Managing Humans: Biting and Humorous Tales of a Software Engineering Manager

by Michael Lopp

I’m talking about the engineering managers who are hiding the fact they never really did much coding.

You are going to give a vastly different sequence of events because you are not talking to a person when you talk with your manager; you are talking to the organization. You instinctively know that telling your boss that you had a beer at lunch is a bad idea,

The next best gauge of your manager’s political clout is cross-functional meetings where his peers are present. How are they treating him? Is it a familiar conversation or are they getting to know him? Should they know him? If it’s his meeting, is he driving it? If it’s not his meeting, can he actively contribute?

Your manager is not a manager until he participated in a layoff.

In the days, weeks, and months that follow shipping 1.0, the work is equally important to your success,

I believe a healthy company that wants to continue to grow and invent needs to invest equally in both their Stables and their Volatiles.

I have a standing agenda item for all team meetings that reads “gossip, rumors, and lies,” and when we hit that agenda item, it’s a chance for everyone on the team to figure out what is the truth and what is a lie.

Status reports usually show up because a distant executive feels out of touch with part of his or her organization, and they believe getting everyone to efficiently document their week is going to help. It doesn’t. E-mailed status reports say one thing to 90 percent of the people who write them: “You don’t value my time.”

A meeting has two critical components : an agenda and a referee

If they’re doing anything except listening, they aren’t listening.

However, the problem here isn’t with Frank, it’s with the referee. Frank is not sensing progress, so Frank has left. The referee has forgotten that . . . if steam isn’t coming from their ears, they might stop listening.

Reset the meeting with silence.

The glaring danger signs for a meeting that is doomed, whether it’s a lack of preparation, the absence of a key player, or the fact the team is wound up about another issue entirely.

More folks are invited to these affairs because everyone believes that if you’re invited to a meeting, you are somehow more professionally relevant.

the definition of a successful meeting is that when the meeting is done, it need never occur again.

Part of their value is their judgment in presenting you with the essential facts,

Sniffing around pisses people off. Sniffing around is often interpreted as micromanagement, a passive-aggressive way of stating, “I don’t believe you can do your job.”

When these seemingly benign stories are not judged, when they are not questioned, the story is over. Bob’s conscience is clear because he gave you a heads-up. Your conscience is clear is because you listened to Bob’s concern, and, yeah, you had a Twinge, but Bob’s delivery record is impeccable, so Twinge be damned, it’ll sort itself out in the end.

The content is merely a delivery vehicle for the mood, and the mood sets your agenda.

A one-on-one is not a project meeting. A one-on-one is not status report.

So, I listen, I take it on myself to find a meaty conversation, and if I don’t find it in the first 15 minutes, I’ve got three moves:

I see you’ve got a handle on your bugs, but one thing we talked about at your last annual performance review was getting a better handle on the architecture. How’s that going?

The point of this discussion is not to solve my Disaster; the point is that we’re going to have a conversation where one of us is going to learn something more than just project status.

When the Vent begins, you might confuse this for a conversation. It’s not. It’s a mental release valve, and your job is to listen for as long as it takes. Don’t problem solve.

Whatever the backstory, the ranter is finding some weird mental satisfaction in the endless restatement of the problem, but they have no interest in solving the actual problem at this point. Annoying. When you’ve got a confirmed rant on your hands, it’s OK to jump into the middle of the Vent—you’re

or worse, it’s happened enough to me that when I see the Disaster approaching, I carefully tuck all of my emotions in a box, lock the box, and magically transform into a Vulcan.

When the Disaster arrives, the absolute worst response is any semblance of emotion.

If someone is going to freak out, it’s going to be on a Monday.

One pleasant side effect of attacking freakouts with questions is that you discover the freak is often already close to a solution.

In that time, their understanding, while soaked in emotion, has more depth than yours.

First, there is a problem that needs to be solved. Second, and more importantly, someone believes the best way to get your attention is by freaking out.

I know it feels like the passive-aggressive Olympics, but I swear this is how Wallace thinks.

when communications are down, listen hard, repeat everything, and assume nothing.

Agenda detection starts by first classifying the participants. There are two major types that you need to identify: players and pawns.

The cons, clearly, are the ones who are being screwed. They’re likely the ones who yelled loudly enough to get the meeting set up in the first place.

If you want the meeting to produce something useful, the pros must be represented.

A common tactic of a good pro is to not acknowledge that they’re the pro.

The cons need a plan, some assurance that will somehow address whatever the issue is.

Remember that for every person on the team who has a strong opinion regarding the decision, there are probably four other coworkers who just want someone to make a decision so that they can get back to work.

they fail convey that this is the decision and further debate is not necessary. A good sign of poor mandate delivery is when the delivery degrades into another debate of the issues.

you’re sitting with someone who was on the losing side of the decision and they’re still nodding their head, they don’t believe the battle is over.

(yay, boo, or yawn)

rub—mandate justification often does not travel well through a large organization.

Back to the rock star who thinks she’s about to be fired. Given that I know there is no chance she’s about to be fired, what am I hearing? First, I’m hearing, “I don’t know where I stand in the organization.”

My rule of thumb is that if I’m debating whether to pass something on for more than a few seconds, I might not be qualified to decide, so pass it on and see what happens.

In this uncomfortable quiet, if they’re about to say it, they just do. Try it; just shut up and see what your team says when you’re saying nothing.

Good time to point out how enthusiasm reduces all engineering estimates by a third.

Managers lead, and a lot of managers translate that into “managers lead by talking.”

Remember this: in most businesses, everyone’s basic agenda is visible after they’ve talked for about 30 seconds.

In each of these groups, there are managers who must speak their native language, as well as be able to translate between spheres in order to get the job done. I believe this is a legitimate reason for managementese.