The Boss Is In:
incapable, incompetent, ineffective, inferior, inflated-egotist, ingrate, inhuman, insane, insecure, insensitive, insincere, insufferable, insulting, intolerable, …
by
Book Cover & Preview Text
Key Players:
- Howard: Boss
- Keith: Electrical Engineer
- Ian: Electrical Engineer
The company had invested heavily in the field of micro-technology electronic circuit chips, called VLSI, or “very large scale integrated” circuit design. Microcircuits could be packaged on a chip with extreme density. Howard was the program manager of a design and development team. Keith and Ian were engineers, members of the team. They saw the need for what is known as an ASIC (Application Specific Integrated Circuit) chip for an application for one of the company’s product lines. Howard was known as an aggressive manager, usually getting his way. Howard succeeded in obtaining company funds for himself, Keith and Ian to spend a month in intensive training in California at a company that, in cooperation with a prestigious university, had invented a new computer-aided chip design methodology.
A dozen teams from high tech companies attended the training course. Training was organized into instructional sessions in the mornings, and laboratory sessions in the afternoons, five days a week. Each brought a circuit design to be implemented and fabricated using the new micro-technology. The objective was to learn the methodology and take home a working micro-tech integrated circuit chip.
Keith and Ian designed a system using conventional means, to be converted to micro-technology. Early into the course Howard looked at Keith and Ian’s design. Based on the circuit density possible using the micro-technology, Howard argued that three or four of the independent circuit units could be transferred onto a single chip, though much work would be required. He made arrangements for the lab facility to be open for his team at night and weekends.
Keith and Ian argued that one circuit was enough to learn and demonstrate, but settled for two. Other teams looked on in awe at their fi erce determination. It put the team’s company into a good light as compared with the others. Howard relished the attention.
The team worked seven days and nights with little rest for the four week duration. They met many difficulties. The new methodology still had flaws. When the final day came, the chip was not finished. All other teams had finished their simpler designs, and there was a time for celebration.
A wine tasting party was planned for the last night of the course. Howard’s team did not attend the party, continuing to work. They worked all night without sleep. They were totally exhausted and did much arguing. They went from the lab, checked out of their motel and took the early morning flight home. They slept on the flight.
The course instructors promised to look at the chip design and see if
they could fabricate it. The chip was finished and shipped to the team. It
didn’t work. It wasn’t like it had failed some of its functions. It wouldn’t
perform any function. Keith and Ian were embarrassed, both at home
and in front of the other participating teams. The company looked bad.
Keith and Ian were quite angry.
What Went Right:
What Went Wrong:
Lessons Learned:
Outcome:
Failure. (Fortunately, the team got a second chance and designed a
micro-tech chip for another application. They learned from the earlier
failure.)
Assessment of Management:
Howard was an aggressive and driving individual. Sometimes this is
good -- not always. Howard managed to get company funds for the
training course. The team had to study and learn the new technology,
transform it into an integrated circuit and bring back a working chip.
There was time before the course for Keith and Ian to design a functional system and do computer simulations to be confident of the design. They informed Howard of their progress, but never got into the details. They had a count of the number of circuit components, but did not know how much real estate the design and wiring would take on the chip. While the technology allowed a very large number of components per unit area, the layout of the circuit with its wiring is very complex. Howard trusted that Keith and Ian had designed a functionally correct system, evidenced by computer simulation.
Howard didn’t listen to their advice about trying to stuff too much
circuitry on their first experience. He accused them of not putting forth
enough effort. When the work could not be finished, Keith and Ian
accused Howard of forcing a wrong decision. Howard never admitted
a mistake. It’s not known what he told his management. Howard was
good at selling his project, but not realistic in implementation. He
wanted to be the best.
What would you do if you were in
Keith’s/Ian’s positions?
- Would you have a confrontation with Howard?
- Would you complain to higher management?
- Could you reconcile Howard’s bad management points with his good?
- Would you attempt another design using the micro-technology you had learned?
- With Howard as leader?
- Other?
Formats
Book Details
About the Book
Most of us have had a bad boss at sometime. Consequences range from minor annoyances to health issues to life or death.
The author takes true stories of stand alone cases from big company environments and identifies bad boss behaviors. He looks at serious cases -- cheating, lying, discriminating, stealing, cultural diversity, gender and even religion related problems. Also intricately planned unfairness. Some are contrary to what one is accustomed to reading. Each case focuses on a snapshot or a moving account that exemplifies a boss’ behavior -- like an unauthorized biography. Some are under the radar of the higher leadership -- some are in line. The cases play out in the longer term.
Facts in each case are analyzed. A case might have a simple solution except for the reluctance to discuss taboos or politically incorrect issues.
While there is no condoning bad bosses, there may be identifiable (treatable) reasons -- such as the case of the boss with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), and others.
See if you would come to the same conclusions. See if you agree with the actions taken by the players. See what you would do if faced with any of these situations.
About the Author
The author has 30+ years in major US corporations and twelve years counseling small businesses. He has conducted Western business seminars in Russia, Ukraine and China. He holds degrees in engineering and industrial management, professional engineers license (ret.) and was awarded the honorary doctorate by Uzhgorod (Ukraine) National University.