Situation Analyzed

In the paper entitled “Software Development Management as a Career Path to Upper Management”, 50 job advertisements for software development manager positions were analyzed and compared. These positions from firms across the U.S. were taken from on-line advertisements as of Fall 2008. A range of small to large firms were included in the sample.

Hypothesis

The paper proposed that a detailed consideration of these openings would reveal a pattern showing a split between positions focused primarily on technical aspects of the job, and those emphasizing business and personnel management activities. Those positions focusing on technical aspects would be more limited to middle management. Positions stressing business and personnel management would be more compatible with career advancement to upper management.

Critical Approach

The paper established categories for positions based on evidence extracted from the wording of the advertisements, including the skill sets required and the position activities listed. The categorization of the positions established empirical evidence for the hypothesis based on the number of positions falling into each category. The argument used in the paper relied on observation and numeric analysis of the data to support the conclusion.

Analytical Methods/Techniques Used

The data set was restricted to current on-line advertisements for positions described as software development manager jobs. This narrowed the range of openings considered, and ensured that comparable jobs were examined. To reduce regional bias positions advertised in many U.S. locations were selected, providing a national data set. Duplicate openings at national firms were eliminated. A review of the wording of each job posting revealed a number of characteristics to be compared. These key attributes were:

• Experience Level Required – the number of years of work history expected of candidates.

• Skills Required – The technical skills expected of each candidate such as programming languages or work methodologies.

• Education Level – The educational background expected from each candidate.

• Task Descriptions – The activities expected in the course of executing the position.

To compare these characteristics, each attribute for each position was recorded in a matrix built in Microsoft Excel ™. Similarities and differences were scored numerically, and based on this comparison each position was ranked as being focused either on the technical (engineering) aspects or on the business and personnel management aspects of development management. Predominantly technical openings were classified as “middle management oriented” while those with a predominantly business focus were identified as “gateway” positions that provided an opportunity to advance to upper management. The statistical breakdown was reported. The conclusion of the paper was that the hypothesis was correct and that there was empirical evidence to support it.

Critique of the Methodology and Results

In this paper the author attempted to provide objective evidence to support a hypothesis. One difficulty with this approach is that the definitions of the material being compared are not extremely clear. Concepts like “middle management” and “upper management” are hard to explicitly define and may vary from company to company. The interpretation of the balance of duties required is also subjective. This leads to the potential for inadvertently skewing the results to support the hypothesis.

These issues are common in the social sciences and business analysis. This could be mitigated with additional definition of terms and more data about the positions to support the categorizations. These issues do not invalidate the conclusions of the paper, but the argument would be stronger if these items were addressed. The paper provides a reasoned overview of the subject considered, but could be more authoritative with the additions noted above.