Tag: Are Right A Lot

Two Things True

Two Things True

By | | Comments 0 Comment

On the same day I wrote about radical responsiveness, I came upon this post that seems to contradict it. I really respect Ethan Evans and enjoy his writing (especially this bit about why you fail to get promoted). And I understand the point he’s making about fragmented attention. The temptation to conflate interruptions with importance is real, and amplified by modern communication technologies. But I’m not prepared to say he’s right and I’m wrong.

For one, I believe it’s possible to be both radically responsive while remaining reasonably non-fragmented. Some degree of interruption is inevitable, but using techniques such as pomodoro can help protect focus while still ensuring important messages don’t get missed for long. Good old-fashioned discipline is required to stick to a plan, but it can be done.

The discipline gets easier with a well-configured set of tools, which is where many folks fail. Learn your tools! And not just the basic features, but the myriad of options for managing notifications, filtering messages, scheduling reminders, etc. It’s not a badge of honor to be “bad at email” or “not understand Slack” if you’re a professional in 2024.

(If any of my coworkers are reading this, they may quickly point out that as recently as last month I didn’t know how to join cell phone calls into a conference. Which… is true. But I learned! And now I know for next time).

Finally, Evans makes an assumption about communication that I don’t believe holds true. It comes through most obviously in this statement:

“Allow chaos to build up within the trivial (the inbox) to accomplish the meaningful.”

Did you see it? The assumption that messages in an inbox are trivial? Tell that to your customer who is informing you of a serious issue with your latest release, or your team member whose employment status is in jeopardy if you don’t respond to their immigration lawyer. Yes, we all get spam, but sometimes interruptions truly are critical and need attention. To lump all of that into the category of “trivial” for the sake of personal flow is a leadership fail. Communication is part of the job; sometimes it’s all of the job.

Of course, I could be wrong. Read the posts and decide for yourself.

Not All Who Wander

Not All Who Wander

By | | Comments 0 Comment

There’s a danger in over-indexing on successful outcomes when evaluating a decision. As a LeBron fan I respect making the right play even if the shot doesn’t go down. When watching football (I hear there’s a game today?) I shake my head at coaches who punt when the data says taking a bigger risk is worth it. The same is true when making business decisions and evaluating technical tradeoffs.

Simple math makes the above obvious in certain cases. Whether a decision has a 90%, 60%, or even 51% probability of success, it is the right decision to make, even if it doesn’t work out (presuming the cost of failure is equal no matter what decision is made).

Of course a nice probability cannot be known in most real-world situations. It’s in those moments when it’s especially important not to focus too much on the outcome. Because a failed result doesn’t tell us anything certain about the original likelihood of success, as even 95% certainty fails 5% of the time.

I don’t say any of this to mean that a pattern of failed outcomes should be ignored, but that full context should be used in any process that attempts to evaluate the road that led to certain results.

To The Point

To The Point

By | | Comments 0 Comment

Today I finally came up with a layperson’s descriptor of the CTO role that I’m happy with:

Responsible for making sure we build things right, but more importantly, that we build the right things.

Yup, that sums it up nicely.

Distant Well-Wishers

Distant Well-Wishers

By | | Comments 0 Comment

Of all the sources of happy birthday messages (which are truly delightful, by the way), one I least expected was a text from the customer service agent at CoveredCA that I worked with to get health insurance after I was laid off nearly 5 years ago, and haven’t interacted with since.

I get that it’s trivially easy for any organization that knows your date of birth to send out such messages, but…

That’s gotta be some kind of automated message, right? Or a mistake? In any case, thanks for “thinking of me” on my special day!

Taste The Rainbow

Taste The Rainbow

By | | Comments 0 Comment

I’m sure there’s research out there that says people do better work when they’re happy. But anecdotally, it’s an obvious truth. Of course there are limits (“fun with respect to work” will almost always be “work with respect to fun”). But in general, fostering a positive work environment and encouraging employees to take care of themselves is good business.

Last week a colleague of mine was revising the spreadsheet we use for high-level estimation, and as part of her adjustments added a few splashes of color. The highlights had a functional purpose, yes, but they were also simply more pleasant to look at. It made me want to work on the spreadsheet at a subconscious level.

Isn’t that nice? I suppose the 49″ ultrawide monitor doesn’t hurt either. 😛

Another obvious example of this phenomenon is font quality and syntax highlighting. Take a look at the following “identical” code samples; which one would you rather work with?

Literally as I was drafting this blog I learned about Monaspace. Taking code aesthetics to the next level, I dig it. Describing the process of adjusting glyph widths as “texture healing” is an especially humanizing touch. Happiness matters!

Godwin’s Law Redux

Godwin’s Law Redux

By | | Comments 0 Comment

As a tech discussion grows longer, the probability of a mention of Generative AI approaches one. It definitely happened at today’s 4S Tech meetup; we didn’t even make it all the way through the introductions.

Additional common topics: biometrics, productivity hacking, ways to get funding, something someone heard on a podcast.

Clear Eyes, Full Hearts

Clear Eyes, Full Hearts

By | | Comments 1 comment

Amazon promotions require “best reasons not to promote” to be documented, both from a manager and from any colleague who provides formal feedback. Arguably it was the most important part of the process, because it demonstrated that input came from individuals who could see the candidate clearly enough to speak honestly about both their strengths and their shortcomings.

When coaching candidates for promotion, I recommended they write their own version of that section, and then we’d review theirs alongside my own. Why? Because if you shy away from your deficiencies, you have no counterargument to them. They’re going to be found out anyways by any competent promotion evaluators, so why not get ahead of the curve.

I don’t pretend this is easy, especially for people who have battled insecurities or have lacked encouraging support throughout their careers. But it’s essential for making meaningful career progress. When advocating for yourself, look your shortcomings straight in the eye.

There isn’t a day that goes by that I don’t miss my Dad, but this week I’ve been particularly reminded of him being the reason I rarely feel insecure in naming my professional weaknesses. What a tremendous gift from a parent, the words “I love you” and “I’m proud of you” spoken aloud, simply and frequently. I must have heard those words hundreds of times. Thousands. So often that their truth got into my bones. I believed him then, and I still do now, even though he’s gone. Thanks Dad.

Cerberus

Cerberus

By | | Comments 1 comment

I’m coming up on six months since I took the CTO job at RIPL. Enough time to meet the team and get settled in, even bring a few tactical benefits that solve immediate needs. But the real work begins now, that of strategic planning that sets us up for long-term success.

Operating in a C-Suite is new to me. I don’t have a point of comparison, but so far it’s been great. Between the three of us we have a well-distributed set of skills and experiences, which means we can lean into our strengths while knowing the others have our blind spots covered. In many ways we’re operating as a coalition of equals more than a hierarchy; of course there’s deference when required, but the level of mutual trust is such that it doesn’t really come up often. And I genuinely enjoy the company (in both senses of the term). Not sure if this is rare or common, but I’m grateful either way.

Perhaps this is how the best leadership teams operate, more like a unified whole than a siloed set of individuals? It’s an idea worth exploring further; the Freakonomics episode Are Two CEOs Better Than One is probably where I’ll start.

A corollary to the above, especially given I’m the oldest person in the group (a fact worthy of its own post), is that finding mentorship from professionals with more experience in my role means that I have to look to sources outside my employer. It’s why I’m trying to build a better professional network through activities like starting 4S Tech, attending CTO Lunches, joining the Rand Leadership Slack, and taking a tech ethics class. I consider these efforts part of my job, because I owe it to my company to develop myself further.

Terminus

Terminus

By | | Comments 0 Comment

Ending conversations is always a bit awkward, whether it be in-person goodbyes, the “uh, are we done?” Zoom meeting closer, or wondering if an email chain needs a final “Thanks” acknowledgement.

Real-time text-based exchanges are particularly tough. Here’s my question: is an emoji response a sufficient message that “yes I got your message, I’m acknowledging that, but I’m not keen to talk further”? Is the vibe different if I send the emoji as a standalone response vs applying the emoji as a reaction to the last message I received?

Need some help from someone in the know, which probably means someone younger than myself.

School’s In Session

School’s In Session

By | | Comments 0 Comment

Tonight I kick off a class from Stanford called Ethics, Technology, and Public Policy for Practitioners. It’s been a hot minute since I’ve been involved with formal education (about 10 years actually), but I’m pretty excited. Not just for the learning, but for the people I’ll meet along the way, who appear to be a fantastically variegated bunch based on what I’ve seen on Slack so far.

Here’s the course description from the syllabus:

Our goal is to explore the ethical and social impacts of technological innovation. We will integrate perspectives from computer science, philosophy, and social science to provide learning experiences that robustly and holistically examine the impact of technology on humans and societies.

Basically it’s Jud catnip. If it sounds interesting to you, I think it’s offered periodically. Here’s a link for future reference.