[HN Gopher] Should managers still code?
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Should managers still code?
        
       Author : blah2244
       Score  : 82 points
       Date   : 2025-03-04 15:41 UTC (7 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (theengineeringmanager.substack.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (theengineeringmanager.substack.com)
        
       | zusammen wrote:
       | Generally, no. There's a risk of unfair competition for work
       | (they can delegate the stuff they don't want because they have
       | political power) and their code often becomes "untouchable"
       | because few will call it out if the code is bad.
       | 
       | A hobby project to keep current isn't a bad idea, though.
        
         | LeafItAlone wrote:
         | As an engineering manager, I actually pick up the stuff other
         | people don't like to do or stuff I notice that is hanging out
         | there. My goal is to move the team forward.
         | 
         | I've also done POCs of work that has been met with resistance
         | that I didn't feel was justified in order to actually give it a
         | fair shake. That is my coding fun.
        
           | bryanlarsen wrote:
           | > I've also done POCs of work that has been met with
           | resistance that I didn't feel was justified in order to
           | actually give it a fair shake. That is my coding fun.
           | 
           | I've had managers do this to me. What an awful experience.
           | Because they're the manager you can't push back against the
           | awful design decisions they made. They feel it's almost done
           | so don't understand that it takes a lot of time to deal with
           | all the side effects they didn't consider.
        
             | LeafItAlone wrote:
             | That's very valid feedback.
             | 
             | I hope I don't come across that was and do have some
             | evidence (not to be laid out here) supporting that I don't.
             | 
             | I think I've created a team and structure where the
             | developers I manage are comfortable telling me I'm wrong or
             | what I didn't consider. It happens weekly. We value honest
             | feedback highly. We do it with respect, but we do it.
             | 
             | We just have some developers on the team that are resistant
             | to ideas that don't follow a pattern until they see it. And
             | sometimes my communication around the initial idea is poor
             | and the best way I can communicate is an implementation.
        
               | james_marks wrote:
               | As with virtually everything in this thread, it matters
               | how you do it. Sounds like you did it well.
               | 
               | I'll add one other great edge in building a quick POC
               | yourself. Sometimes your idea actually _is_ bad, and
               | trying to articulate it in code helps you see it.
        
             | scarface_74 wrote:
             | A POC should just be a happy path to prove a concept. I had
             | a CTO who would routinely throw together code just to prove
             | out an integration or another concept with hard coded
             | values everywhere and drop the code in Dropbox for me to
             | lead the effort of making it production ready as the
             | architect. He would go back and forth with the vendor until
             | things worked.
             | 
             | This helped me out by leaps and bounds. I was usually
             | swamped with other research. I would then make it ready for
             | production or lead the team to and take care of the edge
             | cases, integration with our config system, logging and
             | alerting, etc.
             | 
             | There is a huge difference between a POC and an MVP. An MVP
             | should be properly designed and scaffolding that you can
             | build on, a POC doesn't take those things into account.
        
         | evidencetamper wrote:
         | > unfair competition for work
         | 
         | That's a very good indicator of a bloated institution. People
         | have to compete for work instead of pushing it away or avoiding
         | it because they already have their hands full.
         | 
         | But I don't believe there is a general rule that applies here.
         | 
         | Most great managers I had were deeply technical and involved in
         | the nitty gritty of the projects, including coding the very
         | spiky aspects of a project.
         | 
         | Most mediocre managers I had were very focused on relationship
         | building. The kind of manager that would need a hobby project
         | to keep current, instead of being the most knowledgeable person
         | in the room.
        
           | mandelbrotwurst wrote:
           | People might compete for the work they view as relatively
           | more attractive for a variety of reasons even when they are
           | quite busy.
        
           | SOLAR_FIELDS wrote:
           | The author starts off with this statement:
           | 
           | > I think that there is a big difference between being in the
           | code and writing code. All managers should be in the code,
           | but not all managers should be writing code.
           | 
           | I think it's not possible to be _in_ the code without
           | _writing_ code. People can pay lip service to being _in_ the
           | code as the author indicates, but as we all know there is no
           | substitute for actually sitting down and writing the code
           | yourself in terms of understanding the actual pains and
           | struggles.
           | 
           | And my anecdotal experience says that if you aren't writing
           | at least some of the code, more often than not the disconnect
           | between the manager and what the team is doing grows and
           | grows.
        
         | nobleach wrote:
         | While that is possible, I think a good manager recognizes these
         | pitfalls. My philosophy is "everyone has to scrub toilets once
         | in awhile - that includes me". You'd have to ask my direct
         | reports but, I'd like to say I lean more toward taking the
         | "grunt tasks" that I don't think are super helpful for my
         | folks' career growth.
         | 
         | Then again, I've been called a bad manager on Hacker News so...
        
           | LeafItAlone wrote:
           | That's how I see it myself.
           | 
           | Obviously being a good manager is first and foremost, but
           | I've always had more respect for managers that I know can
           | (even if they never do) do my job as well as bring a manager.
           | Early in my career at a startup I had a manager that was both
           | and excellent manager and right there in the trenches with
           | you when issues arose or business deadlines were approaching.
           | The amount of respect I still have for that individual is
           | immeasurable and I'd go work for them again in a heartbeat if
           | they asked.
        
             | otherme123 wrote:
             | And OTOH, nothing worse than a manager that don't know what
             | he wants nor how to do it, but he "will know when it is
             | right", and keep you redoing stuff.
        
         | pc86 wrote:
         | IMO if an EM is taking the fun stuff, or the high-profile promo
         | packet stuff, that's a symptom of a lot of very bad things. My
         | boss is an upper-level EM and has at least a few PRs in a
         | couple projects every sprint, and it's almost entirely boring-
         | but-blocking stuff, or stuff that nobody wants to figure out,
         | or stuff that is important but not sexy and not likely to get
         | anyone noticed. He's not writing new features or writing UIs
         | that are getting put in pitch decks or anything.
         | 
         | If I were an IC and my boss was picking the sexy work I would
         | leave. If I was a director and one of my EMs was picking the
         | sexy work I would fire them.
        
       | devmor wrote:
       | This is a good article, and I find myself agreeing with it almost
       | entirely. My current manager is one of the most effective
       | development managers I've ever had in my career, and I think a
       | good part of that is because he is involved in the codebase, but
       | not directly responsible for new features in whole.
       | 
       | I have had managers with no concept of what's going on the
       | codebase, and those were dysfunctional development teams that
       | produced poor results, despite great communication and productive
       | meetings.
       | 
       | I have had managers that were effectively another engineer on the
       | team, and those were dysfunctional development teams that
       | produced decent results, but had poor interaction with
       | stakeholders and no unified direction.
       | 
       | As in many things, the ideal seems to be a happy medium. Someone
       | who can read the code, who can write the code, and is interested
       | in both, but whose duties are not primarily to do so.
        
         | hermitShell wrote:
         | I agree with this sentiment! One way to set up teams is with a
         | squad leader who acts as shit shield first, and developer if
         | the company is running smoothly. That way if the boss manager
         | is a full time shit shield with little time to understand
         | product, the team still has a local product owner to guide the
         | team's vision and concept of the product, but the power
         | imbalance is also less as the team lead could fairly easily be
         | deposed by accessing the manager.
        
       | asdev wrote:
       | Absolutely not. Nothing like an out of touch manager slowing down
       | their engineers with random PR comments and questions. They
       | should not go deeper than the design document/architecture level.
       | They are not adding any value trying to put their washed skills
       | on display.
        
       | kvdveer wrote:
       | Tldr: managers should be in the code, but should not code
       | themselves.
       | 
       | The article suggests managers should focus several tasks that
       | depend on the ability to code, but not produce code themselves. I
       | think that's not sustainable. When a manager stops producing
       | code, their skills in that area begin to deteriorate. I've seen
       | it happen several times. When you stop coding, you'll eventually
       | start missing crucial things in code review, make very poor
       | estimations of labour involved, and assign the wrong team members
       | to tasks. It won't happen immediately, but it will happen within
       | 5 years.
       | 
       | I think a better way is to keep producing code, but at a lower
       | rate. If the project you're working down doesn't permit low-
       | commitment development, start developing tooling or pick up a
       | side project. A coach doesn't need to be a top-player in the
       | coding field, but they do need to remain fit.
        
       | technojunkie wrote:
       | Middle management for software engineering has gone through a
       | paradigm shift. The trend for businesses is flatter structures,
       | manager roles with more responsibilities and this reality largely
       | includes being as deep in the code as direct reports.
       | 
       | Since 2023, most roles I reviewed or interviewed for were
       | player/coach roles, often close to 50/50 split. In my last EM
       | role, I was hired for exactly this.
       | 
       | I found very few EM roles that are primarily managing with only
       | "being in the code"; I can count on my hands out of hundreds of
       | Engineering Manager roles. Probably closer to 95% or more EM
       | roles require hands-on technical work similar to Tech Lead roles.
        
         | oldandboring wrote:
         | I have noticed this as well, and if you're interviewing at a
         | startup, it's almost guaranteed to be a highly technical
         | position. Either a hybrid EM/Tech Lead role or a hybrid
         | EM/architect role.
        
         | peterldowns wrote:
         | True in my experience as well -- and I think it's a good thing
         | but companies are way behind in preparing people to fill these
         | roles.
        
       | williamcotton wrote:
       | From the article:
       | 
       | > _It depends on the manager, the team, and the organization. As
       | a senior leader, I would rather my managers be in the code as per
       | the above list, but not necessarily putting themselves in the
       | critical path by writing code, given that they are likely to be
       | interrupted more often, have more meetings, and be pulled in more
       | directions than their reports._
        
       | righthand wrote:
       | I was a manager for about 9 months before being laid off. The
       | goal was to attain power but also work on the huge backlog of
       | work we had. I wanted to use the power to block outside forces
       | that would push my engineers in the wrong direction or remove
       | their focus for investigating things like platform bugs.
       | 
       | What ended up happening was that the project work even though
       | completed was used to gaslight me for 6 months as breaking the
       | platform and causing bugs. Issues that infra team promised to
       | "fix later".
       | 
       | Go ahead code when you're a manager it can be effective, but be
       | careful when working with outside ineffective teams they will put
       | blame on you if they can. Management is political and once you
       | start making moves that outshine other teams, opposition will
       | come out of the wood work to bring you back to their level of
       | unhappiness.
       | 
       | The trick to identifying this is when people start naming you at
       | meetings you aren't in. It might be good things they are saying
       | but that may shift as the good things well dries up.
        
       | lkrubner wrote:
       | "But what does this mean for frontline engineering managers? Is
       | the new normal just about writing more code and doing less of the
       | other things that peacetime managers would normally do?"
       | 
       | "Should they be able to do code reviews? Yes."
       | 
       | There is no standard answer here. At many companies it is the
       | Head Of Product who also oversees the tech team. They may not
       | know how to write code, and will not know how to do code reviews.
       | Some project managers lead engineering teams without knowing how
       | to code. That's especially true outside of the tech industry.
       | 
       | For anyone interested in specific numbers, I interviewed Eric
       | Garside about his experience scaling Freshly from 3 engineers to
       | almost 80 engineers, see here:
       | 
       | https://respectfulleadership.substack.com/p/eric-garside-as-...
       | 
       | I also surveyed several of the CTOs who I know in New York City,
       | about team size and scale and responsibilities, they gave their
       | answers here:
       | 
       | https://respectfulleadership.substack.com/p/a-survey-of-ctos...
        
       | giantg2 wrote:
       | I've never seen a dual role manager that is actually good. It's
       | usually a senior dev that gets stuck with management duties. They
       | are usually good technically but then lack finesse and knowledge
       | about most managerial issues (budget, employment law, team
       | dynamics, etc). You're now at a disadvantage because the stuff
       | they are supposed to protect you from or have power to help
       | further your career is not developed. If your managers don't have
       | enough management work, then flatten your org and expand their
       | reach so they do.
        
         | pc86 wrote:
         | It really only works in orgs that are large enough to accept a
         | bit of bloat, mature enough to have good managerial practices
         | and invest in growing managers, and where the new manager has
         | only a couple reports (2 is the perfect number). So you take a
         | very good, senior IC who wants to be a manager, you cut their
         | IC duties by 25-50% and you give them 2, _maybe_ 3 direct
         | reports. This is after doing some sort of formal managerial
         | training, internal or external, and with the acknowledgement
         | from their director /senior manager that they're going to be
         | spending more time with them for the next 2-6 months and having
         | skip 1:1s to make sure everything is going ok.
         | 
         | How many organizations do you think check all those boxes _and_
         | are willing to do that? It 's not many.
        
           | giantg2 wrote:
           | Yeah, I've never seen one that checks all that.
        
             | pc86 wrote:
             | I've bounced back and forth between IC and EM
             | (intentionally) and I've seen some that get very very close
             | then completely blow it with one of these. One in
             | particular would put people through management training for
             | a full day each week for months, give them a very senior
             | director, all the "right things" but then cut their IC
             | duties by maybe 10-15% at most and give them a team of 12
             | people to manage. And they wondered why fully half of new
             | managers wanted to go back to IC work after a year or two.
             | 
             | The best realistic thing I've seen, and my current
             | workplace, is pretty good with small teams and training and
             | all that, but basically doesn't offer any pay increase from
             | upper level IC to first-level management and so you have to
             | be okay with basically 20% more work for the same money.
             | It's not perfect but one benefit is you don't get any
             | managers who are only in it for the money.
        
               | peterldowns wrote:
               | I don't see your contact info in your HN profile but
               | could I get in touch with you to learn more about how
               | teams can get this right? My email is in mine.
        
       | robotsquidward wrote:
       | My best managers were ex-engineers who didn't touch the codebase.
       | They understood how things worked, and could talk architecture &
       | concepts, but they didn't expect to be able to sit down and write
       | code at our level. Maybe they wished they would have the
       | time/opportunity still, but realistically they were focused on
       | leading.
        
         | giantg2 wrote:
         | This is exactly how it should be in my opinion. This matches my
         | experience with who I saw as being good managers.
        
           | fifilura wrote:
           | Were they happy with it or did they become miserable after a
           | while?
        
             | giantg2 wrote:
             | They were happy with it. On the opposite side, almost every
             | dual role manager I've known have been miserable. Most of
             | the ones I knew dropped out and went back to dev only work.
             | A few stuck it out and got promoted into a no-code
             | management role.
        
         | mitthrowaway2 wrote:
         | My best managers did code! They didn't close tons of tickets
         | but they did do small things, and by keeping active in the
         | codebase they were very cognizant of the state of documentation
         | and technical debt, and could make informed decisions without
         | relying on second-hand reports. It kept their understanding of
         | the codebase grounded in reality. They knew which features were
         | held together with duct tape, what areas needed attention, and
         | planned timelines and expectations accordingly.
        
           | lexandstuff wrote:
           | This is 100% my experience. I appreciate a manager who can
           | jump into the codebase to fix the small stuff: typos, lint
           | issues, updating minor dependencies, etc., unblocking devs
           | from doing the main work. I like when they have some sense of
           | the reality of the codebase, as you put it, and know who is
           | actually contributing vs bullshitting.
           | 
           | The worst managers I've ever had were the so-called
           | "technical" managers who had never looked at the code. They
           | were often involved in technical decisions, but their
           | opinions were entirely based on vibes. Since they were a
           | manager, people felt obliged to listen to their input, even
           | if it made no sense.
           | 
           | Either: a) be completely non-technical, and make sure you
           | have a technical leader on the team who you trust, who does
           | know the code or b) get involved in the code, enough to
           | support and unblock your team.
        
         | only-one1701 wrote:
         | In my experience, there's a time limit on how long these kinds
         | of people can be good managers from the perspective of
         | accurately assessing a) which ICs are contributing what and b)
         | how long it it'll take to implement something. The fact of the
         | matter is that an engineering manager who can't or won't write
         | code will never know as much about his team or indeed the
         | product as one who does.
         | 
         | It's a shame that the "maturation" of the tech industry has
         | resulted in these non-coding eng managers whose main skillset
         | is often bullshitting, managing up, or both.
        
       | bitwize wrote:
       | Maybe?
       | 
       | Managers should not be evaluated based on code output -- it's not
       | their job. However, writing code here and there -- to evaluate
       | new technologies, make a rough prototype, or demonstrate a
       | technique to be adopted by individual contributors -- may aid
       | them in their management responsibilities and should be embraced
       | when it does.
       | 
       | I've seen what happens when a manager is also responsible for
       | individual coding duties. He ended up with roughly twice the
       | work, shifting between two mutually incompatible mental
       | modalities all the time, cranky with his subordinates and making
       | a lot of sad phone calls to his fiancee explaining that he'd be
       | late home from work, again. Not a good fate for any worker, even
       | if the pay and prestige are better.
        
       | kevinventullo wrote:
       | One important distinction to make is the difference between a
       | manager who started out as an IC on the project (esp. the case
       | when they actually built the thing from the ground up) versus a
       | manager brought in from the outside. I think the former is more
       | likely to be hands-on and generally speaking the expert in the
       | room. But, sometimes you need the latter. It can be challenging
       | (even counterproductive) for the latter person to try to be
       | technically relevant, when they are often the _least_ technically
       | knowledgeable person in the room when they join.
       | 
       | I say this as someone who has been in both roles!
        
         | peterldowns wrote:
         | I'm curious, how have you seen the "outside" manager build
         | trust/confidence/respect with the team without doing at least
         | some engineering work?
        
       | kevmo314 wrote:
       | > Do code reviews. Don't just skim PRs (sorry, reader!), but
       | really dig into them: run the branch locally, test it, think
       | critically about the design and the implementation, and provide
       | feedback. Record a video of your review to highlight things that
       | could be better.
       | 
       | Please no! Most managers want to increase output and engineers
       | are aware of that. It is exceptionally frustrating when your
       | manager tells you during your 1:1 that they want to help move
       | things along and then does quite literally the opposite in a PR.
       | 
       | If you must dive deep into a PR, get the PR unblocked and then
       | follow up with the change. Or stop telling your direct reports
       | that you want to help unblock them.
        
         | alkonaut wrote:
         | Anything that can be done in a follow-up shouldn't have to
         | block a PR. But if the architecture is wrong, it's better to
         | fix before than after. You are speeding your teams throughput
         | by pointing out the problem earlier rather than later.
         | 
         | But I don't think a manager necessarily needs to be at this
         | level of detail.
        
           | roenxi wrote:
           | > But if the architecture is wrong, it's better to fix before
           | than after.
           | 
           | Although this is true; if the manager is thinking about and
           | getting involved in architecture _after_ the PR is written it
           | does suggest something has gone wrong. If there are
           | architectural considerations then it is good to discuss them
           | with the coder before they start developing.
           | 
           | PR review is a great time to pick up subtle bugs, do last-
           | line sanity checks or get used to someone's style but if they
           | are a bad arena for combating most code issues. If they are
           | picking up design problems there is probably a process flaw
           | to be corrected.
        
         | ein0p wrote:
         | Modulo the video, I did exactly this when I ran a team, only
         | for what I thought were "important" or "gnarly" PRs. It works.
         | I rarely had to spend more than an hour on a PR, because small,
         | atomic PRs were all but mandatory on my team, with "atomic"
         | taking precedence over "small". I would also review some of the
         | PRs post-facto, after they are committed, as I was almost never
         | a "formal"/blocking reviewer on them.
         | 
         | Recording a video seems excessive to me. No one has the time or
         | desire to watch me bloviate about something that I could say in
         | a few PR comments that can be quickly skimmed.
        
           | peterldowns wrote:
           | Can I get in touch with you to ask more about your time
           | leading teams? No contact info in your HN profile but if
           | you're interested, my email is in mine.
        
         | Cthulhu_ wrote:
         | If you as a manager have the time to do an in-depth code review
         | like that... you're doing micromanagement and you're showing
         | that you don't trust your subordinates. And clearly, you don't
         | have anything more important to do.
        
       | mp05 wrote:
       | > If you mean being the primary implementer of features, then
       | probably not.
       | 
       | It's my belief that any engineering manager worth their salt
       | should push back on this and argue for a seat at this table,
       | every single time. I don't want to work for someone who is
       | disinterested in new functionality in codebases under their
       | purview.
        
         | scarface_74 wrote:
         | I want my manager to _manage_. I need them to play the politics
         | to get what I need as far as resources, to set business
         | priorities and to make sure I'm aligned with those priorities.
         | 
         | I need them to then trust me to accomplish the objectives
         | myself on smaller implementations or to lead the team on larger
         | implementations.
        
           | mp05 wrote:
           | I can't tell if you're agreeing or not?
           | 
           | I'm not asserting anything about if a manager should code,
           | but rather calling out a statement in the article. A good
           | engineering manager should never be surprised by some new
           | functionality.
        
       | n_u wrote:
       | Strong yes for 3 reasons
       | 
       | 1. Reducing dev friction.
       | 
       | When I had managers who coded they were ruthless about removing
       | friction in the dev and deployment pipeline because they had to
       | deal with it too. If build times went up, deployment
       | infrastructure broke or someone's PR broke dev they would roll it
       | back immediately. If someone consistently blocks PRs the manager
       | noticed the trend and would address it.
       | 
       | 2. You get a much better sense of IC's contributions by writing
       | code.
       | 
       | There are ICs who play politics very well and sell themselves but
       | that set is not the same as the ICs who deliver. If you are
       | writing code you start to notice which ICs have written key
       | features, built critical APIs or worked on hard problems because
       | of comments and Git blame.
       | 
       | 3. Understanding your codebase.
       | 
       | I hope most managers have solid CS and engineering fundamentals
       | but that is a necessary but not sufficient condition to grasping
       | the full picture. There's a reason it takes time to ramp up to
       | full productivity on a new codebase. If you work in the codebase
       | and have had to use that one annoying but critical library or
       | dealt with that tech debt from 2 years ago then you know what is
       | hard and what isn't. I've found when a codebase has a quirk that
       | makes developing certain features hard all of the non-technical
       | people keep forgetting why we can't do that thing and all the
       | technical people have it burned into their brains.
        
         | x0x0 wrote:
         | Also, I'm just fundamentally skeptical you can do a good job of
         | running a team, or hiring, when you don't know how to do the
         | thing the team does. Software development skill requires active
         | use/work to maintain it.
        
           | roenxi wrote:
           | Here here. There are a lot of decisions where there is no
           | real contest between the choices to someone who has tried
           | both options but are difficult to tell apart from a distance.
           | EMs should be in a position where they are trying things in
           | practice.
           | 
           | I'd draw an example of someone who hasn't used git before,
           | making a choice between a git repo and managing code by
           | keeping daily .zip files. Anyone (almost anyone) who is a
           | career coder won't see a choice there.
           | 
           | That example is so basic I think most EM would get that right
           | even if they didn't deal in code but the same dynamic turns
           | up at every level of work. There are situations where there
           | is a right option, the right option is obvious to everyone
           | who is working on it and it is is a drain on the org when
           | management gets confused and thinks that something that isn't
           | an option is viable because they aren't on the ground working
           | on it.
        
         | flashgordon wrote:
         | Just curious have you managed people? At what capacity (tl? Em?
         | Pm?)? How big was your team? What was the company env like in
         | which your team(s) functioned?
        
           | apwell23 wrote:
           | just curious what's your ssn, dob and mother's maiden name.
        
           | flashgordon wrote:
           | I guess I should have added some context. I have been (and
           | keep swinging between) ic and management roles (including
           | managers) regularly. I love coding and try to sneak in some
           | when I have time (as a manager).
           | 
           | But that a manager should always code is not something i
           | found helping the team or the manager - all the time. One
           | size does not fit all. In startups yes frankly there is
           | hardly a need for a manager and it is TL, TPM, EM role
           | combined into one.
           | 
           | In larger cos though a most managers are innundated with all
           | kinds of non technical work (meetings, alignment, perf
           | management, product discussions etc). While having coded
           | before is a great thing keeping uptodate is actually robbing
           | the manager of time for all other things on the plate (and
           | those actually benefit the team beyond what meets the eye).
           | 
           | Besides at large orgs there is also so much technical (think
           | large scale design and integrations) knowledge that a manager
           | needs to keep track of which also needs time investment.
           | 
           | Then there are various level/career related things that
           | necessitate one or more TLs a manager needs to work with or
           | manage and coding often gets seen as a manager "not doing
           | their job" or worse stealing a junior engineers
           | opportunities.
           | 
           | There's a lot more that is very environmental but hope sets
           | some context.
        
         | apwell23 wrote:
         | At the same time, they also tend to start interfering in the
         | solutions proposed by their team. It hard to stave off that
         | temptation.
        
           | whstl wrote:
           | First: it's not "interference" if they are also part of the
           | team.
           | 
           | Second: If their ass is on the line, then they DO get a
           | bigger say. They are paid for seeing potential problems,
           | guiding the team, among other things.
        
         | peterldowns wrote:
         | Well said -- completely true in my experience. It's called
         | _Engineering_ Manager for a reason!
        
         | dietr1ch wrote:
         | > 1. Reducing dev friction.
         | 
         | This is so important, my managers who didn't code pretended
         | things weren't too bad and took a "just deal with it" attitude
         | whenever I proposed going for a QoL improvement.
        
           | vrosas wrote:
           | On the flip side I had a manager who had written a lot of the
           | codebase before I joined and had a terrible time allowing
           | anyone to touch his precious baby, regardless of how much his
           | prior "art" was hurting us, our productivity, and by
           | extension the company.
        
             | ge96 wrote:
             | Yeah... I said it was a "flaming pos" I felt bad about
             | that. But he won't let me add tests so idk whatever. (we
             | prototype software so speed is the main goal but yeah,
             | stuff starts breaking, backtracking, hey... tests)
        
         | eevilspock wrote:
         | I think it depends on how it is done, and the kind of ICs you
         | have on the team. It can come off as micromanagement, which
         | _may_ work well enough if you have not-so-competent ICs, but
         | will backfire if you have talented ones.
        
           | convolvatron wrote:
           | I've found it really helpful to be a support programmer. not
           | someone that takes on big tasks. nothing with a hard
           | deadline. not something that someone else needs to do their
           | work. leftover cleanup. testing. minor refactoring. build.
           | 
           | you need to keep your hand in the game just to understand
           | what's going on with the codebase. but you're not an a-list
           | player here.
        
         | oliwarner wrote:
         | Friction can be more of a problem too though. If your manager
         | is objectively better than the team, estimates can get cut
         | short and failing to meet those adds tension.
         | 
         | Obviously a good manager might pitch in, understand their teams
         | capabilities but it's not always a natural transition for
         | senior devs moving to management.
        
         | andoando wrote:
         | I don't see why you need to be writing code to understand all
         | of this. It can help, but almost everything you said is
         | ascertained from daily syncs
        
           | dv_dt wrote:
           | Fewer or shorter daily syncs is a plus
        
           | Aeolun wrote:
           | You don't _need_ to be writing code. But it's a convenient
           | shortcut to a great many things that otherwise take dedicated
           | effort to understand.
           | 
           | Some managers will do that. Most won't. Given that, it's
           | easier to just tell them all to code.
        
         | webdever wrote:
         | I tend to agree but, playing devil's advocate, is this true for
         | other roles? Does a movie director need to know how to build
         | sets? How to sew costumes? How to use Blender/Maya/Houdini? My
         | manager can code, used to code, sometimes does code, but they
         | aren't familiar with their team's current work.
         | 
         | Like imagine you were a coding manager 10 years ago with AI
         | experience. Sometime over the last 10 years your team does AI
         | infra. You, as a manager and as an IC, have zero AI experience
         | (you've never trained a model, never used a trained model,
         | never using any of the various AI frameworks). Are you still
         | okay to manage this team or should you be replaced with someone
         | who does have that experience?
        
           | theresistor wrote:
           | > I tend to agree but, playing devil's advocate, is this true
           | for other roles? Does a movie director need to know how to
           | build sets? How to sew costumes? How to use
           | Blender/Maya/Houdini?
           | 
           | I don't know that much about movie making, but my
           | understanding is that there would be managers and/or leads
           | within each specialty, who are (among other things) managing
           | the interaction between their specialty and the director /
           | producers.
           | 
           | That seems pretty comparable to what's being discussed here.
        
           | SpicyLemonZest wrote:
           | In any industry, if you want a team to work well, you have to
           | have someone with both authority and hands-on experience
           | who's responsible for providing day-to-day guidance.
           | Sometimes that person is called a "supervisor" or "tech lead"
           | instead of "manager", although this typically implies some
           | division of responsibilities as well; no reason the person
           | providing guidance necessarily has to be the same person
           | reporting to leadership or hiring and firing.
        
           | mitthrowaway2 wrote:
           | Toyota calls it the gemba walk. Managers need to see how the
           | factory is running with their own eyes. Not just live behind
           | a desk and listen to what they hear in meetings.
           | 
           | A movie director can see the sets with their own eyes. But
           | you can't see the state of a software codebase without
           | reading and understanding the code, and the most surefire way
           | to do that is to try to write something, even just
           | documentation.
           | 
           | You don't assess the state of your software by walking around
           | the office and looking at hands on keyboards. You look at the
           | codebase.
        
       | chasd00 wrote:
       | i lead dev teams in the consulting world, I don't code even
       | though i really want to. Sometimes I get pulled in for time
       | sensitive work or the hard stuff but that's about it. Every time
       | I get bored as a manager and reserve some fun stuff for myself a
       | crisis happens that needs my attention and then the code falls
       | behind schedule. So I guess that's the end of that.
       | 
       | i like the analogy of a sports team coach for being a manager.
       | You can motivate, cheer, train, and drive the team to victory but
       | you can't step on the field.
        
       | breadwinner wrote:
       | Steve Jobs on this topic:
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bVKcxK_tVBM
       | 
       | Summary: Managers who know how to manage, but don't know how to
       | do anything are not the best managers. The best managers are the
       | great individual contributors who never ever wanna be a manager
       | but decide they have to be a manager because no one else is going
       | to be able to do as good a job as them.
        
         | TrackerFF wrote:
         | Anecdote: This is also how you end up with the "Peter
         | principle", unfortunately.
        
         | scarface_74 wrote:
         | Managers who didn't want to be managers are the worse ones.
         | They don't know how to play politics and compete for resources
         | against other managers and make sure their team gets raises and
         | promotions.
         | 
         | The skillset you need for management are different from those
         | you need as an IC
        
           | breadwinner wrote:
           | > _They don't know how to play politics and compete for
           | resources against other managers and make sure their team
           | gets raises and promotions._
           | 
           | Clearly those are not the skills Steve Jobs valued.
        
             | JustExAWS wrote:
             | Yes and Steve Jobs led illegal collusion between most of
             | the big tech companies to keep compensation down. He wasn't
             | exactly the most employee focused CEO.
             | 
             | https://research.upjohn.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=134
             | 3...
        
         | jedberg wrote:
         | This comes from the perspective of someone who manages
         | managers. So if you're looking to hire managers, and don't care
         | about retention, perhaps this is good advice to follow.
         | 
         | But if you're looking to evaluate _your_ manager, or hire
         | managers who can retain great people, maybe not the best
         | advice.
        
         | crazygringo wrote:
         | There's a third option that's missing from that dichotomy:
         | people who are OK individual contributors but who are actually
         | really good at managing people.
         | 
         | These are the best managers, because they have the
         | disposition/skills to be a good _manager_ , but also aren't
         | going to make dumb engineering decisions.
         | 
         | IC's who become reluctant managers are generally _terrible_
         | managers because it 's not what they're good at and not what
         | they enjoy.
        
       | georgeecollins wrote:
       | I once had a lead programmer (who was a great one) who insisted
       | that a manager should not have access to the source code of our
       | project. I have often worked with engineers who were nervous
       | about who could check in code so I kind of understood. And this
       | really was a great lead, technically strong and a good leader so
       | I said, fine no code access for me.
       | 
       | It was a terrible mistake for me. So much of my value as a
       | manager was being understand what the engineers were doing. I am
       | not a great programmer but I can do it, and I could usually
       | understand what an engineer was trying to do from looking at
       | their check ins rather than listening to them in stand ups. I was
       | just not that useful. There were times when the team was doing
       | things that I knew I had seen done before with much better before
       | with different methods, but just talking about it was relatively
       | ineffectual.
        
         | inglor_cz wrote:
         | Why not a read-only access? This way, the manager cannot break
         | anything.
        
       | Vaslo wrote:
       | Don't allow your skills to atrophy. If you get to a high
       | position, it's much harder to find a job at that level. If you
       | can code, you can always find something.
       | 
       | If you can't code, and you can't get a manager role, you're in
       | trouble.
        
         | scarface_74 wrote:
         | That's why I have one year of expenses in a liquid savings
         | account in addition to retirement savings. So I can have the
         | runway to get back into coding if necessary.
         | 
         | Are you proposing that they do coding on the side after they
         | get off of work? I have a strict policy of "no side work" and I
         | have since graduating from college in 1996. When I get off
         | work, I don't think about computers again until I go back to
         | work the next day.
         | 
         | I'm not a manager. But I am now a "staff software architect"
         | working full time at a third party cloud consulting company
         | after pivoting from software development and doing a previous
         | stint working at AWS in the consulting department (full time
         | direct hire - AWS Professional Services).
         | 
         | My specialty is supposedly developing applications using AWS
         | services. But as I moved up I find myself doing no coding.
         | 
         | My job is half working with sales and being the first technical
         | contact for a customer and writing long and detailed
         | requirement documentation and getting the customer to sign the
         | contract for us to do the work. The other half is as a tech
         | lead coordinating between the customer, project manager, sales,
         | and the subject matter experts on our side who lead/implement
         | the various "work streams" (development, data, cloud
         | architecture, etc).
         | 
         | First issue, when I was looking for a remote job last year and
         | the year before as a developer as a plan B job, every opening
         | had hundreds of applications and I heard crickets. This has
         | never happened to me and I looked for software development jobs
         | in 1999, 2008, 2012, 2014, 2016 and 2018. The job at AWS fell
         | into my lap in 2020.
         | 
         | It's a shit show out there right now for software development
         | jobs especially remotely. Did I mention I was looking for
         | regular old enterprise Dev jobs?
         | 
         | On the other hand for differentiated strategic cloud consulting
         | jobs, I had no problem getting offers quickly.
        
       | tdeck wrote:
       | A lot of what's in the article resonates with me. Specifically,
       | I've seen cases where managers unwittingly use coding (a problem
       | they feel comfortable with) as a way to escape from facing more
       | serious manager responsibilities (problems they don't feel
       | comfortable with). When you've got 10 years of experience doing
       | X, and you just started doing Y two years ago, it's natural to
       | try to play to your strengths by doing X.
       | 
       | But as a manager, there's a whole category of things that only
       | you can effectively do, because the social environment and power
       | structures are set up that way. In that context, coding is a
       | distraction for a manager. Writing code often takes a lot of
       | mental energy and stays in your head even when you're not at the
       | keyboard.
       | 
       | I don't want my manager getting nerd sniped when they should be
       | coaching a struggling colleague, advocating to upper management,
       | having a tough conversation with a toxic team member, or reigning
       | in the PM.
        
         | peterldowns wrote:
         | I'm in favor of managers being engineers but everything you
         | wrote is true. I wish I had read this comment a few years ago,
         | it would have saved me and my teams some trouble.
        
       | jawns wrote:
       | As a manager, I make a point to produce some code that makes it
       | into production every quarter, but my reason for that is not
       | because I can't help myself from writing code. Rather, I want to
       | understand the pain of the sdlc. I want to understand firsthand
       | how long it takes to get something deployed and how many steps it
       | takes. Being able to empathize, rather than just sympathize, with
       | my direct reports has made me a better manager.
        
       | pragma_x wrote:
       | Should they be able to? Absolutely. Should they exercise this on
       | projects they manage? Probably not.
       | 
       | I ran into this problem years ago. It's not exactly good form to
       | be manager that contributes to the team's project, is at the apex
       | of code review, and is responsible for team performance reviews,
       | all at the same time. It can work, but without other people at
       | your level reviewing your work, you'd be asking the team you
       | manage to call out your mistakes. That's the kind of thing that a
       | lot of people might not be comfortable with, so you're really
       | asking for softball and rubber-stamp reviews on your work. This
       | makes for poor optics: your work always goes to `main` virtually
       | unchallenged, while everyone else has a harder time.
       | 
       | At the same time, you need to be technically competent if you're
       | managing a team while in the review loop. To do otherwise is to
       | create situations where you will lose face with your team. So,
       | sticking to review only is probably the best answer here.
       | 
       | There are workarounds though. It makes sense to maintain a pet
       | automation project just to stay sharp while solving real problems
       | (e.g. every manager needs better reporting). You can also
       | negotiate out cross-team contributions where your work may be
       | reviewed by folks that do not report to you.
        
         | dan_can_code wrote:
         | To "lose face" with a team shows a lack of trust. I think it's
         | fine if you don't have a perfect solution, but require some
         | eyes on your work. But you're right, if you don't have people
         | your level (or better yet, more experienced) reviewing your
         | work, getting an honest code review is challenging.
        
       | scarface_74 wrote:
       | A manager should _never_ write any code that is part of the
       | critical path of the deliverable.
       | 
       | Every single time without fail that I have had a manager who
       | still tries to be an active contributor, one of two things
       | happen.
       | 
       | Either they never keep their commitments as a coder because they
       | are spending too much time on their management duties including
       | meetings, manhole up, and career development for their reports or
       | they are horrible managers who don't or can't do what I need from
       | them as a manager - get me the resources I need to do my job,
       | play politics and manage up and especially fight for raises.
        
       | simonw wrote:
       | When I've worked as an engineering manager I've found the advice
       | to "stay out of the critical path of getting features into
       | production" to be very helpful. It's difficult to commit to
       | coding timelines as a manager, and it harms your team if _you_
       | are the bottleneck to shipping something.
       | 
       | But... keeping your hands in the mix elsewhere helps you stay
       | informed and make better decisions. I found writing things like
       | internal debugging tools, documentation, helping out on code
       | review and architectural discussions, building example features
       | against APIs etc were all good uses of my time.
       | 
       | An interesting trend I've observed over the past couple of years
       | is that a lot of my friends who had moved into engineering
       | management and stopped coding completely are picking up more
       | coding tasks now thanks to LLMs - previously spending ~4 hours
       | getting a development environment working and getting back up to
       | speed wasn't justifiable, but LLM assistance means they can now
       | get something small and useful done in just an hour which is much
       | easier to carve out time for.
        
         | peterldowns wrote:
         | "Your manager should be able to consistently make small
         | contributions" is also a good litmus test for your developer
         | env/tool/experience. If it takes more than 20 minutes to get
         | set up and start working your team probably has a problem.
        
         | alostpuppy wrote:
         | 100%
        
       | gogasca wrote:
       | I'm manager and contribute every week for clean up, refactoring,
       | add tests, extra e2e testing and overall fixing issues in
       | existing development and production environment that are either
       | too boring or affecting team operations. Sometimes contribute to
       | small features but I make sure Im.not blocker or promise things
       | to anyone (mainly work on experiments with no SLO)
        
       | svilen_dobrev wrote:
       | it depends. Last ~3 years i was CTO of small company - with a
       | software team of 7-10. With the idea of - no-more-coding (TM).
       | Just the other 90% - from cleanup repos and jira etc project
       | things - to organise proper reviews and workflows - process
       | things, etc, to.. pushing infrastructure, hiring and pitching to
       | investors/clients. But the codebase was.. not ideal. It was hard
       | and tempting but i managed not to touch it directly, only did
       | rise architectural-and-similar-level issues, and did (somewhat
       | nitpicky) code reviews - like, date-arithmetic IS very important,
       | pretty-please. Still, had to build a crawler over the production-
       | codebase to visualise the event-flows and map consequences - a
       | reverse-engineering live-Documentation, kind-a. Scratching my own
       | itch? pfft. (hint: There was no other docs..)
       | 
       | But then there were some small non-essential projects that would
       | have been complete distraction for the team.. so i took one, then
       | another. In nodejs which isn't my cup of tea - so even better,
       | learned some things the hard way. Though.. lucky they were rarely
       | needing support, or it would have become a chore.
       | 
       | Then, one day, the company was acquired, and.. i am not a CTO
       | anymore, but a (tech and also non-tech) Lead of some future
       | greenfield project, ~re-factor with diff.goals. So here we go -
       | research, architect, code, hire, discuss, demo, eh.. usual tiny-
       | startup thing - except that the politiking and the now-everyday-
       | a-new-policy chase me away.
       | 
       | So.. IMO one has to keep _some_ of the programming skills sharp.
       | In order to stay relevant. But this applies when you are 1 level
       | away from actual coding. If farther.. probably no time, and no
       | point. Although.. too long staying hands-off, and there may be no
       | coming back - and losing grasp of how-it-feels-like to be in the
       | trenches.
        
       | mcherm wrote:
       | One important caveat: I recommend that managers take on coding
       | tasks that are SMALL and UNIMPORTANT. Leave the key work for the
       | front-lune developers (feel free to code review it).
        
       | 999900000999 wrote:
       | Yes.
       | 
       | Back at my first salary job, the CTO of the company would
       | occasionally jump into the code base to write some code when
       | everyone else was busy .
       | 
       | It was a very small startup, but seeing him do that motivated me
       | to work harder. It was also just a very awesome thing for him to
       | do, since he could have just said no I have to go pick up a pie
       | this evening figure it out .
       | 
       | Below him, the best manager I've ever had, was regularly writing
       | large amounts of the core code base. In my opinion this is really
       | good for team morale. If you want to call yourself a startup,
       | this is how things should be done .
       | 
       | When I think about it, I really would only like to work for
       | startups with around 50 people or less, or mega corporations. I
       | don't particularly like the quasi 1,000 person start up with 800
       | rules, and a lack of stable funding.
        
       | ryathal wrote:
       | A manager of developers should know how to code, but any formal
       | expectation of them coding shouldn't exist. This holds for medium
       | to large organizations. The managerial duties should be enough to
       | require the vast majority of their attention. Expecting
       | development on top of management is a way to add fake capacity to
       | a team to help ensure burnout.
        
       | jedberg wrote:
       | I'm a good coder, not a great one. I hire great coders to work
       | for me so that if I had to write code I would be the worst and
       | least productive person on the team.
       | 
       | Therefore it is to everyone's benefit that I don't touch code. I
       | do sometimes put on an engineering hat and help with
       | brainstorming how we will build new things, or asking questions
       | about open issues that no one has asked, but that is the extent I
       | will get involved in engineering. I try to only get involved when
       | it's something where my decades of experience will add a lot of
       | value.
       | 
       | And historically all the best managers I ever had were the same
       | -- former engineers who could understand everything we were
       | talking about, but did not get involved in coding or code
       | reviews.
       | 
       | Your manager should never be a blocker to getting things done.
        
       | bionhoward wrote:
       | Isn't one of the best gifts a manager can give to their team, the
       | gift of clarity?
       | 
       | A manager able to give their team programmatic tests to pass
       | brings a level of precision which makes it much easier for them
       | to know when the work is done.
       | 
       | If managers communicate requirements in the form of acceptance
       | tests more often, then the problem of projects running over time
       | and over budget will occur significantly less often, because
       | there will be clear finish lines for dev teams to run towards and
       | cross, and reproducible pass/fail outcomes to inspire confidence.
        
         | _hfqa wrote:
         | clarity, purpose and a path for career growth
        
       | massung wrote:
       | My view - as a manager - is that as I get older (simply put) I'm
       | not as good any more as my younger team! While I help them, I
       | also learn a lot from them as well. And I love that.
       | 
       | I have experience: project management, real life, edge cases,
       | dealing with C-levels and customers, risk mitigation, being calm
       | when sh*t hits the fan, mentoring, etc. These are things the team
       | benefits from far more than my fingers typing away.
       | 
       | At the same time, if I'm actually doing my job well, I really
       | don't have time to code.
       | 
       | I also want my team (senior and junior) to have a feeling of
       | ownership. The company has goals and directives, but what's being
       | built belongs the team, not me. All the successes are theirs, and
       | the failures are mine alone.
       | 
       | When do my fingers hit the keyboard? When there's a time crunch
       | (if I'm not willing to work more how can I ask the team to?),
       | when the team is having a difficult time with a particular
       | problem, or maybe when there's some downtime and I can fix a few
       | outstanding bugs or work on something extremely isolated (I never
       | want to get halfway through something and then have to hand it
       | off to the team).
        
       | MattPalmer1086 wrote:
       | Short answer: no.
       | 
       | Background: I used to be a developer and have managed developers.
       | Now I work in info sec and manage info sec.
       | 
       | Longer answer: this question has been discussed throughout my
       | career.
       | 
       | (1) Does it help for a manager to understand what a team does and
       | needs to do? Absolutely yes. Some managers can do this without
       | domain experience but it's a lot harder for them and the team.
       | 
       | (2) Should a manager keep doing what their team does? Probably
       | not. I can actually do most of what my team does faster and
       | better, but they need to learn to do it. I don't scale. I can
       | mentor them, and if there's a need for more resource I can get it
       | for them.
       | 
       | Edit: I do actually still write code - but just in my own time
       | because I enjoy it.
        
       | 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
       | Yes but only a little.
       | 
       | I think managers are often out of touch with what the team puts
       | up with.
        
       | pklausler wrote:
       | If they're directly managing coders, then they absolutely _must_
       | be able to build, tweak, and run their product by themselves, and
       | articulate the reasoning behind its design decisions.
        
       | tommykins wrote:
       | I don't code much anymore, the vast majority is reviews the only
       | time I really need to get on the tools is if it's a concept that
       | I need to teach someone, or more likely, something has gone quite
       | badly wrong and it's 2100 and I don't feel like waking anyone.
        
       | tschellenbach wrote:
       | Yes, managers not coding was caused by ZIRP. It's a dumb idea.
       | 
       | - You need to understand the work to evaluate your team
       | 
       | - You need to understand the work to prioritize and rank what's
       | important
       | 
       | - You need to understand the work to know which roles to hire for
       | 
       | - Good developers typically don't want to have a non-technical
       | engineering manager
       | 
       | - The budget for a non-contributing team member reduces your
       | budget for engineers
       | 
       | - It creates a more hierarchical and less flat org chart, which
       | creates communication scaling challenges
       | 
       | I would only consider non-technical managers for companies with
       | large budgets and a non-technical product. Not only should they
       | be technical, they should be excellent.
        
       | iancmceachern wrote:
       | Yes, if you can't measure it you can't manage it
        
       | etamponi wrote:
       | No. The amount of work that a manager has to handle to do their
       | job right is incompatible with coding at a professional rate. If
       | you have a manager that codes, then they won't have (enough) time
       | to:
       | 
       | - Write and design your packets (if in a corporation), or your
       | career path (if in a smaller company)
       | 
       | - Align with other teams, get consensus, shield you from politics
       | beyond your level.
       | 
       | - Make long term planning and making sure your team and
       | neighboring teams follow it.
       | 
       | - Listen to you and your colleagues and handle conflicts.
       | 
       | EDIT: forgive me for not read TFA first. I won't change my
       | comment as it aligns very well to the article. I still think that
       | the answer to the "should code" question is no, not maybe...
       | Let's not try to make overload and overcomplicate what "coding"
       | means.
        
         | option wrote:
         | I am a manger and the best I can do is occasionally fix minor
         | bugs and improve public docs. I feel like doing that is very
         | important to better "stay in touch" with the product.
        
           | etamponi wrote:
           | Kudos for that! And lucky :) I think we agree that no much
           | time is left a part from minor bug fixes :)
        
         | mrinterweb wrote:
         | I've seen manager calendars, and their days are packed with
         | meetings. Expecting them to do in depth code reviews, pairing,
         | is unrealistic.
         | 
         | I think eng managers should rely on their ICs to inform them of
         | what is going on, and the manager should be the advocate for IC
         | dev needs. Devs should be able to tell their manager what the
         | pain points are engineering is experiencing and the manager
         | should advocate on behalf of their team.
        
         | jtonz wrote:
         | It has been interesting what both groups of 'yes' and 'no'
         | chime in here. Personally I am on the side of 'no' but for a
         | rather simple reason. I ask myself the following question:
         | 
         | Why spend time being good at something you don't care about
         | being good at any more?
         | 
         | It is purely a personality thing however for me I would like to
         | continue moving up the career ladder and you rarely see CTOs,
         | VpEng rolling up their sleeves and sifting through CloudWatch
         | logs. I want my focus to be on working the skills associated
         | with those roles.
         | 
         | As a people manager that works with many incredibly capable
         | engineers that are aspiring to be managers, I share with them
         | this advice, 'excellent engineers compound their value by
         | making other engineers excellent. It's far more difficult to do
         | that when you are writing code.'
        
         | bastardoperator wrote:
         | Depends, I always took a sprint task, certainly less than the
         | team itself, but how do I design a career path if I'm
         | blissfully unaware of the work that is being done? How do I
         | plan long term if I don't understand the technical complexity
         | of the problems being faced? Why would I waste time on conflict
         | resolution when I can spend time enabling and building people?
         | You want to argue about your colleague, or make do you want to
         | advance and make more money?
        
       | bradlys wrote:
       | I find a good manager treats me like a peer and not some
       | superior. Part of that is being in the trenches and having
       | experience with what I'm working on. Maybe they're not taking on
       | entire features anymore or doing the same level of code review as
       | others but I think for a manager who manages ICs - they should be
       | much closer to the code. Maybe this would be the "team lead" in
       | some companies or a supervisor type role but I think I prefer
       | that kind of person to be my actual manager than some other
       | nebulous person who doesn't even interact with me on a daily
       | basis.
       | 
       | A big problem I had with some managers who didn't code was that
       | they sometimes had wild expectations. They were also not good
       | mentors. They couldn't really teach you much of anything because
       | their job was so distinctly different from what you were doing.
        
       | ranger207 wrote:
       | "Administration" and "technical leadership" are two different
       | skill and task sets, and it's a shame they're conflated into one
       | position
        
         | pphysch wrote:
         | They are not that different.
         | 
         | Conway's Law is real.
         | 
         | Great engineers are not just "pure programmers", they
         | understand the scale and organization of their domain. Similar
         | for managers.
         | 
         | In joking terms, the 8th OSI layer is "money/politics".
        
       | ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
       | I found that coding was important, as it helped me to connect
       | better with my employees, and their challenges.
       | 
       | I also found that I could _never_ schedule myself into the
       | critical path. Most of my coding was open-source stuff, on my own
       | time.
        
       | notepad0x90 wrote:
       | Big no! from me.
       | 
       | Anyone in a people leadership role has to have a political
       | mindset. You simply cannot be technically oriented and
       | politically oriented at the same time. This is not a negative,
       | the human brain, generally speaking, can't focus on two unrelated
       | priorities at the same time.
       | 
       | I have had a highly negative experience over this. When resolving
       | technical conflicts, you expect technical merit and reasoning to
       | be used. But managers who also meddle in technical affairs use
       | political leverage and tactics to see their desired technical
       | outcome. This is a very unpleasant and toxic affair overall.
       | 
       | Imagine trying to solve a bug, but your manager wants a specific
       | work around implemented which will result in bigger problems down
       | the road. If you disagree with your manager, your performance
       | review will suffer, you will be called disagreeable, hard to work
       | with,etc.. You are only considering the best course of action
       | from a technical perspective. Your technical peers can also
       | review your code and reasoning and you can debate in a civilized
       | manner over the technical merits of the issue. But as soon as a
       | manger is involved, things will get toxic fast. It is nearly
       | impossible to avoid micromanagement as well.
       | 
       | Especially if the manager really knows what they're talking
       | about. Then they'll really be looking over everyone's shoulders
       | and causing drama.
       | 
       | It is such a disorienting thing, having to fight political drama
       | over simple and straightforward matters. This is how I learned
       | what gaslighting is! I would be reaching out to people I consider
       | a lot smarter than myself, asking their opinion on the subject
       | (and they'd mostly agree with me), because I legitimately got
       | disoriented and doubted everything I knew.
       | 
       | I really hope none of you experience this. At least when someone
       | is being mean/toxic for other reasons you can explain it away,
       | but when they use their technical expertise, that's a whole new
       | level.
       | 
       | The whole concept of your management trusting you with the
       | details and expecting you to show result goes out the window this
       | way.
        
       | __erik wrote:
       | People never discuss company size along with this question.
       | 
       | If you're at a giant company, the answer is likely no, there's
       | enough politicing and paperwork where the highest impact thing to
       | be done by a manager is likely not coding.
       | 
       | If you're at a startup / smaller more nimble org in a big
       | company, the answer is likely yes, if you've gotten to the point
       | where you're a manager, in theory you're a very good engineer and
       | you should spend your time coding, but on things that aren't on
       | critical path. Bug backlog, experimental things with no hard
       | deadlines, proof of concepts, all of these are valuable things.
       | Leading from the front is also just generally good with smaller
       | groups.
       | 
       | Also under discussed by people having these debates (typically
       | managers), is not acknowledging how bad most managers are at
       | coding, especially if their job hasn't required them to code in a
       | while. I see all the time that managers look for any excuse not
       | to code, because it would reveal to their team that they're at
       | best an L4 level coder after being in management for 5-10 years.
        
       | tschellenbach wrote:
       | Keep in mind that many companies don't do non-coding engineering
       | leaders anymore. So from a career perspective, if you take a role
       | that's non-coding, you are making yourself unemployable for large
       | parts of small - medium sized companies, as well as larger
       | companies that don't do this.
        
       | spicymaki wrote:
       | Reading these arguments are funny to me. By now there should be
       | decades worth of research on this topic, all we seem to do is
       | give anecdote after anecdote with no conclusion.
       | 
       | Either no is doing this research or no one trusts the
       | conclusions.
       | 
       | Other topics like this are WFH or RTO, 4 day WW or 6 day WW. We
       | as a profession seem to never come to a consensus.
        
       | zabzonk wrote:
       | If you can't code, you should not be managing programmers. How
       | much code you write will obviously depend on circumstances.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-03-04 23:00 UTC)