3 ms·

I'm not quite sure where you're getting "performance = maximizing units of output" from my post, as the whole point was the difference between squeezing out a l

by tibbar 2y ago

I'm not quite sure where you're getting "performance = maximizing units of output" from my post, as the whole point was the difference between squeezing out a little more code vs. keeping the team on track doing actually valuable stuff. Either way, I think we mostly agree here: the EM is the face of the team who makes sure the team, as a unit, is doing valuable work as a sustainable pace that's understood as such internally. However, to be clear, software teams, engineers, and engineering managers are absolutely evaluated on their performance, which is a complex and subjective metric, and the manager is generally the one held responsible for it at the team level.

nine_zeros 2y ago
> However, to be clear, software teams, engineers, and engineering managers are absolutely evaluated on their performance, Yes, and no one said that this kind of evaluation has produced long term success. It has widely been recognized that when upper management is more involved in evaluation rather than leading teams of managers themselves, they address issues and market conditions too late. Thus, affecting businesses negatively over and over. https://hbr.org/2016/10/the-performance-management-revolution https://hbr.org/2016/10/the-performance-management-revolutio... In other words, managers are being asked to NOT perform to certain metrics/evals but to make choices that benefit the company - even if it falls outside any evaluation rubric.
- tibbar 2y ago
  Pardon my cynicism, but this doesn't really change anything. These companies are still evaluating their employees, just informally. They are still promoting and firing people. There are still teams who are doing well and teams that are not. There are teams that picked the right goals and met them, and teams that failed to deliver on their promises for yet another quarter. There are still teams with happy stakeholders and teams that infuriate everyone whom they interact with. It doesn't matter how you measure it or try to ignore it, the buck still stops with the manager of each team.

by tibbar 2y ago

nine_zeros 2y ago

> However, to be clear, software teams, engineers, and engineering managers are absolutely evaluated on their performance, Yes, and no one said that this kind of evaluation has produced long term success. It has widely been recognized that when upper management is more involved in evaluation rather than leading teams of managers themselves, they address issues and market conditions too late. Thus, affecting businesses negatively over and over. https://hbr.org/2016/10/the-performance-management-revolution https://hbr.org/2016/10/the-performance-management-revolutio... In other words, managers are being asked to NOT perform to certain metrics/evals but to make choices that benefit the company - even if it falls outside any evaluation rubric.

tibbar 2y ago
Pardon my cynicism, but this doesn't really change anything. These companies are still evaluating their employees, just informally. They are still promoting and firing people. There are still teams who are doing well and teams that are not. There are teams that picked the right goals and met them, and teams that failed to deliver on their promises for yet another quarter. There are still teams with happy stakeholders and teams that infuriate everyone whom they interact with. It doesn't matter how you measure it or try to ignore it, the buck still stops with the manager of each team.