How I do 1:1s

When I do 1:1s with my reports, I explicitly tell them, “No status updates”.

We have emails, slack channels, and team meetings (ideally as the pre-read, not the meeting itself) for status updates.

Our 1:1 is for you.

At all times, I’ve got a mental model of how you are doing in each of the PM competency areas¹ . I know what types of projects I can steer or delegate to you, either because it’s a strength of yours or because it’s something to get better at. I also know (because I’ve asked you!) what your career goals are, so I can fold that into our conversations and opportunities.

I also have a 1:1 agenda doc that we both have access to. Throughout the week, either of us can pop in there and add a keyword or phrase to the doc, to remind ourselves of the thing to talk about.

Our agenda topics usually fall into these categories:

1. Relationship and trust building — what makes you tick, what feels rewarding, what is scary, and why? My goal, in addition to getting to know you better, is to create a psychologically safe environment that allows you to be vulnerable so that you actually tell me this stuff, tell me bad news when you learn it, and ask for help.

2. Coaching and reinforcement — what happened in the last week that showcased a theme we’ve been working on? What was a time when you did something awesome (or at least, better) that we want to celebrate² ?

3. “How can I help?” — you want my help solving some problem, or have some question in search of an answer. Or maybe the reverse: I’ve noticed a problem that I want you to solve (or, I have something that I want your help solving), or I have a question that you may be able to answer.

But before all of that, I’m opening with “How are you?” Sometimes, your answer makes clear that we’re going to do none of our agenda because of Feelings³ . You’re pissed that other people are getting in the way, you’re anxious about the latest layoff rumor, you’re scared after a meeting with Exec that went poorly.

I’m listening, asking questions, engaging, validating your feelings⁴ . I will make a snap call — are you open to problem solving the situation in this meeting, or should we come back to it another time? Emotional attunement (with boundaries!) is the answer, once again.

(Thank you, Dan Storms, for requesting this topic!)

The Workshop

This is a newsletter-only section where I share a half-baked idea in hopes that y’all who are smarter than me can work it out with me.

If we could rate tech industry people managers from 0 - 10, where 0 was “should be fired immediately and committed crimes” and 10 is “I would follow this person anywhere”, what do you think the average rating would be? What do you think the average rating should be?

I’m gonna guess the average rating is a 6, and it should an 8.

I think the average is 6 (as opposed to a 5) because of survivorship bias — the chances someone is a good manager the longer they’ve been a manager gets more likely. But I could see the argument for the average being a 5 or even 4, in that, yes, long time managers are more likely better than average, but there’s a ton of inexperienced managers who are bad to neutral.

As many others have pointed out, the problem is that being a people manager is a new career track, requiring new skills, than being an IC, and for some reason, no one teaches it. Even MBA programs, which I would have thought would be some kind of “officer training school”, miss the mark. And then layer on the Peter Principle, where people get promoted until they reach incompetence.

I wish companies took this more seriously. Allocated more budget to manager training and coaching. Created more “understudy” type roles for promising young executives (Director, VP level) to spend a year shadowing the CEO, being a part of every meeting and CC’d on every email, like Jeff Bezos used to do. We need to show and tell people what “good” looks like. Reading it in a book or podcast (or this newsletter, thank you!) is better than nothing but it’s such a poor remedy for the size of the gap most companies have.

1  Which is based on the PM rubric that your org uses. Hopefully every PM is very familiar with it and you are, at least twice a year, using it to check in on how you think they are doing compared to how they think they are doing. The conversation should be more than “I think you’re a 3 (out of 5) at strategy and you think you’re a 5”. It’s more like “It looks like there’s a gap; let’s talk about it. What does being a 5 at strategy mean to you?”

2  Especially with new concepts, people often don’t know what good looks like, even when they are doing it themselves. So make sure to point it out: “You did a great job handling that tough question from the CFO. You answered her question with a Yes/No up front, then backed it up with a short argument that drew from our strategy and real data. Then you paused and asked if she wanted to hear more.”

3  Go read Rands’ post on 1:1s. He does a great job giving some emotional intelligence-based tips on how to engage with your 1:1 depending on how they show up.

4  Which is different from saying I agree with your behavior. Maybe I do, maybe I don’t, that depends on the content. But I can put in the effort to empathize with how the situation made you feel and why.