I am not taking about managers managing a team of OO developers here, I am talking about managers that think that practices and tenets of OO apply and benefit the process of managing a team of smart developer... things like encapsulation (secrecy, mysteries, a lot of closed door meeting), loose coupling (I don't really care about how or what you do, just do it), and lets not bring up Polymorphism.
In the interest of full disclosure, I currently work for an organization that is 90% (roughly?) "there"... we do keep a very open channel of communication, and open door policy does not mean "wood plank at office threshold is ajar". There is still a little bit of mystery around some initiatives and decisions, but that is almost understandable given history and culture. This post is NOT about my current experience, it is an outlet from accounts elsewhere that are not foreign to me by both direct and indirect experience and exposure. Luckily most of this BS does not have a current effect on me, but because it HAS and because I feel for those who have to put up with this idiotic approach, I feel inspired if not obligated to express my opinion about it.
In all seriousness, there just isn't room in a team you want to make cohesive for unnecessary bullshit, mysteries or the dreaded "on a need to know basis" line. If we want to work together as a team, and we are striving to foster open lines of communication with the introduction of Agile practices, there just isn't room for private meetings or delivery of information in a delayed and layered fashion.
What is it that is feared? Are we in a world that is THAT paranoid that we think we have to "protect" ourselves from the people we let into our own "home turf"? If you don't trust them, then why did you hire them in the first place?
When smart people get fed crap, the immediate reaction is anger. There is the sense of being insulted and then devalued and then unappreciated and then ... you get the point. When they feel this way, the natural tendency is to seek this information out, generating an environment of gossip and conspiracy theorist. You'd want to know what the heck is going on, period, whether it affects you in any way. Your first and perhaps more natural reaction is defensive and then perhaps proactive: What can we do about it? How can I contribute, help, be a force acting to obtain value through change. But most of these reactions go "unnoticed" or in the best (worst) scenario only viewed as negative/punishable/unnaceptable behavior on the part of the developer.
The context to which this opinion applies or better put is intended for, is that of the professional applications/software development world. Developers, Architects, Database Administrators, IT guys and gals.
I would like to see the day organizations hire people they can trust. You should be hiring Professionals, not monkeys. Professional in my book is not defined by how old you are or how many years of experience you have. If you are an unprofessional loser right out of college, or in the absence of formal education, during your 1st year at your 1st job in the trait, then nothing will change 10, 15 or 20 years later. You'll just be the same loser with less hair or more gray hair, or more wrinkles and a pot belly.
If as a manager you have an opinion about a team member that is relevant to your environment, the business or the project, just say it, splat! flat out, not PC, no sugar coating the negative or adorning the positive. I am not foreign to seeing managers calendar's full of private meetings & "checkpoints" on people. How insulting is that? Of course you "have" to make it private because its idiotic to have checkpoints on anyone to begin with!
My pet peeve extends to include common "controlling" type activities such as "web content filtering" or super strict PC usage policies. If someone is dumb enough to look at inappropriate material (porn, warez, take your pick) while at work (because what they do in the privacy of their own home is their business) or is prone to click on dancing bunnies, you'd probably want to find out sooner rather than later wouldn't you? Or would you just rather have a false sense of control of a wondering mind by administering smaller and continuous shocks? I won't fear repeating myself here: If you hire true passionate professionals, this is a non issue.
Hire with confidence and trust. Assume the best, not the worst. Measure, keep an eye out for red flags, sure you just can't turn your back on it just like that, but don't bring forth paranoia a the de facto management style, bring, seed Trust and you'll harvest good will, productivity, sense of belonging. If a person betrays that trust, then act accordingly. This brings home the very important sense of accountability. I am not advocating be a push over or a tyrant, find your own style, your comfort zone for dealing out consequences. Each person, each organization should have a defined threshold for tolerance to *these* issues we are talking about here.
Good 'ole "boys" clubs don't work, they segregate, they devalue, they demean. It is very much Binary. It sends the signal that if you are not "in" then you are "out", and so, what are you to expect from those that are "out"? Do you think you can expect, let alone demand loyalty?
Subscribe