The Illiterati (was Re: Social Hacking [was: "Strong Scripting Skills" - a definition?])

Fri Jan 30 11:18:06 PST 2004

On Fri, 30 Jan 2004, richard childers / kg6hac wrote:
>  vraptor at employees.org wrote:
>
>>... I'd like to hear some more geek social/cultural hacking stories and
>>techniques, be they engineering your self-presentation, sussing out
>>the true inquiries underlying the interviewer's questions, or better
>>ways to deal with the bureacracies.  I'm sure all of us could use some
>>new tools to put in our bag of tricks for dealing with clients/bosses/
>>co-workers (and maybe even spouses/SOs :-).
>
>Speaking directly to Nadine's implied question; how does one
>diplomatically, tactfully, yet meaningfully maintain a high level of
>technical communications with people who hate to read and write, and
>maybe think, too? People who, maybe, need everything translated into
>PowerPoint cartoons, before they can give it their (apparently limited)
>attention?

You may interpret my question that way, but in fact, that was not the
intent of my request.  I've been a communicator and teacher of
technical communication for far longer than I've been a systems
administrator.  I've also been a manager and a team lead, so I've seen
the other side of the fence.

My request was exactly as asked--I'd like to hear some "social
hacking" stories, successful or unsuccessful, so we can all derive
benefit from them.  I'm experienced enough to know that I can always
learn something new, and benefit from others' successes and mistakes.

>Put another, more diplomatic, way ... how do you deal with managers who
>want short one-line emails?

[...snip speculation on how "they" got that way]

>Such characteristics are generally associated with people whom we might
>charitably describe as illiterate. Are these people illiterate? I'm not
>being derogatory; I ask the question sincerely.

"These people" are not illiterate, nor are they ignorant.  They are
*overwhelmed*.  Recall the age of most managers (esp. 2nd tier and
above).  These folks have little to no experience before the age of 20
with computers.  Unlike the youth of today who can "surf" the TV and
give you a plot summary of the three shows they've been sifting
through in the past 30 minutes, these 2nd/3rd/4th tier management
types were not brought up in a multi-tasking environment.

Also consider the increase in the number and types of tasks a manager
is required to deal with today versus ten years ago.  Computers have
actually increased the number of tasks (in my mind) a manager is
required to deal with.  I'm thinking about the HR paperwork increase
over the last couple decades, the "down-chain" shift of budget
development responsibility, inter-/intra-company projects, keeping up
with HR law, new coaching and management techniques, plus learning new
technology at least in a general sense.  It's an ugly race that has no
finish line.

As a manager I was prepared to rely on my team to come up with the
"right answer" and keep me informed in a general way, as I ran
interference for them.  But as the senior SA, I also had to be
prepared to get my hands dirty, too, which meant keeping up with them
in addition to my managerial tasks.  And do the latter without
usurping my team or giving the impression to my manager that "I
couldn't let go."  Quite the juggling act.  I learned a lot, not the
least of which was more respect for the workload of a manager.

Therefore, it's my belief that managers want things distilled to a
succint answer, so they can deal with it efficiently.  "TMI" applies:
literally, they can't deal with "too much information", because they
have too much already.  This may also explain the "incompentence" of
perfectly capable and intelligent managers--their stress threshold has
been crossed.

Geeks of the same age as the 2nd/3rd/4th tier management types are
generally flexible and adaptable.  Each group's gravitation to the
roles they are in--geek/engineer, or manager, administrator, etc.--is
generally a result of the psychological and personality traits.

As we have seen here on the list, geeks tend to go the down into the
minutae rather than summarizing/highlighting/being succint.  Rather
guaging the audience, and adapting the message appropriately (e.g.  as
in Jim's interview story), geeks just keep digging into the message
teasing out the nuances, spiralling downwards into more detail,
relevant to the task at hand or not.  Geeks like information--in fact,
in many cases, they crave it, and prefer it over action and decision.

The "rabbit hole" tactic, while useful in some circumstances,
undermines us when dealing with management, because it's contrary to
their expectations.

As a teacher of communication, it's my viewpoint that the
responsibility for being understood lies with the person giving the
message.  Therefore, it is up to the geek to adapt his/her message to
the audience it's being given to, be that audience management wanting
a status report, the HR person trying to configure their email client,
or the other systems administrator to whom you are handing off the
problem.  I constantly remind myself "audience analysis" because I
know my geek tendencies will bite me on the butt if I'm not careful.

I also attribute the generally poor, IME, networking skills that most
geeks have partially to our tendency to rabbit hole on technical
topics and avoid talking about the elephant in the room. "Who do you
know that might have info useful to me in my job search/quest for more
clients?"  Think about your other positive geek traits and how they
undermine your social networking skills.

Regards--

=Nadine=

--
N. Nadine Miller
vraptor at employees.org

p.s.  As for your conspiracy comments, I do believe that America is
suffering from a general "dumbing down" as a result of changes in
education over the past several decades.  But, that's a political
discussion that is not on-topic for this list.