Hacker News Reader

Comment by skeeter2020 | Hacker News Reader

skeeter2020

I dislike that skip levels are positioned as some sort of variation of a 1:1, as other than the # of people they have nothing in common. The 1:1 is for the employee while skip levels are all about the senior manager. We already have enough opportunities for them to set the agenda and drive the conversation. A real 1:1 is a frank conversation about early-stage (potentially bad) things and based on mutual trust and vulnerability; this is impossible with the power dynamic in a skip level.

>> when it comes to individual contributors, who are a two level skip for me, ... I do a skip level group meeting with three to six people.

and this isn't even a 1:1. I can't imagine you get any sort of honest or actionable feedback in this sort of forum. There's a mismatch between the tool and the operator.

View on HN

> mutual trust and vulnerability

Depending on your manager and organization, this is definitely not mutual. Managers have power over their reports, even if it is as subtle as being able to influence the decisions of more senior management over who should be promoted, retained, demoted, or fired.

If you have a bunch of cogs working, sure. But if you have a dynamic team that has the courage to point things out to senior leaders it can be a good way to pull back the veil on what’s really going on.

I'm curious what "dynamic" means in this context to you.

People actively working and interested in making the product and business better. Not just “doing time” at work.

This is an extremely delicate issue in any large organization. Skipping one level basically means: "Let's see what important things my report is not telling me". If you are asked for such a meeting, anything you say could be used against your direct manager. You need to know the office politics well before speaking anything that could have even small impact on anything. I saw people freaking out for mentioning minute stuff "behind their backs."

With a small team, it's very different - but usually the hierarchical structure is much more horizontally aligned so this is not much of a problem.

I must have worked at organizations with flatter structure than the others here. Talking with your skip level manager is an ordinary thing, if he has some opinions on the things you are responsible for why would he talk to your manager and not just go directly to you? Managers are mostly for bookkeeping purposes anyway, they shouldn't tell you what to do on a daily basis. At least they didn't in the 3 places I worked.

I had a skip-level yesterday as the Senior Manager talking to a group of 8 IC's in my org.

They brought critical feedback to me about an initiative we as a group are working on. They brought actionable ideas and they communicated them to me in a professional and sincere way.

We worked together to identify their areas of concern to make sure I understood them and I communicated that I would bring these up and work to see if we could adjust with that in mind.

2 hours later, I had my regular weekly 1:1 with a manager involved and presented those proposals. I asked them what could work as proposed and what needed work. Most were accepted, not because I mandated them, but because this is real feedback. Some we are working to get more clarity on and figure out if we can change anything.

Not all of my skip levels are this fruitful but trust and vulnerability come from creating psychological safety. I thanked the group for being a part of making that happen.

----

I also have a rule in my skip levels that if you are uncomfortable raising in the group setting there are two options:

- We can talk privately - You can ask me prior to the meeting to raise the point in the room

The second has never been used yet, but I keep it open if someone feels like they are not comfortable speaking out, but want to discuss something in a group that could be challenging.

Your skip level manager is not any more able to fire you than your manager, so I see no reason why you'd have to be more careful in those meetings than the 1:1 with your manager. I'd even say that if you aren't getting to meet and make an impression on your skip level then there is something wrong. They are your best bet to get promoted and if the organization tries to block that path for you then why should you stay instead of looking for better opportunities?

> Your skip level manager is not any more able to fire you than your manager

True, but say something that reflects negatively on your manager, and if they hear about it, they may rapidly become _more likely_ to fire you than the skip-level manager.

Why would you say something (whether it's negative or not) to your skip that you haven't said to your direct manager? Skip-level meetings should be about distilling important topics from your 1:1's with your direct manager and sharing with your skip what they need to know. There shouldn't really be any information that your skip has that your manager hasn't gotten weeks earlier (if it's negative, so they can try to fix it).

Not all of your work has to involve your direct manager. Some of it might come from the skip or higher, either because it’s super-secret or to give you more visibility.

In that case you still need healthy communication with your own team manager, but you wouldn’t be telling them everything except what they need to know to manage your workload.

>I see no reason why you'd have to be more careful in those meetings than the 1:1 with your manager

The first thing that comes to mind is you wouldn't want to tell your skip level manager anything that you wouldn't (or haven't already) told your direct manager. That's going outside the chain of command and creates political and organizational issues that no one will appreciate.

If you're telling your skip level something that you haven't or wouldn't tell your direct manager, that is an indication that you are failing to communicate with your direct manager. That in itself is worth the skip level person knowing.

For this is less about being careful, and more about not going off on a spontaneous rant, which honestly, isn't a good idea to do for the chain of command anyway. Spontaneous rants are for your peers. Deliberate communication up and down the COF.

My two cents anyway.

> That's going outside the chain of command and creates political and organizational issues that no one will appreciate.

I'd refuse to work anywhere that cares about chain of command. Managers are for bookkeeping purposes, not commanding. If your manager doesn't let you talk to the people you need to talk to to get things done then it is a very toxic environment.

I agree with this, and disagree with the parent comment's framing of this as "going outside the chain of command", but I do think that if you have a healthy relationship and open communication with your direct manager, I can't think of many reasons not to tell your direct manager something before telling your skip-level (or above), as a courtesy and an opportunity for them to address the issue first but not because of some rigid expectations around "command structure".

Of course this isn't a hard rule, if I'm having a conversation with my skip-level and some topic happens to come up that I haven't spoken with my manager about before, I'm not necessarily going to hold back just because of that, I can follow up with my manager later. But if something's bothering me or I have some feedback or something like that, I'd generally chat with my manager about it before anyone above them.

This is half true. When I was an employee I viewed the chain of command as existing for my benefit, not my manager's. If some random bigwig wanted me to do something for them I would direct them to my manager. It wasn't my job to arbitrate between differing management demands on my time.

Know who butters your bread.

I always did whatever the higher power wanted. It served me well.

Managers aren't for bookkeeping or commanding; they're for leadership.

> Your skip level manager is not any more able to fire you than your manager

Not in my experience. For my manager to fire me I need to be first put on an improvement plan. Skip manager can waive this and fire me on the spot, risking a potential lawsuit for the company.

> A real 1:1 is a frank conversation about early-stage (potentially bad) things and based on mutual trust and vulnerability; this is impossible with the power dynamic in a skip level.

This is true but I do think you’re over-dramatizing it a little. It’s also a good time to be positive (remind them what you do around here) or just talk. Which is important when everyone is working from home!

I would see that kind of group thing as more about building some rapport in a less scary environment than a skip level so that they feel if something was up they can come to you.

> this is impossible with the power dynamic in a skip level.

That is emphatically not true in the general case. It certainly isn't for me with my senior leadership.

The dynamic exists in all relationshps regardless of (and even still in) your specific interpersonal dealings.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com