Managers need to be able to communicate effectively, either by speaking or writing. They also need a certain degree of flexibility in their thinking and problem-solving skills.
One way to achieve this is by encouraging the participation of more developers in management. This way, managers can have a better sense of what needs to be done, and how it can be done.
Also, the manager must be able to think ahead and create a vision for how things will proceed. This takes deep thought and reflection.
To do these things, the manager must be able to think independently and creatively.
Another important aspect is the ability to communicate with others. A manager must be able to effectively explain his or her ideas, so as not to create confusion.
Also, managers must be able to communicate their ideas neutrally. This means that they can't try to force their own opinions on others. Instead, the manager needs to explain how things work and what is necessary for them.
Last week, an employee of mine was arguing with me about how managers should be able to communicate effectively. To him, it seemed obvious that the manager must be a good communicator and that's why he became one in the first place. I found myself trying to explain to him that there is no reason for this idea; at least not objectively so.
Let's start with the definition of communication. The Oxford English Dictionary defines it as 'The imparting or exchange of information, ideas, opinions, etc., by speech.' Or in other terms: we communicate when we share information.
Now, what happens when we share information? What goes on in our minds when we do so?
I would say that most of the time when we are communicating with someone else, we do not actively think about what information to impart or how it should be imparted. Most of the time this is either intuitively obvious (like in a language which you speak fluently) or something that has been learned and internalized over years (i.e., something like a standard procedure for work). As such, I would suggest that communication is not really an activity but more so a reflex.
So how does this relate to managers?
I would argue that managers should not be good communicators. Not because of some philosophical idea but because managers have no need to communicate anything.
It is clear that the software development process should be improved by managers. No one can argue against this.
Even if the developers themselves don't know what they are doing, managers can still manage them successfully and ensure that their process is a success. Managers should be placed in every software development team.
Managers are better than developers at managing software development because they know more about what is going on. Managers understand the process far better, which also means that they can be very successful.
I do not believe that developers should manage software development. Developers are far too inexperienced in the process and cannot manage it successfully. If developers were placed in charge of managing their own development, they would be a complete failure.
The software development process should be improved with managers because they know how to manage the developers and ensure that the software is good. Developers are not able to do this successfully.
Also, I do believe that the software development process should be improved with developers with defining pipelines/processes with their managers in transparently and collaboratively.