3 ms·

This is the first writing I've seen in a while that posits something specific that works better in office than remote. It doesn't match my experience though. T

This is the first writing I've seen in a while that posits something specific that works better in office than remote. It doesn't match my experience though. The person I hired during WFH consistently works on the right things and has great judgment, while the other team members who predate it are either neutral or struggling in the same way they did before the pandemic. Why do you believe seeing a person live makes it easier for you to instruct them on what is worth spending time on? What's your evidence?

steveBK123 3y ago
WFH separates good and bad performers but management is too lazy to take the signal.
- johndhi 3y ago
  I'm a manager. What should I be doing to help elevate my under performing team member? (There is of course a lot of nuance in my specific situation but would love to hear general thoughts on what makes a manager good.)
  - steveBK123 3y ago
    Feedback as to their performance gaps Training materials and “what good looks like” references for self guided study Mentoring from yourself or good performance seniors on team Specific goals and projects to aid in development But emphatically the solution is not to force the rest of the team back to office as some sort of punitive measure.
    - xscott 3y ago
      I can't help but read that list as "criticize and micromanage them". But I was never a good manager, and I don't know how to do better.
      - steveBK123 3y ago
        In the context of underperformers, better early and explicit than let it fester & ambush with a PIP when it’s basically too late to fix, no?
        xscott 3y ago
        Like I said, I wasn't a good manager, so my opinion doesn't mean much, but no - I don't agree with you. I've seen two strategies that seemed to work for teams. A) foster a healthy culture of people who want to do a good job and let their interactions increase the standards. B) Have a ton of process. Option A flows top down and requires the people to interact. In-person friendly nudges to bring the new kid up to speed are effective and not taken as criticism. Nudging over email or chat, it's hard to convey that we're all on the same team, and I think it leads to resentment. Option B is unpleasant and achieves maybe 10% efficiency, but progress keeps moving. People tend not to squabble because nobody cares enough to put the energy into it. I hated these environments. There really is a difference between communicating in person vs online. For instance, you'll probably lock your heals in response to what I wrote in this post, whereas in-person we'd probably exchange some smiles and body language and we'd both know it's just a friendly conversation. :-)
        steveBK123 3y ago
        I get your points and not disagreeing that top down process and micromanagement suck. I guess I’m trying to say that a lot of managers are afraid to give the negative feedback they hold privately and even lament to their peers about. So some underperformers have no idea they are on thin ice until it is far too late. By being nice this type of management isn’t actually helping the person grow. Sometimes a blunt conversation works wonders for that one person on the team that everyone knows is a problem child. Sometimes the conversation uncovers the person is unhappy due to something outside work and needs a little time/space. Sometimes it turns out the person doesn’t like their current role and you can help carve out a better fit for them. Waiting for the annual review process to mark someone down or to start a PIP once forced to do so doesn’t help them. Anyway I doubt I was a good manager either and am glad to be a high paid IC instead.
    - xtiansimon 3y ago
      Yes. This. If you've experienced a "career reset", then you should have at the very least learned this outline. This is where the rubber meets the road: feedback, training, tools, expectations, and I would add consequences. When these fail, its time to part ways (and in this nominal form, the same could be said for the employee or manager).
      - steveBK123 3y ago
        Exactly, I responded to the context of "What should I be doing to help elevate my under performing team member?" If you are not giving timely candid feedback as to the what/why/when/how to that team member as to their performance issues, you are doing them a disservice. The sooner they have an opportunity to course correct, give their feedback to you, or ask for a role change.. the better. Coasting along without agency for a year or two until PIP season is not fair to them.
bfung 3y ago
100% agree here. With Remote, many things have to be put in writing, organized, and referenced back to. Way less room for misinterpretation than the occasional drive-by chat.
- steveBK123 3y ago
  And as it turns out many people are incapable of putting things in writing because they can’t organize their own thoughts.
- cyanydeez 3y ago
  culpability might be a detriment to multiple managers.

steveBK123 3y ago

WFH separates good and bad performers but management is too lazy to take the signal.

johndhi 3y ago
I'm a manager. What should I be doing to help elevate my under performing team member? (There is of course a lot of nuance in my specific situation but would love to hear general thoughts on what makes a manager good.)
- steveBK123 3y ago
  Feedback as to their performance gaps Training materials and “what good looks like” references for self guided study Mentoring from yourself or good performance seniors on team Specific goals and projects to aid in development But emphatically the solution is not to force the rest of the team back to office as some sort of punitive measure.
  - xscott 3y ago
    I can't help but read that list as "criticize and micromanage them". But I was never a good manager, and I don't know how to do better.
    - steveBK123 3y ago
      In the context of underperformers, better early and explicit than let it fester & ambush with a PIP when it’s basically too late to fix, no?
      - xscott 3y ago
        Like I said, I wasn't a good manager, so my opinion doesn't mean much, but no - I don't agree with you. I've seen two strategies that seemed to work for teams. A) foster a healthy culture of people who want to do a good job and let their interactions increase the standards. B) Have a ton of process. Option A flows top down and requires the people to interact. In-person friendly nudges to bring the new kid up to speed are effective and not taken as criticism. Nudging over email or chat, it's hard to convey that we're all on the same team, and I think it leads to resentment. Option B is unpleasant and achieves maybe 10% efficiency, but progress keeps moving. People tend not to squabble because nobody cares enough to put the energy into it. I hated these environments. There really is a difference between communicating in person vs online. For instance, you'll probably lock your heals in response to what I wrote in this post, whereas in-person we'd probably exchange some smiles and body language and we'd both know it's just a friendly conversation. :-)
        steveBK123 3y ago
        I get your points and not disagreeing that top down process and micromanagement suck. I guess I’m trying to say that a lot of managers are afraid to give the negative feedback they hold privately and even lament to their peers about. So some underperformers have no idea they are on thin ice until it is far too late. By being nice this type of management isn’t actually helping the person grow. Sometimes a blunt conversation works wonders for that one person on the team that everyone knows is a problem child. Sometimes the conversation uncovers the person is unhappy due to something outside work and needs a little time/space. Sometimes it turns out the person doesn’t like their current role and you can help carve out a better fit for them. Waiting for the annual review process to mark someone down or to start a PIP once forced to do so doesn’t help them. Anyway I doubt I was a good manager either and am glad to be a high paid IC instead.
  - xtiansimon 3y ago
    Yes. This. If you've experienced a "career reset", then you should have at the very least learned this outline. This is where the rubber meets the road: feedback, training, tools, expectations, and I would add consequences. When these fail, its time to part ways (and in this nominal form, the same could be said for the employee or manager).
    - steveBK123 3y ago
      Exactly, I responded to the context of "What should I be doing to help elevate my under performing team member?" If you are not giving timely candid feedback as to the what/why/when/how to that team member as to their performance issues, you are doing them a disservice. The sooner they have an opportunity to course correct, give their feedback to you, or ask for a role change.. the better. Coasting along without agency for a year or two until PIP season is not fair to them.

bfung 3y ago

100% agree here. With Remote, many things have to be put in writing, organized, and referenced back to. Way less room for misinterpretation than the occasional drive-by chat.

steveBK123 3y ago
And as it turns out many people are incapable of putting things in writing because they can’t organize their own thoughts.
cyanydeez 3y ago
culpability might be a detriment to multiple managers.