I fundamentally believe in this idea of "manager as servant."
I agree that "manager as a servant" is a good ideal, but not realistic, but for a different reason. It seems pretty obvious: "manager as a servant" clashes quite a bit with "manager decides who gets [fired|a bonus]", with "manager is usually older/more experienced", and also with "manager gets paid more".
The problem is, that the people who get promoted, don't.
Not in my experience. The place I work, the CTO (a non-coder for quite some time) gets it when it comes to being unassertive, taking all the blame, and none of the credit.
Why can't we go whole-hog on the "manager as servant" direction, then? Content creators hire/fire their managers. Money flows from those actually making it, downward. In tough times, people downsize by firing their boss. You give your manager performance reviews.
Why can't we go whole-hog on the "manager as servant" direction, then?
Who is we? I can't do it because I don't have the experience to run a company. If you do, go start one, and run it any way you like! I would hypothesize that given the median developer, such a company will dive right into the ground. What you need are rock-star developers.
Right now, as far as I can tell, rock star developers become well-paid consultants. It's a matter of supply/demand - junior developers who need their jobs more than their jobs need them are stuck in the corporate hierarchy. Great developers get consulting jobs and consistently charge ~$200/hour or ~$1000/day, pick who they work for, and have the chance to jump ship if they disagree with management. Some have recruiters, who act like agents do in acting/sports, to represent them/help them find work.
As the developer community as a whole gets better, I imagine one way the market could move is towards a "label" model (kind of, but not exactly like the music industry), where groups of developers form consulting firms for legal and business issues. Right now, the value-add of consulting firms is mostly brand and marketing. When a development teams start to demonstrate they are good enough to be recognized for their own brand, the social restructuring will follow.
Another direction the development of "enterprise software" market can move is partnerships - like legal or financial firms do. My wife works for PWC - a private LLP with 155k employees (8,280 partners [1]) and ~$30 billion in revenue. If they can outsource their financial and tax work to a finance firm, I don't see why banks should do tech in-house.
this is how i wish the bank bailout had gone. instead of essentially giving the ceos and other top bosses money, fire those suckers and get some fresh minds in to take responsibility. the government should be investing like an actual investor who wants to get their money back.
I agree that "manager as a servant" is a good ideal, but not realistic, but for a different reason. It seems pretty obvious: "manager as a servant" clashes quite a bit with "manager decides who gets [fired|a bonus]", with "manager is usually older/more experienced", and also with "manager gets paid more".
The problem is, that the people who get promoted, don't.
Not in my experience. The place I work, the CTO (a non-coder for quite some time) gets it when it comes to being unassertive, taking all the blame, and none of the credit.