Summarizer

Manager Coding Concerns

Criticism of managers using AI to write production code without proper skills, causing incidents and requiring real engineers to fix issues

← Back to Web development is fun again

The trend of managers using AI to shortcut production coding is met with sharp criticism from engineers who argue that prioritizing delivery speed over technical depth leads to "drowning" in production incidents. While some suggest that managers should strictly limit their coding to non-critical prototypes or developer tools, others view any managerial coding as a distraction from their primary leadership duties that ultimately forces staff to clean up "good enough" AI-generated messes. This tension highlights a growing divide where business leaders push for rapid LLM-assisted output, often ignoring the long-term pain of technical debt until a major system failure finally necessitates a return to proper engineering hygiene.

9 comments tagged with this topic

View on HN · Topics
> lost their personal side project time Yes ! > moved into management roles Please stop. Except if "coding" is making PoCs. If it's actual code that runs important stuffs in production: either one cares enough to understand all the ins and outs and going into managements didn't cut them from coding, either they're only pushing what they see as "good enough" code while their team starts polishing resumes and they probably have a better output doing management. PS: if you only have half an hour for writing something, will you have 3h rolling it back and dealing with the issues produced when stuff goes sideways ? I really don't get the logic.
View on HN · Topics
A common policy I've seen from engineering managers who code (and one I've stuck to myself when I've been in engineering management roles) is to avoid writing code that's on the critical path to shipping. That's means your team should never be blocked on code that you are responsible for, because as an engineering manager you can rarely commit dedicated coding time to unblocking them. This still leaves space for quite a few categories of coding: - prototypes and proof of concepts - internal "nice to have" tools that increase developer quality of life (I ended up hacking on plenty of these) - helping debug issues
View on HN · Topics
I don't like it. It lets "management" ignore their actual jobs - the ones that are nominally so valuable that they get paid more than most engineers, remember - and instead either splash around in the kiddie pool, or go jump into the adult pool and then almost drown and need an actual engineer to bail them out. (The kiddie pool is useless side project, the adult pool is the prod codebase, and drowning is either getting lost in the weeds of "it compiles and I'm done! Now how do I merge and how do I know if I'm not going to break prod?" or just straight up causing an incident and they're apologizing profusely for ruining the oncall's evening except that both of them know they're gonna do it again in 2 weeks). I really don't know how often I have to tell people, especially former engineers who SHOULD KNOW THIS (unless they were the kind of fail-upwards pretenders): the code is not the slow part! (Sorry, I'm not yelling at you , reader. I'm yelling at my CEO.)
View on HN · Topics
Now we ALL be project managers! Hooray!
View on HN · Topics
The head chefs at most restaurants delegate the majority of details of dishes to their kitchen staff, then critique and refine.
View on HN · Topics
I would argue that you technically did not cook it yourself - you are however responsible for having cooked it. You directed the cooking.
View on HN · Topics
Why is the head chef called the head chef, then? He doesn’t “cook”.
View on HN · Topics
It’s because business demand speed and shipping over other concerns. We had to fight hard for proper quality controls in the face of the LLM coding assistance boom where I work. These are great tools but they have limits and can lead to poor engineering hygiene quite quickly. It took a major issue being attributed to having too much trust in these tools before we were able to enforce better hygiene with them
View on HN · Topics
Yeah. I love programming. I even love the business side where you solve real problems for people. What I don't love is the constant pressure to just deliver faster and faster. So forcing these chatbots on us fill a need for the CEOs and manager types that just want to DELIVER DELIVER DELIVER, but the benefit for the people that are forced to use them are marginal at best. There are some valid use cases for LLM-based tools, but businesses mostly aren't interested in those because it doesn't make line go up. Streamlining operations? Nah. Shove a Chatbot where it doesn't belong so you can try to get a billion dollar investment? NOW WE ARE COOKING C-suites and managers don't give a shit about quality unless they feel the pain. That's the most important thing I've learned. If you can find a way to push the pain up to the people that make the decisions, the more likely they are incentivised to improve it. It doesn't matter if you see a problem that takes 2 days to fix coming a year away - they do not care until the application crashes because of it. Office politics sucks.