Global vs detail oriented brain 5

[epoisses]

We all know the anecdotes about micro managers and other detail minded people. My boss is detail minded, actually several colleagues are detail minded and I have the impression that it's the company culture, or let's say it has worsened because it hadn't struck me when I joined a couple years ago. I am global myself and I usually think of "translating" messages to detail minded people, i.e.: throw in a dozen small, not necessarily relevant items so the message does not fit on one page and their interest is immediately tickled. ;-)

The other day I forgot to do so though. After I sent out a (short!) list of actions resulting from a meeting, my boss replied to all: did you discuss X, Y and Z? I responsed: yes, yes and no, with the idea in the back of my mind that I would bump into him later that day to discuss further. My detail minded co-worker apparently saw an open goal and sent a much more detailed reply to all. My boss replied to all thanking the other guy for his useful response and publicly told me off for having sent a reply "of no interest". Which of course is TRUE... for a DETAIL minded person!

But after that the issue started to haunt me. This is not the first "detail minded company" I work in. The anecdotes about micro managers are so generic it almost seems as though you have to be detail minded to get anywhere higher up the food chain, as contradictory as this may seem. Detail minded often gets confused with "driven", "dedicated", "rigorous"... or is it really the same thing!? I get sooo booored with details, I prefer to work with global people, I actually think many global people have a sense of humor while many detailed people don't (sorry it's not a pleasant thing to say), but are global people really fit for corporate life if they get bored so quickly? Is a global brain simply a lazy brain?? (You can see the existential crisis I'm in today...)

 

[KENAT]

You darn French and your existential issues;-).

I've actually become worried that I'm turning into a control freak micromanager, I guess detail oriented in your parlence. I also think I may be on the autistic scale or something somewhere as occasionally I get hung up on something and just can't let go, not matter what, even if I realize I'm doing it.

My manager is certainly the global kind, don't trouble him with details for the most part.

By the way, though not as sharp as it was I like to think I have at least a bit of a sense of humo(u)r left.

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

 

[KENAT]

Sorry epoisses, your other post reminded me you're not french just live there. Still, they must be rubbing off on you;-).

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

 

[Dinosaur]

I have found that if you don't have a style that matches your boss, he is likely to not notice your full contributions to the organization. I also think this is more prevelant in engineering. If you can't solve the kinds of problems your boss thinks are important, he will think you are of little value.

In my particular discipline, the big picture people have all the top jobs and they delegate the details to the lower people. From my point of view, it appears to get ahead, you need a few detail oriented people around you to fix things so you can spend your time looking good and promoting yourself. Maybe that is too harsh though.

 

[MintJulep]

The problem is that people don't know how to ask questions.

Your boss asked: "Did you discuss X, Y and Z?"

You answered the question asked.

What your boss really wanted to know however was: "What was the outcome of the discussions of X, Y and Z?"

Certainly, had he asked the proper question, you would have given a full answer.

 

[MadMango]

MintJulep I'd give you a star, but I feel that if you've worked with someone for any amount of time (+6mos) you should be able to know when to take them literally and to "read into" their questions.

I don't think global= lazy. Some people see/comprehend the big picture faster than others, they don't need to be inundated with the details up front. People exist that do need those details, it can frustrate others. There is room for both mindsets in "corporate life", they just need to be in the proper positions.

"Art without engineering is dreaming; Engineering without art is calculating."

Have you read faq731-376 to make the best use of Eng-Tips Forums?

 

[MintJulep]

MM,

Conversely, the boss should know that if he asks epoisses "Did you discuss X?" the answer will be yes or no.

I have - for the most part - successfully trained the people who manage the projects that I work on to ask the question that they want answered.

When they forget, I will prompt them. For example, my response would have been "Yes, we spoke about X and Y, but not Z. Do you need to know the discussion details, or just the outcome?"

 

[jmw]

Ah, but have you successfully trained your boss?
I had a boss who would invariably read any emails, memos, reports etc. and laboriously correct spelling and grammar mistakes and then hand them back to the author(s).
He would write incredibly small margin notes you needed a magnifying glass to read.

Sadly, he never actually seemed to actually read or understand what was said. Pretty soon any emails, memos or reports sent to him were found to be of greater and greater verbosity. This seemed to give him plenty to occupy his days (and plenty of satisfaction) and we could get on with some real work.

JMW

http://www.ViscoAnalyser.com

 

[electricpete]

The sender of course has to make judgements about the level of detail important in any correspondence. It will depend on the importance of the issue, the amount of time available to compose a response, and the context/audience of the message. I often find managers in my organization don't want a lot of detail up front (just the bottom line conclusions and recommendations.. they'll ask questions if they want the rest) so I provide a lot of curt summary level emails if that is my audience (with attachments if I think there are important details neceesary to communicate).

For your boss to thank a co-worker for additional details is natural.

For your boss to publically (reply to all) criticize your email is ridiculous on 2 levels
1 - you didn't do anything wrong... answered the questions and made judgements about the level of detail required.
2 - even if you did do something wrong, or your boss wanted to provide you guidance on the way he wants things done in the future, it is not appropriate to communicate that in a reply to all type message. I can't say I have ever seen any supervisor criticize the efforts of his subordinates in an email... that is something best done verbally, or if time/convenience demands an email then it should be to one person only.







=====================================
Eng-tips forums: The best place on the web for engineering discussions.

 

[civilperson]

Global issues are management horseflop, engineering is ALL about the details.

 

[BillBirch]

Star for civilperson.
Epoisses,
I would think that you task of preparing a list of actions resulting from a meeting would require an accurate representation of points discussed and agreed. The fact that your boss identified missing topics suggests that you were caught out and he had to effectively complete your work. This has nothing to do with "global" or "detail-minded" people. Certain tasks call for attention to detail, while fewer still (and usually at a higher level) allow a global approach.

Our profession, generally requires that attention to detail and if you cannot be bothered to apply it, someone else (like a checker) has to finish your work.

On the example you used, the preparation of a list or minutes of a meeting should not require such a follow-up to get it correct, and you should be worried that this - what we call in Australia "no worries, she'll be right" - attitude will lead your boss to lack confidence in your ability to finish a job.

 

[Jack808]

I, for one, agree with MJ about asking the right question. My current boss (for two more weeks) asks broad questions and expects exact answers. Sometimes he wants the details, sometimes just one word. If he doesn't get the answer in the amount of detail he wanted he will start to yell. What's worse is if you hesitate...

That aside; in my limited experience, global minded people are better off for some higher level positions because they aren't blinded by the details as many are (myself included).

 

[MadMango]

A lot of people that I have known that "aren't blinded by the details" ask for or expect unrealistic results.

"Art without engineering is dreaming; Engineering without art is calculating."

Have you read faq731-376 to make the best use of Eng-Tips Forums?

 

[IRstuff]

Engineering is about the solution to specific problems. As such, while detailed design is what results in the final product, the detailed design is a consequence of the requirements generated from the global perspective and global requirements.

Additionally, detailed design is constrained by conflicts in requirements, i.e., performance vs. power consumption; elegance vs. strength to withstand earthquakes. It's the big picture guys that determine which one gets sway and where to draw the line.

In a well functioning engineering organization, you need to have both types.

TTFN

FAQ731-376

 

[blutfort]

While I don't know you...I'm guessing when you answered yes, yes, no. You were fully aware of the high probability someone was going to get their nose out of joint. I do the same thing on occasion to make a point. You just got busted this time.

I'm reminded of an old Brady Bunch episode...If I ask you if you have a watch; is the proper response yes or no? I don't think so. A reasonable person would expect an answer of "No sorry." or "Yes, It's 3:34".

 

[MechEng2005]

Star for IRStuff! Reading the posts I was thinking just that. The balance between details and global thinking is critical in engineering. Obviously, when doing detail work, such as specifying a size/grade of a bolt, you are looking at the loading it is subjected to, which is a function of the part you are bolting (i.e. a bracket for supporting a platform), which is determined by the global picture. The details all lead up to a final "global" design. Only being able to see one is a good step towards less than optimal design.

I am detailed orientated and had to "learn" to think more globally. Before, I could have designed a large machine and welded guarding all around. Took me a bit, but I've finally figured out that, hey, maybe their should be maintenance access. And removable hatches at areas that may need more frequent adjustment.

 

[ykee]

I'm wondering if the OP wasn't commenting on a few different things: micromanaging and the inability to prioritize, and whether or not attention to detail is important for engineering.

I agree with comments on the importance of details -- BUT I also think that some detail oriented people get caught up in knowing all the details all the time, even when these details are of no use to them or the work they do. Not just in the micromanagment sense, but also in the how many significant digits should you have in the solution sense.

 

[epoisses]

blutfort, I think you are right, it must have been my subconscience crying for a boss who would just say "OK great, so you manage it, let me know if you run into any problem".

BillBirch, yes I would love to have a checker here - am used to having my wife play the checker role at home...

 

[KENAT]

What are they paying your way for a checker these days, maybe I'm interested;-).

I think IRstuff and others who talk about both being needed and balancing the requirements of both.

The difficult thing is when you need to be doing both yourself, making sure you don't get so over whelmed by details that you miss the global.

As to playing games with managers, deliberately setting them up for something, it's hard not to sometimes, though not perhaps a good career move.

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

 

[HgTX]

I suppose I'm the other way round--my boss is much more "global" than I am. After 6 years, he still hasn't learned that when I ask, "What is happening with X?" the correct answer is NOT "It's being taken care of."

Someone mentioned boss-training above. I don't know how much more explicit I can get than, "If I just wanted to know whether or not it was being taken care of, I would have asked whether it was being taken care of. That's not what I asked."

Hg

Eng-Tips policies: faq731-376