Here’s a trap I’ve noticed leaders falling in to. And it can be tough to untangle.

People bring problems to them. But not many people ... like 1-2% of the company. So they walk away believing it is a small problem ... “I need to hear from others”.

What is going on? 👇 (1/n)
What determines whether ppl speak up?

Awareness
Awareness of impact on others
Perceived impact/severity
Sense of urgency
Sense of safety
Skill in providing feedback
Confidence that org will respond
Perception that issue is being addressed

Why does this matter? 👇 (2/n)
Take a newcomer to the company.

Newcomer sees the problem. But...

They aren’t aware of impact
Low sense of urgency
Don’t interact much outside their team
Believe something is being done about it
Less confident about navigating org

well, they don’t speak up 👇 (3/n)

...
Another scenario.

An employee has seen repeated cycles of feedback over the years, and no tangible action. They lack confidence org will respond. They’ve figured out how to work around the problem.

“I guess that’s just the way it is”

Well, they don’t speak up 👇 (4/n)
Or

Imagine that most retrospectives are local. People don’t really get to hear open feedback from across the org. So they themselves sit around wondering if it is “just me”.

Or mentioning X is seen as “bringing problems not solutions...”

Well, they don’t speak up 👇 (4/n)
The company runs a regular engagement survey and things seem on the up and up. There’s qual feedback (only a small group of ppl review it). But there has been a drop in participation.

Well, the survey isn’t representative. It is a sample of ppl willing to reply 👇 (5/n)
Or ... imagine a scenario where feedback passes “up the chain” through a series of managers. The managers respect the feedback, but water it down (a bit) with each hop.

They are worried it might reflect negatively on them...

Well, the feedback gets watered down 👇 (6/n)
You see the issue here.

1 to 2% of a company mentioning X, could very well be a signal of much larger (and more important, and more urgent) issue.

So...# of ppl raising X, is rarely a good indicator.

Dig deeper (7/end)

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with John Cutler

John Cutler Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @johncutlefish

2 Nov
“Our developers just like to code so we can’t do X”

Lots to unpack here, but a couple thoughts:

1/n: Until anyone sees something work, they’ll opt for their comfort zone. We all do it.
2/n: If you’re asking developers to do X, but their department is incentivized around Y (e.g. shipping) .... sure, developers will want to avoid doing X
3/n: Sometimes it is the person saying “Our developers...” who doesn’t want to do X, or doesn’t want their reports to do X. They are the uncomfortable one!

Dig deeper. Find out what “the developers” really have to say
Read 5 tweets
25 Oct
Recent DM

“When I hear ppl from Silicon Valley talk about product, they make it seem so easy, structured, and common sense. They are so confident. My team just can’t do that”

My reply:
1/n It is hard everywhere. I’ve spoken to those companies. They don’t have it all figured out
2/n Confidence — and in many cases naive confidence — can go a long, long way. Part of what you’re seeing is the confidence to buy-in to a way of doing things.

This has obvious not-great side-effects, but it is there.
3/n As structured as it all seems, the trick is often what they aren’t doing, the dependencies they don’t have, and the processes that aren’t constraining teams.

When everything is greenfield and new and on the up and up, you only see one side of things.
Read 4 tweets
23 Oct
Reading the replies — the snarky, serious, cynical, and otherwise — a couple things occurred to me.

1/n - the difference between things imposed / inflicted on humans, and invitation. Sounds like lots of companies are imposing on ppl instead of inviting...
2/n... as a phrase itself, “digital transformation” risks leaving out humans altogether. There is an implied “transformer” — the company — and implied solution — digital (replace non digital things w/ digital things).

Who benefits? Why? Sounds like this is missing in many orgs
3/n... gap thinking vs. present thinking (thanks @cyetain ). I think ppl are justifiably skeptical of things smacking of gap thinking. Same reason we are skeptical of miracle diets and “life transformation” lasting 30 days.
Read 5 tweets
21 Oct
[Thread] An observation about some companies "at scale" or scaling...

The number of teams doing work for the sake of work ... that would be better off doing nothing (or garden, weed debt) ... can be overwhelming.

The need to keep people busy, becomes the org's undoing (1/n)
..what organizations underestimate is the ballooning cognitive load and the web of dependencies (both explicit and implicit)

...this creeps on teams because it is possible, in the short term, to create a veneer of efficacy. To cover it up. To hire managers! Process! But.. (2/n)
..it doesn't last. The underlying problems haven't gone away. The teams optimizes around the dysfunction.

It gets worse

The org assigns 10% of the team to fix the issues plaguing 90% of the work. The 90% work around the fixers. There's no way the 10% can keep up (3/n)
Read 5 tweets
18 Oct
The challenge of incentive structures in this model is one of the big challenges of product overall. Quick little thread (1/n)
If the layer of managers does not collaborate and interact regularly, there is absolutely no way they can take stock of performance more holistically. You'll end up with competing incentives. (2/n)
If the developer manager treats her team as three one-person teams ... to be loaded up and managed individually, that will have unintended 2/3rd order effects for the product manager and designer (and their relationship to their team)

Incentive: crank out *my* projects
(3/n)
Read 6 tweets
16 Oct
A quick thread on how @Amplitude_HQ is using @MiroHQ to help customers instrument product analytics.

We use unique sticky colors to describe Events, Actors, Event Properties, and Actor Properties.

A player from the Oakland As swings a bat and gets a strike (1/n)
When helpful, we think in terms of timelines.

This can help visualize how properties change. In this example a music fan on the free plan plays a bunch of songs, and then upgrades their plan type. (2/n)
With workflows, we use a slightly different pattern.

Here, an Admin starts and finishes the configuration workflow, and we indicate all of the intermediary steps ... which often can happen out of order (humans are weird)

Note we include the narrative and interface (3/n)
Read 6 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!