I manage a small team of developers on an application which is in the mid-point of its lifecycle, within a big firm. This unfortunately means there is commonly a 30/70 split of programming tasks to "other technical work." This work includes:
- Working with DBA / Unix / Network / Loadbalancer teams on various tasks
- Placing and managing orders for hardware or infrastructure in different regions
- Running tests that have not yet been migrated to CI
- Analysis
- Support and Investigation
It's fair to say that the developers would all prefer to be coding, rather than doing these more mundane tasks, so I try to hand out the fun programming jobs evenly amongst the team.
Most of the team was hired because, though they may not have the elite programming skills to write their own compiler / game engine / high-frequency trading system etc., they are good communicators who "can get stuff done," work with other teams, and somewhat navigate the complex bureaucracy here. They are good developers, but they are also good all-round technical staff.
However, one member of the team probably has above-average coding skills, but below-average communication skills. Traditionally, the previous Development Manager would give him the programming tasks and not the more mundane tasks listed above. I don't feel that this is fair to the rest of the team, who have shown an aptitude for developing a well-rounded skillset that is commonly required in a big-business IT department.
If I continue to give him more programming work, I know that it will be done faster (and conversely, I would expect him to complete the other work slower). But it goes against my principles, and promotes the idea that you can carve out a "comfortable niche" for yourself simply by being bad at the tasks you don't like.
What should I do in this situation?
See Also: "Is rotating the lead developer a good or bad idea?"
Answer: Get S*** Done (58 Votes)
It sounds like you are placing too much effort on having well rounded individuals and not enough effort on having a well rounded team.
There is nothing wrong with being good at something—in fact, that is probably why he was hired! You should be thankful to have someone who is good at programming to begin with.
You stated:
"[I]t goes against my principles, and promotes the idea that you can carve out a "comfortable niche" for yourself simply by being bad at the tasks you don't like.
If he was a mediocre programmer, then I'd agree. But you didn't say that. You said he was a good programmer. He's not being bad at the other tasks to get out of them, he's merely focused his efforts on becoming a better programmer. There is nothing wrong with that.
As a manager, it is not your job to make sure that everyone is "well rounded." It is your job to make sure that s*** gets done. And you're not doing that. In fact, you're making decisions that are stopping things from getting done.
Whatever problem you have, you need to get over it—you are making your team less productive.
Related: "How to lead a not-so-good team?"
Answer: Respect/Reward Productivity (23 Votes)
You are catching some heat here in the other answers for your decision to "do something" about this guy, but I fully get what you are saying. If the other team members "would all prefer to be coding, rather than doing these more mundane tasks" then they are going to be annoyed that you are rewarding the bad performance of the poor communicator by giving him just the tasks that everyone wants.
Imagine you are one of the "good communicators" on the team whose skills are comparable to the dev in question. You handle calls, work with other non-IT staff who barely know a mouse from a keyboard, write up plans for user sign-off, and more, all because your boss says to do it. The grumpy dev, in the meantime, because he has "poor communication skills", gets to sit back in his cube all day ignoring the users working on the "fun" stuff only.
Now you said that the grumpy dev has "above average" skills, but you didn't say he was the best. This means that maybe 1/3rd of your team, those good communicator devs who are the grumpy dev's skill level or above, are all feeling pissed off.
Is it worth losing some productivity from your BEST PERFORMING STAFF because they are annoyed with the grumpy-dev? You'll have to decide.
Unless you want to fire the guy, I suggest you take one of these approaches:
- Mentor him to be a better communicator.Only you can tell if this is feasible. You might find just holding his hand a little more might help. Some people are just terrified of formal business interactions and express it by being pissed off when asked to do it.
- Incentivize the "good communication," either with money or other benefits. Make it clear that you actually value good communicators and then your devs won't be so annoyed. But the reward has to be real & meaningful. "Lunch with the district manager" won't cut it. Neither will a "star player/kudos/attaboy" award that's just a piece of paper. It's gotta be extra money, extra leave, some flex time, some serious recognition with higher-ups who control pay raises, etc.
Answer: Don't Just Type There, Do Something (6 Votes)
First of all, putting blame on your team members... denotes poor managerial skills.
I mean, if he really has poor communication skills, I'm very sorry for his social life, but really, at work this isn't as much his problem as it is yours. And let's face it, he could actually just be bored by your dull work setting, or maybe private problems are influencing his performance, or maybe he's secretly plotting to kill you all.
Communication takes at least two, and after all, the one with poor people skills could be you. Nevermind the rest of the team members getting along pretty well, they could all be compensating (even unknowingly) for some communication deficiency you have and blissfully ignore.
And anyway, don't go around asking the Internet about people that sit three desks from you. Go to the chap and ask him if there really is anything wrong and if it can be worked out.
Maybe he just hates his desk position (is he facing the lavatories?).
Hint: Listen to the answer, like he's a sentient human being, not a human resource.
Try explaining him in detail the need for certain practices and the meaning of certain decisions, some people dig details, as they give them a sense of having a captain that isn't driving the ship into the cliffs.
See Also: "How do I succeed as a lead developer?"
Answer: Simply Stated (4 Votes)
If everyone on your staff has the same title/job description and the job description includes everything you listed then this programmer needs to have these other skills sharpened by getting assigned more of these other non-programmer tasks. Likewise your other staff will not have their programming skills sharpened if they continually have to work on non-programming tasks (use it or lose it).
But I still think that your main priority should probably be meeting your deadlines (which you might still be able to do while distributing the work evenly).
Think you know how to manage a developer who's got an unbalanced set of skills? Disagree with the opinions expressed above? Bring your expertise to the original post at Stack Exchange, a network of 80+ sites where you can trade expert knowledge on topics like web apps, cycling, scientific skepticism, and (almost) everything in between.
reader comments
39