IISM

iism.org - https://iism.org Why CEOs are failing software engineers and other creative teams > Here is the rub: new value is a function of failure, not success, and much of software engineering is about discovering new value. So, in effect, nearly everything you are taught as a business major or leader is seemingly incompatible with software engineering. https://iism.org/article/why-are-ceos-failing-software-engineers-56

I'm the original author, and I certainly believe that there are all kinds of great CEOs. What I am saying in this article is that software engineering CEOs are breaking out due to the super-infrastructure that is software, and that guys like Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos are using software to speed the value fulfillment cycle -- see https://iism.org/post/glossary-value-fulfillment-cycle-68

Strongly disagree, software engineering is nothing like factory work, or rather, companies who view it as such and only have "predictable, maintainable error free software" as their objective will have their lunch eaten by disruptive companies who understand software is a creative tool to deliver value and should be treated as such. You should read https://iism.org/article/why-are-ceos-failing-software-engineers-56 > Applying replication management techniques to creative work is a systemic mistake that actually disadvantages companies that are developing software – this is because the skills, workflows and founding principles for discovering new value are almost entirely different from those needed to efficiently replicate value. > It should be clear that not having an effective creative management system is a huge gap in the value fulfillment cycle. If this gap remains unaddressed, the market will solve the problem by investors, over time, moving their money to entities that are discovering new value at higher rates. So, if you have this kind of systemic void, it’s really in your best interest to address the gap as soon as possible, and I would encourage you to give some serious consideration to empowering an effective creative management system.

To understand the angle of this article, I looked for what this site is selling: https://iism.org/training > We have a management problem! > How traditional management sabotages the bottom line > Developers are fine, management needs to change Folks who agree with these headlines & don't click away immediately seem more predisposed towards the offered product, which seems to be a mixed bag of developer-entrepreneur-leadership training that would make sense for a small, flat organization.

>The majority of these men believe that the fundamental interests of employees and employers are necessarily antagonistic Taylor's ideas were quite good in the context of labor practices at the time. People were getting paid a buck a day to come work at the factory, and companies employed speed bosses to walk the floor and yell at employees to hurry up. Speed bosses and management got production bonuses, workers got a buck regardless of productivity. Taylor and Gantt instead had companies give bonuses to both staff and management for extra output, which resulted in higher productivity. For history buffs here is a picture of an original "Gantt chart" where he is comparing workers folding textiles after putting in the Scientific Management system. More black in the chart is an indication of workers earning the bonus more often. https://iism.org/material-player/software-management-essentials-intro-…