- "As a people's manager, what is your managerial style?"
- My answer would be: From a textbook perspective I would say I use a mix of most styles (maybe throw out a few terms - paternalistic, democratic, laissez-faire, "management by walking around"* of course only if you understand what they mean and really use them), depending on the situation. I am mostly a laissez-faire style leader, preferring to surround myself with capable individuals that can to a large extent work autonomously. When decisions need to be made I am capable and willing to make them, but work to ensure that the decisions first and foremost benefit the company, then as much as possible considers the employee(s) in the equation.
- The key to me on a question like this is to indicate that you feel it is important that all individuals have apart of the process, this may not be as important in some environments, I can say that in a technical field where the employees are highly skilled knowledge workers it is essential for their happiness, productivity, and growth for them to be involved in decision making.
- "As a team lead, how do you keep team members motivated?"
- My answer would be something like: I feel that leadership and motivation go hand-in-hand a good leader is inherently motivating. It's important that as a leader you are helping direct people to the best and correct decisions, but you aren't making the decisions for them. By giving employees autonomy, positive feedback, opportunities to excel and advance, and avoiding negativism most employees will be driven to excel.
- No company wants to hear that you will motivate employees by money. They know that financial compensation is important, but they want to hire managers that can help them get the most of their employees for the money they will pay them.
- "When managing a group of professional how do you make sure everybody is contributing to the maximum of their abilities?"
- Essentially this is the same question as number 2. A good leader that is capable of motivating a team will naturally drive his/her employees to work at the maximum of their abilities. Being cognizant of your subordinates and their unique situation and needs is the other part of this equation. All employees go through periods of inefficiency. It's the nature of people, they get tired, sick, burnt-out, have difficulties at home, etc. and all of these will impact their work. If you keep good, open lines of communication between you and your employees you will know when a little extra is needed. Perhaps as they start to get burned-out you could give them a special project that would ignite their interest in their job and get them excited about work again.
- This boils down to a question of motivation, how can you motivate employees to put in their best effort, again in ways other than just giving them more money.
- I’ll try to come back with an answer on this one again soon.
- Autocratic: you make all the decisions – like a dictator
- Paternalistic: you still make all the decisions, but unlike a dictator you consider both the employee and the company’s best interests
- Democratic: you work with the team members to come up with solutions to problems
- Laissez-faire: you are pretty hands-off and pretty much let the people run themselves
- Management-by-walking-around: you are constantly trying to keep your hand on the pulse of the company/team to be aware of what is needed where and how you can best help. It is something of a mix between democratic and laissez-faire in that you help guide, but don’t necessarily make the decisions.
Below is the full post that this is a response to (http://linkd.in/sh4izq):
Some interesting interview questions
Here are some interesting questions I have been asked lately when interviewing for either technical lead or architect position. How do you even approach answering them? Please pick one question and give your version of the answer, if you wish.
1) "As a people's manager, what is your managerial style?" I answered: "I am a consensus seeker", but I think they expected a more elaborative answer. Any takes on this one?
2) "As a team lead, how do you keep team members motivated?" Well, compensation is a great motivator. Ability to do "cool" things so they look good on the resume is another one. But I doubt an interviewer wants to hear either of this answers, is there anything else to this business of motivation? Was I supposed to say that I use every occasion to give a motivational speech?
3) "When managing a group of professional how do you make sure everybody is contributing to the maximum of their abilities?" What if they don't, how is that a problem? What if a project does not require them to show "maximum of their abilities"? What if they are experts in .NET 4.0 but the project is still stuck (as a matter of corporate policy) with v. 2.0. How can they even show their strength? What this question is really about?
4) "As a solutions architect, how do you make sure that the system while being developed is doing what it is supposed to do?" I said something about soliciting frequent user feedback, but that sounded as if I am deferring this responsibility to the user. What a "solution architect" should do?
Thank you
If you look at a company as providing solutions to problems faced by customers (and potential customers), then I would think that managers should be architects of those solutions- making sure those solutions are appropriate for the customers. That may include customer feedback, but it also involves making sure that the customers core problem is understood sufficiently to determine if the offering will meet that need in a satisfactory manner.
ReplyDeleteQ1: As a people's manager, what is your managerial style? A: Adaptive. Is that textbook? No, but each style is most appropriate dependent on situation and the managed. My ideal is paternal but I acknowledge the quality of people with whom I choose to surround myself requires my operational method be management by walk around. I serve them by keeping my thumb on the pulse, my eyes over the horizon and my team interacting democratically.
ReplyDeleteQ2: As team lead, how do you keep team members motivated? A: Vision. Be cognizant that the greatest form of compensation is to be valued, to feel that one’s contribution makes a difference. Give them your trust in responsibilities they feel challenged to accomplish, and back them up to succeed. Enable them to usually do what they excel at, but call on them occasionally to “help” with work tangential to their typical responsibilities. Provide leadership opportunities, ask them to present when you “can’t.” People fear the spotlight but will grow to not look foolish in it. See the potential in people you lead, trust them to step up, swallow the RISK and call on them when you KNOW that YOU could deliver on your own. Express your unwavering belief in their potential and your determination to see them fulfill it. Hope and ambition will motivate them for you. People become lackluster when held down. Give them a picture of what they can become, a path to follow, your trust, and service. They will do the rest.
Q3: When managing how do you make sure everybody is contributing to the maximum of their abilities? A: If the team is of a similar skill set (for example all designers) then I don’t want them all at their maximum ability. How far can YOU run at 100 percent? I want them functioning very well and enjoying life with a couple at their max. I rotate them like geese and enable them each to shine, recover, and shine again. Remember that a flock flying in formation only expends 90% the energy and goes a greater distance than an individual does on his own. This applies to cycling teams and it applies to designers. People learn to anticipate and look forward to going “balls to the wall” as the hero, then recovering. This builds their portfolio of accomplishment for the year, like powerlifting it also increases their MAX, and builds justification for bonuses while striping their work of the drudgery of “routine.”
Q3b: What if a project doesn’t require them to show maximum ability? What if they are experts in .NET 4.0 but the project is stuck as corporate policy in 2.0. How can they show their strength? A: Even if they are an expert at say .NET 4.0 and it is a .NET 4.0 project there will be other factors that constrain resources from shining such as: time frame, inadequate funding, clients who fear risk or lack vision, mistakes by team mates, etc., Resources rarely shine because of what they “could do if situationally things were perfect” they shine because they are skilled, talented, or intelligent enough, driven and resourceful enough, enduring and adaptive enough, (get the picture?) to make something happen with the situation they are given when others can’t. THESE are quality people: the ones that can turn a hard situation into a profitable one.
Q4: As a solutions architect, how do you make sure that the system while being developed is doing what it is supposed to do? -I said something about soliciting frequent user feedback, but that sounded as if I am deferring this responsibility to the user. What should a "solution architect" do? A: You gave the correct answer. Ultimately it is about the user so enable their contribution. You aren’t differing responsibility to them, you are being responsible by testing your solution on them. The architect should have enough domain knowledge to produce a solution that is mostly right and enough humility to recognize the reality that they are going to miss something, have the willingness to put the success of the project ahead of yourself. Ultimately doing so works out to everyone’s benefit including your own.