Ask HN: What happened to the guy whose boss was ignoring him? | Hacker News Reader

Ask HN: What happened to the guy whose boss was ignoring him?

It's been 3 months.

Don't want to list the username, even tho it looks like a throwaway -- it wasn't listed explicitly as such.

Also, I would like to be able to close the feedback loop on all these Ask HN threads -- to see if who is giving good advice, what that advice is, etc.

View on HN

Original post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26123394

I missed the original thread but just had a quick read through now. That situation is absolutely bizarre to me. Don't people have regular 1:1s with their direct reports? How common is it for bosses not to meet regularly with direct reports?

Never had these before and now that I do, I do not like it.

There is nothing to say, I do my job, you do yours: leave me alone.

We get team meetings twice a week where we discuss workload and trivia, what can a 1 on 1 possibly add?

I see these as something that looks 'nice' in a manager's agenda ("Man, you are fully booked out, you work hard!") but add nothing to the efficiency. Go and produce something, solve a problem, that's how you earn my respect.

If I need you, or you need me: contact me based on demand.

> We get team meetings twice a week where we discuss workload and trivia, what can a 1 on 1 possibly add?

Speaking as a manager, if your 1:1's are purely focused on day-to-day work activities, they're missing the point.

Sounds to me like you've never had a manager who actually attempts to coach and mentor their staff to support them, train them, help define career goals, and create steps to achieving those goals.

My 1:1s? When they're done well, they're typically a mix of issues of the day--I don't typically poke my nose into what my staff are doing, so the 1:1s are an opportunity for staff to raise issues and concerns in a safe space--combined with developmental activities and bigger picture strategic items.

And in the background of all that is building a strong interpersonal relationship. It's a chance to ask about how the person is doing (I'm always on the lookout for signs of stress or burnout), how their family is doing, how the dog is doing. That forms the bedrock that ensures we have an open line of communication so we can deal with issues when they come up.

> I see these as something that looks 'nice' in a manager's agenda ("Man, you are fully booked out, you work hard!") but add nothing to the efficiency.

Bluntly, if your managers find these meetings easy or have them on the agenda because they "look nice", the manager isn't taking them seriously.

Every one of my 1:1s requires a) preparation, b) deep focus and attention, and c) significant mental and emotional investment. When done well they can be exhausting.

Hell, a while back I asked my staff if we could move to bi-weekly one-on-ones. I won't lie, this was a selfish request on my part as I find them pretty taxing. To a person they asked to retain a weekly cadence. Go figure.

Of course, if you have an incompetent micromanager, yeah, they're gonna be a waste of everyone's time, in which case I feel bad for you, because that really sucks.

Absolutely agree with this. I find 1x1s with my directs a useful time to focus on communicating intent and mentoring, as well as hearing about the frustrations / other bits and pieces one might not casually hear about.

Sure, some of them can be a bit dull, not every week is exciting, but my experience is the same -- they can be tiring if done well, but very rewarding.

Your approach sounds reasonable and well intended. But talking about family, dog, wellbeeing and career building on a weekly basis? Can you please explain what else you dicuss in those meetings?

It varies week to week. I tend to run them fairly organically, and in general I prioritize using the time to ensure the staff member is getting what they need from me (which, by the way, sometimes means more time, which means we may cancel or cut short a 1:1 at the staff member's discretion).

Typically I prep with a few work-related items I'm interested in--developmental goals I want to revisit, strategic items I want to talk about, things to follow up on from previous 1:1s (and yes, that means I keep notes from each session so that I can refresh my memory on what we've discussed, follow up meaningfully on items, etc).

I usually lead in with just some casual chit-chat to break the ice and see how folks are doing. That might last 5 minutes or it might last 25 minutes depending on what the staff member needs that week.

Some meetings end up being heavily focused on developmental stuff. Others may be hot tactical issues because the staff member needs help on a bunch of stuff. Most are a mix.

What with COVID and working from home I've found myself much more regularly checking in on quality-of-life issues: How is your stress level these days? Is your workload manageable? How is childcare going? Is the family healthy? Partly that's to ensure the staff member knows we're supporting them, but it's also to ensure we have open lines of communication so we can nip burnout issues in the bud before they become problems.

Now, do I cover all of these topics every single week? No, of course not. You might be surprised to discover that some managers are in fact in possession of basic common sense. :)

But, using those notes I mentioned earlier, I try to ensure we're periodically touching base on these various topic areas so that we're making progress across various axes.

And again: I asked my staff if we could go to bi-weekly and they said they'd prefer not to. I assume that means I'm doing something right.

Yeap. No 1:1s or in-person performance reviews, there's no bizword cliché ships sailing together, climbing of career mountains, 360 feedback, or anything else cohesive or supportive. The point isn't to instill dread, shame, or lectures but to help... managers aren't there to be bullies, slave-drivers, or hubristic self-ego-expanders.

I'm a line manager and I 100% agree with this. I call this kind of behaviour Business LARPing - doing those things that you _think_ managers or business owners or whatever are supposed to do regardless of whether it's helping you or anyone else.

It depends on the manager. It can be a good opportunity for feedback to go up the chain / get additional context / nuance, discuss strategy, is it time to ask for a pay rise, are there any minor issues like not writing thoughtful descriptions for PRs...

Of course you can have these chats ad hoc, but frankly often that can distract and derail other conversations and meetings. I like my boss, and I value our 1:1s and frequently (for example while I moved country) just making sure I was OK, my partner was OK and we were settling in etc. those kinds of issues can build up over time too.

If it's just an exercise, kill it - but if it's creating value for both parties, then keep it up.

I've had a weekly all hands where basically the CEO just wanted to waist everyone's time being brought up to speed and hashing out everything with everyone there. In the same company I had a sort of HR contractor who basically ended up providing emotional support and an avenue for honest feedback of management as a sort of 1:1, and the all hands was an absolute waste of everyone's time (because it was only really for the CEO), whereas those one to ones actually helped bring about positive change in the company, and clarity on what wasn't working.

I'd have started from the same position as two parent comments, but I have actually benefited from gold one to ones.

My current boss and I decided to reduce frequency, as we didn't need it, and then upped it again during pandemic just as an excuse for a walk and talk outside with another human. Be flexible, and get value or cut it out. But writing off 1:1 entirely only works well if you're having the right conversations elsewhere.

Finally, I have mostly worked at smaller companies where it's not an opportunity for senior management to aggressively monitor performance, constantly try to push you and find excuses for who to fire / promote / move to other team. I guess in a larger business with middle management and politics, 1:1s can be more toxic and less productive...

I have mixed feelings about 1:1. I find it not that useful.

However, some people need a nudge. That original post is a good example of what happens when there's no scheduled 1:1 and both parties assume that the other one will initiate the conversation. Having bi-weekly 1:1 is too much. Once a month is better. Regarding team meetings, 1:1 is not the same. In 1:1 you have an opportunity to speak privately with the manager and discuss things you might be uncomfortable talking about in front of the team.

I did very few of these since I assumed management position. Instead,I do less formal meetings,where things are discussed in a more casual style. I do point out positives/negatives if there's any without waiting for a specific meeting. For me,the biggest one is continuous development and I strongly believe that people should be learning things all the time instead of doing the same year after year. So I did offer various training paths, budgets for courses, even allocated time during the work hours so people could learn on their own. Result? Very very little motivation. People could have literally transformed their lives and careers if they would have taken it seriously, but instead it was bare minimum effort or no effort at all. Eventually I did change it and told people that they need to come up with their own things what they want to do and I'll approve it. Nobody did :( It wasn't much better on the hiring side too: we hired people with zero experience and told them they could do things that would double or triple their salaries in a few years and yet not much interest.

If once or twice per year counts for your question about regular 1:1s then it's been a long time since I didn't have that in a company (I guess 2011ish). If regular would be once per month or week, I didn't have that since 2017 (2 diff companies).