmas rush, cut
the number instead. You might not get your Christmas cards
until July, but the services wouldn't need a rate increase!
| Quote: | Not that it will help much, the ATC system will only work when the
ATC company is held economically liable for any damages to
airliners or passengers. Unless one pays for the damage of *not*
having a working national air traffic, the obvious way to save
money is to shut the whole thing down. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in