blocks|key|4795975|text|这意味着人们知道如何做好他们的工作。他们不需要被微管。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|4795976|一般来说，管理者的角色是告诉人们该做什么，而不是如何去做。|entityMap^0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|E|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|F|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|D|$]]

It means that people know how to do their jobs. They don't need to be micromanaged.

The role of a manager, generally speaking, is to tell people what to do, not how to do it.

blocks|key|4796032|text|举个例子，|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|4796033|当你开车去商店的时候，你可能不会说“请更换发电机”--你说“当我转动钥匙时，发动机不会翻过来”。也许你确实需要一个新的交流发电机，或者可能是电池，发电机，电磁铁等等。如果机械师按照你的指示，你会得到一个新的交流发电机，但你的汽车仍然可能无法启动！|4796034|所以，你可能会问，有什么区别，我如何进行战略沟通，而不是战术？简而言之，它是在谈论你的目标和挑战，而不是提供潜在的解决方案。例如，您可能会说“我希望用户注意到在我的网站上的特殊产品”，而不是“让商店按钮更大、更红”。也许在主页中添加一个特色产品会更好地达到这个目的。你可能会错过最好的解决方案，即使有最好的意图。|4796035|可能是管理者让团队找到最好的解决方案，而不是给出一个解决方案。|entityMap^0|0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|I|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|J|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|D|3|E|5|6|7|K|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|F|3|G|5|6|7|L|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|H|$]]

With an example,

When you take your car to the shop, you probably don’t say “Please replace the alternator” you say “When I turn the key, the engine won’t turn over”. Maybe you do need a new alternator, or maybe it’s the battery, generator, solenoid, etc. If the mechanic follows your directions, you’ll get a new alternator but your car still may not start!

So, you might ask what’s the difference, how do I communicate strategically as opposed to tactically? In a nutshell, it’s talking about your objectives and challenges rather than providing potential solutions. For example, you might say “I want users to notice products that are on special at my Web site” rather than “Make the store button bigger and red”. Maybe adding a featured product to the home page would serve that purpose better. You could be missing out on the best solutions, even with the best intentions.

May be the Managers let the team to find out the best solution rather than giving a solution.

blocks|key|4796102|text|战略方向是长期(我认为是>=3年)的长期目标。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|4796103|几年后，你想和你的团队/部门/组织达成什么目标？|entityMap^0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|E|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|F|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|D|$]]

The strategic direction is the long (>= 3 years in my opinion) term goal. 

What do you want to achieve with your team/department/organization some years from now?

blocks|key|1054371|text|这个问题已经回答了，但我想增加一个例子，以帮助理解两者之间的区别。为此，我将使用XCOM，这款游戏基本上分为两层:战略层和战术层。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|1054372|XCOM是抵御外星入侵的最后一道防线。你是个准军事组织。地球正被敌视的外星人包围着。你需要拯救地球。|1054373|首先是战术层面。在这里，你有士兵，你和外星人进行直接的枪战。你让你的人通过地图，让他们掩护，与敌人进行交易，并清除地图(或完成目标)。|1054374|第二，战略层面。每次(战术)任务完成后，你就回这里来。这是对地球的概述。哪些国家正在被接管？你对哪些紧急情况有反应？考虑到你有限的资源供应，你打算升级士兵装甲吗？他们的武器？你打算升级你的卫星网络以便保卫更多的国家吗？|1054375|这两层是完全分开的。战略层处理全局决策，战术层处理“地面上的靴子”小规模的交互。|1054376|1054377|但这两个人互相灌输。处理好战略层意味着你可以升级你的士兵的装备，从而在战术战斗中取得更大的成功。相反，完成战术任务意味着你把敌人推回来，这就排除了战略层上的障碍。|1054378|在软件开发中，程序员是士兵，管理者是指挥官。他们执行不同的任务，不能完成彼此的任务(很好)，但他们朝着相同的目标努力。|1054379|1054380|经理不能也不应该做出技术决策，比如使用哪种设计模式。程序员不能也不应该做出管理决策，比如团队的人员配置或优先处理的事项。|1054381|有效地，“提供战略而不是战术指导”的意思是“做宏观管理，不做微观管理”。|entityMap^0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|U|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|V|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|D|3|E|5|6|7|W|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|F|3|G|5|6|7|X|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|H|3|I|5|6|7|Y|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|J|3|-4|5|6|7|Z|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|K|3|L|5|6|7|10|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|M|3|N|5|6|7|11|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|O|3|-4|5|6|7|12|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|P|3|Q|5|6|7|13|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|R|3|S|5|6|7|14|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|T|$]]

The question has been answered, but I wanted to add an example that helps in understanding the difference between the two. For that, I'm going to use XCOM, a game that is essentially split into two layers: the strategic layer and the tactical layer.

XCOM is the last line of defense against an alien invasion. You are a paramilitary organization. The Earth is being besieged by hostile aliens. You need to save Earth.

First, there is the tactical layer. Here, you have the soldiers, and you engage in direct gunfire combat with the aliens. You move your people through the map, have them take cover, trade shots with the enemy, and clear the map (or complete the objectives).

Secondly, there is the strategic layer. After every (tactical) mission, you return here. This is an overview of the planet. Which countries are being taken over? Which emergencies do you respond to? Given your limited supply of resources, are you going to upgrade soldier armor? Their weapons? Are you going to upgrade your satellite network so you can defend more countries?

The two layers are completely separate. The strategic layers deals with big picture decisions, the tactical layer deals with the "boots on the ground" small scale interactions. 
But the two feed into each other. Handling the strategic layer well means that you can upgrade your soldiers' gear and thus have more success in the tactical combat. Conversely, completing tactical missions means you push the enemy back which removes obstacles on the strategic layer.

In software development, the programmers are the soldiers, and the manager is the commander. They perform different tasks, are not capable of doing each other's task (well), but they work towards the same goal. 
The manager can't and shouldn't make technical decisions such as which design pattern to use. The programmer can't and shouldn't make management decisions such as the staffing of the team or what gets prioritized.

Effectively, "provide strategic but not tactical direction" means the same as "do macromanage, do not micromanage".

In their influential team leadership book, "Peopleware", DeMarco and Lister suggest that managers should provide "strategic but not tactical direction" for their IT teams. 

This is intriguing, but they don't go on to explain exactly what they mean! Any thoughts on what this intriguing idea looks like in practice? Is it a good or bad practice?

Strategic and Tactical direction for IT teams

翻译质量差，导致语言生硬或混乱。

没有提供实际的解决方法或示例。

解答不清晰，无法理解或解决问题。

页面排版不美观，阅读体验差。

文章

问答

视频

教程

学习中心

腾讯云实验室

直播

竞赛

腾讯云代码分析专区

腾讯iOA零信任安全管理系统专区

腾讯云架构师技术同盟交流圈

腾讯云数据库专区

腾讯云智能顾问专区

腾讯云原生专区

腾讯混元专区

腾讯云TCE专区

腾讯云Lighthouse专区

腾讯云HAI专区

腾讯云Edgeone专区

腾讯云存储专区

腾讯云智能专区

腾讯轻联专区 

腾讯云开发专区

TAPD专区

腾讯轻量云游戏服专区

腾讯云最具价值专家

腾讯云架构师技术同盟

腾讯云创作之星

腾讯云开发者先锋

腾讯云AI代码助手

云原生构建

TAPD 敏捷项目管理

Cloud Studio

SDK中心

API中心

命令行工具

功能1上新10个字符

功能2描述100个字符功能2描述100个字符功能2描述100个字符功能2描述100个字符功能2描述100个字符功能2描述100个字符功能2描述100个字符功能2描述100个字符功能2描述100个字符。

功能2上新100个字符功能2上新100个字符功能2上新100个字符功能2上新100个字符功能2上新100个字符功能2上新100个字符功能2上新100个字符功能2上新100个字符功能2上新100个字符。

功能5描述100个字符功能5描述100个字符功能5描述100个字符功能5描述100个字符功能5描述100个字符功能5描述100个字符

功能5上新100个字符功能5上新100个字符功能5上新100个字符功能5上新100个字符功能5上新100个字符功能5上新100个字符功能5上新100个字符功能5上新100个字符功能5上新100个字符功能5上新100个字符

功能4上新

文章&问答评论现已支持表情

全新交互，全新视觉，新增快捷键、悬浮工具栏、高亮块等功能并同时优化现有功能，全面提升创作效率和体验

社区富文本编辑器全新改版！诚邀体验～ 

精选全网热门MCP server，让你的AI更好用 🚀

💥开发者 MCP广场重磅上线！

涵盖代码开发、场景应用、自动测试全流程，助你从零构建专属AI助手

一站式MCP教程库，解锁AI应用新玩法

聚焦“写作效率、视觉美观与运行性能”三方面进行全面升级，为您提供更高效、稳定的创作环境

社区富文本&Markdown编辑器全新改版上线，欢迎大家体验!

诚挚邀请您参与本次调研，分享您的真实使用感受与建议。您的反馈至关重要，感谢您的支持与参与！

社区新版编辑器体验调研

在他们有影响力的团队领导书"Peopleware“中，DeMarco和Lister建议管理者应该为他们的IT团队提供”战略而不是战术指导“。这是有趣的，但他们并没有继续解释他们的确切含义！对于这个有趣的想法在实践中是什么样子有什么想法吗？这是好的还是坏的做法？

问IT团队的战略和战术方向
EN

回答 4

Software Engineering用户

Software Engineering用户

Software Engineering用户

社区

活动

圈层

关于

腾讯云开发者

热门产品

热门推荐

更多推荐

问IT团队的战略和战术方向EN

回答 4

Software Engineering用户

Software Engineering用户

Software Engineering用户

社区

活动

圈层

关于

腾讯云开发者

热门产品

热门推荐

更多推荐

问IT团队的战略和战术方向
EN