Useful Manager???

(Genre: Just Like That)

The world will not be the same without Sardars (Disclaimer: I apologize to all Sardarjis), Blondes (Disclaimer: I apologize to all blondes) and Project Managers (Disclaimer: I do no accept apologies of any Manager). There will be no jokes. The beauty of existance of these 3 types of species in society is that jokes (atleast poor ones) can be created on the spot. I created 2 just today and am sure can churn out new Manager PJs at the same rate daily.

PJ 1:
Me : What were you guys doing in the conference room ?
My colleague : Interviewing a candidate.
Me : For what position ?
My Colleague : ohhh multitasking - this, this this etc.
Me : Oh, So you were definitely not looking for a manager

PJ 2 :
We found a bug today...If I leave X blank then system throws error : "PLEASE enter X". If I enter X then i get an error "Please do not enter X". So I can proudly claim the discovery of the MANAGER BUG. (And the manager doesnt even say PLEASE!!!!)

But other than being a constant inspiration for jokes and bitching about , how is a manager useful ? Is there any such term as a "Useful Manager" ?

Well Google seems to give 270 results for this term (this blog might make it 271) - but most of it is for some software or the other. Wherever it is used for people, it is mostly preceded by a word like "lesser", "not a", "non" etc. It can't be just a coincidence, can it?

The term "Useful Manager" is a paradox in itself. If you are a manager than you cannot be useful, and vice versa. Consider the following traits of a good manager:

1. A good manager needs to do good resource management and get maximum efficiency from his/her resources. In other words "A good manager is able to suck the last drop of blood from his subordinates, load each subordinate with the amount of work which is not humanly or even assily not possible. And then later question as to why the work is not complete, while he finishes his game of Solitaire in his cabin.

2. A good manager delegates responsibility to his subordinates. In other words, he does not do any work himself; if the work is "a success" he claims credit for it with his bosses; and if it is "a failiure" then he can always claim that the management has not provided him with the right resources.

3. A good manager questions his subordinates. He claims to follow the Confucius diktat "That which is watched, improves". But he doesnt understand its meaning and this leads to PJ 2 above.

So how can a manager be useful ?

By not coming to office once in a while. This has the following advantages:

1. Subordinate morale increases as there is no constant bickering

2. Subordinate productivity increases as no one suddenly pops-up a useless question when he is on a roll while working

3. Subordinate health improves as he/she can recover some blood sucked out by the Manager (Refer point 1 in Traits of a good manager above)

4. Subordinate can get his problems solved easily as one level of red-tape in organization reduces

If someone reads this blog, it might seem to be tongue-in-cheek, smart-ass kind of a article. But from my point of view it is a tragic realization of what will happen to me in 2-3 years time when I try to be a "Useful Manager" and fall prey to the Peter's Principle - "People rise to their level of incompetence"