4 ms·

When I was a manager I had to take a training based on the book "The Coaching Habit." It left me really sour on the role, and explained some of the behavior of

When I was a manager I had to take a training based on the book "The Coaching Habit." It left me really sour on the role, and explained some of the behavior of previous managers of mine that I least appreciated, specifically that their approach to management seemed to be to just get me to articulate and explain my problems over and over until I somehow rubber-ducked myself into solving them myself. When that didn't work, it transitioned to "so how can I help?", which would again eventually be turned around into "now you know how to go help yourself", no matter how direct the request was or how much it really needed management authority behind it. I get that the point of the strategy is to help people with strong director-style personalities to listen and empathize a bit more, but in my experience it ended up being implemented as "my responsibility to my reports is to listen and nod."

psunavy03 11mo ago
This is a main reason why Agile Coaches often end up with such a bad rap, and the role is on the outs. They're supposed to be people who can work with leadership to ensure the right people are on the right teams working on the right stuff at the right time. And turn around and be able to help teams untangle their QA and CI/CD processes to speed delivery. Instead, the damn "life coaches" got their foot in the door and started infecting everything. The only time "coaching" is a valid approach is when both you and a coachee agree that the person has what they need to solve the issue and just needs a sounding board or a rubber duck. There's nothing more infuriating that needing help solving a problem and being told "well how would YOU solve the problem?" Idiot, if I knew that, I wouldn't be asking!
- BobaFloutist 11mo ago
  Also makes for a poor metaphor, because coaches in sports are supposed to be absolute experts in absolutely everything about the sport without the physical ability to implement it. Imagine if a football player told their coach "I'm not sure how to deal with this specific opponent's strategy" and the coach was like "Well have you tried thinking about it more?"
  - skeeter2020 11mo ago
    there are lots of sports coaches that were not good players, but they are absolute experts in their sport. For some reason we've let agile/life coaches convince us that "management" is the event and someone with customer service management experience has a lot to say about software development management. Ted Lasso is a great show, but it's not gonna happen IRL. Though the Diamond Dogs would be a great peer group for Engineering Managers... https://larahogan.me/blog/manager-voltron/ https://larahogan.me/blog/manager-voltron/
    - TylerE 11mo ago
      And plenty of great coaches that WERE very good players. Steve Kerr for instance had 5 NBA Championships as a player and is up to 4 as a Head Coach.
      - psunavy03 11mo ago
        The point is that being a good teacher of anything is not the same skillset as being good at it. The Venn diagram overlaps, but not entirely.
    - z3t4 11mo ago
      They might suck at the sport, but then they think about it and learn why they suck, then they can be a good coach, compared to someone who is very good and thinks the reason is because they're smarter, rather then being on the right place on the right time, with the best genes.
citizenpaul 11mo ago
> "The Coaching Habit." Oh wow. This comment just completely explained the worst "manager" I ever had. They must have been using this terrible method. >no matter how direct the request was or how much it really needed management authority behind it. They nearly drove me insane with this circular cycle. It was the only job I ever walked out on. I emailed on a Sunday night that I would not be returning to the office after a particularly terrible cycle of this nonsense. To be clear I am not a "needy" employee. When I ask a manager for something it is because I do not have the authority do the thing.
- pyrolistical 11mo ago
  Tell the manager you are assuming their authority. You will force the answer out of them either way
  - hyperhello 11mo ago
    This is really how it’s done. Don’t go over their head; go under their boss’s.
    - citizenpaul 11mo ago
      I'm not sure you understand just how dedicated they were to this whole turn it back on the employee method they were apparently using. I just skimmed the summary on the book after reading this comment. Its a toxic method of avoiding accountability masquerading as "mgmt" You can't do whatever you describe if it needs sign off by a manager that simply ghosts on everything you try to send their way. You can assume responsibility but I'm not committing fraud for a company that does not care. Also what you said means that you are now officially responsible for the mistakes which I'm pretty sure is what this whole "method" is about.
      - pyrolistical 11mo ago
        If they are not signing things required for your job then you need to go over their head
bsoles 11mo ago
The "required" reading for newly minted managers in my $billion company was/is this shit called "One Minute Manager": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_One_Minute_Manager https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_One_Minute_Manager, including "one minute reprimands" as if employees are children. Happily, I am no longer a manager.
harrall 11mo ago
My biggest complaint about some people is that they measure success by the act of doing and rarely by the result. If I help someone, I am checking if you no longer need help. If I say I’m going to be there at a certain time, I remember every time I’m late. If I do laundry a certain way so I won’t lose a sock, I make sure I haven’t lost a sock. When I do something, my brain replays me “Oh the last time you did this, you made this mistake. Do you want to try it a different way?” People read how you are “supposed to do things” and feel good when they do it. If you switch to measuring your work by your result, you learn way faster and also get really good at things.
- ToucanLoucan 11mo ago
  You've put into excellent words what I have done my whole life. Intent matters but it isn't sufficient. If you "meant to be on time" but weren't, you failed. Simple as. You don't need to lash yourself about it but too many folk are ready to give themselves a pat on the back for good intentions, or trying but failing, etc. If you say you're gonna be somewhere, show the fuck up. Anything short is a miss. Failing to account for that makes you an asshole, IMO.
  - gretch 11mo ago
    If you’re interested in the subject and want to read more, the concept is commonly called “outcome oriented” vs “process oriented”. A LOT of workplace conflict arises out of outcome oriented ppl having to work with process oriented people.
    - bruce511 11mo ago
      I did ceramics for a whole and noticed a common trend. The creator judges the product compared to their imagining of what they wanted to make. Yhe piece invariably falls short (because our imagination is better than our skillset.) Everyone else simply looked at the piece objectively. It was either beautiful or not. I started to look at programs the same way. The criteria for judging my program differs to the criteria for judging other programs. So for my software I care about architecture, clean code, the language I used, how clever it is. I judge others by their UI, documentation, support, correctness, intuitiveness etc. I hate when their UI constantly changes. Even small (cosmetic) bugs turn me off. But my stuff has no docs, the UI is butt ugly, there are some rough edges, but if you avoid the bugs it gives you the right answer (very fast) while consuming less ram, disk, or cpu. And I used new-framework or popular-new-language and runs on any OS etc.
skeeter2020 11mo ago
Three buckets of "management": 1. Mentoring: "this is what I did in a similar situation..." - overused and often not as similar or detailed as needed. 2. Coaching: "what do you think?" valuable for longer term development that depends on deeper thought and introspection; Your immediate problems a generally neither of these. 3. Sponsoring: "You mentioned you're looking for X and I heard about a new project where you could learn... want me to connect you?" under-used by managers, super valuable but harder to scale & can be hit/miss. What your ICs actually need a lot of the time: "solve this problem for me." Most managers can't do this, which is why they became managers. The good ones combine their own skills with 1-3 above to unblock and DON'T push it back on the requestor.
- jvanderbot 11mo ago
  "Can't" is not why people become managers. At least be thoughtful and say "Won't" (because they prefer management)
  - skeeter2020 11mo ago
    I intentionally used the word can't, because I don't think it's an option that they're choosing, rather a lack of ability.
    - ErrantX 11mo ago
      You may not mean it but I do think sometimes framing it this way implies leading and managing is something that requires less ability (it's a skill in its own right). What I think is true is people cap out their technical competency, and look to shift their skillset and, globally, we are bad at a) training them to be good managers (because there is a wrong assumption it's an innate skill) and b) weeding out the many who also lack the ability to be a manager.
      - shermantanktop 11mo ago
        Agree, it’s a skill, it can be learned and improved, and of course some people have some natural ability. But for every skill there’s a floor and a ceiling. The floor for managers is imo far lower than it is for tech ICs. Incompetent managers have many options to hide their misdeeds. That doesn’t say anything about the average or the ceiling.
eecc 11mo ago
So basically a crash course in psychoanalysis?
nrawe 11mo ago
The Coaching Habit is a fantastic book and is the right way to do. Managers don't exist to solve other peoples problems; it's vice versa. Managers are accountable for a problem, and responsible for building a team that can solve it in the most cost effective way. Their team members are responsible for solving the problem. Managers are also responsible for a lot of other things (tracking, reporting, cost management, roadmaps, change management, hiring/firing, process improvement). IME the managers who don't like the coaching side largely don't really want to be managers or don't understand that distinction in responsibilities. (Not helped, TBF, by lots of pretty awful promotion schemes that don't support people on that path). What The Coaching Habit does leave out is the need for mentoring. Mentoring is not a synonym for coaching, it's active: "my report does not know how to do this thing, I need to tell/show them how to do it." While coaching: "my report knows how to do this, they need a soundboard for getting to the right answer." It can distinctly suck some time, for both parties. However, in the long run, when managers stop coddling, their team members start growing. One person who hated me bitterly when I started on the coaching road with them now thanks me for it because it helped them to build their confidence and ultimately their skills to become a CTO. I have similar stories from others. YMMV.
- kuresov 11mo ago
  Understanding the distinction between mentorship and coaching from this perspective was very helpful. Thank you!
- nrhrjrjrjtntbt 11mo ago
  Isn't the definitions the other way around regarding coaching and mentoring? Coaching is about skills. Mentoring is about advice/soundboard.
  - lightbulbish 11mo ago
    My understanding is that coaching is about helping the individual solve the problem himself/herself. Mentoring is about adding information or skills such that the individual becomes more capable and thus are able to solve a problem.
  - 11mo ago

psunavy03 11mo ago

This is a main reason why Agile Coaches often end up with such a bad rap, and the role is on the outs. They're supposed to be people who can work with leadership to ensure the right people are on the right teams working on the right stuff at the right time. And turn around and be able to help teams untangle their QA and CI/CD processes to speed delivery. Instead, the damn "life coaches" got their foot in the door and started infecting everything. The only time "coaching" is a valid approach is when both you and a coachee agree that the person has what they need to solve the issue and just needs a sounding board or a rubber duck. There's nothing more infuriating that needing help solving a problem and being told "well how would YOU solve the problem?" Idiot, if I knew that, I wouldn't be asking!

BobaFloutist 11mo ago
Also makes for a poor metaphor, because coaches in sports are supposed to be absolute experts in absolutely everything about the sport without the physical ability to implement it. Imagine if a football player told their coach "I'm not sure how to deal with this specific opponent's strategy" and the coach was like "Well have you tried thinking about it more?"
- skeeter2020 11mo ago
  there are lots of sports coaches that were not good players, but they are absolute experts in their sport. For some reason we've let agile/life coaches convince us that "management" is the event and someone with customer service management experience has a lot to say about software development management. Ted Lasso is a great show, but it's not gonna happen IRL. Though the Diamond Dogs would be a great peer group for Engineering Managers... https://larahogan.me/blog/manager-voltron/ https://larahogan.me/blog/manager-voltron/
  - TylerE 11mo ago
    And plenty of great coaches that WERE very good players. Steve Kerr for instance had 5 NBA Championships as a player and is up to 4 as a Head Coach.
    - psunavy03 11mo ago
      The point is that being a good teacher of anything is not the same skillset as being good at it. The Venn diagram overlaps, but not entirely.
  - z3t4 11mo ago
    They might suck at the sport, but then they think about it and learn why they suck, then they can be a good coach, compared to someone who is very good and thinks the reason is because they're smarter, rather then being on the right place on the right time, with the best genes.

citizenpaul 11mo ago

> "The Coaching Habit." Oh wow. This comment just completely explained the worst "manager" I ever had. They must have been using this terrible method. >no matter how direct the request was or how much it really needed management authority behind it. They nearly drove me insane with this circular cycle. It was the only job I ever walked out on. I emailed on a Sunday night that I would not be returning to the office after a particularly terrible cycle of this nonsense. To be clear I am not a "needy" employee. When I ask a manager for something it is because I do not have the authority do the thing.

pyrolistical 11mo ago
Tell the manager you are assuming their authority. You will force the answer out of them either way
- hyperhello 11mo ago
  This is really how it’s done. Don’t go over their head; go under their boss’s.
  - citizenpaul 11mo ago
    I'm not sure you understand just how dedicated they were to this whole turn it back on the employee method they were apparently using. I just skimmed the summary on the book after reading this comment. Its a toxic method of avoiding accountability masquerading as "mgmt" You can't do whatever you describe if it needs sign off by a manager that simply ghosts on everything you try to send their way. You can assume responsibility but I'm not committing fraud for a company that does not care. Also what you said means that you are now officially responsible for the mistakes which I'm pretty sure is what this whole "method" is about.
    - pyrolistical 11mo ago
      If they are not signing things required for your job then you need to go over their head

bsoles 11mo ago

The "required" reading for newly minted managers in my $billion company was/is this shit called "One Minute Manager": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_One_Minute_Manager https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_One_Minute_Manager, including "one minute reprimands" as if employees are children. Happily, I am no longer a manager.

harrall 11mo ago

My biggest complaint about some people is that they measure success by the act of doing and rarely by the result. If I help someone, I am checking if you no longer need help. If I say I’m going to be there at a certain time, I remember every time I’m late. If I do laundry a certain way so I won’t lose a sock, I make sure I haven’t lost a sock. When I do something, my brain replays me “Oh the last time you did this, you made this mistake. Do you want to try it a different way?” People read how you are “supposed to do things” and feel good when they do it. If you switch to measuring your work by your result, you learn way faster and also get really good at things.

ToucanLoucan 11mo ago
You've put into excellent words what I have done my whole life. Intent matters but it isn't sufficient. If you "meant to be on time" but weren't, you failed. Simple as. You don't need to lash yourself about it but too many folk are ready to give themselves a pat on the back for good intentions, or trying but failing, etc. If you say you're gonna be somewhere, show the fuck up. Anything short is a miss. Failing to account for that makes you an asshole, IMO.
- gretch 11mo ago
  If you’re interested in the subject and want to read more, the concept is commonly called “outcome oriented” vs “process oriented”. A LOT of workplace conflict arises out of outcome oriented ppl having to work with process oriented people.
  - bruce511 11mo ago
    I did ceramics for a whole and noticed a common trend. The creator judges the product compared to their imagining of what they wanted to make. Yhe piece invariably falls short (because our imagination is better than our skillset.) Everyone else simply looked at the piece objectively. It was either beautiful or not. I started to look at programs the same way. The criteria for judging my program differs to the criteria for judging other programs. So for my software I care about architecture, clean code, the language I used, how clever it is. I judge others by their UI, documentation, support, correctness, intuitiveness etc. I hate when their UI constantly changes. Even small (cosmetic) bugs turn me off. But my stuff has no docs, the UI is butt ugly, there are some rough edges, but if you avoid the bugs it gives you the right answer (very fast) while consuming less ram, disk, or cpu. And I used new-framework or popular-new-language and runs on any OS etc.

skeeter2020 11mo ago

Three buckets of "management": 1. Mentoring: "this is what I did in a similar situation..." - overused and often not as similar or detailed as needed. 2. Coaching: "what do you think?" valuable for longer term development that depends on deeper thought and introspection; Your immediate problems a generally neither of these. 3. Sponsoring: "You mentioned you're looking for X and I heard about a new project where you could learn... want me to connect you?" under-used by managers, super valuable but harder to scale & can be hit/miss. What your ICs actually need a lot of the time: "solve this problem for me." Most managers can't do this, which is why they became managers. The good ones combine their own skills with 1-3 above to unblock and DON'T push it back on the requestor.

jvanderbot 11mo ago
"Can't" is not why people become managers. At least be thoughtful and say "Won't" (because they prefer management)
- skeeter2020 11mo ago
  I intentionally used the word can't, because I don't think it's an option that they're choosing, rather a lack of ability.
  - ErrantX 11mo ago
    You may not mean it but I do think sometimes framing it this way implies leading and managing is something that requires less ability (it's a skill in its own right). What I think is true is people cap out their technical competency, and look to shift their skillset and, globally, we are bad at a) training them to be good managers (because there is a wrong assumption it's an innate skill) and b) weeding out the many who also lack the ability to be a manager.
    - shermantanktop 11mo ago
      Agree, it’s a skill, it can be learned and improved, and of course some people have some natural ability. But for every skill there’s a floor and a ceiling. The floor for managers is imo far lower than it is for tech ICs. Incompetent managers have many options to hide their misdeeds. That doesn’t say anything about the average or the ceiling.

eecc 11mo ago

So basically a crash course in psychoanalysis?

nrawe 11mo ago

The Coaching Habit is a fantastic book and is the right way to do. Managers don't exist to solve other peoples problems; it's vice versa. Managers are accountable for a problem, and responsible for building a team that can solve it in the most cost effective way. Their team members are responsible for solving the problem. Managers are also responsible for a lot of other things (tracking, reporting, cost management, roadmaps, change management, hiring/firing, process improvement). IME the managers who don't like the coaching side largely don't really want to be managers or don't understand that distinction in responsibilities. (Not helped, TBF, by lots of pretty awful promotion schemes that don't support people on that path). What The Coaching Habit does leave out is the need for mentoring. Mentoring is not a synonym for coaching, it's active: "my report does not know how to do this thing, I need to tell/show them how to do it." While coaching: "my report knows how to do this, they need a soundboard for getting to the right answer." It can distinctly suck some time, for both parties. However, in the long run, when managers stop coddling, their team members start growing. One person who hated me bitterly when I started on the coaching road with them now thanks me for it because it helped them to build their confidence and ultimately their skills to become a CTO. I have similar stories from others. YMMV.

kuresov 11mo ago
Understanding the distinction between mentorship and coaching from this perspective was very helpful. Thank you!
nrhrjrjrjtntbt 11mo ago
Isn't the definitions the other way around regarding coaching and mentoring? Coaching is about skills. Mentoring is about advice/soundboard.
- lightbulbish 11mo ago
  My understanding is that coaching is about helping the individual solve the problem himself/herself. Mentoring is about adding information or skills such that the individual becomes more capable and thus are able to solve a problem.
- 11mo ago