A mistake a lot of us in tech make is thinking everyone is like us. Twitter makes this worse because we follow people like us. I'm going to call them "Product people" like we did at LinkedIn in the old days. It includes designers and engineers.
We are people who like new things.
Product People are never satisfied. We believe something could always be better.
We don't like being told what to do, but we enjoy being challenged.
We don't mind ambiguity, because it is a space of opportunity.
And it's hard to imagine any other way to be.
When I was a new design manager at Yahoo (gosh, in 2002?) we had to do "interesting" work like figuring out what a search interface should be and "boring" work like making banners.
I decided to rotate designers from role to role so they could have fun sometimes and rest sometimes
When I moved the woman who made banners into the visual design role for the search product and rotated the vizd working on search into her role, I made them both miserable.
I'm lucky people were willing to talk to me honestly, despite my being the boss.
I learned that the banner designer just wanted to make pretty things and go home at 5 to her family. Meanwhile, the search designer wanted really hard challenges like figuring out how search could be pretty and effective. Not all designers enjoy AB testing. He found it fun.
I've never forgotten that mistake, and try to avoid it. Some people just want work to be a job.
Some people feel more comfortable with a clear hierarchy and being told clearly what to do
(though no one likes micromanaging, in my experience anyhow.)
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I am against aspirational and committed OKRs. tl;dr on why: the limits of working memory and tessler's law.
What do I recommend instead: consider if you want a moonshot goal or a yoga stretch.
If you have never done yoga, a good teacher will invite you to stretch but NOT hurt yourself. So as you set a goal you can start with what you know you can do but then slowly increase it until you feel the stretch. When you say off this is a bit hard, but not impossible.
I heard stories of a company where they stopped using OKRs because the team would kill themselves each quarter to make the OKRs. Because they couldn't self-regulate I'd suggest they use yoga stretches instead. Here the manager would coach them down from their moonshot goal.
Via the suggests, I've gotten a lot of clarity on the problem:
My students are asked to make interactive fiction (IF.) They are computer science students (HCI) and while they are all great at nonfiction, many struggle with fiction (never mind the complexity of interactive.)
Some have never even written fiction! I cannot imagine this TBH.
I notice they have a lot of freedom creating "disposable" stories such as RPGs and other story telling games.
But when they make their own story, the often start strong and then get stuck. This is to be expected:
I read the entire thread and have no idea what you are referring to except I’m wildly in favor of all of it.
@rdonoghue I'm now inventing a story about Jue, who forages teacup spider silk.
The teacup spider, called so because it is about the size of your grandmother's teacup, spins a strong and soft silk that takes die marvelously. It is high in demand, but sadly no one can farm the spiders.
I have been trying to google this, but don't have the right language. How does one find a therapist who specializes in working with a service animal to address one's mental challenges?
I got my service animal over a year ago at a suggestion of my psychiatrist (who specializes in meds, and really nothing else. But he is very good at meds and respects I want as little of them as possible.)
I have worked with a service dog trainer for a year. It's made me realize
It's not enough to have a trainer. The trainer I worked with mostly focused on canine good citizenship and a handful of tasks. What I realize now I really need is someone who understands my challenges and can recommend a doggy response.
Once upon a Time, someone, perhaps Andy Grove, perhaps Peter drucker, came up with a very simple idea. What if we told people what result we wanted and trusted them to figure out how to make that result happen.
They called it managing by objectives. And the big idea was saying, "we'd like to improve engagement." Or "we'd like to make the business successful by becoming the number one name in processors" or "we'd like to make the world's information findable and usable."
And then someone else figured out a good way to format it, a lot like SMART goals. Let's unite the company by having a visionary objective and clear results. And then all these smart people that we've hired can figure out what they should do to make those results happen!