The summary you made here about a book on management techniques seems interesting, and the techniques feel right, but are they actually true?
I’m pretty concerned here. I think I partially buy this because you take information from the book seriously, and I think you’re a pretty good manager (Disclosure for onlookers: Peter is my manager). And then I read your book review offering much of the advice you give/do, and I want to believe it more, but I’m pretty worried about doublecounting.
Given the information available, other hypothesis that explains the data I can personally observe include:
Peter’s a pretty good manager for other reasons, and incorrectly causally attributes this book for good management skills
Linch is deluded in thinking Peter’s a good manager; Peter’s actually mediocre
“management styles” are a complex function of both objectively good qualities, but also manager- and managee- specific traits, so even if this book is pretty good for Peter, it won’t be useful for other readers of the EA Forum
etc.
I think trusting the quality of a book on management, without clear empirical checks, is especially concerning given past concerns by other Forum commenters for a) book reviews in general and b) management/leadership skills advice in particular.
Despite my (serious) reservations, I think your paraphrased version of the book offers a valuable perspective, and I intend to reread your notes shortly before the next time I’m in a management position.
The summary you made here about a book on management techniques seems interesting, and the techniques feel right, but are they actually true?
I’m pretty concerned here. I think I partially buy this because you take information from the book seriously, and I think you’re a pretty good manager (Disclosure for onlookers: Peter is my manager). And then I read your book review offering much of the advice you give/do, and I want to believe it more, but I’m pretty worried about doublecounting.
Given the information available, other hypothesis that explains the data I can personally observe include:
Peter’s a pretty good manager for other reasons, and incorrectly causally attributes this book for good management skills
Linch is deluded in thinking Peter’s a good manager; Peter’s actually mediocre
“management styles” are a complex function of both objectively good qualities, but also manager- and managee- specific traits, so even if this book is pretty good for Peter, it won’t be useful for other readers of the EA Forum
etc.
I think trusting the quality of a book on management, without clear empirical checks, is especially concerning given past concerns by other Forum commenters for a) book reviews in general and b) management/leadership skills advice in particular.
Despite my (serious) reservations, I think your paraphrased version of the book offers a valuable perspective, and I intend to reread your notes shortly before the next time I’m in a management position.