Home | Login | Recent Changes | Search | All Pages | Help

AdviceOnHiring

Refers to: Advice on How to Hire Testers
Although this column specifically discusses testers, the problems of evaluting candidates based on just tool experience (or any form of strictly technical experiences) still holds. Have you done anything to avoid that problem where you work? Any ideas for interviewing teams, hiring managers, or HR people? -- JohannaRothman 2002.05.12

I think you've already heard from me, JR!;-))

I think that the headline A Plea for Hiring Managers looks like beating the drum to get ex-managers off the streets. Phrasing it A Plea to Hiring Managers is clearer.

My recommendation is to buy JR's forthcoming book on technical hiring!

BobLee 2002.05.12

One thing I always keep in mind (and try to get into other peoples) is my own variation on an analogy Steve McConnell uses in Rapid Development. Steve talks about the four pillars of the temple of rapid development - people, process, product management and tools. If you don't attend to all four pillars, the temple collapses.

My variation on this analogy, which is hopefully a little more dynamic and memorable, goes like this..... drop the product management pillar, and change tools to products. You know have 3 P's.

Instead of pillars, imagine that you're trying to spin plates (See http://jpillustrators.com/artisitsz/gc/PlateSpinner2t.gif). You should start with the People plate (as they're the most important), then Process (which People define) and finally Product (which helps support the People executing the Process). However, as you'd imagine with plate spinning, keeping any one plate spinning to the detriment of the other two leads to disaster.

PhilStubbington 2003-08-13

Ahh, people, process and product. I agree with you. I wrote those things in a book "The Software Project Manager's Handbook" about five or six years ago. (Amazon.Barnes and Noble carries this and I am working on a second edition to it right now).

After "inventing" those three Ps, I read them in a couple of places. I guess that shows that this is a pretty good idea because people are inventing them independently.

DwaynePhillips 14 August 2003

Not to sound facetious, but do not process and product directly result from hiring the right people and letting them do what they know how to do?

CharlesAdams 2003.08.14

Johanna, does the phrase mean process in the sense of how to accomplish something, the desired end result, or both? If it includes end result, is manager synonymous with leader? Or are "leader" and "manager" two different cats? In my career, I lean to the school that a manager is a facilitator and a leader is one who points the way with clarity. I do not mean that a manager and a leader cannot be the same individual. -- CharlesAdams 2003.08.14

A manager is someone who uses people to accomplish work.

A leader is someone who uses work to develop people.

There is, of course, some overlap.

The quote is from Leadership When the Heat's On by Danny Cox and John Hoover. SherryHeinze 2003.08.14 updated 2003.08.18

I see the situation as a harmony among people, process, and product. There are several combinations among these three.

If I am told what product to build and what process to use, I should hire people who can build the product using that process. For example, "Build a word processor using a straight waterfall model." There is little room for iteration and learning in this process, so I should hire people who KNOW how to build word processors.

Another example, "Build a word processor with the people you have on hand." If these people KNOW word processors, I should use a simple, straightforward process like a waterfall. If the people don't know much about how word processors work (like me), I should use a process that allows for iterations and learning."

Another example, "Use a waterfall process and the people you have on hand to build anything." This process allows for little learning, so I should build a product that the people know.

The combinations continue.

As an aside, people might argue that WaterfallIsSilly... [continued on its own page]

DwaynePhillips 15 August 2003

Re Charles' question about about people knowing what they have to do: I meant people should know what the desired results are. Manager and leader are different. I'm still puzzling about whether valuable results can come about with no leadership. I know that teams can generate products (and leaders) with no management. I don't know if managers can generate results with no leadership.

I'm starting another thread on ManagersandLeaders JohannaRothman 2003.08.15

PhilStubbington 2003.08.19