Many people want to be managers to grow their careers but in reality being a leader is more important in the long run. A leader is someone whose authority is earned and people choose to follow as opposed to someone people have to follow because it’s their job.
Good leaders are…
• focused on the team instead of themselves. Good leaders want to develop others and help them grow. They are ambitious but it’s for the team’s success not just their own career.
• effective and transparent communicators. They also understand listening is part of communicating
• self aware about their strengths and weaknesses. Self awareness is coupled with a growth mindset. Weaknesses aren’t limitations but opportunities to learn.
• respectful to their team and act with personal integrity. They set positive examples of how people should be treated.
• effective at both short term execution and long term strategy. There is a vision for where we’re going and a path for how to get there.
• effective delegators. Good leaders encourage autonomy and avoid becoming decision bottlenecks while giving the team growth opportunities.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The Wall Street Journal article has some good advice on getting a raise.
Compensation is market based not inflation based. You get a raise because people at your skill level are worth more (check levels.fyi ) not because the inflation rate went up x%.
In tech, a meaningful number of companies did one off compensation increases last year because market rates have gone up.
It’s worth exploring and securing job offers outside your current company if you missed the wave last year. You’re likely underpaid. blog.pragmaticengineer.com/off-cycle-comp…
A lot of web3 advocacy became easier for me to understand once I realized most advocates aren’t technologists.
The most ardent advocates are people who treat making money as a signal of value (e.g. VCs, early adopters, grifters, etc) who view the tech as Star Trek technobabble.
I approached web3 from the perspective of how can this create value for a company with millions of users or enhance a product making millions of dollars. And that turns out to be the wrong question.
The right question is how do I turn FOMO into money? That’s the core of crypto.
In contrast, with Web 2.0 it was straightforward to discuss how one enhanced value of a 1M+ user or $1M+ product by adding incorporating JavaScript, inline updates without refreshing and enabling users to create content instead of primarily consuming it.
I’ve read a bunch of books on business and leadership over the past two years. Here’s one lesson from each of my favorite books in the genre.
OKRs need to be owned by individuals or specific teams to ensure accountability. For speculative stuff, first target should be a ship deadline then afterwards revenue or usage goals.
People and relationships are the foundation of any company’s success. The primary job of each manager is to help people be more effective in their job and to grow & develop. Managers enable this through by supporting, respecting, and trusting their people. amazon.com/Trillion-Dolla…
This practice of declaring your race & gender before a presentation reminds me of the phrase “I don’t see color”
This is problematic because it’s a lie. We all can’t help the racial/gender biases we’ve been socialized with via media & cultural portrayals
One of the reasons I graduated towards tech was because the culture seemed closest to a racially color blind one. Your code works or it doesn’t. It isn’t like being a lawyer or in sales where your success is mostly dependent on other people viewing you as likable & competent.
Of course I was wrong because the color blindness of tech breaks down when you want VC funding or want to be promoted beyond a certain level. But it’s mostly true for entry to mid-level positions. A practice of reminding people of your race & gender is antithetical to that.
These income tax articles don’t point to any meaningful problem. Here’s why using an example.
House prices in the Seattle area are up $100K-$200K in the past year. Homeowners are wealthier (net worth up) but they have no new income (bank accounts flat). google.com/amp/s/www.nyti…
Governments understand taxing a $100K home price gain as income doesn’t make sense since you didn’t actually make $100K, it’s potential income. Instead they charge a far lower tax rate on the overall asset (a 1%-2% property tax) which is more reasonable to bear.
Not charging for asset gains applies not just houses but also stocks, ownership stakes in a company or even crypto. Imagine having to pay taxes on Bitcoin spikes over the past year before you even sold any.
I learned about the concept of Failure Theater recently. One reason GOP voters love Trump is that he actually did what he promised. The GOP villainized lots of things from immigration to Obamacare but understood they’re actually not bad so never fixed them redstate.com/streiff/2015/0…
Then comes in Trump promising a bunch of brash ideas consistent with that world view from trade wars with China to Muslim bans and he actually does it. He fulfilled a lot of seemingly outlandish promises from his campaign. Whatever didn’t get done seems more on Congress than him.
He effectively broke the cycle of GOP media & politicians saying terrible things about liberals and their ideas but not taking drastic action. That was all Failure Theater.
Cruz & Hawley pandering to Trump voters miss the point. You won’t be the next Trump by sucking up to him.