4 ms·

Can't speak for your boss, but I definitely am sometimes a few abstraction layers further up in concepts than the ICs on the team, and it's a lot more frustrati

by 9dev 1y ago

Can't speak for your boss, but I definitely am sometimes a few abstraction layers further up in concepts than the ICs on the team, and it's a lot more frustrating to realise the others don't really know what I'm getting at because I didn't create clear enough goals than getting that feedback right away. People in leadership usually get there because they value time and efficiency, and if you don't spin that as "your agenda is trash" but "I cannot contribute to this meeting and would like to pursue my other tasks", I doubt they will be mad at you. It can also be worth it to bring this up with your team and establish a meeting culture, as suggested in TFA. That way, you can discuss this openly and everyone has a shared understanding of what is okay.

watwut 1y ago
> People in leadership usually get there because they value time and efficiency Equally if not way more often they are there, because they like to control things or organize things or like having power or see it as career setup. Or they like working with people. Time and efficiency is not something you get on these positions.
9rx 1y ago
> it's a lot more frustrating to realise the others don't really know what I'm getting at I understand why it may initially seem frustrating to realize that you are not offering value to the team, but us ICs are used to recognizing that and quickly cutting you out of the picture. It is no big deal in the grand scheme of things. Don't worry.
- fn-mote 1y ago
  That’s a super cynical reply to a manager (engineering head) who said they would prefer people to tell them in the meeting what’s going wrong. I would certainly be glad to have someone like that over my division.
  - 9rx 1y ago
    What is cynical about reassuring a leader that they aren't needed? You've failed as a leader if you find yourself being needed.
    - 9dev 1y ago
      What do you mean by "needed" here? If leaders weren't needed in some capacity, they wouldn't exist. Teams definitely do need leaders, to simply agree on a direction to move into to begin with. If you're of the opinion that management plays their politics game while ICs run the show, then I pity you for the work environment you're in. That isn't how it's supposed to work, and there are better places.
      - 9rx 1y ago
        > Teams definitely do need leaders Do they? The entire Agile Manifesto was written about how teams don't need leaders. That doesn't automatically make it valid, of course, but industry was all over it for a time. An entire industry got it wrong? Yes, it wasn't long before "leaders" afraid of losing their job bastardized it into some kind of management framework with nonsense like Scrum[1], granted, but industry support for it also died in that moment. What does that tell you? > If leaders weren't needed in some capacity, they wouldn't exist. False premise. The world is full of all kinds of things that exist but aren't needed. > If you're of the opinion that management plays their politics game while ICs run the show, then I pity you for the work environment you're in. I'm not really sure what this means. It doesn't seem to have any connection to the original discussion. Where are you going with this? > That isn't how it's supposed to work, and there are better places. How is what supposed to work? -- [1] To be fair, Scrum considers itself "training wheels" for Agile. It clearly indicates it is something to use for a short period of time to wean yourself off malformed leadership practices as you transition into Agile. If used as written, it may be a useful tool. But when have you ever seen that happen in practice? In reality, when you find it in use, "leadership" has enforced its use — often modified to their arbitrary fancy — and never let go like it suggests you need to.
        9dev 1y ago
- 9dev 1y ago
  I'm not sure I understand your point. It's not like I do a poetry slam session in meetings, but work on the technical direction we're moving toward. I'm less worried about offering value than people not getting the information they need to do their job?
theshrike79 1y ago
I had a deal with one engineer on my team, when I used to do that boss crap. Their body had to be present in the meeting, but they could keep working on their laptop. This was because WAAAY too much of the silent information about the company products was on their mind and it was by far the fastest way to get it out. I could just quickly refer to them for 15 seconds to clarify how something actually worked and keep on with the meeting. ...also they once got bored during a sales meeting and coded a full-ass PoC about what the customer was asking during the meeting. That kind of person.

by 9dev 1y ago

watwut 1y ago

> People in leadership usually get there because they value time and efficiency Equally if not way more often they are there, because they like to control things or organize things or like having power or see it as career setup. Or they like working with people. Time and efficiency is not something you get on these positions.

9rx 1y ago

> it's a lot more frustrating to realise the others don't really know what I'm getting at I understand why it may initially seem frustrating to realize that you are not offering value to the team, but us ICs are used to recognizing that and quickly cutting you out of the picture. It is no big deal in the grand scheme of things. Don't worry.

fn-mote 1y ago
That’s a super cynical reply to a manager (engineering head) who said they would prefer people to tell them in the meeting what’s going wrong. I would certainly be glad to have someone like that over my division.
- 9rx 1y ago
  What is cynical about reassuring a leader that they aren't needed? You've failed as a leader if you find yourself being needed.
  - 9dev 1y ago
    What do you mean by "needed" here? If leaders weren't needed in some capacity, they wouldn't exist. Teams definitely do need leaders, to simply agree on a direction to move into to begin with. If you're of the opinion that management plays their politics game while ICs run the show, then I pity you for the work environment you're in. That isn't how it's supposed to work, and there are better places.
    - 9rx 1y ago
      > Teams definitely do need leaders Do they? The entire Agile Manifesto was written about how teams don't need leaders. That doesn't automatically make it valid, of course, but industry was all over it for a time. An entire industry got it wrong? Yes, it wasn't long before "leaders" afraid of losing their job bastardized it into some kind of management framework with nonsense like Scrum[1], granted, but industry support for it also died in that moment. What does that tell you? > If leaders weren't needed in some capacity, they wouldn't exist. False premise. The world is full of all kinds of things that exist but aren't needed. > If you're of the opinion that management plays their politics game while ICs run the show, then I pity you for the work environment you're in. I'm not really sure what this means. It doesn't seem to have any connection to the original discussion. Where are you going with this? > That isn't how it's supposed to work, and there are better places. How is what supposed to work? -- [1] To be fair, Scrum considers itself "training wheels" for Agile. It clearly indicates it is something to use for a short period of time to wean yourself off malformed leadership practices as you transition into Agile. If used as written, it may be a useful tool. But when have you ever seen that happen in practice? In reality, when you find it in use, "leadership" has enforced its use — often modified to their arbitrary fancy — and never let go like it suggests you need to.
      - 9dev 1y ago
9dev 1y ago
I'm not sure I understand your point. It's not like I do a poetry slam session in meetings, but work on the technical direction we're moving toward. I'm less worried about offering value than people not getting the information they need to do their job?

theshrike79 1y ago

I had a deal with one engineer on my team, when I used to do that boss crap. Their body had to be present in the meeting, but they could keep working on their laptop. This was because WAAAY too much of the silent information about the company products was on their mind and it was by far the fastest way to get it out. I could just quickly refer to them for 15 seconds to clarify how something actually worked and keep on with the meeting. ...also they once got bored during a sales meeting and coded a full-ass PoC about what the customer was asking during the meeting. That kind of person.