Month: October 2010

  • One year later …

    Well, it’s been a year now since I started this blog.  I thought I should commemorate the occasion by writing something deep and reflective.  The problem is, I’m not very good at deep and reflective. So, you’re stuck with this post instead.

    A close friend of mine used to call me Mr. Spock, a nickname I was both proud of and resentful of.  I was pleased that my friend thought me logical, efficient, direct, and striving for optimization, all like Mr. Spock.  I was a bit bothered that he presumably also thought me lacking of emotions, the other defining characteristic of Mr. Spock.

    I realized, though, that like Mr. Spock, I grew up thinking that my feelings and emotions merely got in the way of getting things done.  (That my personal focus was/is on getting stuff done and not on feeling good, or making meaningful bonds with other people, etc., is another interesting note that will have to wait for some other post- maybe this blog’s second anniversary!) If something had to get done, it didn’t really matter what I thought of about it  – it still had to get done. What I came to realize, perhaps intuitively, and perhaps as a mechanism to keep the focus off me, was that the feelings and emotions of other people did matter to them getting things done. If I wanted to do things that involved more than just me, I had to take the feelings, emotions, desires, and needs of others into account.

    I started learning about what was important to others completely unaware of what I was doing. For one thing, focusing on other people kept them from focusing on me. I’ve always done things like ask my barber how she got started cutting hair, how she decided this is what she wanted to do, how she handles doing a hair cut the customer requests, but which she doesn’t like, …. I didn’t consciously teach myself to ask questions like these – it was just part of who I was.  People love to talk about themselves, and it helped me in that I didn’t have to.

    Happy First Birthday to astromanager.net!

    Later on I realized these sorts of questions, and the insights they offer, are exactly some of the keys I needed to have to be a better manager.  Strangely enough, not everyone is like me, so if I’m going to get the best out of people, I have to understand their needs and desires.  I have to be sensitive to their feelings and moods. I can’t treat them as chess pieces to be placed on the board in a winning position if they don’t want to be there.

    There wasn’t really a particular day or moment when I realized these things; as I said before, I found myself naturally doing some of them way before I ended up managing people and projects.  But I will say that as I gradually learned to pro-actively use this approach as a regular way of interacting with people, I became much more effective. (I also learned to build better relationships with people. Imagine that.)

    Simple concept, really- learn what people want and find ways to help and enable them to get it.

    Management, though, is full of simple concepts, yet we don’t always follow them. The tradition hierarchy of executive privilege, need to know information, top-down decision making, and etc., all violate these simple concepts.  Yet they have often been so instilled into our consciousness of what management is, that we can all too easily forget about the people side of management, and we end up blindly following these rather unnatural techniques of the past.

    So, part of my reason for writing this blog has turned out to be to remind myself of these obvious tenets of people and project management.   And like most things I do, if I can save others time by offering something I’ve done, then the return for my time spent has increased and I’ve made Mr. Spock proud by being even more efficient.



    While this blog is helping Scot be more like Mr. Spock in terms of optimization and efficiency, he’s still working on distancing himself from Mr. Spock’s dry, emotionless nature. His 8-month old daughter is certainly helping in this regards and although he hopes she grows up to know and love Mr. Spock, he hopes she doesn’t completely identify him with Daddy.

  • Healthy Conflcit

    I recently picked up a copy of A Grand and Bold Thing by Ann Finkbeiner. It’s a book about the original Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS). I actually haven’t read it yet, so I’ll probably say more about the book later, but I have had some fun flipping through the pages and reading/re-living various random passages and episodes. One thing I noticed by this quick perusal is that Finkbeiner seems to have chosen to focus her book on Jim Gunn (of course) and the Princeton / FermiLab tension that defined the project for a large part of its life. Upon reflecting on this choice, I realized there was no shortage of conflict within the SDSS and not limited to these two powerhouses. Yet, when I remember the years I spent with the SDSS, conflict is not one of the first things I think about.

    No, instead I think about people’s drive and dedication to the project. I think about a group of people faced with a limited amount of time and money doing whatever it took to get their shared project done. I think about a talented group of people making each other better. And yes, I think of conflict, but a conflict born out of this shared mission, a drive to succeed, and ultimately, enough trust in each other that discordant views could be aired and the right answer would get chosen, regardless of its origin. I even remember instances where conflict was created as a mehanism to help spur progress.

    So yes, there was conflict, Plenty of it.  Did people get bent out of shape, angry, annoyed? Did some people cross the line and make personal attacks? Did things sometimes get out of hand? Yes, yes, yes. And certainly some of this conflict could have, should have even, been avoided, but my point here is that for this project, conflict worked very well. The Sloan Digital Sky Survey was (and still is) an unmitigated success.

    That conflict was so alive and flourishing I take as a sign of a healthy organization where trust and security were high enough to allow open conflict.

    I certainly don’t generally condone creating conflict to try and improve productivity (although it can have its instances). What I do condone, though, is creating an atmosphere where conflict can and does naturally arise. Only when people are being honest with each other, have passion about what they are doing, and are generally united with a common ultimate goal in mind, does healthy conflict arise. Before you try creating conflict, try creating an atmosphere of trust and security. Seek out and listen to dissenting views. Fix the system, not the person, when mistakes are made. Establish a culture of openness and trust. Help people feel secure enough in their positions to know that mistakes are not personal failings and that false harmony is not the key to a productive workforce.  These things will create an atmosphere where honest conflict can arise, pushing, pushing, pushing at the boundaries of your project to do things better, faster, cheaper.  If you don’t have open conflict, you probably don’t have a very high performing organization.

    Another thing I think about when I think about the SDSS is the difference between projects and institutions. Projects have a limited set or resources and time to complete a task. They therefore have to be focused and directed or else their project will fail. Institutions don’t have these same constraints.With a more or less guaranteed stream of funds, they merely have to do better this year than last year. Things can wait for an institution where they can’t in a project. What’s even more interesting here, though, is that there is nothing preventing institutions from acting like projects, despite their more steady funding. I think adopting many of a project’s methods and mentalities will help propel an institution to continued excellence and to not be content with simple steady improvement.


    Scot remembers one of his first days with the SDSS. Standing around the breakfast table, he commented how exciting it was to be involved in the project at the such an early stage (official survey operations having not yet started). A visiting, real longterm Sloanie simply laughed and said that this was actually closer to the end of the project than it was the beginning. A very valuable perspective was thus quickly gained.