jevanish

That’s a very good point that you need to protect your codebase. I 100% agree.

Left to their own devices, AI can add a lot of extra code you don’t need, overbuild features and functionality, and create a lot of unintended consequences.

If you want to protect your codebase, robust review and carefully deploying changes is essential as you rightfully point out.

Ironically, that’s also what our product does (ai code analysis that runs your code), but as you can see we wrote the post from our experience with infrastructure benefits in mind.

Yeah, HR cannot help you be a better manager, especially considering many of the worst managers and experiences people have at their companies involve HR.

Those training sessions are also terrible. Even if they did have good content (instead of rah-rah and feel good BS), you can only remember so much at once, which even has a name for it: the Ebbinghaus Forgetting Curve https://peakmemory.me/2013/06/29/hermann-ebbinghaus-and-the-...

Yeah, certainly consequences matter. The more they have to change or else X (which they really don't want), the more likely they are to change. That said, unfortunately, many will only do just enough to not get fired.

It's certainly a two way street between a manager and team member to work well together, but in my experience the best managers in Silicon Valley/tech retain great people for a long time. In fact, many bring former team members with them from company to company, being a talent magnet.

Totally agree. Trying to lead clubs and student groups in college taught me more about leading than anything I did in a classroom.

If you're doing it right as a manager, it's not about authority. Instead, you should be working to align interests and support your team.

Having someone younger than you as a manager can feel awkward, but if they actually invest in you and listen to you, it can be a great relationship...especially if you know you don't want to be a manager. Then, it's like this person is doing you a favor, so you can stick to the IC work you like.

Knowing what to do is a hugely uphill battle on its own, but then actually being brave and making the time to have the necessary discussions with your team is another level. Many managers are afraid of doing so or fear the time commitment.

The counter intuitive lesson many leaders have to learn is that when you proactively have these discussions that align interests between employee and company, while also showing some empathy for your team, you fix many problems when they're super easy, instead of massive fires to fight.

With all that in mind, that is exactly why I started Lighthouse; knowing what to do and then actually doing it are two separate things. Keeping it all in Google docs and making your own system from scratch rarely holds together as well as someone automating things and reminding you of the right things to do.

This^. Well said.

Certainly finance has its own terrible reputation and problems, but that does not absolve Silicon Valley / Tech companies from doing better. They absolutely have the knowledge, funding, resources to do better.

The reason the Valley is different is because if you have 35% turnover at most companies, you're out of business.

In Silicon Valley, you can hide it behind more recruiters and funding. I've talked to multiple companies with first hand accounts of that level of turnover, which is rare in other industries because they'd go out of business losing that many people.

I appreciate the skepticism, but that's a very fixed mindset. People can absolutely change and I've seen it hundreds of times.

It certainly can take a "come to Jesus" moment like you find out your team hates you, you get fired, a wave of employees quit on you, etc, but people can absolutely change when they decide to.

Character is absolutely important, and it does predispose one to being a better manager, but you can become a good manager later in life.

Unfortunately, as we discuss in the article (I wrote it), the incentives aren't always there, nor are the positive examples of what to do.

A lot of employees either A) don't know what to talk about or B) aren't sure what their current manager considers safe topics.

Questions like the above (though not all of them) can help spark discussion and get them to open up. I've personally seen a number of times where team members have a lot to say about something and didn't realize I wanted to hear their ideas on that topic.

Obviously, delivery matters, and choosing a good question is important. If you have a foundation of trust already built (see Psychological Safety research) then a lot of those questions can help.

Getlighthouse.com can help you run your 1 on 1s and access questions like these with your notes.

Why do you think they hate it?

Your 1 on 1s are going to evolve over time with them.

At the start you want to simply build some rapport and get a feel for their work style. Ask them about how they prefer certain things like project updates and how to handle problems that arise.

Then, as you get comfortable, your 1 on 1s can and should cover a wide variety of topics: - Your Career Growth / areas of interest you have - Suggestions for improving you/your team's work - Problems you want their help with / what they think of the solution you came up with - Personal issues that could affect your work (babies, funerals, long term sickness of loved ones, divorces, etc) - Praise things your manager did you like so they do more of it (They're human too...let em know) - If they're open to it, feedback you have for them - FYIs that you may know about that they may not have visibility to and will want to monitor (see Andy Grove's "Black box of management" https://medium.com/@iantien/top-takeaways-from-andy-grove-s-...) - Things you want to lobby for (changes, class you want to take, a project, a certain assignment, etc)

More detail on how to approach your 1 on 1s that I've sent to employees here: https://getlighthouse.com/blog/effective-1-on-1-meetings/

1 on 1s as status updates are horribly inefficient, which is why managers should not use their 1 on 1s for them.

However, when a manager uses 1 on 1s for what they're actually for (career growth, feedback, blockers, coaching, praise, etc) they have the best teams and best performance, because they make sure the employee stays motivated and the team as a whole operates better.

I've uncovered so many problems that would have otherwise blown up later, as well as found tons of ways to better motivate team members from them, I can't imagine not having them, nor ever working for someone who doesn't do them.

Why do you have a hard time sticking to it? What do you end up doing instead?

This is awesome. I bet your team really loves working with you.

You may find this helpful too then for you to get started on them and see where you may want to learn more deeply: https://getlighthouse.com/blog/one-on-one-meetings-template-...

Can't you give most of those status update-y things another way? Seems like most of that would be covered in a standup, or email.

Your 1 on 1 could be so much more: your career growth, situations you want help with, feedback and ideas for them, things you want coaching on, any issues they should know about (like say a sick/dying family member), etc

From Creativity Inc, by Pixar cofounder Ed Catmull:

“My door had always been open! I’d assumed that that would guarantee me a place in the loop, at least when it came to major sources of tension like this.

Not a single production manager had dropped by to express frustration or make a suggestion in the five years we worked on Toy Story.

…Being on the lookout for problems was not the same as seeing problems.”

Source: https://getlighthouse.com/blog/ed-catmull-quotes-leadership-...

That's really unfortunate. They can be incredible meetings to fix problems, work on your career, grow skills, give and receive feedback, and a lot more.

Unfortunately though a lot of managers don't know what to do as you suggest, but some of them can be shown a better way.

Putting some things you want on the agenda is a great way to make that change. Then you can take the temperature to what they will be open to.

Working backwards though, this is why you should interview your future manager really hard before signing on to the job...to make sure you have one of those 25% that are good (based on your number)

This is really good advice ^

Measured, and with good variation.

Your concern makes sense if it's all they do. Status updates and talking about your managers needs would be a crappy 1 on 1 if that was every time. It's supposed to be the employee's meeting.

However, if you mix up what you talk about a lot, then spending some of it on managing up would be pretty smart, just like you likely only talk about their long term career sometimes.

A lot of topics and ideas to discuss here https://getlighthouse.com/blog/one-on-one-meeting-questions-...

This is really good. A lot of the other replies do talk about how bad managers will take credit for your work, but the good and okay ones will appreciate this and it will work out. Assume your manager is a good human being, or go find one that will reward this kind of behavior.

Being a manager, especially mid level, can be really lonely. Your boss is often not very available, and then you have a team you're trying to help, but with little training on how to do your job (hence the Peter Principle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_principle).

So with that in mind, having an employee that actually cares about what your perspective, and wants to help where appropriate will be very helpful.

And this all ties back to being good at managing up, which is a really good skill to develop in your career; if you find the right leader it will lead them to taking you with them as they level up in better and better roles.

Agree with those thoughts and would add that especially for things like 1 on 1s, you need to see someone's reaction to questions you ask.

For instance, I talk about feedback from a team member for you...are you defensive? are you surprised? upset? It's hard to tell all that just from someone's voice or the silence on the other end of the phone line.

As for appearance, that really isn't that important:

1) Skype is now giving you the option to blur the background when on video, which hopefully becomes a common feature in the market

2) Zoom and Google both have "visual correction" which makes everyone look better on the call

3) Most important, as a manager I don't care if you look like a model or Gary Busey...it's just about reading your reactions and being able to create a connection. I'm sorry if you've had bad managers who treat that like an inquisition, but for good managers, those that care (and read 6,000 word essays so they get better) really benefit from this because they use it from a position of trying to help.

All good. As we describe in the post, tone can be easy to read too much into since it lacks visual and audio signs to go off of, so I gave you the benefit of the doubt :)

Well said. Communication is really at the core of most of the issues...it comes from the question un asked or all the little times you would have seen/heard/said something that doesn't happen when remote.

I've seen this work one of two ways:

A) If you're already in remote place X then they'll look up salary data on your area and offer to pay that amount or a small premium above it based on your title/experience level.

B) The most clever people I know will take a job in SF or NYC, get some wins under their belt so the company loves them, then say they need to move but would love to still work here. When that happens, the company usually would rather keep you than have to find a replacement, so they accept, and most importantly your salary is unchanged.

Both have serious risks: With A) just check Twitter and you'll see that remote work job posts are getting hundreds of applications...so no guarantee you can find a job fast.

With B) the company may not go along with it, and then what?

Glad you think this is obvious to you. For many, it's not, which is why we wrote the article...so more people see it as clearly as you do.