Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

“Manager READMEs” from some tech companies

hackernoon.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 105 posts

Re: “Manager READMEs” from some tech companies

#91

Post by ivraatiems »

I feel strongly that the kind of people who identify the need to create a document like this are probably not the people who most need such a document written about them.

That is, in order to feel it necessary to write something like this, you must be a manager who prioritizes answering the question "what can I do to maximize the happiness and productivity of my direct reports," over "what can I do to ensure my own personal success, regardless of anyone else." Such a person is already going to do the right things, and is much less likely to be hard to work with.

The people who really need these kinds of documents written about them are the ones who are actually difficult to work with - but for many very good reasons, that won't happen.

Re: “Manager READMEs” from some tech companies

#93

Post by elliottcarlson »

ivraatiems wrote: post #91

I feel strongly that the kind of people who identify the need to create a document like this are probably not the people who most need such a document written about them. That is, in order to feel it necessary to write something like this, you must be a manager who prioritizes answering the question "what can I do to maximize the happiness and productivity of my direct reports," over "what can I do to ensure my own p…

I think the publication of these are offering others the opportunity to be introspective of their management styles. While the document I wrote isn't necessarily covering anything I don't already tell and re-affirm to my direct reports, it was a great exercise in thinking through my management style and what it means to me. I hope that the more popular these things become, further conversations can happen in the community to figure out how to help those managers that might need that help, and help organizations identify potential problem areas in their org structures.

Re: “Manager READMEs” from some tech companies

#94

Post by mmt »

diminoten wrote: post #70
bitL wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I firmly believe cooperative talented people can self-manage and drive vision better than any top-down authority. I can understand it won't work with people that go to work just for money though.

My boss has told me more than once that his goal is to get the people under him to fill the role he's currently filling as our direct manager. This is, according to him, the only way he can move upward. He currently does a decently large amount of work for us as a team, but he's trying to shift that work onto us, because as you're pointing out here, cooperative and talented people can indeed self-manage. The problem…

> It's not really about being in charge/calling shots

I believe, admittedly based only on personal experience and anecdotal evidence, that this attitude is shared by a vanishingly small minority of managers, at least in practice.

Even the manager you mentioned referenced "the only way he can move upward" which implies even he ultimately wants to be in charge or call the shots in some hierarchical system, or am I reading too much into it?

Re: “Manager READMEs” from some tech companies

#95

Post by CrankyFool »

geofft wrote: post #52
FireBeyond wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Welcome to Netflix and Me ( https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1TPSwdqDqVfWG9anfiOjG... ), including slides like "Are you afraid of being fired yet?"

Oh, that's the old version of http://bit.ly/roy-slack-readme , which no longer has it (and I skipped reading the old version because I read the new one, thanks!). My understanding is that Netflix intends to have an unusually high-firing culture (cf. their culture deck, "The unusual part is that we give adequate performers a generous severance package"), so if I'm at Netflix I absolutely want my manager to be up-front…

(Hi, I'm Roy Rapoport -- the author of both slide decks).

Referring to the Netflix version of the slide deck as "the old version" of the Slack version of the slide deck is inaccurate. I'm in a somewhat unusual position amongst the people whose READMEs were quoted, because I got to write one from both sides of the fence: As the established person welcoming a new member to the team (Netflix), and as someone joining a new organization (Slack). READMEs, for me, then end up looking very different.

It's also worth noting, as geofft notes, that Slack's culture and Netflix's culture are very very different, so the concerns of people within them would be different (and should be addressed differently). The concern that you might be fired was pervasive for new people at Netflix, and I sought to alleviate it; it's not a commonly-held concern at Slack.

Re: “Manager READMEs” from some tech companies

#96

Post by CrankyFool »

zippo wrote: post #77

I wonder how many direct reports these managers have. Does anyone have insight? I believe 1on1 is good from my experience in companies where there is a lot of change and a lot going on the #1 feedback I get is people want more information, more 1on1, more team time. With roughly 40 direct reports 1on1 is nearly impossible with the other demands.

Honestly, I think 40 direct reports is borderline insane. You can't effectively support that many people (as you note yourself). Speaking as the author of two of these READMEs, at Netflix I had at peak around 12 direct reports (one was a manager with his own reports) and at Slack I have 3 (all of whom manage their own teams).

Re: “Manager READMEs” from some tech companies

#97

Post by exolymph »

silveroriole wrote: post #8

Interesting that many seem to prefer weekly 1:1s. That seems far too much to me. I would absolutely dread having to spend so much time on that with my manager or my managees and I can’t imagine there are substantial benefits to it (does anyone REALLY have meaningful thoughts about their job/career path EVERY WEEK?)

Monthly would be a better cadence for me, but that may be because I've mostly worked in jobs where I talk to my manager frequently on a daily basis.

Re: “Manager READMEs” from some tech companies

#98

Post by rdiddly »

chrbarrol wrote: post #71
rdiddly wrote: post #24

These should be taken as the hypothesis statement at the start of an experiment, that will or won't be borne out by what actually happens. Show, don't tell. One reason: People can be wrong about themselves. Or they can, with varying degrees of either idealism or self-dishonesty, present a rosy view that amounts to little more than a sales pitch for themselves. If it's true, you'll find out soon enough. If it's not, y…

Too many teams I have worked in have way too little personal on-boarding in my opinion. At least with these presentations I know how the manager "wants" to present him/herself, if this turns out to be false, as you say, I'll know soon enough. On the other hand there are managers that do not introduce themselves enough to new employees which forces you to effectively learn by trial and error how you should interact wi…

It definitely does provide a sort of head-start on reaching that understanding, so in that sense it's valuable.

Re: “Manager READMEs” from some tech companies

#99

Post by kelnos »

apple4ever wrote: post #28
kelnos wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eh, I think it depends on the individual. I have a 1:1 with my manager every three weeks, and that's plenty for me. If something urgent comes up between meetings (which is pretty rare), he's just a Slack message away. But some employees have enough to discuss that weekly is great for them. I think it's nice for a manager to at least give their reports the option of a weekly 1:1; if there's nothing to discuss sometime…

You probably hit on why some people love them and why some don’t. I think it depends on the manager, the employee, and the nature of the job. When I was an employee, I hated them. As a manager, I talk enough with my employees that scheduled 1-on-1s are unnecessary. We are also so busy that I can’t see scheduling 1-on-1s. But I could see other companies, employees and managers being different.

Yeah, agreed. It'd be nice if a manager let their reports set the frequency of the 1:1s, or at least encouraged them to cancel or cut them short if they don't have much to discuss. (Obviously canceling to the point where you don't get to chat for months isn't great, but there's a happy medium somewhere.) But many of the managers I know seem to value the ritual (or perhaps the "look at me, I'm doing useful work!" aspect) of the 1:1 so much that it would reflect poorly on the employee at review time if they skipped even rarely.

Re: “Manager READMEs” from some tech companies

#100

Post by apple4ever »

ams6110 wrote: post #41
elliottcarlson wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Out of curiosity, did you mention that to them?

I would try to say that I really had nothing new to discuss this week, but the meetings were not optional. And to be clear, the meetings weren't the main reason I left those jobs. They were more just annoyances than anything else. But I feel the same way about stand-ups which are apparently pretty popular.

Sounds like we are pretty similar. I just never saw the benefit as an employee or a manager. I really hate meetings that are unproductive, and weekly 1-on-1s always felt that way.
Post reply on HN