LISTSERV at the University of Georgia
Menubar Imagemap
Home Browse Manage Request Manuals Register
Previous messageNext messagePrevious in topicNext in topicPrevious by same authorNext by same authorPrevious page (August 2009, week 3)Back to main SAS-L pageJoin or leave SAS-L (or change settings)ReplyPost a new messageSearchProportional fontNon-proportional font
Date:         Mon, 17 Aug 2009 14:26:50 -0400
Reply-To:     Toby Dunn <tobydunn@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender:       "SAS(r) Discussion" <SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
From:         Toby Dunn <tobydunn@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject:      Re: Do this. Don't do that. Can't you read the signs?
Comments: To: Ray Burton <jrburtonsaspro@GMAIL.COM>

>I've noticed that so much of the assignments from upper/middle >management are lin the "urgent" quadrant. It's sad that they wants so >much to be "get 'er done!" that their prime resource, their people, >never have much time to learn and grow. A larger part of someones >workload should be in the "important but not urgent" quadrant than the >"urgent" quadrant. If not, that is bad management. Unfortunately, >too many managers don't realize or understand that.

There is a difference between a manager and a leader. What many are asking for is a leader rather than better managment. Most of the problems I hear described is because the place they are working either has no leader or one that isnt doing a very effective job at leading. Managers jobs are to ensure that the work is getting performed on time and correctly. Its the leaders job to help the entire staff including the managers grow both personally and proffesionally, among other things.

One of Covey's collegues is John Maxwell if you havent read his books id suggest giving them a try to add to Covey. A leader soesnt have to be the guy or gal at the top, it can be someone in the middle or at the bottom. In short we all can be leaders to some degree or another.

Which brings me to another book QBQ "The question behind the question". Most of my career has been learning on my own, that is too say that while I have been fortunant to have been sent to SAS classes most of the reason I code the way I do is from me learning programming practices, techniques, and languages on my own with the help of some of the SAS-L gurus. You and only you are responsible for your personal growth and development both personally and proffessionally. While a good company and a good leader will ensure that you get it, one cannot count on nor blame anyone else for not recieving it other than themselves. Everyone must have some personal accountability in this area.

It just my opinion and one fact that I live out daily. I have a personal and proffesional growth plan that I review each year. In fact I have been reviewing it this past week as Im about to go into a budget meeting where I have to defend not only mine but the people that are under me plans for the next year. While I will admit my new boss is an awsome leader and manager, it hasnt always been so, regardless I have never stopped learning and growing because of a leadership failure.

Toby Dunn

When you look around and there are no leaders you have two options, sit around and do what everyone else is doing and accomplish nothing or get up off your duff take charge and be the Leader.

On Mon, 17 Aug 2009 13:50:25 -0400, John Burton <jrburtonsaspro@GMAIL.COM> wrote:

>Mary, Nancy, Paige, et all, > >On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 11:26 PM, Mary <mlhoward@avalon.net> wrote: > >> BUT, just as the Covey training states, one must make time not only for >> the urgent but for the important but not urgent, and that's what I'm seeing >> in some of the other programmers- if you focus on urgent all the time >> (and it is a team leader's job to try to make you do so, so don't blame him), >> then you miss out on learning the important but not urgent. >... >> It is the balance of the short term need- which must be done, and the >> long-term strategy- to accomplish the job in an "easier" way- that is the >> challenge of programmers. Read Steven Covey- if you always spend >> your time in the urgent, and never in the non-urgent, but important, sector, >> then you never advance. >> >> But also there is the need to be able to distinguish between what is >> *important* from what is not; I'm not sure this can be taught! > >A lot of food for thought there. > >I've noticed that so much of the assignments from upper/middle >management are lin the "urgent" quadrant. It's sad that they wants so >much to be "get 'er done!" that their prime resource, their people, >never have much time to learn and grow. A larger part of someones >workload should be in the "important but not urgent" quadrant than the >"urgent" quadrant. If not, that is bad management. Unfortunately, >too many managers don't realize or understand that. > >> So do I code differently than my co-workers? I think yes, in that I use >> SQL more and BASE SAS less, and more functions, and much more ODS, >> especially in terms of gathering pieces of output and putting them together in reports. > >Everyone has their own programming style. Who's to say which is more >right... SQL, Base SAS, functions or whatever. One thing is >important. That is to be open to learning new ways of doing things. >Don't think of a new concept as an obstical, but as a challenge and >something new to learn. Lord knows, there's always something new in >SAS to learn or a new way of doing it. > >The thing that can be really frustrating, though, is going to a shop >that is not as technilogically advanced as one you came from. Then >you can be really frustrated when the stuff you were used to doing one >way is now not possible. <grrrrr> > >On Aug 15, 2:19 am, bruc...@PROVIDE.NET (Nancy Brucken) wrote: > >> So what's the solution to the problem of poorly documented, convoluted, >> inefficient, wallpaper code that seems widespread throughout the pharma >> industry (and others, as well), and SAS programmers who spew spaghetti >> code without stopping to think about the poor, unfortunate souls who are >> left to modify their code several years later, when a study finally >> completes or an NDA submission is filed, and the original programmer has >> long since departed for another company? Many SAS programmers have never >> taken any formal programming courses in any language, and so have no >> concept of how to structure their code so it's robust and readable. If >> they're surrounded by others just like them, they never learn there is a >> better way to do things. Anyone who has been in this industry for any >> length of time has a boatload of horror stories. > >That describe the last two shops I was in and they were staffed by >full time employees, not intenerant newbie contractors. The >management came from non-programming disciplines (pharmacy and the >last shop) and had no concept whatsoever of system development life >cycles. Yes, even OTU's have to have a limited SDLC design! They >didn't even know what a programming development time-line looked like. > >As such, management like this likes to surround itself with staff that >will grind out carp to meet their unreasonable deadlines and most have >not had a real programming education. So often they've evolved from >being a business analyst or some other background and picked up a >little SAS here, a little SQL there, PC skills OJT and were forced to >learn just enough mainframe to FTP data to their desktop. > >Sometimes they can develop an pretty decent quickie report on SAS >preferably SAS/EG, but not anything that can be put into production if >need be. > >On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 8:59 AM, Paige Miller<paige.miller@kodak.com> wrote: > >> I used to think that eventually, the poor programmers will realize >> they aren't getting above average performance appraisals, >... >> So even the "threat" of poor performance appraisals didn't budge >> people to improve their programming. > >Sometimes these people get good or excellent performance appraisals >because they're will to "get 'er done" instead of doing it right the >first time. Managers and supervisors love folk just produce lots of >stuff that they can present instead of producint the quality stuff. > >> But, you can mark me down as pessimistic. We are fighting human nature, >> and that's a tough fight to win. > >I think human nature has always been part of the equation. > >Best Cheers, >Ray Burton >Chattanooga TN >AnalyticBridge, inCircle, Linked-In, MedZilla


Back to: Top of message | Previous page | Main SAS-L page