Learning—Learning from Gaming Management

Note: The order of paragraphs in this article is similar to the original text, but it is not a direct translation and includes my personal insights. For the accurate original text, please refer to the original link.

This article was originally written in Japanese, but it contains many points that resonate with my work experiences and offer opportunities for learning. Therefore, I decided to make a brief reference to it along with my thoughts.

The author, 36 years old, transitioned from being an engineer to taking on a management position. The reason for this change was that with age, he gradually lost his passion for technology. His boss suggested, "Why don't you give it a try?" and with a salary increase, he decided to step into management.

Interestingly, the author mentions, "However, I have some issues; I dislike people and prefer to work alone. Why should I manage others when I could just work quietly?" Since he doesn't have to worry about performance metrics and still receives a paycheck, he feels it's best to just do his job.

From this, I sense that while not every engineer may have a passion for technology, it doesn’t mean they can't perform well at their jobs. Having a passion for technology and doing a job well can indeed be two separate matters. There are certainly individuals like the author who are motivated by their paycheck.

The fundamental elements of management are quite simple, as the author describes, and can be divided into capability and mindset. The capability aspects include:

• The ability to think rationally and logically, reaching an average level.
• Being able to communicate effectively in front of others.
• Not displaying embarrassment, hesitation, or panic.

The mindset aspects include:

• Viewing goal achievement as a joyful endeavor.
• Being able to empathize with engineers' feelings.
• Considering oneself a leader rather than a boss.
• Seeing oneself as the least valuable member of the team. This point from the author is rather negative and should be considered carefully. He believes that the value produced by management is zero and that managers merely exploit their team members. Therefore, if the team succeeds, it's due to everyone’s efforts, and if it fails, it's the manager's own incompetence or laziness.

Basically, management does not require you to like or dislike people; meeting the above conditions suffices. Thus, the author feels that it doesn't matter who takes on this role. However, I believe that truly effective managers are rare. Many managers may not want to see you outperform them and will go to great lengths to protect their positions or take credit for your achievements. Honestly, being a competent manager might be harder than being an engineer.

Management and Strategy

The author further explains that he views management as similar to playing a game, where collaborating with a team to defeat an enemy follows a similar principle. He will discuss many elements he believes are important.

Strategy

In playing Go, there are usually established strategies one can reference. These strategies, known as "joseki," are specific sequences of moves discovered and passed down by others, defining steps that ensure both black and white pieces are evenly matched. While it's fine not to follow these strategies, doing so can easily put you at a disadvantage.

The author also notes that in Age of Empires, you can use the shortcut HCCC to quickly produce villagers. Although it only saves a few seconds, being the first to advance to the Feudal or Castle Age gives you an advantage.

In management, there are also certain strategies that must be memorized. Fortunately, the field of software development has produced many methodologies (such as Agile) and classic references (like The Mythical Man-Month, The Phoenix Project, and Joel on Software). Experience plays a role, but learning established strategies can help you avoid unnecessary pitfalls.

Parameters in Management

The author identifies three key parameters:

1. Morale
2. Respect
3. Communication

Morale is a significant indicator; without it, people may not die but will lack productivity. I believe that satisfying morale is quite challenging, possibly beginning with recruitment. Engineers often have their own projects and technologies they want to pursue, making it difficult to satisfy everyone.

Respect is also an important indicator because management doesn't work like a game where you can simply right-click to command someone to move. The extent to which people will follow your instructions depends on the content of the assignment and how much respect they have for you.

For instance, if you ask someone like B to work overtime on a rushed project, their willingness to comply will depend on their respect for you. The required "respect value" can vary based on the complexity of the work.

When developers lack respect for you, their motivation will stem from "getting paid," "because you are the boss," or "this is an order," which can lead to a problematic development process.

To enhance "respect value," the author suggests a few points. First, take action based on the other person's type. For example, if they value technical skills, you must possess a corresponding level of expertise to increase "respect value." Conversely, if they prioritize "people" and personality, you should make an effort to present yourself as approachable and engaging. Of course, everyone has different approaches, and there’s no need to force yourself to change.

Another simple way to boost "respect value" is to actively listen to others, regardless of their requests. After all, as someone who is nearing the end of their technical prowess, I can only earn respect by helping to alleviate various challenges faced by engineers.

Communication and "respect value" are interconnected. Actively speaking up in meetings can increase "respect value," but it’s crucial to avoid situations where people frequently say, "What are you talking about?" as this will gradually diminish your "respect value" and erode your voice.

Humans are not entirely rational beings; often, logic alone isn’t enough for agreement. Sometimes, even when you are correct, various factors can prevent acceptance. After all, human nature ultimately dictates decisions, not just reason.

Personally, I have some thoughts on this. Everyone could simply share warm feelings every day. Why focus solely on technicalities or professionalism? It's unrealistic to expect unanimous agreement on every issue. The CAP principle can only accommodate two options at most; who can be greedy enough to want them all? Just deciding on programming language frameworks can lead to endless debates, not to mention the numerous decisions within a product.

Thus, I believe that extremes on either side are not beneficial. I hope that professionalism can be effectively embodied under the guidance of managers, with those who master technology and expertise having sufficient authority and voice to push development, while those less familiar with the technology can follow and provide timely input.

Discussing Autonomy

The author believes managers cannot fully command their teams, just as in a game of League of Legends (LoL), where teammates may not always follow your lead. To achieve goals, managers need team collaboration, making the effective use of "respect value" critical. Managers should help team members pursue their interests as much as possible.

But how far should team members' autonomy extend? This is a dilemma for managers; it wouldn't be practical to allow a team member to say, "I don't want to work," and then permit them to slack off.

The author again uses LoL as an example. First, observe your teammates' actions, such as whether they can respond to ganks, maintain farm stability, position well, or effectively use their abilities. If you allow a struggling team member to underperform, the game is likely to be lost. In such cases, teammates can choose to roam more, use warning signals to guide others, and assist with tanking skills, among other strategies.

Of course, you may also encounter high-skilled players who perform flawlessly and coordinate excellently with teammates in team fights and tower demolitions. Such individuals are rare in the workplace as well. However, when you do have such teammates, it's crucial to enable their autonomy, which might involve delegating responsibilities and authority. Even if the outcome may lead to failure, responsibility should not be wholly placed on them. Instead, provide as much support as possible.

The author also mentions that there will be those who clearly refuse to contribute, essentially being problematic teammates (the original text uses the term クズ, meaning "good-for-nothing"). Working with such individuals makes it impossible to achieve goals. For those who lack self-reflection, no autonomy should be granted, nor should they be placed in the same team.

At this point, the most important thing is to trust that this person can succeed, maintaining that trust throughout and providing as much assistance as possible. This kind of trust is crucial.

Morale

Next, the author returns to the topic of improving morale. He believes there are two necessary plans—one instinctual and one rational.

Instinctual morale resembles the camaraderie found in university clubs, where members work together to achieve a common goal. However, work is not a club; it’s about achieving objectives and completing projects, so a rational plan is also necessary.

Without rationality and clear goals, it can devolve into a club-like environment where no achievements occur, resulting in a group of people who enjoy each other's company but are unproductive. Conversely, lacking instinctual morale can lead to declines in motivation.

He provides a few examples:

• There’s no need to organize special drinking parties; some might even find them off-putting.
• Providing "a sense of security" to team members is essential.

The Paradox of Security and Autonomy

Fundamentally, the human brain tends to avoid thinking and decision-making, which is often referred to as the "comfort zone." Ideally, everyone else would handle everything.

However, providing too much comfort can lead to resistance, as engineers thrive on solving problems and embrace challenges as part of their nature.

In this regard, managers can work to eliminate unnecessary decisions, such as what colors to use on Trello or what time to hold meetings—small matters that don’t significantly impact productivity.

Bringing Humanity into Work

The author uses the example of Trello’s background image, suggesting that incorporating photos from outings can spark conversations. Currently, the team shares brief "stories" during daily stand-ups. These stories can vary—perhaps someone bought a new game, went on a trip, cooked something new, or tried a new dish. Each story lasts about 2 to 3 minutes but fosters communication among team members, which is a great initiative.

Indeed, while engineers often think rationally, each engineer is ultimately a living, breathing human, not a robot. As humans, we all have emotions, which is a significant challenge for managers to address.

Next, the author shares some tips for meetings, emphasizing a few priorities:

• Define the meeting's objectives and what conclusions or actions are needed. Failing to do so will gradually diminish your "respect value."
• Boost morale.
• Gain "respect value," or at least maintain it.

Aim for Assimilation

In simple terms, it’s about "reading the room." Yes, engineers may find this off-putting, but it is indeed the case. People from all cultures read the room; it’s just a matter of degree.

Here, the author believes that managers should allow anyone who wants to speak to do so, without monopolizing the conversation. If no one is speaking, then the manager should take the initiative to create space for discussion, encouraging dialogue among everyone.

If opposition becomes too severe, it can create unnecessary hostility, but a lack of input can lead to diminished morale. Finding the right balance is an art form.

During meetings, it’s crucial to avoid silence, as it can significantly impact the atmosphere. However, when faced with silence, one can employ a tactic, such as proposing a seemingly absurd idea. This can stimulate others to chime in and discuss, potentially leading to more thoughtful engagement.

Pose Questions to Others

Often, others may have ideas but are unsure whether to voice them. Posing questions to others can be very effective in such situations.

Focus on Preferences Rather Than Accuracy

Sometimes, you might encounter a situation where you are stuck between options A and B and don’t know which to choose. In such cases, ask team members which option they prefer (not which is correct, but which they like). Assuming everyone has already considered the trade-offs and understands the pros and cons, even if it may not be the most accurate answer, the team should proceed with the option they prefer. This approach has several benefits:

• Usually, asking team members what they prefer encourages them to think critically.
• If team members know their answers will influence the direction, they will naturally engage in deeper thinking.

Given this, managers should provide sufficient trust.

Praise and Speak Up Loudly

While this may not be the author’s philosophy, when praising someone, it should be done publicly, loudly, and sincerely. This is an excellent way to boost morale and motivation within the team.

On the contrary, if you need to address issues or offer constructive criticism, it’s best to do so privately, clearly stating areas for improvement without personal feelings involved.

Observe Others' Expressions

An effective way to maintain control is to show your face. You can observe others’ reactions during your speech, while failing to turn on your camera may lead others to wonder, "What is this person doing?" which can diminish your "respect value."

The Most Important Thing

For the author, the most crucial task for a manager is to "protect themselves." This means not taking on responsibilities beyond their paid duties. After all, management is not magic; some things are impossible. While having a sense of responsibility is commendable, claiming to be capable of achieving the unachievable will only lead to burnout. So, if necessary, escape and resign; your departure won't affect anyone else's happiness.

The value of this article lies in its authenticity. Compared to various management books filled with theories, this provides a closer look at real workplace experiences. I have also been someone overly obsessed with technology, resulting in poor outcomes and burnout. While dedication to technology can sometimes be a boon, if it’s unachievable in the workplace, it can be pursued outside.

In my current company, although there are occasional frustrations, I am generally satisfied, as the projects are quite challenging and offer many learning opportunities. Moreover, I have learned more about navigating workplace interactions beyond just the technical aspects. Finding a balance between principles and practicalities is crucial.

Ultimately, work revolves around people. I recognize that I have much to learn in this regard. I’m not someone who thrives on praise or feels invigorated simply because I receive compliments, nor do I believe that I need to be praised like a child to perform my tasks effectively. However, I understand the importance of these dynamics and see them as areas for practice and improvement in the future.

Note: The order of paragraphs in this article is similar to the original text, but it is not a direct translation and includes my personal insights. For the accurate original text, please refer to the original link.