Whenever I start a new job, I purchase a lot of chocolate in various varieties. Then I put it in an easy to see, easy to transport cup. Then I walk around the building and introduce myself, bestowing candy on anyone who wants it.
I trade people’s names and a hello
for candy. I am always careful to visit the Help Desk people (which,
for those of you not in the tech industry, are the folks who usually
manage your email, passwords, computer issues, etc.), the receptionist,
IS/IT (if they are separate from Help Desk), any executive assistants,
and my immediate co-workers/team. I want my first interaction with these
people to be pleasant, and I’m not ashamed to say so; as a matter of
fact, many people smile and laugh when you tell them that you’re bribing
them for good will in advance.
That’s the trick to
bribery. It’s a blatant means of manipulation, and failing to
acknowledge that blatancy can annoy or upset people. Being obvious about
what you’re doing sets them at ease, and people who meet you with a
smile and the association of a treat, are more likely to think of you
fondly the next time you run into them.
For example,
you meet Mary the receptionist. You’ve passed her desk and know she
collects bears, so, when you’re out and about, bring her a bear. A
non-creepy bear, btw. Nothing to inspire concerns you might want to date
her or stalk her, and nothing so expensive she feels obligated for
receiving it. The point is—bears, candy or good conversation—you are
letting Mary know she is important because you thought about Mary even
when she was not around; and that means a lot to people. It could also
be things like, if Mary is busy, sign for the package for her if that’s
possible. You get the gist; do something kind of a tangible nature. Feel
free to tell her it’s a bribe if you’re doing it just to get on her
good side (feel free to let her know you want to be on her good side),
and you will be banking good fortune against a need in the future…and
you might make a friend along the way.
A lot of
techniques I suggest in this blog are methods of manipulation; the point
that I try to keep clear, that I continue to strive for, is that you be
upfront and transparent with people. It often makes them laugh, yes,
but its a vital ingredient to the natural integrity on which they will
base their opinions of you. You want them happy. You want to associate
yourself with a good thing. But you also want to take those baby steps
of good communication and connection to the next level, which is very
hard to do if those people feel you're in it only for yourself, and are
willing to manipulate people in negative ways to get what you want.
You
do want to manipulate people, yes. But you want to do in positive ways,
so people understand what you are doing and who you are. And it
certainly doesn't hurt if the first thing they think of when they see
you is tasty candy.
Thursday, November 29, 2012
Wednesday, November 21, 2012
Re-Run: Never Volunteer. Well. Sort of.
Another favorite article being re-run for your enjoyment.
This may seem counter to my overall message of help and bribery, but it fits in just fine. Before I explain how, however, I would like to give you the story my father gave me on the topic of volunteering that illustrated why not volunteering is a really, really good thing:
Dad and a bunch of other young men whose heads have been freshly shaved get off the bus for the first time at the Marine base for their very first day of boot camp. Carrying their supplies, they line up outside the bus and are confronted by a drill sergeant.
The drill sergeant says "I need 2 volunteers!"
Two hands go up. My father is neither of those two men.
"You two, report to the barracks to clean the toilets! Everyone else, drop your stuff off and head to the mess hall. And Gentlemen, let this be your first lesson: never volunteer."
The moral of the story is that you should never volunteer when you do not know what you are getting into.
This, in general, is a good lesson: don't leap into something without knowing what you're leaping into. I'm sure there are some Mammoths (not especially known for their leaping, but let me have this metaphor!) that wished they'd thought it through before moseying through the tar pits.
It is not always possible to know what's around the next corner, but when you do know, then volunteering might be an option; as I note in my early blog posts, bribing people in advance is a really good idea. Volunteering can be a method of doing a good turn for someone or some project either in thanks or to bank up good will...who knows when you'll need it?
When volunteering, know and enforce your boundaries. Which is to say, volunteering to give a brown bag to five people about X process is very different than when upper management thinks that's swell and wants you to do it at the quarterly meeting for 20 minutes with full PPT presentation.
When you are volunteering, you are agreeing to do a service for a charity or someone else in a charitable way. Many people who are involved with volunteer work capitalize on the fact that we do not like to disappoint or upset people, and put themselves more in a customer seat than in the seat of someone who is--at least in this case--getting something for nothing. Since customers give us money, we work our butts off to make them happy. But charities and folks receiving charitable energy/money/etc. do not have to receive the same quality level of service; its always good if you can put in your best effort, but if you're doing someone a favor, at the end of the day, you're still the one doing the favor--you get to decide the parameters of what you are willing to do, and subtle or not-so-subtle pressure by them should not change that...whether you're giving money or time to build homes for families in need or running that document to the fourth floor for your boss down the hall.
Now, if I could just tattoo that last paragraph on my forehead (backwards), I could work on one of my own weaknesses, which is, as you have guessed, maintaining boundaries around volunteer work. I am a sucker for someone in need.
On that note, Happy Holidays to you and yours!
This may seem counter to my overall message of help and bribery, but it fits in just fine. Before I explain how, however, I would like to give you the story my father gave me on the topic of volunteering that illustrated why not volunteering is a really, really good thing:
Dad and a bunch of other young men whose heads have been freshly shaved get off the bus for the first time at the Marine base for their very first day of boot camp. Carrying their supplies, they line up outside the bus and are confronted by a drill sergeant.
The drill sergeant says "I need 2 volunteers!"
Two hands go up. My father is neither of those two men.
"You two, report to the barracks to clean the toilets! Everyone else, drop your stuff off and head to the mess hall. And Gentlemen, let this be your first lesson: never volunteer."
The moral of the story is that you should never volunteer when you do not know what you are getting into.
This, in general, is a good lesson: don't leap into something without knowing what you're leaping into. I'm sure there are some Mammoths (not especially known for their leaping, but let me have this metaphor!) that wished they'd thought it through before moseying through the tar pits.
It is not always possible to know what's around the next corner, but when you do know, then volunteering might be an option; as I note in my early blog posts, bribing people in advance is a really good idea. Volunteering can be a method of doing a good turn for someone or some project either in thanks or to bank up good will...who knows when you'll need it?
When volunteering, know and enforce your boundaries. Which is to say, volunteering to give a brown bag to five people about X process is very different than when upper management thinks that's swell and wants you to do it at the quarterly meeting for 20 minutes with full PPT presentation.
When you are volunteering, you are agreeing to do a service for a charity or someone else in a charitable way. Many people who are involved with volunteer work capitalize on the fact that we do not like to disappoint or upset people, and put themselves more in a customer seat than in the seat of someone who is--at least in this case--getting something for nothing. Since customers give us money, we work our butts off to make them happy. But charities and folks receiving charitable energy/money/etc. do not have to receive the same quality level of service; its always good if you can put in your best effort, but if you're doing someone a favor, at the end of the day, you're still the one doing the favor--you get to decide the parameters of what you are willing to do, and subtle or not-so-subtle pressure by them should not change that...whether you're giving money or time to build homes for families in need or running that document to the fourth floor for your boss down the hall.
Now, if I could just tattoo that last paragraph on my forehead (backwards), I could work on one of my own weaknesses, which is, as you have guessed, maintaining boundaries around volunteer work. I am a sucker for someone in need.
On that note, Happy Holidays to you and yours!
Monday, November 19, 2012
Allies in the Audience
Managing talks/presentations/classes with rowdy people who have something to say
Tuesday, November 6, 2012
Re-Run: You Can't Just Nag People
The original post ran in December 2010. Please enjoy a blast from the past:
You Can’t Just Nag People. It’s Rude. Also, Everyone Has Expectations, They Just Don't Always Tell You.
But it is technically your job to nag people, if you are a manager (or a lead, etc.). Just sayin'.
I’m not advocating a paranoid world in which people are completely unreliable and projects never get done due to stupidity or maliciousness (although I'm certain the world seems that way sometimes). I’m just asking to take a look at the fact that because the word “manager” is somewhere involved with you, your job is to make sure stuff gets done, and you will likely be held accountable for that expectation that others have of you.
While people make mistakes and forget things or prioritize them lower than other things, or spill coffee all over themselves ten seconds after saying yes to you and what they promised flees their mind as the searing pain tears through their clothing, its not a really good idea to let people feel like they’re in need of a constant nag. You’re no one’s mother (ok, you might be, and you might be at the office, but you know what I mean). But you are interested in getting things done in a specified time frame in order to meet your own obligations and goals.
To that end, let people know you’re going to nag about items that require such time frames. When you know you need something, do not be afraid to ask for data back by specific dates and times. Always explain why, try to be as transparent as possible about your requests, and reiterate that you understand that it is a request. If it’s a pressing request and they cannot agree to the time frame, that’s ok, too. You can either escalate to get the time you need from that person or tell the person who requires the data that they’ll have to wait (more on escalating—preferably without making people upset—in future blog posts). Then be sure to follow up with your information source after securing a time when you can check back.
What about requests that you have to fulfill that come in with no time frames? So, for example, you need an answer about a question you received this afternoon. There may be no time expectation expressed by the person who asked you, but using you judgment you would try not to assume there isn’t one. Because, for every request you will ever receive, there is always a time expectation, even if one isn’t expressed. Assuming there’s no hurry, or assuming that answering immediately is required can both be problematic. Answering too soon may mean your answer may not contain the full expected data set, and answering too late can be, well, too late.
When you receive requests, always try to get an idea of the importance of the request and the time frame. People will, without fail, inadvertently distort both. However, with both, you can make an educated guess about how fast you need to get an item completed. In turn, after taking the task, you can have a better idea of how much time to negotiate with others over before getting the data you require to return to the original requestor.
And, doing it all patiently, calmly and consistently will make some people actually ENJOY you nagging them. Really. It has happened to me, and all of those who reported as such are certifiably sane (or so they tell me).
You Can’t Just Nag People. It’s Rude. Also, Everyone Has Expectations, They Just Don't Always Tell You.
But it is technically your job to nag people, if you are a manager (or a lead, etc.). Just sayin'.
I’m not advocating a paranoid world in which people are completely unreliable and projects never get done due to stupidity or maliciousness (although I'm certain the world seems that way sometimes). I’m just asking to take a look at the fact that because the word “manager” is somewhere involved with you, your job is to make sure stuff gets done, and you will likely be held accountable for that expectation that others have of you.
While people make mistakes and forget things or prioritize them lower than other things, or spill coffee all over themselves ten seconds after saying yes to you and what they promised flees their mind as the searing pain tears through their clothing, its not a really good idea to let people feel like they’re in need of a constant nag. You’re no one’s mother (ok, you might be, and you might be at the office, but you know what I mean). But you are interested in getting things done in a specified time frame in order to meet your own obligations and goals.
To that end, let people know you’re going to nag about items that require such time frames. When you know you need something, do not be afraid to ask for data back by specific dates and times. Always explain why, try to be as transparent as possible about your requests, and reiterate that you understand that it is a request. If it’s a pressing request and they cannot agree to the time frame, that’s ok, too. You can either escalate to get the time you need from that person or tell the person who requires the data that they’ll have to wait (more on escalating—preferably without making people upset—in future blog posts). Then be sure to follow up with your information source after securing a time when you can check back.
What about requests that you have to fulfill that come in with no time frames? So, for example, you need an answer about a question you received this afternoon. There may be no time expectation expressed by the person who asked you, but using you judgment you would try not to assume there isn’t one. Because, for every request you will ever receive, there is always a time expectation, even if one isn’t expressed. Assuming there’s no hurry, or assuming that answering immediately is required can both be problematic. Answering too soon may mean your answer may not contain the full expected data set, and answering too late can be, well, too late.
When you receive requests, always try to get an idea of the importance of the request and the time frame. People will, without fail, inadvertently distort both. However, with both, you can make an educated guess about how fast you need to get an item completed. In turn, after taking the task, you can have a better idea of how much time to negotiate with others over before getting the data you require to return to the original requestor.
And, doing it all patiently, calmly and consistently will make some people actually ENJOY you nagging them. Really. It has happened to me, and all of those who reported as such are certifiably sane (or so they tell me).
Tuesday, October 16, 2012
You're a Freaking Expert
I have Imposter Syndrome. I've been in the business for 20+ years, command a large salary, write this blog, teach scrum and process management and I still feel like someday, someone's going to notice I have no idea what I'm doing and that I'm just making it up as I go along.
Turns out, knowing what your doing is a fluid thing; making it up as you go along is perfectly acceptable and has gotten many people to great heights of accomplishment. Albert Einstein rarely remembered to tie his shoes--he went to work in slippers when his wife was out of town--but we're still quoting him today.
I am, by no means, Albert Einstein or anyone like him. But I am an expert at what I do. So are you. Think about it a minute. Strip away the "wait until they find out I don't know what I'm doing" and think about your job and the accomplishments in your life that led you to where you are. Got it? See it?
Yeah, you're a freaking expert.
You would be paid to do what you do if you weren't; from flipping burgers to writing code (and everything in between) employers are not just hiring people who can get by in this economy, they're hiring good, resourceful people. Experts, or soon to be experts. You're one of them.
When you look at the folks you manage, put the expert glasses on and take a look. I bet that each member of the teams you work with or the team you manage has something you'd consider them the lead on. Something that is in their wheelhouse of expertise. People often forget that they were hired because they rocked before they got this gig. They often get bogged down in the minutia of what they are doing and how well (or how poorly) that particular minutia is doing. Even if you know they could do more than they are doing now, you know it because you hired them to be competent. You hired them for their expertise.
People you work with need to hear that now and again. Not just compliments and praise and what have you, but that they are experts. That they were hired to do the job they are doing and they are doing it well. You need to hear that, too, incidentally. The entire department may have left for another company (which actually happened to me one time), leaving you the senior one in charge, but you're the one with the l33t skillz. You deserve to be there, both because of what you know and maybe because no one knows anymore than you do.
In any case, feel self-doubt: you will. Listen to your employees kabitz about their problems and their work. Then remember, you're a freaking expert. A professional. You're getting paid to do this. And so are they. Sometimes this means they need to straighten up and fly right to earn that concept of expertise, but typically, they just need to be reminded of it in their darker moments: that you rely on them because they are experts.
Turns out, knowing what your doing is a fluid thing; making it up as you go along is perfectly acceptable and has gotten many people to great heights of accomplishment. Albert Einstein rarely remembered to tie his shoes--he went to work in slippers when his wife was out of town--but we're still quoting him today.
I am, by no means, Albert Einstein or anyone like him. But I am an expert at what I do. So are you. Think about it a minute. Strip away the "wait until they find out I don't know what I'm doing" and think about your job and the accomplishments in your life that led you to where you are. Got it? See it?
Yeah, you're a freaking expert.
You would be paid to do what you do if you weren't; from flipping burgers to writing code (and everything in between) employers are not just hiring people who can get by in this economy, they're hiring good, resourceful people. Experts, or soon to be experts. You're one of them.
When you look at the folks you manage, put the expert glasses on and take a look. I bet that each member of the teams you work with or the team you manage has something you'd consider them the lead on. Something that is in their wheelhouse of expertise. People often forget that they were hired because they rocked before they got this gig. They often get bogged down in the minutia of what they are doing and how well (or how poorly) that particular minutia is doing. Even if you know they could do more than they are doing now, you know it because you hired them to be competent. You hired them for their expertise.
People you work with need to hear that now and again. Not just compliments and praise and what have you, but that they are experts. That they were hired to do the job they are doing and they are doing it well. You need to hear that, too, incidentally. The entire department may have left for another company (which actually happened to me one time), leaving you the senior one in charge, but you're the one with the l33t skillz. You deserve to be there, both because of what you know and maybe because no one knows anymore than you do.
In any case, feel self-doubt: you will. Listen to your employees kabitz about their problems and their work. Then remember, you're a freaking expert. A professional. You're getting paid to do this. And so are they. Sometimes this means they need to straighten up and fly right to earn that concept of expertise, but typically, they just need to be reminded of it in their darker moments: that you rely on them because they are experts.
Wednesday, October 10, 2012
Lights! Camera! Focus!
Ok, that's not how that saying goes. It's supposed to be "action." Of course, focus is a type of taking action, so I think that I am allowed to use the phrase as the title on technical merits as well as artistic license.
As a manager, you have two jobs to do: 1) your management job and 2) your "regular" work. Rarely does a manager JUST manage people, and a person who just does "regular" work and no managing is not actually a manager no matter what the label on the tin says.
No one tells you when you become a project manager or a people manager that these are two distinct jobs. No one tells you that if you're doing a good job at one, you're probably neglecting the other one at least a bit. Most employers assume you know what to do and leave you to do it (unless you're working in a less-than-happy environment with a micro-manager...this is not that blog post, though).
So how do you do it?
On the surface, it seems pretty sensible: come in and work. All work is work, right? Wrong. Like the features in your products, the work you do has different priorities. Unlike the features in your products, there is no general consensus about the priorities of your work; most people giving you work are usually unaware of work you've gotten from other people or that you have work of your own to do. They just know they need the TPS report by Monday and you're their source for that report. To them, the requests they make of you are, with very few exceptions, your highest priority.
As you know five items that are all marked "highest priority" basically means that the person going through the list of the five items is the one who really prioritizes those items...if you label all items at the same priority (even if it's the lowest possible), it sort of renders the concept of you setting the priority as moot because it really doesn't give information to the person who is looking for it in terms of priority. So that person makes up the priority themselves.
Note, that's an excellent argument to have with a boss, stakeholder, etc. who wants everything done now, at the highest priority. But this article is about staying focused and doing your two jobs.
This means that you are the arbiter of priority. Your boss, the CEO, the President of the United States may come to you and give you work to do...but at the end of the day, you're the one who does it (or passes it on to be done) and you are the one who decides the final order in which it is done, by doing it in that order.
For me, this sort of enforces list making habits. I need to know, somewhere, in a concise way, all the stuff I have to do. There are lots of organizational programs out there, even tasks programs available in Microsoft Office Outlook. Notepad and pencil also works. The gist is, write down everything you have to do for a set period of time, in whatever order you can remember it.
Next, go through the list and prioritize it. Use the information from the folks asking for the outcome of those tasks, but don't let it control the priority; a 12 hour task might be your boss's highest priority, but a 10 minute task might be his secondary priority. Knocking out the ten minute task could make you look like a hero before you start on the 12 hour one.
My rule of thumb for writing down tasks in a list is that the task has to take more than 10 minutes or is easily forgettable (or both). Oftentimes, if its faster to do the task than write it on the list, I just do the task. Also don't forget to include tasks that you know you have to do but don't often consider tasks--things like going to a daily 15 min meeting or, if you take up more than 10 minutes a day doing it, checking your email. This means you also include all your management stuff as well as all your "regular" stuff.
Base your decisions on priority by:
Now review the prioritized list and determine how much stuff there is managerial, and how much is "regular work." There are some days--for example, when you're working the week between Christmas and New Year's and everyone except you is on vacation--when doing managerial stuff is not as important as regular work. There will be other days where regular work is less important than managerial work, such as when you have to work with an employee to map out their paternity or maternity leave.
On the whole, however, you need to not only stay on top of your high priority issues, you need to balance your time between your regular work and your managerial duties. The exact balance of work 50%-50%, 25%-75%, etc., is determined by you, time of year, and anything else you can think of. But now is your time to review your tasks, their priorities, and make sure they measure up to the balance of the two jobs you have. This might alter the order of the things you do, and will likely affect their priority.
Then you do the work.
I do this a few times a week; when I start a new job, I do it at least once a day. Eventually I get into the rhythms of the day and need the list less often, but its always good to do it at least once a week to make sure that neither of your two jobs are suffering.
It's too easy to get distracted. Too easy to lose focus. Both jobs you do are very important. But its equally important that you stay focused, manage the work, and are ready for the camera and the lights at any time.
As a manager, you have two jobs to do: 1) your management job and 2) your "regular" work. Rarely does a manager JUST manage people, and a person who just does "regular" work and no managing is not actually a manager no matter what the label on the tin says.
No one tells you when you become a project manager or a people manager that these are two distinct jobs. No one tells you that if you're doing a good job at one, you're probably neglecting the other one at least a bit. Most employers assume you know what to do and leave you to do it (unless you're working in a less-than-happy environment with a micro-manager...this is not that blog post, though).
So how do you do it?
On the surface, it seems pretty sensible: come in and work. All work is work, right? Wrong. Like the features in your products, the work you do has different priorities. Unlike the features in your products, there is no general consensus about the priorities of your work; most people giving you work are usually unaware of work you've gotten from other people or that you have work of your own to do. They just know they need the TPS report by Monday and you're their source for that report. To them, the requests they make of you are, with very few exceptions, your highest priority.
As you know five items that are all marked "highest priority" basically means that the person going through the list of the five items is the one who really prioritizes those items...if you label all items at the same priority (even if it's the lowest possible), it sort of renders the concept of you setting the priority as moot because it really doesn't give information to the person who is looking for it in terms of priority. So that person makes up the priority themselves.
Note, that's an excellent argument to have with a boss, stakeholder, etc. who wants everything done now, at the highest priority. But this article is about staying focused and doing your two jobs.
This means that you are the arbiter of priority. Your boss, the CEO, the President of the United States may come to you and give you work to do...but at the end of the day, you're the one who does it (or passes it on to be done) and you are the one who decides the final order in which it is done, by doing it in that order.
For me, this sort of enforces list making habits. I need to know, somewhere, in a concise way, all the stuff I have to do. There are lots of organizational programs out there, even tasks programs available in Microsoft Office Outlook. Notepad and pencil also works. The gist is, write down everything you have to do for a set period of time, in whatever order you can remember it.
Next, go through the list and prioritize it. Use the information from the folks asking for the outcome of those tasks, but don't let it control the priority; a 12 hour task might be your boss's highest priority, but a 10 minute task might be his secondary priority. Knocking out the ten minute task could make you look like a hero before you start on the 12 hour one.
My rule of thumb for writing down tasks in a list is that the task has to take more than 10 minutes or is easily forgettable (or both). Oftentimes, if its faster to do the task than write it on the list, I just do the task. Also don't forget to include tasks that you know you have to do but don't often consider tasks--things like going to a daily 15 min meeting or, if you take up more than 10 minutes a day doing it, checking your email. This means you also include all your management stuff as well as all your "regular" stuff.
Base your decisions on priority by:
- Due date
- Rank of person who gave it
- Emphasis on priority as given by the person who gave it
- What you'd like to get accomplished in this time frame (ie: finally knocking down that gigantic thing you haven't been able to get to for weeks or cranking out a piece of low hanging fruit so you look productive to your manager and his manager, or anything in between)
- Relationship to your measurable performance goals
- If you are blocking other people from being productive by not doing a specific piece of work (ie: not completing a code review that blocks someone from checking in code, for example)
- Anything else you deem important criteria
Now review the prioritized list and determine how much stuff there is managerial, and how much is "regular work." There are some days--for example, when you're working the week between Christmas and New Year's and everyone except you is on vacation--when doing managerial stuff is not as important as regular work. There will be other days where regular work is less important than managerial work, such as when you have to work with an employee to map out their paternity or maternity leave.
On the whole, however, you need to not only stay on top of your high priority issues, you need to balance your time between your regular work and your managerial duties. The exact balance of work 50%-50%, 25%-75%, etc., is determined by you, time of year, and anything else you can think of. But now is your time to review your tasks, their priorities, and make sure they measure up to the balance of the two jobs you have. This might alter the order of the things you do, and will likely affect their priority.
Then you do the work.
I do this a few times a week; when I start a new job, I do it at least once a day. Eventually I get into the rhythms of the day and need the list less often, but its always good to do it at least once a week to make sure that neither of your two jobs are suffering.
It's too easy to get distracted. Too easy to lose focus. Both jobs you do are very important. But its equally important that you stay focused, manage the work, and are ready for the camera and the lights at any time.
Tuesday, September 25, 2012
Picking Your Battles: Letting things go v. lettings things drop
This may come as a surprise, but you cannot control everything.
I spend a lot of time each day desperately trying to remember that fact.
My weakness aside, a lot of stuff happens in a work day when you're the boss; a million little decisions need to be made, and you make them, sometimes aware of it, and sometimes not. Things are bound to irritate you. Over time, they may, in fact, fill you with wrath.
Rather than turn into a large green copyrighted character with anger management issues, you need to look at something no one ever really discussed with me about management: when to let things go as opposed to letting things drop.
Now, semantically, that sort of sounds the same. "Let it go" and "Drop it" both are things you tell a dog to do who has absconded with your fine silver ladle. For purposes of this article, we're not talking about a Great Dane and expensive silverware, we're looking at the concepts of what your ego can allow to pass over and through you, and what you know is important but is not as important as other things that you can drop. In the first case, you're letting things go that aren't as important, in the second case, you're holding onto things so important that it's okay to let go of other important things.
Letting things go, of the two, is probably the easiest...when you're not emotionally engaged in the problem. For example: a team you depend on changes the code you depend on from them without telling you for the hundredth time. At this point, you're pretty sure they aren't thinking outside their own box, and it's probably pissing you off that you have to spend thirty minutes with the team figuring out that is actually the problem (and not your teams' recently checked in code), then another twenty minutes to an hour waiting for the folks on their team to get back to their desks from lunch or a meeting to discuss the issue, then another twenty or so minutes proving the problem is on their end, followed by a hasty apology and then code work on the part of both teams to resolve. Upon querying those involved, this is not malicious. Steps put in place to minimize this damage/time taken in this process is working. It's not legal to choke co-workers.
You have to let it go.
If you can think of other ways to optimize the solution, great, implement them. But if you've done all you can, you cannot control everything...its going to happen again. Take a deep breath. Find a nice pillow. Scream into the pillow. Let it go.
The reason allowing things to drop is so much harder is because you have more of an illusion of control over the situation than you do in the "let it go" situation. Pretend, a moment, that what you're managing are fine china plates (I know, silverware, now plates, my brain is throwing a fancy cocktail party and apparently I'm not invited), and you're juggling those plates. Now imagine that a circumstance has occurred to throw in another, larger, but even more precious plate into your juggling routine--maybe your boss tells you this is "the highest priority!"; or the front end servers have crashed and the team that normally manages them isn't available, so your team is on point; or the freaking president of the company has his car here to test out your service first hand and your team needs to do the best possible job of their lives on changing his oil and rotating his tires. Well, not his, but his car's.
You didn't screw up. You were juggling what you were told to juggle. There's a wiggling voice in the back of your head that says "maybe I can juggle this one, too" while the reasonable voice is shrieking "let something drop before you break EVERYTHING."There's this feeling that, maybe, you can do this, too, when if you were advising a friend about such things you'd be unloading plates from her hand faster than she could grab them back from you because what she's suggesting is insane.
But if you don't have someone to help you balance the load, you are, at least figuratively, going to be dropping some things that, up until the crisis, you thought important. This may break those things--their deadlines will be missed, it will set the team back time as they transition between that item and others, an opportunity to provide information to get better or furhter sales might be lost--but a rational person would look at all the plates in the air and pick the one that you need to let go of, even if it might shatter, so you don't drop and shatter everything else.
This is balance for your team, of course; they have a finite amount they can work in a day or week. But this is also balance for YOU. As a manager, you often feel important because people treat you as an important person. But the reason you are important is because you make the hard decisions and have to stand by them. You make them with input from others (you'd be stupid not to), but you do make those decisions. You choose which plate drops so the other plates can keep being juggled safely.
This is very, very hard to do.
You can cushion the landing of an item you let drop by communicating like a crazy person, so that it comes as no surprise to all involved. You can create contingencies for when to recover from the risks created by dropping that item, and when you can pick it--or whatever it turns into--up again.
But you still have to figuratively have something in your hand that you open your fingers on and watch/hear plummet to the floor.
Letting things go is about recognizing that external forces over which you have little to no control force your hand, and letting go of your emotional load related to that issue can make you happier and more capable. Dropping things is about recognizing that external forces over which you have little to not control force your hand, but you have to pick which items you're working on suffer because of that interruption...and then let go of the emotional load related to the issue as it plummets so you can be happier and more capable.
Once you recognize these are things you will have to do--that you will disappoint someone (even and often yourself), you no longer have two brutal things happening to you at any time...you have two, brutal options to use to help make you and your team more effective.
I spend a lot of time each day desperately trying to remember that fact.
My weakness aside, a lot of stuff happens in a work day when you're the boss; a million little decisions need to be made, and you make them, sometimes aware of it, and sometimes not. Things are bound to irritate you. Over time, they may, in fact, fill you with wrath.
Rather than turn into a large green copyrighted character with anger management issues, you need to look at something no one ever really discussed with me about management: when to let things go as opposed to letting things drop.
Now, semantically, that sort of sounds the same. "Let it go" and "Drop it" both are things you tell a dog to do who has absconded with your fine silver ladle. For purposes of this article, we're not talking about a Great Dane and expensive silverware, we're looking at the concepts of what your ego can allow to pass over and through you, and what you know is important but is not as important as other things that you can drop. In the first case, you're letting things go that aren't as important, in the second case, you're holding onto things so important that it's okay to let go of other important things.
Letting things go, of the two, is probably the easiest...when you're not emotionally engaged in the problem. For example: a team you depend on changes the code you depend on from them without telling you for the hundredth time. At this point, you're pretty sure they aren't thinking outside their own box, and it's probably pissing you off that you have to spend thirty minutes with the team figuring out that is actually the problem (and not your teams' recently checked in code), then another twenty minutes to an hour waiting for the folks on their team to get back to their desks from lunch or a meeting to discuss the issue, then another twenty or so minutes proving the problem is on their end, followed by a hasty apology and then code work on the part of both teams to resolve. Upon querying those involved, this is not malicious. Steps put in place to minimize this damage/time taken in this process is working. It's not legal to choke co-workers.
You have to let it go.
If you can think of other ways to optimize the solution, great, implement them. But if you've done all you can, you cannot control everything...its going to happen again. Take a deep breath. Find a nice pillow. Scream into the pillow. Let it go.
The reason allowing things to drop is so much harder is because you have more of an illusion of control over the situation than you do in the "let it go" situation. Pretend, a moment, that what you're managing are fine china plates (I know, silverware, now plates, my brain is throwing a fancy cocktail party and apparently I'm not invited), and you're juggling those plates. Now imagine that a circumstance has occurred to throw in another, larger, but even more precious plate into your juggling routine--maybe your boss tells you this is "the highest priority!"; or the front end servers have crashed and the team that normally manages them isn't available, so your team is on point; or the freaking president of the company has his car here to test out your service first hand and your team needs to do the best possible job of their lives on changing his oil and rotating his tires. Well, not his, but his car's.
You didn't screw up. You were juggling what you were told to juggle. There's a wiggling voice in the back of your head that says "maybe I can juggle this one, too" while the reasonable voice is shrieking "let something drop before you break EVERYTHING."There's this feeling that, maybe, you can do this, too, when if you were advising a friend about such things you'd be unloading plates from her hand faster than she could grab them back from you because what she's suggesting is insane.
But if you don't have someone to help you balance the load, you are, at least figuratively, going to be dropping some things that, up until the crisis, you thought important. This may break those things--their deadlines will be missed, it will set the team back time as they transition between that item and others, an opportunity to provide information to get better or furhter sales might be lost--but a rational person would look at all the plates in the air and pick the one that you need to let go of, even if it might shatter, so you don't drop and shatter everything else.
This is balance for your team, of course; they have a finite amount they can work in a day or week. But this is also balance for YOU. As a manager, you often feel important because people treat you as an important person. But the reason you are important is because you make the hard decisions and have to stand by them. You make them with input from others (you'd be stupid not to), but you do make those decisions. You choose which plate drops so the other plates can keep being juggled safely.
This is very, very hard to do.
You can cushion the landing of an item you let drop by communicating like a crazy person, so that it comes as no surprise to all involved. You can create contingencies for when to recover from the risks created by dropping that item, and when you can pick it--or whatever it turns into--up again.
But you still have to figuratively have something in your hand that you open your fingers on and watch/hear plummet to the floor.
Letting things go is about recognizing that external forces over which you have little to no control force your hand, and letting go of your emotional load related to that issue can make you happier and more capable. Dropping things is about recognizing that external forces over which you have little to not control force your hand, but you have to pick which items you're working on suffer because of that interruption...and then let go of the emotional load related to the issue as it plummets so you can be happier and more capable.
Once you recognize these are things you will have to do--that you will disappoint someone (even and often yourself), you no longer have two brutal things happening to you at any time...you have two, brutal options to use to help make you and your team more effective.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)