leading the techie workforce.

I find leaders in the Information Technology (IT) field interesting to look at because to me, they can easily lose their right to lead.  I believe leaders have earned the right to lead if they are able to add value to their team. They have to be a valuable resource.  There has to be a reason why a specific person is in the leadership position and not someone else.  Either  they have more knowledge, they manage people better, or have more experience.  But they have to be bringing something else to the table than the rest of their team.  If this can't be done, why do you need a manager?  Or a director?  All a company is doing then is paying someone a higher salary to do the exact same job as a direct report.

Zach, my boyfriend, currently works in the IT field.  He works as a Network Administrator for a home furnishing company.  And at the age of 25, with only one year of experience after college, he is more qualified to be in his boss's position, Director of Information Technology, than his boss is.  This is because his boss knows nothing about new technology.  Technology is constantly changing and evolving.  It seems like new advances in technology come out every month.  Every time I turn around there's a new iPhone out, or a new version of Microsoft Office.

When people talk about earning the right to lead, most bring up experience.  This is where I start thinking about how much of a role experience plays in an IT leader's right to lead, because to me, experience is not the number one thing that helps them earn it.  Just because you have 15 years of experience working in IT does not mean that you will add value to your team.  Leaders in IT have to develop differently than other leaders.  For example, an HR Manager with 15 years of experience would be highly qualified to lead.  Because you could say that the generalist has extensive knowledge of rules and regulations, has experience dealing with a variety of HR related issues and has worked in a number of different HR roles.  With these things combined, this HR Manager would be a valuable resource to their team.  On the other hand, take someone like Zach's boss.  He has over 15 years of experience working in the IT field, but he has not earned his right to lead because 15 years ago technology was very different.  Things like Windows 7, virtualization and cloud computing did not exist, and these things, among others, are essential to performing an IT Manager's job today.  Unfortunately, Zach's boss has no knowledge of any of the above listed.  Yes, he has extensive experience  in other related areas, such as management experience, but is that really enough?

The real problem then comes in when a leader becomes a burden to their team because they cannot add value.  Zach spends a lot of his time explaining things to his boss that his boss should already know.  Or his boss will incorrectly solve problems, or answer questions from management, employees, or vendors and Zach will have to "clean up" after the mess.  This is not a leader who adds value to his team.  It is a leader who does just the opposite.

Do you agree that experience isn't the number one factor when evaluating an IT leader's right to lead?  Have you ever had a leader who knew absolutely nothing about the field they were leading in?

Side note: Another good HR related point to think about is how companies are selecting candidates in IT.  When a job posting says "minimum of 10 years of experience", what kind of "experience" is the company really looking for?  A lot of technology that is predominately used at companies today did not exist 10 years ago, so why does years of experience matter if the next person in line with 5 years of experience can perform the same job?