At any Managerial position you need to be 95% Strategic and 5% Tactical. How true is this?
Printable View
At any Managerial position you need to be 95% Strategic and 5% Tactical. How true is this?
Wossy, Could you explain it more?
Maybe this would be better in the General Developers forum?
Managerial positions have major percentage of "political" issues to account for if they want to remain or move up.
I wasn't sure as it isn't a technical question so I put it here... What would you suggest?Quote:
Maybe this would be better in the General Developers forum?
So that's why they should be majorly inclined towards strategic? Is that what you mean? If yes, then would you agree with the above percentages?Quote:
Managerial positions have major percentage of "political" issues to account for if they want to remain or move up.
I disagree with the percentages, but agree with the overall statement. I'd shift it more to 60-40. However, I suppose that I've never had the luxury to be a manager where my hands remained clean.
Thread Moved
I mean like you always have to watch what you say and do or you can get enemies which will try to force you out or try to make you and / or your ideas look bad. Everybody is always trying to climb the corporate ladder and will step over you to get where they want to go.
@Shaggy, how did you arrive at 60-40?
@Rob: I am curious. What %age would you allocate?
I'd shift it to 80-20. Just about everything follows the Pareto Principle.
I don't know the difference between strategic and tactical though. As a developer, the only thing I see is politics, maneuvering and the spouting of nonsense, so the difference between the two is going to be lost on me. Are you a manager?
Definately way more then 50%. Maybe somewhere like 70% or 80%+Quote:
Originally Posted by koolsid
Hmmm... I never explored that angle.... nice one Mendhak...Quote:
I'd shift it to 80-20. Just about everything follows the Pareto Principle.
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Difference...gic_managementQuote:
I don't know the difference between strategic and tactical though.
If anyone reports to you... then you are a manager, no matter what field you are in...Quote:
As a developer, the only thing I see is politics, maneuvering and the spouting of nonsense, so the difference between the two is going to be lost on me.
Yes I am... and hence the dilemma...Quote:
Are you a manager?
Today I had a lengthy discussion on that with other managers and every one had a different view... no two views were the same...
Since the only forum that I visit besides facebook is vbf :p so I thought of posting this here and see what others (basically Managers) have to say...
I believe that nobody in particular can arrive at any particular percentage for this issue. It also largely depends on the type of professionals and kind of people you are working with. The 'What' and 'How' varies with this.
My definition of good professionals will be pros who know the technology, implementation, know how to get help when stuck, help/collaborate others with tech questions etc.
My definition for good people: ummmm..... dedicated people, dedication towards project, company etc. Basically, people who take their job seriously and understand how their (in)competence could affect the entire company, team and project.
Consider yourself a manager. You must understand how your subordinates, peers and team members think about you and you must know each individual to some extent. There could be 4 possibilities:
1) You have a team of good professionals and good people. You, as a manager, would discuss and explore different areas with everyone but still would most likely to distribute power of making and taking decisions to 'n' number of people. (but won't sit back and relax, because you are not installing a copy of Windows).
2) Team of Good professionals but not-so-good people. People might have personal differences, or might not like each other etc. Your role as a manager would more likely to be "How" to get things done in a smooth manner rather than "What" because you could depend on them for they might be best in their field.
3) Team of not-so-good professionals but good people. Most likely, you would end up putting people in a group who have understanding, friendship and help each other on tech front. You might have more concentration on "What" to be done so that the team(s) could finish the job on time. Note, "How" is equally important too, but "What" gets the focus, so that appropriate job could be given to appropriate group.
4) Unprofessional and bad people. Not possible. Companies generally don't hire such people and even if they do by mistake, not matter what strategy you employ, you are doomed.
In a typical project environment scenario, the "what" has already been decided, but the balance between "what" and "how" needs to be done throughout the designing, development and maintenance of project/ system etc.
@Mendhak, as a Developer, even I used to think everything a part of politics, but you need to be part of politics to come out clean. Personally, I have never done that and like to stay away from all this nonsense, but if your reporting manager is idiot and doesn't know how to deal with politics and same people, you may end up in bin (like me). And what will you prefer?
Good strategy = good tactics. I'd say it's 100% strategy, tactics is omnipresent. You can't allot a percentage to tactics, everything you do is tactics. It's the strategy that defines your tactics. Without 100% strategy, your tactics will fail.
Where I currently work, I've observed that the strategy and tactics is to shift focus to someone else no matter the situation. So, I've decided if everyone wants to switch focus, I'll pick winning projects / ideas and speak up, allowing the focus to switch to me. So far, so good.
Another good way to look at it.... Let me go through more suggestions...Quote:
Good strategy = good tactics. I'd say it's 100% strategy, tactics is omnipresent.
I would say that the Strategical percentage goes up the higher up the management ladder you go !
Development Managers have involvement with both the What & the How, (for example where i work Development managers look after individual products, and they would probably be around 70% - 30% strategical - tactical) but the Development managers manager is fairly uninvolved with the How (strategical up to maybe 90 / 95 %), and their manager wont have any involvement with the how at all just deadlines and the bottom line.
Are you familiar with the term: "Pulling it out of your ..."?Quote:
Originally Posted by koolsid
I suspect that I am in a FAR different field than the bulk of the posters in this thread.
Its questions like this that make managers bad. Truly good managers recognize that their job is to manage a team effectively so that they process the maximum amount of widgets in a way that does not demoralize the team or the quality of the product.
All this waffle about strategy and tactics is such a load. If managers spent there time checking on their team and maximizing potential instead of being on the john reading the art of war everyone would be better off.
I used to work for an amazing manager he would keep enough distance from the team that he could be stern yet always knew if we had issues personally or otherwise. He also made it his business to asses everyone performance and assign jobs that they where more likely to do better than work on a rota.