4 ms·

What I mean that it gravitates toward menial tasks. They will have an edge. "Deliver product X" most of the time depends on so much more than my or the teams p

What I mean that it gravitates toward menial tasks. They will have an edge. "Deliver product X" most of the time depends on so much more than my or the teams performance. Maybe it is not even a priority anymore?

Jensson 2y ago
> "Deliver product X" most of the time depends on so much more than my or the teams performance. Maybe it is not even a priority anymore? Don't you have an OKR tree? If it isn't just your teams responsibility then just put it at a higher level in the org, and then the individual teams will have OKRs saying they should contribute to such efforts. If you have too rapid pace of individual features, then an OKR can be to reduce latency when other functions need help from you to increase collaboration among teams etc, if that is a bottleneck to delivering features. If a team you depend on often respond "we don't have time helping you, wait a week!", then that team should get an OKR to reduce that time since those delays are costing you a lot. Such delays are easily measurable so becomes excellent OKRs. Other good OKRs could be to reduce time to review code etc, to help speed up coding iterations and make job more fun, waiting for a response isn't fun. We typically got code reviews in much less than an hour, for smaller things often within minutes, that is much better than waiting a day on it. Edit: If your managers isn't doing these things then they are just incompetent, such an org will be dysfunctional regardless what you do, the OKR just makes that dysfunction more visible but they would work like shit regardless. OKRs really do help managers fix such organizations, as you can see from my examples above, those would really help you deliver features to customers in time.
- fifilura 2y ago
  Those are all examples of menial tasks IMO. So the organization/company that delivers on those - Wins?
  - Jensson 2y ago
    Yes, ensuring all parts do their job effectively so that nobody gets bottlenecked is the core to organizational efficiency. And those bottlenecks and organizational dysfunctions are extremely frustrating when you try to do your job, so it is good for employee happiness as well.
    - fifilura 2y ago
      I disagree. Delivering on the core functionality is the most important task.
      - Jensson 2y ago
        Depends on the team. If your team has multiple roles then your OKR should match how much you should spend on each, ignoring an important aspect of your role in the OKRs doesn't help anyone. I worked at a core library team at a big company, we had both OKR to improve the library and OKR to help people with issues in a reasonable amount of time. Both are important. Anyway, in the end that isn't your decision to made, you were hired for a reason so a level or two above you should decide what is the most important here. So you disagreeing doesn't change that. It is common for teams such as yours to prioritize the wrongs things, OKRs helps show such dysfunctions and makes it easy to fix. If you really are causing problems by deprioritizing customer requests then a higher level manager would go in and tell you to put that back on.

Jensson 2y ago

> "Deliver product X" most of the time depends on so much more than my or the teams performance. Maybe it is not even a priority anymore? Don't you have an OKR tree? If it isn't just your teams responsibility then just put it at a higher level in the org, and then the individual teams will have OKRs saying they should contribute to such efforts. If you have too rapid pace of individual features, then an OKR can be to reduce latency when other functions need help from you to increase collaboration among teams etc, if that is a bottleneck to delivering features. If a team you depend on often respond "we don't have time helping you, wait a week!", then that team should get an OKR to reduce that time since those delays are costing you a lot. Such delays are easily measurable so becomes excellent OKRs. Other good OKRs could be to reduce time to review code etc, to help speed up coding iterations and make job more fun, waiting for a response isn't fun. We typically got code reviews in much less than an hour, for smaller things often within minutes, that is much better than waiting a day on it. Edit: If your managers isn't doing these things then they are just incompetent, such an org will be dysfunctional regardless what you do, the OKR just makes that dysfunction more visible but they would work like shit regardless. OKRs really do help managers fix such organizations, as you can see from my examples above, those would really help you deliver features to customers in time.

fifilura 2y ago
Those are all examples of menial tasks IMO. So the organization/company that delivers on those - Wins?
- Jensson 2y ago
  Yes, ensuring all parts do their job effectively so that nobody gets bottlenecked is the core to organizational efficiency. And those bottlenecks and organizational dysfunctions are extremely frustrating when you try to do your job, so it is good for employee happiness as well.
  - fifilura 2y ago
    I disagree. Delivering on the core functionality is the most important task.
    - Jensson 2y ago
      Depends on the team. If your team has multiple roles then your OKR should match how much you should spend on each, ignoring an important aspect of your role in the OKRs doesn't help anyone. I worked at a core library team at a big company, we had both OKR to improve the library and OKR to help people with issues in a reasonable amount of time. Both are important. Anyway, in the end that isn't your decision to made, you were hired for a reason so a level or two above you should decide what is the most important here. So you disagreeing doesn't change that. It is common for teams such as yours to prioritize the wrongs things, OKRs helps show such dysfunctions and makes it easy to fix. If you really are causing problems by deprioritizing customer requests then a higher level manager would go in and tell you to put that back on.