What is the difference between an engineering manager and a data science manager? It's a question I find myself ruminating over almost constantly. There's tons of good thinking and writing about eng management out there, but I don't find that it always translates to the DS world.
-
Show this thread
-
Granted, "Data Science" is still a broad cover term, so depending on your flavor of data science, the leap is shorter. One way of segmenting the DS world that relate to is the type A vs. type B DS, where A is for "analysis" and B is for "building").https://medium.com/@rchang/my-two-year-journey-as-a-data-scientist-at-twitter-f0c13298aee6 …
2 replies 3 retweets 43 likesShow this thread -
My suspicion is that most eng management advice can apply to Type B DS management pretty readily. Their work is more purely engineering. But what does that mean for Type A DS management? What makes it different and thus hard to apply the same advice to? I have some thoughts.
2 replies 0 retweets 17 likesShow this thread -
To start, DS is not essential like engineering is. Yes, a product will be worse without analytics on how it's performing, but it can still ship. Everyone loves to talk about being data driven, but many people still operate on intuition and feel.
1 reply 7 retweets 60 likesShow this thread -
It's easy to find ways to a feature launch a success, especially if basic metrics are neutral to positive. Who cares if the differences are statistically significant? We shipped fast! We paved the way for future innovation! And it is fun to use and looks great!
2 replies 1 retweet 12 likesShow this thread -
A DS can do tons of analysis to support a product area or launch, but that work could be largely ignored. As a DS manager, you are stuck wondering--was that because the DS failed to understand their customer's needs, or did their customer not use that work for some other reason?
1 reply 2 retweets 21 likesShow this thread -
This happens to engineers too, but it's not as common. Not everyone sees a DS's time as precious. It's not that they don't appreciate it it, but rather that it's a value-add. If DS work doesn't pan out, oh well! We didn't REALLY need it.
1 reply 2 retweets 18 likesShow this thread -
And for Type A DS managers, this makes measuring the contributions and progress of your team extremely difficult. The value your team adds is often realized by influencing someone else to act. It's latent, a second order effect. It takes time to see.
1 reply 5 retweets 31 likesShow this thread -
A consequence of this is that Type A DS work (and management) tends to be more relationship-based. This is a good path forward, since folks are more likely to trust someone they have a good relationship with, but it also means that Type A DS work is less modular.
2 replies 2 retweets 24 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @imightbemary
In OKR-land where does this leave you for measuring the output/impact of your group?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Oh man, I wish I had a good answer to this question! When partner teams have clear roadmaps, it helps to divide your work between analysis supporting execution and analysis supporting strategy, then picking projects that make it easier for them to execute now and in the future
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.

