Here's the basic answer: the 1:1 is for you, not for me. If I'm doing my job well, I already know the status of your work. This is a chance for you to talk about anything that you want.
Some of my reports ask about technical things: how can we solve X better? Can we use Y algorithm? Why did we wind up going with Z tech instead of something else?
Some of my reports ask behavioral questions: how can I work better with Sue? I'm not confident in my presentation skills, can you help with that? I think I pissed off Bob, how can I recover?
Some ask for business discussions: how can we contribute better to the business? what are the most important priorities of the business? why are we focusing on a silly feature when there's so much tech debt to take care of?
And others talk about themselves: how can I get a promotion? How do I level up? What's my biggest weakness and how can I work on it?
Some people do all of the above, and some do none of the above. Some people have no interest in 1:1s, and it's just a quick status update and we bounce.
For that last group of people, I tend to try to poke and prod and try to get _something_ out of it, though.
I'll put it this way: the 1:1 for you, but it's also too valuable to skip just because you don't want it. We will have a 1:1 on a regular cadence, whether you like it or not. I don't want a meeting for the sake of having a meeting, but 1:1s are the single best way for managers to connect to team members. If you want to cancel all of the time because you have nothing to talk about, then that indicates a number of different possibilities, very few of which are good.
With that in mind, it's in your best interest to make 1:1s the best they can possibly be, which you are doing, so kudos to you.
Hope that helps.
So what I'm hearing, it's not actually for me, it's for you.
I try to avoid canceling 1:1s myself if possible, since it really sends the message that your boss doesn't care about you or your work, and if the boss doesn't care, why do the work?
Consider it this way: if I schedule a 1:1, and you cancel it every week, then that tells me that you don't find time with me to be valuable. How do I fix that? Is that a signal about you hating meetings, or is it a signal that I'm a bad manager?
If I schedule 1:1s, and you join them, and then you give me one word answers to everything I ask, then you clearly don't want to be there. That gives me signals about our relationship: if we had a good relationship, we'd have more comfortablec conversations.
If I schedule 1:1s, and you join them, and you are apathetic or antagonistic, then that also tells me that there's a problem.
The 1:1 is an incredibly valuable period of time for us to have candid conversations, exchange feedback, and develop our relationship. That kind of thing requires two people to tango. I can't force you to do those things. But if you don't want to do those things, and you don't want to ensure that we work well together and can exchange feedback freely, then maybe we don't work well together, and we should re-evaluate our working relationship.
So is it for me? Sort of. The goal is for you to be involved with me in a private but accessible way. You and I having a relationship where we can build on fundamentals and create a safe, welcoming, innovative environment is the single most valuable thing a manager can do and that a report can accelerate and encourage.
But if you don't want to participate in that, then that doesn't bode well for your career at my company.
If you want to take that as "it's for you, not me," then that's fair, but I don't think you and I would work well together.
It's totally for the manager, they gotta fill their calendars to look like they're doing stuff. I hate when they want me to rank myself from 1-5 on various things just to tell me, "I don't think you're a 5, you're performing as expected. COL raise." I just put 3's on everything and wait for it to be over. Our company (whose application I built from scratch) just started doing this with a new manager after 6 years and I put in my notice on the first one.
My buddy put's all 1s. It's a stupid business culture bullshit thing like mandatory after hours "team building" exercises and stupid infantilization things they love to do now. The best managers on the best teams I worked with never did this.
It being for the report means it is also for the manager. The success of the report is the success of the manager.
But all of your examples are things I would have already discussed with my manager outside of any kind of formal 1:1s, so that doesn't leave anything for the 1:1.
That makes a 1:1 basically a performative exercise: I have to perform in it well enough that my manager won't be left thinking as you do in the quote.
Some of us don't have matching calendars so having a regular 1:1 cadence is easier. I know that I'll have a meeting with my supervisor every 2 weeks and if I have something I can tell them then. And if there's nothing to say we end it early and get back to work.
I have one or two reports that fit pretty well into a group like you, who talk about "all of those things" outside of 1:1s. Totally a valid position! We still do a 1:1, but those turn into sort of work-tangential conversations, things like new tech that we're experimenting with on the side, or ideas for features that might be fun, or ways that we can incorporate the things they want to do into future roadmaps. Maybe it's not the most productive thing, but it can be fun, and sometimes you can be surprised by what comes out of a really good 1:1.
As sort of an example, I had a guy on my team that was super smart, highly productive, and he didn't need much hand-holding. We'd schedule 1:1s, and they would go well, but we'd also talk almost every day about the kinds of things that would normally come up in 1:1s. Just like you're describing.
We shared direct feedback regularly (he got distracted easily), we talked about the way he interacted with team members (which wasn't always great), the projects that he worked on (which were not necessarily the ones he wanted to work on). It was, on the surface, a good relationship, but obviously not a great one.
Then one day he mentioned off-hand something about his immigration status. My ears perked up, and I said "Tell me more." So in our 1:1, for probably 2-3 sessions, we talked about nothing but immigration and how it works, what his concerns were, and how much energy he spent thinking about his immigration status. Then he taught me about how the H1-B priority levels worked, and in the midst of that conversation, something clicked.
The reason this guy was easily distracted and the reason he was unhappy with the projects that he was working on wasn't because he had ADHD or thought the work sucked. The reason was because the projects he was working on were not things he could show to Immigration and say "See, I deserve a higher priority."
Once I had that realization, I was able to zoom out a bit and find projects that would give him a leg up on the prioritization scheduling. I was able to find time to let him work on white papers and formal, published research. He was able to patent something that we worked on. I helped him find conferences to give speeches at. All of these things he tackled with gusto and enthusiasm and, incidentally, fit into our company's roadmap.
Without that 1:1 that was seemingly unnecessary, I never would've made this connection, and he would still be miserable. Now he has his green card, just 18 months after that conversation, in part because he was able to demonstrate that he met certain criteria to the immigration authorities.
I understand the perspective of "I checked all the boxes outside of the meeting, why do I need this meeting?" but I encourage you to consider some of the softer values of the meeting. Even things as simple as getting to know your manager and finding out you have things in common will help.
It kind of sucks, but the more people can view you as a PERSON and not as a RESOURCE, the happier you both will be. And part of that involves spending lots of time with someone offline.
1. OP didn't say what they wanted to achieve, except for generally improving their career. It's worth trying to make that specific. OP's idea of that will be different from yours, and different from mine. Each person has different objectives.
2. In most situations, your manager is trying to make you successful, for some definition of successful. This is a joint endeavour. It's worth trying to understand what your manager sees as success, even if there is not 100% overlap with what you see as success. 'High Output Management' has good sections on both effective 1:1s and delegation. They are only a couple of pages each. Worth reading and re-reading.
3. Good 1:1s require some effort (including preparation and follow up) but the investment should be worthwhile. (Of course, it's possible that the majority of people have regular 1:1s that are close to useless. But this doesn't have to be you.)
It's for both.
It allows the manager to build rapport and trust, to find out things that might not be said in a public or formal setting, and to mentor and coach in a safe environment.
You, as manager should also be asking plenty of questions, including to seek feedback.
I don't do it in every 1:1, but probably every 3rd or 4th 1:1, I ask for feedback about my own performance and about how they feel about other parts of the organization. I've found it incredibly valuable.
But the primary agenda is your agenda, not mine. Mine is often supplemental and periodic, but the more important and more immediately relevant agenda is yours.
If I need to talk to you about something else, it would be in something other than a regularly-scheduled 1:1, typically.
My team are welcome to come up with other ways to do it besides a 30 minute chat in a sterile room or over Zoom, but we need to keep a regular cadence of feedback, or our working relationships will deteriorate.
I have one guy who just wants to go for walks, so instead of getting in a room, we'll both walk 15 minutes to a Starbucks, grab some coffee, and walk back, and that gives us 30 minutes to chat. Only occasionally will I insist on doing it with a whiteboard or a laptop, but those are usually when there's something more "formal" about it. I'd say we only do it in an office room about once a quarter.
For some of my team, it's a 15 minute chat, for at least two of them, they turn into 60+ minutes of discussion. There's no one-size-fits-all here, but there has to be _something_, IMO.
Don’t make it too practical, try to have small talks too and chat about topics unrelated to work to build personal connection. The purpose of 1-1s is that and not to discuss current projects.
When you touch work-related topics, try to be as efficient as possible. Make sure you keep track of all discussed topics and ready to answer questions about action items from previous 1:1s.
If you need something, show some work in that direction too: e.g. you need some training? Find a few courses, check prices, suggest the best option on your opinion. If something can be done in advance or in async way, do it that way (applies to all sorts of meetings).
I also always asked how did I look from his point of view. It was very important for to know how my performance was perceived, since it’s easy for there to be a discrepancy between how I see my performance vs how it is perceived.
He was also very friendly and shared career advice and whatnot. I truly truly believe that having a dedicated eng manager can be a big factor of a 1x vs a 10x. I know that during that time with my manager I was a 10x and when he moved to another department my performance lowered, where it was motivation, lack of resources/feedback, or a combination or a bunch of other factors, having a good manager can make or brake a role in a company!
My manager always say that my 1:1 are the easiest for him. I've asked him what in the world the other people are talking about that don't make them as easy, but his response is so vague (to maintain confidentiality) as to be useless. Not that I really want a longer 1:1...
Then again, if you dislike your manager, the meetings can be pretty jarring. Sometimes you just don't have that chemistry with them. And some managers try too hard to make 1:1s "useful" according to their taste, which really makes them just another reporting session you want to avoid.
A bit unexpected, doesn't seem healthy to me. Surely there are more important things happening in the average week other than career progression?
EDIT: I better stop reading this as I've always liked GitLab, but am catching some heavy Lumon vibes :D this is one of the possible agenda items: "SING - if added, the person who added it leads a singalong with all willing participants in the meeting" (at https://handbook.gitlab.com/handbook/leadership/1-1/suggeste...)
Once a week is way too often in my opinion, and the whole setting is much too formal.
I prefer 1-to-1s to be informal without agendas. Once a month is enough. It is a time to build rapport and trust and obviously it has to be "synchronous" and in person if possible.
He lets me slide when I say "not much", fortunately, but I think it's an overly intrusive ask, especially in front of the whole team.
Areas of topics I focus on:
* Opportunity for Personal Growth
* Feedback on complex dynamics within my team or company
* Market opportunities for product (if relevant)
* Overall Engineering strategy
After my agenda is complete, then the manager can bring up items they feel are noteworthy. I generally leave half of our one-on-one open for them to drive a bit.
I asked for feedback, and when I would hear a basic response like "keep doing what you're doing" I would shoot back and ask if that means I will receive a 5 on my annual performance review.
Bring up things like performance reviews, comp adjustments, promotions, etc.
But, caveat, there are a lot of really mediocre managers. If you put in work to make your 1:1's more effective, and they're not having the intended effect, it's a them-problem, and it's time to find a better team to join.
As a manager, I hate using 1:1's for status reports.
1:1’s are both ways. As a manager, I’m giving you the unfiltered truth and access to ask anything you wish. I also will be candid about observations I see (or perceive) to help you improve. Or I’ll forward praise I heard someone give you.
These aren’t meant to be performance reviews. They’re meant to be relationship builders. For the betterment of the team and yourself.
Next time, come prepared.
I stopped expecting meaningful career growth at a company. It's easier to grow by jumping ship, plus it widens your perspective.
When I was a bit more junior, I asked if I'm performing at your expectation and what I should be doing if not. If there was a suggestion, it was a typical generic statements that didn't add much value.
Whether a manager "cares" about their reports or the company is going to matter a lot. I find most people don't care much. I had this one manager who cared both. We built the entire platform ecosystem company relies on, and I still chat with him every once in a while :)
1:1 are a place to ask for a raise and let your manager tell you why you are not getting one.
And I mean raise, not promotion. That's a misdirection and more work. Your goal is raise, until you are capped, then promotion, and back to raise.
1. Talk about getting a promotion (even if you don't want one) - this will help you get better regardless 2. Talk about 'taking over' some of your manager's work - perhaps temporarily while he/she is on vacation. (This indicates leadership) 3. Talk about doing something that makes you a 'world class X' (well at least you need to become the best at X in your company. If your manager can't help you get there at least he/she should reduce obstacles) 4. Talk about how you can be less of a burden for the manager (from the manager perspective, the best reportee is the one you do not need to manage)
Some people Im going over technical things, some people are gripe-ing over external depts, some people we just grab a beer and chat.
I try to push the conversation towards business growth topics but not very hard.
So to answer the question I think frame the meeting to your own goals.
Genuinely curious about how not great my process is
Some of my employees prefer a phone call and we just chat. Others like the structure. I spend 4 hours a week doing 8 x 30 min 1:1s
I’ve come to embrace that it doesn’t look the same for each person.
To answer your question directly, take some time and figure out for yourself, what are your work goals, what are your personal goals, what problems do you encounter at work that affect you that you feel could be solved. Bring out of the box ideas… unless you’re facing disciplinary action, the 1:1 is for you and your personal growth.
In my current role they have a system so we just base it off that. There are goals and level (i.e. job titles) rubrics.
You could ask if aligned goals could be set and then discuss how they are going.
Goals should be able to change in an agile org.
They should align to the company but also align to your growth and outcomes that can be used to promote you or get you a bonus.
If the companies doesn't have this set up it might be worth asking for it for you as a "snowflake".
Believe me (bitter experience!) if you look for another job having impact stories (this will generate) will help you get hired at a higher level.
Goals and accomplishments isn't all the 1-1 is. I see another comment about gitlab which seems worh a read!
I stole this format from Mike Crittenden [1] and made some modifications to it. It has worked wonders for me and my team.
It helps us to create our Brag Document [2], introduced by Julia Evans, together.
1 - https://critter.blog/2022/03/25/my-new-and-improved-1-1-form...
Want more money? Use this to figure out what the company and manager would want in exchange so you can work towards it.
Want more visibility for promotions? Use it to figure out the highest visibility projects and get assigned to those
Want to work on newer/different technologies? Use it to figure out where those could best fit in or get reassigned if they are already in use.
Some examples:
- Change the way standups are done - Do something not directly related to the team - Do debt - Change / take over the way a project is being done
In general it worked well because either I had a good idea in which case I'd often get the agency to do it, or perhaps not directly but a path towards it or it wasn't and I learnt something.
On what's a good 1on1 I wrote this https://www.paceflow.io/guides/topics/one-on-ones
Though it will be probably different from what you are going to see in big tech and their smaller copycats where they make 1on1 a glorified status update.
If the person in the 1:1 just wants to turn the crank and go home then it's pretty pointless. At the least come with a bullet list of corp. questions that need answers and if you don't have any then cancel the 1:1.
If you want a really simple framework just focus on the previous week and highlight what went well (ie. that needs repeating), what went badly and needs fixing (or coaching, etc), what needs changing (could be a combo of both above).
Every 3-6 months I try to have a more strategic conversation about career paths and making sure annual goals are on track. Effectively reviewing progress against them and making sure the person is on track for success, adjusting as necessary. Similarly, asking about what projects they want to do next, where do they think we should dedicate effort and focus, etc. If they had the resources what would they do? This can be a great way to learn about how they approach problems, and to uncover issues in process and tooling. I want everyone on the team bought in to feeling like they can make a difference, and it’s really helped my teams develop great tools.
Other good questions I like to ask periodically are around what’s frustrating, what could we improve as a team, etc. I want their input to improve the life of everyone.
I always try to ask for feedback and how I can improve, or what roadblocks I can remove for people.
Sometimes we just chat - teams work well together when they understand each other. I like to know what’s important to people, and what isn’t. What stresses them, and what helps them flow. Sometimes those things just come from less structured conversation.
I’ve found having a shared doc to jot down notes in the week really helps. A google doc, OneDrive doc, whatever. Just something that’s open and can throw in some bullets to talk about. Particularly when blocked on something, or I need to ask a question about how to strategically approach a problem, I’ll throw it in the doc. Then before the 1-1 I reread it to prep my thoughts. It’s worked really well for me with my managers, and with my reports.
Ask what they’re focused on and how you can support that. Ask about what their manager cares about and how you can support the larger department or org. Ask what they’re worried about. Ask what makes them happy.
The most value I’ve had from 1-1s has often been just getting to know people, and demonstrating empathy, compassion, and engagement. This is why I really hate the project based 1-1s - they end up being very transactional, and very 1-sided; just a list of “I did this ticket” type things. For people who are used to it, it can take a while to break out of the cycle.
### *Agenda*
- Highlight of the week - Work: - Personal: - Updates + Questions - Issues? - Topics - Top Tasks - Feedback
- current goals (including 5 year goals, 1 year goals, short term goals) - significant actions since last 121 - skills matrix score increases and justification for him/her to approve - projects I'm doing/ideas - tasks that me and him/her need to do between now and the next 121 - questions and concerns
Documents have ranged from 14 pages down to 4 - Typically when I have a bad manager the documents tend to be longer.
This came about because in my previous role I found I would go into 121's saying "yes, I think I have earned a better score in EntraID" and he would say "I need evidence". There were also allot of very inconsistent bits of information regarding progression passed. It became very clear I needed to keep track of all of this and essentially game the system, and twist my managers arm. This became so effective three of my co-workers have also began doing this, and to my understanding copies of my 121 prep documents are passed around upper management as a way of saying "yea, this is what happens when you don't address issues".
From doing this I have somewhat taken control of my 121's and typically lead them rather than let them happen to me. If I am honest it is an incredibly effective measure for self advocation and rapid career progression. I have been considering for some time putting a template onto my GitHub for others to use.
Some managers only want more status updates and find more ways to discredit your work. Others want to genuinely build you up and will even help you get a new job because they truly value their subordinates.
I found the best way to have “effective” 1:1s was by getting a new manager. Either switching projects, teams, or companies. Most often it was by switching company. Even then, you’re still a victim of circumstance.
Especially in a place like Silicon Valley where the idea of truly investing in an individual is a long gone concept - you’re gonna have a hard time finding that kind of resonance. This is why some people follow their managers everywhere. I will also mention - just because a manager does this for someone else doesn’t mean they will do it for you. There are many reasons for that, of which are completely out of your control.
1. Staff updates their personal journal by Friday before our 1:1
2. Staff takes a one time skill assessment of all the tech dimensions we use on a likert skill so I know what they are strong and weak at (like might be weak in batch processing, containers, etc).
3. Staff periodically updates their career journey which has
-Start Date
-Elapsed Time
-What were your expectations in the elapsed time you were here?
-Review of skills matrix and what you want improved
-Current Role
-Desired Next Role
-Projects worked on in this year
-What skill sets did I learn in this years projects?
-Certifications
-Next year I want to accomplish
-In 5 years I want to accomplish
[ these are all the artifacts I use as a reference point ofr myself]
-- then during the 1:1 I ask
1. 'how are you?' --> And then I listen to see how their response is. Are they sighing a lot, are they stressed are they bored. I then follow up to make sure everything is okay emotionally or they have issues. I have noticed a lot of employees are not honest in what they say
2. I then assess how they are doing in terms of their
- project delivery
- tech skills
- soft skills
and get feedback accordingly.
Most engineers I have are doing well on projects and tech skills, but often need work on soft skills. I ask them to focus on soft skills by thinking of
- communication
- writing
- reading
For those who need help in communication I advise them to attend a Toastmasters class in person. Also I have been advocating for staff to read 'Supercommunicators' as a way to think about communication as a framework.
For soft skills, I believe the way of improving is being well rounded in the humanities, and not just going hard core tech.
