You're on The List!
First of all, thank you for taking the time to invest in your team. My goal with the Lead SV List is to connect with folks personally who are tackling the hard problems in building engineering organizations at every level. I'll send over that list of time making tools now. After you've had a chance to digest that, then I'll send over the Engineering Culture Check too. It's a subset of the questions I use as a part of my work at Lead SV to assess engineering culture. I hope you'll find them valuable!
p.s. In the meantime, here's some of the recent articles I've posted here on Lead SV. It's a great sample of the kind of writing you can expect semi-regularly in your inbox.
As we learned in the ABCs of Effective Training, most training programs are ineffective, especially over the long term. This hasn’t stopped companies from spending more than ever on learning & development efforts. In 2017, companies spent almost 30% more on training than in 2016. However, in that same year, the same companies reported that the effectiveness of their training did not improve. That’s because effectiveness i doesn’t ultimately rest on the amount of training we are doing but on what happens before and after the training.
Most training is mediocre at best, but leaders don’t have the tools they need to identify, evaluate, and determine if a training program is going to be worth the investment. You can take a quick temperature check of any training and instructor quality by using a trick called the “ABC method.”
Writing status reports can be a tedious affair, but if done right, status reports can be a valuable exercise that helps programmers share the impact of their work and accurately convey information to upper management. To get the most value from writing one, you’ll need to approach the task in a different way.
Because Type 2 decisions can be made quickly by high judgement individuals, these decisions help a company to be more agile. That certainly sounds like how we want engineering decisions to unfold. Yet almost every engineering organization has fallen prey to applying Type 1 decision making to all of their decisions. We need to get back to Type 2 engineering decisions.