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

Senior Engineers Build Consensus (2019)

hyperbo.la

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 123 posts

Re: Senior Engineers Build Consensus (2019)

#41

Post by __blockcipher__ »

whateveracct wrote: post #37
atypicbiped wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same here. Does anyone you work with know your plan? If not, how do you deal with the loneliness?

I'm married and have pets :shrug: Use your free time post-covid to build up something worthwhile. A cat is a good start! Love for its own sake is more than enough. But it takes a suspension of disbelief that modernity may have beat out of you.

> Use your free time post-covid to build up something worthwhile. A cat is a good start!

And to take it further, even if you’re one of those (many) people who thinks the sky is constantly falling with COVID...there is still no reason to wait until “post-COVID”. If you want to build a skillset start working towards that now, not tomorrow

Re: Senior Engineers Build Consensus (2019)

#42

Post by __blockcipher__ »

ZephyrBlu wrote: post #38
vishnugupta wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> because there was no advance warning or discussion. As a manager I learned to keep my senior engineer pre-informed the hard way. Personally, when I was an IC, I was totally fine not being kept in the loop because I was impervious to such news or changes. So I just assumed that’s how it’s with everyone. Clearly I was wrong. That said, it is important to release that pre-information in an informal fashion lest they s…

Are you really impervious to changes though? You're almost certainly going to be affected in some way. Also, I don't really see the point in hiring supposedly intelligent engineers and then cutting them out of the decision making process. Btw I'm not even a senior engineer, I'm a _junior_.

I’ve always felt the same way, I absolutely detest the whole farce of a manager claiming they’re “shielding the team” when really they’re just making critical decisions without informing their own team / gathering [real] consenshs.

To be explicit, there is absolutely a place to “shield the team”, but I’m talking about a pattern I’ve observed that many managers will use that as a pretext to avoid keeping people in the loop and essentially get to boost their own career by holding others back. Real shielding is when you politely tell team Y that their proposal is going to require your team to have to own and operate a net new production service, not when you make critical decisions without consulting some of the biggest stakeholders - your own team.

Re: Senior Engineers Build Consensus (2019)

#43

Post by __blockcipher__ »

sgtnoodle wrote: post #18
andrewem wrote: post #17

I used to work with an engineer who would have a loud negative emotional reaction the first time they were told about some new thing that would be happening at our company, and after a little bit would be totally fine with it. After one or two instances of this pattern, the manager learned to talk to the engineer ahead of time, so the upset reaction wouldn’t happen in a big meeting. I suspect that more of us are like…

Sounds like me at work last year when I had to take high dose steroids!

Presumably you’re referring to corticosteroids which are not anabolic steroids. Or just making a tired joke, I couldn’t tell which :P

Re: Senior Engineers Build Consensus (2019)

#44

Post by __blockcipher__ »

sgtnoodle wrote: post #30
anonytrary wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And this is how you end up with an entire engineering team that has no idea what the hell is going on. Don't be a "10x engineer". Empower 10 other people around you. That's what the real 10x engineers are doing.

When I joined my current company, I was the only software engineer working on embedded firmware (with plenty of help from folk with non-software backgrounds.) I had about a year and a half of frantic coding to set the foundation in place, and now almost 5 years in we have an embedded team of over a dozen people. I'm not particularly interested in management, and there has been no pressure for me to go that route, so…

I know exactly the archetype of engineer you’re talking about and they are hands down some of the most valuable engineers you’ll find.

It’s possible to have a 10x multiplier in “individual output” or whatever you want to call it, but 9 times out of 10 the most valuable engineer is the one who can provide detailed, actionable feedback on patches, architectural change proposals etc but is also willing to get their hands dirty when it makes sense. That, IMO, is what I consider a ‘true’ 10x engineer to be

Re: Senior Engineers Build Consensus (2019)

#45

Post by victor9000 »

nullsense wrote: post #12
tootie wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a boss type guy and I absolutely do this intentionally but not because it's not really me setting policy as much as I'm focus group testing. I run it past peers or a few influential people who could be receptive. Get them to to think about it and give some feedback. When I bring it up to the group it's because it's been well-received and the other influencers are ready to back it. Similar to how this article expl…

I feel like everyone savvy just does this because they understand the consequences of not doing it and the clueless people always just bitch about there being so much office politics. In my experience it's just the communication protocol that works.

It's not so much politics as it is the fact that no one likes surprises, particularly not your boss or your boss's boss. Almost every major people-problem I've had to sort out in the past year has been a result of someone not getting buy-in from their team or superiors before proclaiming a major change. Change is good, everyone wants you to make your awesome improvements, but you're not a cowboy. You have to engage the people who will be affected by this change, collect feedback, and address any concerns that are surfaced.

Re: Senior Engineers Build Consensus (2019)

#46

Post by victor9000 »

ggm wrote: post #27

Sometimes consensus is impossible. You have to move on without it. Either you get stasis, or gradual change, or revolution or fracture/fork and no matter what you get dissent, consequences and cost. Consensus doesn't always exist. Its great to build it and its great to seek it.

I don't think consensus needs to be unanimously affirmative in order to make progress. Even dissent can be a form of consensus, in that everyone in this group acknowledges the proposed course of action, and have formed their positions relative to it.

Re: Senior Engineers Build Consensus (2019)

#47

Post by vishnugupta »

ZephyrBlu wrote: post #38
vishnugupta wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> because there was no advance warning or discussion. As a manager I learned to keep my senior engineer pre-informed the hard way. Personally, when I was an IC, I was totally fine not being kept in the loop because I was impervious to such news or changes. So I just assumed that’s how it’s with everyone. Clearly I was wrong. That said, it is important to release that pre-information in an informal fashion lest they s…

Are you really impervious to changes though? You're almost certainly going to be affected in some way. Also, I don't really see the point in hiring supposedly intelligent engineers and then cutting them out of the decision making process. Btw I'm not even a senior engineer, I'm a _junior_.

I was impacted by some of those decisions for sure but I didn't let that affect me one bit is what meant to say by impervious.

In a biggish company you will come to learn that ICs's opinions doesn't matter; at best they will be heard to be ignored later. So as an IC the best thing for me was to focus my energy and skill to create the value the best way I could i.e., shipping software and helping my immediate neighbours unblock their work whichever way I could. Once my line manager noticed that I was indeed creating value through my primary skill he began seeking my opinion once in a while and I could see that it did have a bearing in his final decision.

There were a few vocal engineers who would regularly vent out their frustration over mailing lists, lunch tables etc., But as far as I could see it wasn't very useful in the sense it wasn't actionable. It takes quite a bit of energy and time to influence an outcome in a meaningful manner. You first need to build up sufficient social capital and then start pushing your opinion either directly or through others (i.e., "influence the influencers" as they say). Obviously it is a useful skill that can be acquired, the question is will you enjoy this in the long run.

Re: Senior Engineers Build Consensus (2019)

#48

Post by ggm »

victor9000 wrote: post #46
ggm wrote: post #27

Sometimes consensus is impossible. You have to move on without it. Either you get stasis, or gradual change, or revolution or fracture/fork and no matter what you get dissent, consequences and cost. Consensus doesn't always exist. Its great to build it and its great to seek it.

I don't think consensus needs to be unanimously affirmative in order to make progress. Even dissent can be a form of consensus, in that everyone in this group acknowledges the proposed course of action, and have formed their positions relative to it.

That's ietf rough consensus. Harder in a dev team i think. But you may be right.

Re: Senior Engineers Build Consensus (2019)

#49

Post by vishnugupta »

__blockcipher__ wrote: post #42
ZephyrBlu wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you really impervious to changes though? You're almost certainly going to be affected in some way. Also, I don't really see the point in hiring supposedly intelligent engineers and then cutting them out of the decision making process. Btw I'm not even a senior engineer, I'm a _junior_.

I’ve always felt the same way, I absolutely detest the whole farce of a manager claiming they’re “shielding the team” when really they’re just making critical decisions without informing their own team / gathering [real] consenshs. To be explicit, there is absolutely a place to “shield the team”, but I’m talking about a pattern I’ve observed that many managers will use that as a pretext to avoid keeping people in the…

> I absolutely detest the whole farce of a manager claiming they’re “shielding the team” when really they’re just making critical decisions without informing their own team / gathering [real] consenshs.

That's clearly not done. What I referred to was decisions that were taken outside the control of the line manager; such as re-org, change in promo process. The line manager will not be part of such decision making process they are mostly taken at director level or above. The line manager though will be kept informed/warned of such changes about a few weeks in advance which is when I would start warning senior engineers in my team.

You will be surprised to learn that line managers have very little influence or say in most of the critical decisions taken. One of their responsibilities is to keep the team pacified i.e., to ensure the "shield" works both ways ;-)

Re: Senior Engineers Build Consensus (2019)

#50

Post by rakoo »

whatshisface wrote: post #21
bww wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You've probably noticed that there aren't really any successful companies that are run as democracies. There are good reasons for that.

Co-ops?

I don't know enough about co-ops but it seems to me they not only redefine the power structure, they also redefine what success (for themselves) is and the means to reach it. Unfortunately ou can't directly compare the two.
Post reply on HN