[crucini]

I've worked blue collar jobs where bosses are way more direct, like your Russian managers - and it's better. I remember one who would tell me most mornings, "Try not to fuck up today!" When a boss is angry and direct in giving feedback, we don't become resentful; we get scared for a while, then settle down. It's the natural way of hierarchy. We all need course correction from time to time, and the modern white-collar way sucks.

This guy's bad feelings were increased by his isolation. Compare this to an old school environment where you got yelled at by the boss, then emerged from the office to the jokes of your co-workers who heard the yelling through the door. That's a more natural environment.

(The old school boss sometimes fucked up by abusing an employee in front of co-workers. It should always be done behind closed doors.)

However in many years of corporate work I can rarely figure out what my bosses actually want or what they're thinking. They talk about corporate initiatives and get that uncomfortable "lying" body language, probably because they don't really believe this stuff but have to parrot it.

Getting back to your Russian managers - I think we are wired for hierarchy but we need certain signals to be comfortable with it. We like to work for bosses who are comfortable wielding power. When the boss projects too much weakness, the power relationship becomes very uncomfortable. I'm guessing that the remote bosses in the story didn't give strong course correction early on because they felt uncomfortable. They let the situation escalate, then took this drastic action.

[scarface74]

I had three different style managers within a three year period.

1. An old army guy who was about 48 who left the military in his early 30s and became a developer. He was smart, direct, but polite. He called a spade a spade, put family first and I enjoyed working for him. He would always tell you when your stuff stinks. He had a falling out with the main office located in another state about two hours away because he intentionally hired senior developers who were all in our 40s who weren't afraid to shake things up and do things the right way. I specifically took the job at the company because of him.

2. After he left, the company promoted a developer to management who would not rock the boat. He was a nice guy, but would never stand up for doing things the right way and you didn't know where you stood until you got a review. I left the company as soon as was feasible -- I put in my letter as soon as I closed on my house.

3. Then I went to work for a company as the software architect for the entire company. My manager there was person who was technically strong and knew how to play politics - not in a bad way - he knew how to navigate corporate structure and would sometimes clean up behind me with my more direct approach at getting things done.

[BrandoElFollito]

Which one you preferred? #1 or #3?

[scarface74]

Managers like #3 have the ability to advocate for their directs when it comes to career development and advances and when it comes to salary.

The one weakness with good managers who are both technically strong and know how to navigate corporate America and "manage up" seems to be that they don't have the time to be technical leads and get into the nitty gritty of what their department is doing. They have to hire or promote someone as the "benevolent dictator" who enforces best practices and who has interpersonal skills to keep the manager informed and to talk to the customer - either the internal or external customer.

The architect role is really important for a type 3 manager.

If you need a mentor though, manager #1 is better but go in with the understanding that the only way you're going to get ahead in your career with that type of manager is to learn what you can from them and be prepared to advocate for yourself within the organization or more realistically, find another job and use what you've learned.

[overgard]

Time is a multiplier on a lot of issues. There are a lot of things that are essentially non-issues if addressed immediately, which can be problems if they linger. I think the white collar world could do with more directness!