|
|
|
|
|
by aniforprez
1381 days ago
|
|
> In the US, most doctors are independent providers for hospitals, they don't have a traditional 'manager' You are putting a round peg in a square hole. As I already stated, these are not the kind of managers we see in development where your manager is your "boss". Even as independent providers, doctors will have someone they are interfacing with who will see to the admin and other work so they are focused on medicine. Less than half of all practicing doctors in hospitals in the US are independent. Most of them are employed by the hospital. You are grievously misunderstanding the role of the "manager" here. There are certainly far fewer managers in independently practicing medical facilities like clinics but that's because the volume is far lower and the doctors themselves wear many hats > but it's lower skill work delegated to people that are subordinate to doctors Again, this is very insulting to the people working these roles. They are not "subordinate" and the work in not "low skill". These are parallel roles to doctors. Leaving this kind of work to doctors would result in a failure of the medical profession in its entirety because of the sheer volume and sensitivity of it |
|
We're talking about the kind of managers software engineers have. Doctors don't have those kind of managers, that's entirely my point.
> Again, this is very insulting to the people working these roles. They are not "subordinate".
They are definitely subordinate in any patient-care scenario. Anyway, I feel like you're missing the point of the analogy, analogies aren't perfect, and you know well what I meant.
If you want to argue lawyers and doctors have managers, fine, give engineers that kind of a manager. IMO, these are subordinate clerical people.