Middle Manager, hated or loved?

An usual day of a "middle" manager

In a corporation, we've all had a manager at some point. If you're not a high-ranking VP, CEO, board member, or owner, this post will hopefully make you smile. At least, that's my hope. But now, let's get to work, as a "good" middle manager would say.

But what is a "middle" manager? If you search on Google or ask ChatGPT or any AI tool, you'll get a corporate definition: they are the glue that keeps the company running, indispensable, blah blah blah. In my opinion, a middle manager is not necessarily a function or position that is indispensable. To put it in black and white terms, they can either be a complete leech, draining the team's energy, or the person who goes through purgatory to get things done, usually without any recognition from the team or the higher-ups.

Managing an R&D team, especially a programmers' team, used to require gloves when speaking with them or assigning tasks. Fortunately (or not), market conditions have changed that.

But let's get back to our subject. We've established that a middle manager can be hated or loved, but I guess we can categorize them and maybe find something in the middle.

Leech: This middle manager delegates everything to their team. No meeting can happen without dragging a technical person along, and no report can be done because high management demands too much from their highness. They are always busy and believe they are the center of the universe. They take credit for all successes and blame the team for all failures. Their technical and soft skills are usually non-existent. This type is pretty hated by both the team and the higher-ups.

Lazy-Smart: Similar to the leech, they delegate everything, but their biggest advantage is that they are too lazy to care or interfere with the team's working model. If the team is well-connected, the job gets done; if not, well, there's an issue. But they don't care enough to be affected. They don't pretend to be busy and only move when escalated. Teams usually have mixed feelings about them, and higher-ups don't care as long as the job gets done.

Dictator: This manager has the highest level of stress, believes everyone else is wrong, and only they are right. They don't trust anyone and want to control every decision, from code reviews to test executions. They believe everyone is plotting against them (usually true because the team is sick of it). They want things done only their way, embodying micromanagement and being proud of it.

Perfectionist: This is the most beloved manager by a technical team. Usually, they have a technical background and believe in perfectionism. The technical team loves them because they can offer technical guidance and are also a man of the people. But the higher-ups and the customers hate them. They do not compromise, delaying milestones and the project. They believe their team and they are perfect and are doing "art," not code. Of course, after a month, they want to rework everything done in the past. It's a killer of budgets.

Funambulist: You're wondering what this means? It's one of the rarest breeds of managers, similar to an unicorn. This type of manager plays a balancing game between the team and the upper-ups. They are technical enough to understand the engineers and can challenge them sometimes, but also trust them. They can build teams that actually become some of the most efficient ones. They can balance requests and what actually needs to be done, negotiating with all stakeholders to create a nice working environment. Loved by the team and the upper-ups.

Of course, what I've written above is an exaggeration; you cannot include a person in a category. Usually, each manager, depending on the situation, can be included in all of the categories.

I would like to hear your opinion. What kind of manager are you, or what type of manager do you have? Do you have a different category? 😀