The Illiterati (was Re: Social Hacking [was:

Sat Jan 31 09:44:04 PST 2004

On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 rflii at speakeasy.net wrote:

>Three cheers to Nadine. This was very well put.

Thanks for the compliment.

>make the right recommendation, resolve the problem, or present options
>to executive level issues. If you couldn't summarize then you were
>perceived to not be the top in your position by lack of confidence or
>technical ability and your exit interview was closer than previously
>thought.

In tech writing classes, when we teach the portion on reports, we
always talked about the "executive summary" at length, why it was
there, and what the reasoning behind it was.  As you "go down the
chain" the interest in a technical report, if it's pertinent to the
reader, gets broader and broader.  Execs just want to make sure you've
done your homework--did you consider the "outliers" and risk factors,
do you have a solution (or two) that fit the bottomline as they see it.
If the solution conflicts with their picture of the bottomline, then
you better be prepped for a microscope and back up your conclusions.

I think some of the "backlash" against IT spending in the last couple
of years stems from IT people eliding the real costs of their projects
in getting the OK from execs through either a) ignorance/incompetence
or b) being fearful of the microscope and taking the easy way out by
saying one thing and "going over budget" later (trying to) shift blame
to vendors/consultants/contractors.  Execs, having been burned by
this, decided to put IT on the back-burner to see if the whole thing
would collapse as predicted--and it didn't.  I figure that execs will
be more suspicious of their IT staff's claims in the future, and will
turn on the microscope from the beginning.

>As I became a manager and spent less time with my own group and more
>with other orginizations in the company, I had to rely on my staff to
>do their job and give me confidence through distinct status of
>proejcts and issues. If they had a problem and needed direction, it
>should have been requested before the status meeting. If they start
>rambling, I presume they have gone the "rat hole"; to me this
>describes a more narrow and maze like picture.

To my mind, this is the picture of a good boss. (Maybe we will work
together some day. :-) The only thing I'd add is "depending on the
maturity of the team".  The majority of my team were in their first
professional jobs, so those team members required more attention to
get them to be proactive and and more coaching on communicating with
clients, each other, and me.

>Now to present a story that Nadine wanted....

[snip "how to demonstrate the need for security" story]

While I was hoping for some stories going the other way (i.e. up
the chain) or some better ideas for "geek networking" strategies,
that's definitely a story to file away for manager/team lead use.

Sometimes folks need a demonstration to wake them up to reality.

Thanks for your comments and the story.

Best regards--

=Nadine=