#20-12-04-06: Why Are You A Technologist?
Why be a Technologist?
”What made you choose to be a technical professional?”
Posted by Steven Cerri on Monday, December 4, 2006
Good evening!
Do you believe in accidents? Do you believe in choice? When you go to an ice cream store, (assuming you like a particular ice cream) do you always select the same flavor? Do you really select that “favorite ice cream (or food) or does it select you? Does your physiology begin the cascade of chemicals as soon as you see that favorite flavor and does your body begin preparing you to select it? Is this really choice or just the allusion of choice?
Did you select your career or did your career select you?For some of you reading this right now you are probably wondering what part of what planet I must be from. How can a career select us?
Look at it this way. Let’s break this career topic into two major groups; the world of apparent and seemingly provable order and the world of apparent disorder. And in the world of apparent order lets put all engineering, scientific, and technical disciplines. In the world of apparent disorder lets put all marketing, inter-personal human interaction and communication, social, and psychological disciplines.
I don’t have to work very hard to convince most of you that the disciplines of marketing, inter-personal human interaction and communication, social, and physiological are areas that we don’t understand well enough to even come close to having a cause-and-effect relationship between the various known parameters. In fact, to most of us, these “human” disciplines are completely “unknowable”. They depend on “people”. They seem to be independent of rational thought or analysis. They seem to be more dependent on blood sugar levels and moon cycles than on identifiable and predictable laws of the universe. Interacting with other people can be as unpredictable as tossing a coin.
On the other hand, F=ma, E=IR, Bernoulli’s equation, computer coding, and the first, second, and third laws of thermodynamics, are trustworthy laws and processes that allow us to build bridges, put humans on the moon, develop electric motors and do the million and one things that allow us to create an ever advancing world. That’s the key isn’t it? These predictable laws allow us to create. Predictable laws of the universe allow us to create something new in that universe.
Now, I can guarantee you that those people who have selected inter-personal human interaction and communication, marketing, and psychology believe they are creating their worlds as well. Only they don’t have to create that world from a predictable set of laws and cause-and-effect relationships. They are willing to live with the seeming uncertainty that comes from working without “concrete” laws.
Therefore, to choose a career in technology instead of a career in marketing or human development is not so much to choose a career, it is rather to choose a way of moving through the world. It is a choice about how much “certainty” you want in the world and how you want to deal with the uncertainty in it. In one career we attempt to diminish the uncertainty in order to create something. In the other, we are willing to live with the uncertainty in order to create something, as well. Both careers create, one with laws that attempt to reduce variability, the other within the dynamics of the variability.
To become an engineer or a scientist is to make a statement to the world something like: “I don’t particularly like uncertainty, and I’m going to do two things; first, I’m going to create what I can using those things I know to be certain in the world; and second, I’m going to do what I can to illuminate what looks like uncertainty and attempt to show that there is actually something certain about what appears to be uncertain. (This, of course, is what Chaos Theory is all about, isn’t it?)
Therefore, for those of us who have chosen the career of technology, (I’m included) we have done so because we want to understand and create order out of the seeming disorder all around us. And the biggest arena of disorder that we see is associated with people (just look at the current international world stage!).
Therefore, as a technologist, when you are tapped to move into technology management, and when you begin down the technology management path, you are making not only a career change, but also a fundamental shift in the way you are choosing to move through the world.
The reason most technical professionals fail to become good technical managers, or the reason they fail to even make the transition, is that they are being asked to completely shift their concept of world. They are being asked to shift form an appreciation of certainty and an understanding of a seemingly predictable world to an acceptance of the unpredictability and seeming chaos of the human world. They are ultimately being asked to leave the world of technology were cause-and-effect rule for the dynamic and variable world of human interaction of human inter-personal communication, motivation, management and leadership.
Is it any wonder this is such a difficult shift to make? Most technical professionals don’t even know they are being asked to take on a new career! Think of it that way, and you begin to understand why I think preparation for this shift is so important. From technologist to technical manager is, for most, a new career.
The transition can be made. It is actually a very enjoyable transition. But it is best made with your eyes wide open and with an understanding of what you are really being asked to do.
Be well
Steven Cerri
Posted by Steven Cerri on 12/04 at 11:03 PM Engineer to Technical Manager • Leadership • Management • Fully Integrated Tech Professional • (0) Comments • Permalink
#19-11-27-06: What’s Coaching About#2
What’s A Coach To Do? (Part 2)
”Getting down to business”
Posted by Steven Cerri on Monday, November 27, 2006
Good evening!
Last week I wrote about coaching and what some coaches provide and how and why it doesn’t work. Now lets clear the air, and start by asking the question, “What should a coach provide and how should they provide it?” Let’s ask, “What’s a really good coach to do?”
I’ll begin by talking about the different types of coaching as follows:
There is what I call tactical coaching. Tactical coaching provides the person being coached with information and processes about how to perform a specific task or a specific project.
Tactical coaching is about “SHOW ME HOW TO...”. For example, tactical coaching may take the form of: “Show me how to develop a budget”, or “Show me how to develop a project schedule”, or “Show me how to make a major presentation and influence my audience.” It is coaching that demonstrates and coaches a person to “do” a specific task or project. It can last for one coaching session or it can go on for the duration of the project or task.
There is what I call strategic coaching. Strategic coaching provides the person being coached not so much with information and processes about how to perform a specific task or a specific project, but rather “How To Think”. This coaching process doesn’t focus on how to do something specifically, but rather on how have the capability to think about, analyze and be capable of performing a task or project as it might come up in the future.
Strategic coaching teaches a person “HOW TO THINK ABOUT...”. This is also the type of coaching that is performed when coaching high level executives. It is the type of coaching that prepares the client for future life questions and actions. This type of coaching tends to last longer and to continue for some period of time. This is the coaching that prepares the client to handle whatever life throws at him or her.
If you’re a manager and you want to coach one of your direct reports or if you’re a direct report and you want your manager to coach you, the first step is to decide what type of coaching is to be done. Is it tactical or strategic coaching? The answer to this question will dictate the structure of the interaction.
The reason the answer to this question is so important is because tactical coaching will require a type of communication that will be relatively directive, precise, and specific. In tactical coaching the coach will emphasize unambiguous behavior. It’s all about outcome and actions. The behaviors, the activities, the actions, the outcomes, will be clear, precise, and it won’t matter who is looking at the behaviors, we will all be able to agree, “They are either there or not”.
On the other hand, with strategic coaching the communication is less about action and behavior, and much more about thinking, decision-making, judgment, and foresight. In strategic thinking there is a lot of self-reflection that must be performed by the coach. The coach must literally allow the person being coached to “see inside the mind” of the coach.
It is also important for the coach to be able to assess when the coach must be silent and to decide that enough information has been presented, and it’s now time for the person being coached to move forward on their own … for a while. Then the coach once again communicates with the person being coached to take them to the next level of thinking, decision-making, and judgment. In this way the coach is preparing the person to think on their own when the need arises.
These two forms of coaching actually are at the foundation of all good coaching. It doesn’t matter if the coach is providing coaching on a project, a crisis, a interpersonal interaction, life-decisions, or general management processes, one of these two coaching processes will be the necessary path to successful coaching.
Finally, in both cases, going back into past issues is of no real benefit. Digging into childhood memories, or past business ventures offers no real clues about what to do in the future. In all good coaching, point to what you want. Point to the desired outcome. Point to the future.
What about the person to be coached?
In order for there to be good and successful coaching, what must the person being coached bring to the table?
The answer is that for good coaching to take place, the person who wants coaching must bring two things to the coaching experience:
First is a real desire to have something different.
If the person isn’t in pain or doesn’t really, really want the positive change they’ll get in their life or their career, then forget it. The person being coached has to want it for whatever reason is important to them.
Second is that there has to be a strong consequence for being successful (or not being successful) in the coaching process.
These two items may seem closely linked and they are. But I like to separate them because they are separated by time. If the person being coached has no significant consequence from successful coaching, either positive or negative, then the results will be in question.
These then are some of the important issues to consider if you are a manager and you want to coach your direct reports, or if you are a direct report and you want to be coached.
And the final word is this:
Managers, not every direct report will benefit from coaching. So pick carefully the direct reports you want to coach.
And
Direct reports and managers, not every one who is above you, or can do something you can’t yet, is qualified to be your coach. So pick carefully the people you want to coach you.
Be well
Steven Cerri
Posted by Steven Cerri on 11/27 at 06:21 PM Coaching • (1) Comments • Permalink
#18-11-20-06: What’s Coaching About
What’s A Coach To Do?
”Getting down to business”
Posted by Steven Cerri on Monday, November 20, 2006
Good evening!
I had some thoughts this weekend around this topic:
“What is it that a really good coach should do for you if you want to become a technical manager?”
Approach #1:
The first coaching approach requires that the coach think of their role as that of psychologist, and indeed some coaches are psychologists. They want to dig into your childhood, into your pains, and they believe somehow that having this reflection will assist you in being a manager. They believe that something in your childhood is “making” you do the things that are keeping your from being a good manager. The reality is, who knows? Digging into past positive or negative memories and experiences only brings them into the present. And if they are negative memories, then they become current negative memories. That whole approach seems ill-suited to management training to me. I don’t find it very useful and it often turns into psycho-bable that just makes a person “relive the stuff” that is no longer usefull. Transitioning from technical professional to manager is not about psycho-analysis. It’s the present and the future that are most important. I know some people think that the “past informs the present and the future”. But it doesn’t have to. That’s the key. So leave the past in the past.
Approach #1 = Strike One!
Approach #2:
A second approach requires that coaches think of their job as one of imparting project management and human resources information so that you can develop a schedule, generate a budget, and perform performance reviews without offending anyone and getting the company sued. This they think is the fundamental role of technical management.
I think it’s true enough that, as a technical manager, you will have to know how to develop schedules and budgets, and perform performance reviews without offending people. However, these capabilities rely on other abilities that must come first. There are plenty of managers who can develop schedules and budgets, avoid performance reviews because they don’t like them, and still aren’t considered good managers. You may have worked for some of them. So being trained in these abilities won’t make you a good manager.
Approach #2 = Strike Two!
Approach #3:
The third approach requires that coaches think of their job as “holding a space” for you so that you can come up with your own answers. The belief here is that, left to your own devices, you have all the information and knowledge you need to succeed on your own. You only need someone “beside you” telling you “you can do it”.
The theory here is that you know what you need to know in order to succeed. You just “don’t have access to it...yet”. This one just amazes me. If you haven’t been trained as a brain surgeon, how can you be expected to be a brain surgeon? You can’t. If you haven’t been trained as a commercial pilot, should we all feel comfortable with you at the controls of your commercial jet on your first commercial flight? Of course not. This is the reason you want a coach who has been in your industry, your career, you shoes.
Sometimes you’ll even get coaches who will give you little quips and phrases that don’t have anything to do with reality or the reality of your business. Sometimes you’ll be told that in order to be relaxed in front of a group, or in order to be relaxed in an important and tense meeting, or in order to feel less intimated around certain people, you should imagine them without any clothes on. This is supposed to remove any sense of intimidation or inferiority. Sorry, I don’t think that solves anything about your ability to conduct business with powerful people or in intimidating situations. It only gets you good at imagining your colleagues naked. You see transitioning from technical professional to manager requires a fundamental shift in one’s behaviors. It won’t happen with a few little tricks here or there. If you need evidence for what I’m saying just look around. How many really good managers have you worked for? How long has it taken good managers to get good? The answers to these questions are all around us. This is work. This is a new career.
Approach #3 = Strike Three!
So now that you know what I don’t think good coaching is, next Monday I’ll discuss what I think good coaching is and how it can powerfully provide you with tools to be successful as a technical manager. Until then…
Be well
Steven Cerri
Posted by Steven Cerri on 11/20 at 11:17 PM Coaching • (0) Comments • Permalink