RE: manager credibility

Subject: RE: manager credibility
From: "Bill Swallow" <wswallow -at- nycap -dot- rr -dot- com>
To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 19:48:20 -0500

::: Clarifications--there is a world of difference between
::: managerial techniques
::: suitable for co-located teams and those suitable for
::: geographically separated
::: teams (who have never had direct interaction). The
::: assumption made by
::: many "experts" is that the techniques are the same. They are not.

Right. That's been said by many already.

::: There is a fundamental difference between managers and
::: leaders, other than
::: semantic; leaders are strategic, creating and selling
::: organizational "vision."
::: Managers are tactical, implementing and directing the nuts
::: and bolts activities
::: to fulfill that vision. The terms mean fundamentally
::: different things, and
::: although it is possible that a manager can be a leader and
::: a leader can be a
::: manager, it is both rare, and confusing to subordinates.

Thanks for paraphrasing me. :) Except for that last part... You confused me
there. It's never confusing to be able to identify a leader.

::: My reference to the incompetency of managers is very
::: specific; I think the
::: techniques that may make them competent managers of
::: co-located subordinates
::: makes them incompetent to manage virtual teams. Take away
::: the stick, and make
::: most of the carrots unavailable, and what is left is
::: overpaid incompetence.

Wow, gee, thanks! Remind me to hire you! *LOL!* As a manager (ahem), I
agree that you make a good point that there are differences in how you
approach managing local and "virtual" teams. However, your generalizations
are pretty harsh and monochromatic. By the same token, I can easily
generalize that people who share your viewpoint of managers are
narrow-minded and bitter, and would not make good employees because they
have conditioned themselves to distrust anyone within a position of

::: Specifically, a manager should be able to encourage and
::: facilitate a high level
::: of task accomplishment WITHOUT resorting to either
::: conventional rewards or
::: punishments. If he or she cannot, then he or she is simply
::: a hack feeding
::: off "legitimate authority." In short, "you have to do it
::: because I say you have
::: to and I'm the mommy."

Again, it would be helpful to know the background for your posts so we can
understand why you are writing what you are writing. It seems you're looking
for agreement to appease something that's eating you. If you let it out so
we may understand where you're coming from, perhaps we can be of help.
Otherwise, well... The replies speak for themselves.

Bill Swallow
wswallow "at" nycap "dot" rr "dot" com


ROBOHELP X5 - ALL NEW VERSION. Now with Word 2003 support, Content
Management, Multi-Author support, PDF and XML support and much more!

Now is the best time to buy - special end of month promos, including:
$100 mail-in rebate; Free online orientation on content management
functionality; Huge savings on support and future product releases;
PLUS Great discounts on RoboHelp training. OFFER EXPIRES March 31!
Call 1-800-358-9370 or visit:

You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as:
archiver -at- techwr-l -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit for more resources and info.


manager credibility: From: Edwin Dahlquist

Previous by Author: RE: management creditability
Next by Author: RE: manager credibility
Previous by Thread: manager credibility
Next by Thread: RE: manager credibility

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads