| Linux kernel management style |
| ============================= |
| |
| This is a short document describing the preferred (or made up, depending |
| on who you ask) management style for the linux kernel. It's meant to |
| mirror the CodingStyle document to some degree, and mainly written to |
| avoid answering [#f1]_ the same (or similar) questions over and over again. |
| |
| Management style is very personal and much harder to quantify than |
| simple coding style rules, so this document may or may not have anything |
| to do with reality. It started as a lark, but that doesn't mean that it |
| might not actually be true. You'll have to decide for yourself. |
| |
| Btw, when talking about "kernel manager", it's all about the technical |
| lead persons, not the people who do traditional management inside |
| companies. If you sign purchase orders or you have any clue about the |
| budget of your group, you're almost certainly not a kernel manager. |
| These suggestions may or may not apply to you. |
| |
| First off, I'd suggest buying "Seven Habits of Highly Effective |
| People", and NOT read it. Burn it, it's a great symbolic gesture. |
| |
| .. [#f1] This document does so not so much by answering the question, but by |
| making it painfully obvious to the questioner that we don't have a clue |
| to what the answer is. |
| |
| Anyway, here goes: |
| |
| .. _decisions: |
| |
| 1) Decisions |
| ------------ |
| |
| Everybody thinks managers make decisions, and that decision-making is |
| important. The bigger and more painful the decision, the bigger the |
| manager must be to make it. That's very deep and obvious, but it's not |
| actually true. |
| |
| The name of the game is to **avoid** having to make a decision. In |
| particular, if somebody tells you "choose (a) or (b), we really need you |
| to decide on this", you're in trouble as a manager. The people you |
| manage had better know the details better than you, so if they come to |
| you for a technical decision, you're screwed. You're clearly not |
| competent to make that decision for them. |
| |
| (Corollary:if the people you manage don't know the details better than |
| you, you're also screwed, although for a totally different reason. |
| Namely that you are in the wrong job, and that **they** should be managing |
| your brilliance instead). |
| |
| So the name of the game is to **avoid** decisions, at least the big and |
| painful ones. Making small and non-consequential decisions is fine, and |
| makes you look like you know what you're doing, so what a kernel manager |
| needs to do is to turn the big and painful ones into small things where |
| nobody really cares. |
| |
| It helps to realize that the key difference between a big decision and a |
| small one is whether you can fix your decision afterwards. Any decision |
| can be made small by just always making sure that if you were wrong (and |
| you **will** be wrong), you can always undo the damage later by |
| backtracking. Suddenly, you get to be doubly managerial for making |
| **two** inconsequential decisions - the wrong one **and** the right one. |
| |
| And people will even see that as true leadership (*cough* bullshit |
| *cough*). |
| |
| Thus the key to avoiding big decisions becomes to just avoiding to do |
| things that can't be undone. Don't get ushered into a corner from which |
| you cannot escape. A cornered rat may be dangerous - a cornered manager |
| is just pitiful. |
| |
| It turns out that since nobody would be stupid enough to ever really let |
| a kernel manager have huge fiscal responsibility **anyway**, it's usually |
| fairly easy to backtrack. Since you're not going to be able to waste |
| huge amounts of money that you might not be able to repay, the only |
| thing you can backtrack on is a technical decision, and there |
| back-tracking is very easy: just tell everybody that you were an |
| incompetent nincompoop, say you're sorry, and undo all the worthless |
| work you had people work on for the last year. Suddenly the decision |
| you made a year ago wasn't a big decision after all, since it could be |
| easily undone. |
| |
| It turns out that some people have trouble with this approach, for two |
| reasons: |
| |
| - admitting you were an idiot is harder than it looks. We all like to |
| maintain appearances, and coming out in public to say that you were |
| wrong is sometimes very hard indeed. |
| - having somebody tell you that what you worked on for the last year |
| wasn't worthwhile after all can be hard on the poor lowly engineers |
| too, and while the actual **work** was easy enough to undo by just |
| deleting it, you may have irrevocably lost the trust of that |
| engineer. And remember: "irrevocable" was what we tried to avoid in |
| the first place, and your decision ended up being a big one after |
| all. |
| |
| Happily, both of these reasons can be mitigated effectively by just |
| admitting up-front that you don't have a friggin' clue, and telling |
| people ahead of the fact that your decision is purely preliminary, and |
| might be the wrong thing. You should always reserve the right to change |
| your mind, and make people very **aware** of that. And it's much easier |
| to admit that you are stupid when you haven't **yet** done the really |
| stupid thing. |
| |
| Then, when it really does turn out to be stupid, people just roll their |
| eyes and say "Oops, he did it again". |
| |
| This preemptive admission of incompetence might also make the people who |
| actually do the work also think twice about whether it's worth doing or |
| not. After all, if **they** aren't certain whether it's a good idea, you |
| sure as hell shouldn't encourage them by promising them that what they |
| work on will be included. Make them at least think twice before they |
| embark on a big endeavor. |
| |
| Remember: they'd better know more about the details than you do, and |
| they usually already think they have the answer to everything. The best |
| thing you can do as a manager is not to instill confidence, but rather a |
| healthy dose of critical thinking on what they do. |
| |
| Btw, another way to avoid a decision is to plaintively just whine "can't |
| we just do both?" and look pitiful. Trust me, it works. If it's not |
| clear which approach is better, they'll eventually figure it out. The |
| answer may end up being that both teams get so frustrated by the |
| situation that they just give up. |
| |
| That may sound like a failure, but it's usually a sign that there was |
| something wrong with both projects, and the reason the people involved |
| couldn't decide was that they were both wrong. You end up coming up |
| smelling like roses, and you avoided yet another decision that you could |
| have screwed up on. |
| |
| |
| 2) People |
| --------- |
| |
| Most people are idiots, and being a manager means you'll have to deal |
| with it, and perhaps more importantly, that **they** have to deal with |
| **you**. |
| |
| It turns out that while it's easy to undo technical mistakes, it's not |
| as easy to undo personality disorders. You just have to live with |
| theirs - and yours. |
| |
| However, in order to prepare yourself as a kernel manager, it's best to |
| remember not to burn any bridges, bomb any innocent villagers, or |
| alienate too many kernel developers. It turns out that alienating people |
| is fairly easy, and un-alienating them is hard. Thus "alienating" |
| immediately falls under the heading of "not reversible", and becomes a |
| no-no according to :ref:`decisions`. |
| |
| There's just a few simple rules here: |
| |
| (1) don't call people d*ckheads (at least not in public) |
| (2) learn how to apologize when you forgot rule (1) |
| |
| The problem with #1 is that it's very easy to do, since you can say |
| "you're a d*ckhead" in millions of different ways [#f2]_, sometimes without |
| even realizing it, and almost always with a white-hot conviction that |
| you are right. |
| |
| And the more convinced you are that you are right (and let's face it, |
| you can call just about **anybody** a d*ckhead, and you often **will** be |
| right), the harder it ends up being to apologize afterwards. |
| |
| To solve this problem, you really only have two options: |
| |
| - get really good at apologies |
| - spread the "love" out so evenly that nobody really ends up feeling |
| like they get unfairly targeted. Make it inventive enough, and they |
| might even be amused. |
| |
| The option of being unfailingly polite really doesn't exist. Nobody will |
| trust somebody who is so clearly hiding his true character. |
| |
| .. [#f2] Paul Simon sang "Fifty Ways to Leave Your Lover", because quite |
| frankly, "A Million Ways to Tell a Developer He Is a D*ckhead" doesn't |
| scan nearly as well. But I'm sure he thought about it. |
| |
| |
| 3) People II - the Good Kind |
| ---------------------------- |
| |
| While it turns out that most people are idiots, the corollary to that is |
| sadly that you are one too, and that while we can all bask in the secure |
| knowledge that we're better than the average person (let's face it, |
| nobody ever believes that they're average or below-average), we should |
| also admit that we're not the sharpest knife around, and there will be |
| other people that are less of an idiot than you are. |
| |
| Some people react badly to smart people. Others take advantage of them. |
| |
| Make sure that you, as a kernel maintainer, are in the second group. |
| Suck up to them, because they are the people who will make your job |
| easier. In particular, they'll be able to make your decisions for you, |
| which is what the game is all about. |
| |
| So when you find somebody smarter than you are, just coast along. Your |
| management responsibilities largely become ones of saying "Sounds like a |
| good idea - go wild", or "That sounds good, but what about xxx?". The |
| second version in particular is a great way to either learn something |
| new about "xxx" or seem **extra** managerial by pointing out something the |
| smarter person hadn't thought about. In either case, you win. |
| |
| One thing to look out for is to realize that greatness in one area does |
| not necessarily translate to other areas. So you might prod people in |
| specific directions, but let's face it, they might be good at what they |
| do, and suck at everything else. The good news is that people tend to |
| naturally gravitate back to what they are good at, so it's not like you |
| are doing something irreversible when you **do** prod them in some |
| direction, just don't push too hard. |
| |
| |
| 4) Placing blame |
| ---------------- |
| |
| Things will go wrong, and people want somebody to blame. Tag, you're it. |
| |
| It's not actually that hard to accept the blame, especially if people |
| kind of realize that it wasn't **all** your fault. Which brings us to the |
| best way of taking the blame: do it for another guy. You'll feel good |
| for taking the fall, he'll feel good about not getting blamed, and the |
| guy who lost his whole 36GB porn-collection because of your incompetence |
| will grudgingly admit that you at least didn't try to weasel out of it. |
| |
| Then make the developer who really screwed up (if you can find him) know |
| **in_private** that he screwed up. Not just so he can avoid it in the |
| future, but so that he knows he owes you one. And, perhaps even more |
| importantly, he's also likely the person who can fix it. Because, let's |
| face it, it sure ain't you. |
| |
| Taking the blame is also why you get to be manager in the first place. |
| It's part of what makes people trust you, and allow you the potential |
| glory, because you're the one who gets to say "I screwed up". And if |
| you've followed the previous rules, you'll be pretty good at saying that |
| by now. |
| |
| |
| 5) Things to avoid |
| ------------------ |
| |
| There's one thing people hate even more than being called "d*ckhead", |
| and that is being called a "d*ckhead" in a sanctimonious voice. The |
| first you can apologize for, the second one you won't really get the |
| chance. They likely will no longer be listening even if you otherwise |
| do a good job. |
| |
| We all think we're better than anybody else, which means that when |
| somebody else puts on airs, it **really** rubs us the wrong way. You may |
| be morally and intellectually superior to everybody around you, but |
| don't try to make it too obvious unless you really **intend** to irritate |
| somebody [#f3]_. |
| |
| Similarly, don't be too polite or subtle about things. Politeness easily |
| ends up going overboard and hiding the problem, and as they say, "On the |
| internet, nobody can hear you being subtle". Use a big blunt object to |
| hammer the point in, because you can't really depend on people getting |
| your point otherwise. |
| |
| Some humor can help pad both the bluntness and the moralizing. Going |
| overboard to the point of being ridiculous can drive a point home |
| without making it painful to the recipient, who just thinks you're being |
| silly. It can thus help get through the personal mental block we all |
| have about criticism. |
| |
| .. [#f3] Hint: internet newsgroups that are not directly related to your work |
| are great ways to take out your frustrations at other people. Write |
| insulting posts with a sneer just to get into a good flame every once in |
| a while, and you'll feel cleansed. Just don't crap too close to home. |
| |
| |
| 6) Why me? |
| ---------- |
| |
| Since your main responsibility seems to be to take the blame for other |
| peoples mistakes, and make it painfully obvious to everybody else that |
| you're incompetent, the obvious question becomes one of why do it in the |
| first place? |
| |
| First off, while you may or may not get screaming teenage girls (or |
| boys, let's not be judgmental or sexist here) knocking on your dressing |
| room door, you **will** get an immense feeling of personal accomplishment |
| for being "in charge". Never mind the fact that you're really leading |
| by trying to keep up with everybody else and running after them as fast |
| as you can. Everybody will still think you're the person in charge. |
| |
| It's a great job if you can hack it. |