121–130 of 134 posts
I've tried do this a couple of times in the last year, but it always seems to backfire, specifically with Gen Z. After I apologize, they seem to think of it as an opening to continue to shit on me and bring up more of my shortcomings -- which is just bizarre to me. Because of this, it's made me really second guess acknowledging when I think I've made a mistake.
You will have to lead. The alternative is a race to the bottom.
I think this goes for Engineers as well. In fact, I say the biggest skill I want from a SENIOR developer regardless of years of experience is humility. Someone who "cannot do wrong" and is a toxic about it will poison the rest of the team with their toxicity. But the seniors who are more open to feedback even from Junior developers, those are the ones everyone else follows to hell and back because they're there with…
One thing I watched closely for in interviews is the moment when an applicant said “I don’t know.” I have not had great experiences with tech co-workers who are incapable of saying that.
I think this goes for Engineers as well. In fact, I say the biggest skill I want from a SENIOR developer regardless of years of experience is humility. Someone who "cannot do wrong" and is a toxic about it will poison the rest of the team with their toxicity. But the seniors who are more open to feedback even from Junior developers, those are the ones everyone else follows to hell and back because they're there with…
> Heck, even the LLMs mess up. You can say that again. In another window, I am iterating with one for fixing my site CSS.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One thing I watched closely for in interviews is the moment when an applicant said “I don’t know.” I have not had great experiences with tech co-workers who are incapable of saying that.
Every time someone mentions a good idea for interviews, I imagine the interview prep people adding it to the standard performance ritual. Then the signal is lost for the needle in a haystack who actually embodies what you sought to find. With how ridiculously performative and disingenuous the techbro interviews have become, if we don't want to play that game, we have to keep some signal unspoken.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Also why neurodiverse people often make exceptional managers. The neurology often results in good systems thinking. The diversity results in lifelong disciplined improvement of social interactions.
Neurodiverse can mean a lot of things. And many of these things are probably detrimental to the manager role.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Heck, even the LLMs mess up. You can say that again. In another window, I am iterating with one for fixing my site CSS.
The best way for me to do CSS is always just live with the dev tools tbh I cant visualize it otherwise.
Took a couple of tries, though. The first run broke everything.
> The ~~Management~~ Skill Nobody Talks About. Getting on with people long term is often about making them feeling acknowledged and being clear about what makes them valued. The real trick to 'repair' is not to make hollow promises. Managers can be perceived as failing when an external event happens and they haven't planned for it, or they bet against it happening. This can kick off a whole chain of events, including…
As a manager, my first priority was to project/protect the corporation interests. I always made that clear to my employees, but after that, my employees' interests generally came second (over my own). It seemed to work. I was a manager at the same company for over 25 years, and my bosses were really tough (but fair).
If you’re fair, what function does being tough serve? Or does being fair allow tolerating the shortcoming that’s being tough?
An employee being tough - resilient, emotionally strong - sounds like a good idea. But manager being tough to reports? I fail to see the function/value.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As a manager, my first priority was to project/protect the corporation interests. I always made that clear to my employees, but after that, my employees' interests generally came second (over my own). It seemed to work. I was a manager at the same company for over 25 years, and my bosses were really tough (but fair).
What does “tough but fair” mean? If you’re fair, what function does being tough serve? Or does being fair allow tolerating the shortcoming that’s being tough? An employee being tough - resilient, emotionally strong - sounds like a good idea. But manager being tough to reports? I fail to see the function/value.
If I showed that I could deliver, they would basically give me a “blank check,” for support, but I was expected to take this high level of trust seriously, and not abuse it. They wouldn’t second-guess my decisions.
They would assume that I knew what I was doing; which could be pretty scary, but I was also expected to ask for help, if I found myself over my head. They might be grumpy, but they’d give me the help. I did risk having the responsibility yanked, though.
Copping to my mistakes was expected. I was also expected to do so, in spite of possible dire consequences. If they found out about it after the fact, or if I tried to cover it up, things would go badly.
Throwing co-workers or employees under the bus was very bad. It pretty much destroyed your rep. Weasels did not do well.
High expectations, high trust, big support, a ton of agency, and really high standards on deliverables and transparency.
From what I read here, a lot of folks would have difficulty in that environment. I liked it, but it could be stressful.
I think the problem is that there's a difference between a good manager and a manager who keeps their job.
The incentive is more strongly aligned with the latter one than the former one. I'm going through a bit of a phase at the moment, so I'm biased. It's "show me the incentive and I will show you the outcome". I used to find that an interesting idea, not sure if true or not. Nowadays a few years later, I'm almost hyper focusing on it, because I'm noticing that it is mostly true. Like, there's some room for individuality…
I've been in that "phase" for several years now. It's rarely steered me wrong.