Aren't the first two covered at standup every day?
My management do not attend standup and I prefer it that way.
I as a manager join the stand up, and I offer to the team the things I am working on and the blockers I am dealing with, just like everyone else in the standup. Maybe it makes more sense for me because as a manager I have a little bit of dev work that happens as well which is maybe just a culture thing at my work place. I can see how it would be detrimental to join standup and be seen as an auditor of all the things that the team is working on.
In brief: 1. What worries you? Not some blatant project stuff but bigger deal issues. "How do I learn enough here to make a lot more money in a few years" or "I don't understand how our product is going to make money in this environment". Stuff like that is probably on your mind in some way (unless you are an unthinking dolt, but you wouldn't be asking this if you were) - get it out there and gain perspective. 2. Bli…
One thing.
Reserve the right for both of you to end 1:1’s early.
Once you remove that expectation, you’ll get a lot more out of it. All of the advice in this thread is great too.
Never got a good answer to the “lot more” money question. The real answer is usually “not here, because we got you ha ha, unless you have a title bump”. Salary in increases are normal but a 50% bump seems to require changing jobs and probably country.
Just got 2.7% for my title bump. Hurray.
That might be less than I’ve ever (~10yoe) gotten without a title bump… ouch.
These have always been an enormous waste of time from my perspective. They only serve to make a manager feel like they know what everyone is doing, all the time. Anything process-wise should be handled through scrum. Anything personal can be handled with ad-hoc 1-on-1 meetings as needed, but should be pretty rare. 1-on-1s for process really do harm to transparency and accountability. If I had a nickel for every time…
> They only serve to make a manager feel like they know what everyone is doing, all the time This is a cynical view of 1:1 time. I've always felt like a 1:1 is a time to bond with my manager, and look out for my own needs so I can make the most of my career. Today I am a manager and I can hand on heart say I am at the service of the people I support. I am not telling them how to spend their time, I am not trying to k…
With a good boss, the 1:1 is a time to catch up with someone who is playing a different role in helping achieve the team's goals.
With a bad boss, the 1:1 is a regular compulsory reminder of who is the boss, and gives the boss something to do.
Looking back now retired - I think I was always too keen to get out of those meetings to get the value out of them that I should of. A manager is the best resource to help you with your career - setting goals and helping you achieve them.
The mission of your manager is to help you to be productive. So this is one obvious theme: what is going on, what is holding you back, how your manager can help you to circumvent the obstacles.
Another theme is getting a helicopter view of what is going on with the company and the product. ICs are tend to have a tunnel vision on their tasks on hands. Getting a bigger picture helps tremendously to be more productive by forming informed decisions on the priorities.
Good luck on retiring in your 40s, that’s currently almost entirely up to external factors like demographics and the federal government. Maker and destroyer of wealth. Baby boomers retiring in mass are about to hit the economy hard. They need their investments to live off of and they will be spending in an economy they aren’t producing for. Inflation will be crazy so the way to compensate will be to stay employed. Do…
You're being downvoted because, in software engineering, retiring in your 40s isn't an unrealistic goal for many. We may be going into tough times, but tough times for those making 200k+ a year is still far better times than most in normal times.
My management do not attend standup and I prefer it that way.
I as a manager join the stand up, and I offer to the team the things I am working on and the blockers I am dealing with, just like everyone else in the standup. Maybe it makes more sense for me because as a manager I have a little bit of dev work that happens as well which is maybe just a culture thing at my work place. I can see how it would be detrimental to join standup and be seen as an auditor of all the things…
It is slightly different if the manager is also a developer, in which case they also have blockers to report. We have scrum masters to deal with blockers. They are not management, just one of the developers most of the time although I have had dedicated scrum masters in the past. The crucial thing is to make the standup a safe space for devs to openly discuss problems without their line manager breathing down their necks. The other thing management tend to do in stand ups is to use the time for irrelevant announcements, most of which should have been an email.
My management do not attend standup and I prefer it that way.
I don't really understand this sentiment. Management joining or not should have 0 effect on standup. They should only be there to hear what folks are working on and or also to give their own updates.
Management being present really does change the dynamic of pretty much any meeting. I watch as junior members of the team either clam up or start show boating. There is even a correlation between camera off and management being present. IMO developers have their best discussions when there is nobody there to impress.