
Don't add your 2 cents - dhruvkar
http://sivers.org/2c
======
haasn
I can't agree with this article at all. From my experience on contributing to
FOSS projects, I feel much better when somebody senior makes adjustments to my
code rather than leaving it as-is.

Not only does it tell me that they actually read my code and spot errors (the
added bug safety net makes it much less stressful for me to write new code),
but it also makes me feel like I'm learning something new that I wouldn't
otherwise have. Finally, it inadvertently means that the rest of my code
passed their “high” standards for quality, which is gratifying - especially
for large commits in which I only need to change little.

I guess the key difference between my experience and this article, though, is
that the article seems to be mostly focused in a non-technical boss commenting
on benign/arbitrary opinions (like shades of color), rather than a technically
skilled superior commenting on his area of expertise. That might explain why I
have such a 180° reversal from this article's stance.

~~~
onion2k
_I guess the key difference between my experience and this article, though, is
that the article seems to be mostly focused in a non-technical boss commenting
on benign /arbitrary opinions (like shades of color), rather than a
technically skilled superior commenting on his area of expertise._

The article is referring to things that are ostensibly subjective changes that
don't make a tangible, measurable difference. The suggestions in question are
often the boss putting their mark on something so demonstrate that they've
made an impact.

Even if the suggestion actually improves the product, suggesting something
that deflates team morale more than it brings to the design means the change
isn't worth it. As a boss that's quite a hard lesson to learn because logic
says you should be doing whatever you can to ship the best possible product.
In reality, especially in the long term, the product is going to be better if
you temper your suggestions in favour of the team.

~~~
noxToken
I think the employee-boss relationship is a factor as well. Generally
speaking, superiors should be able to make constructive criticisms to their
subordinates without it impacting morale in a negative manner. That makes
criticism a two way street.

Bosses must make sure that they're not all critic with no praise. No one wants
to be critiqued all the time without kudos for the good portions and hard
work. Tone, body languages, and timing all play into how an effective leader
communicates positively or negatively to a team member.

On the flip side, staff need to be able to separate their personal worth from
the work that they do. This can be especially tough in some fields and with
some personality types such as art, design, and programming. When your work is
highly subjective, when you're starting your career, or when their are a
million methods to achieve the same goal (with some methods being better
without obvious reason as to why), it can feel like critiques are attacking
the person instead improving the work.

An anecdote from my personal life: I worked as a paralegal for a while. I
started off mediocre at the job, but after a management change, my new boss
had manuals that gave standardized instructions on how to do nearly
everything. That's when I started to excel. There were many specific times
when I would give my boss documents, but he _never_ let them slide. Ever. He
would say, "The language and structure of this document is perfect, but you
know I can't let anything slide without having _something_ to change." He'd
mark something subjective such as substituting a synonym with the same meaning
and tone or moving a sentence that didn't affect the language of the
paragraph. It never bothered me, but I can see how that would definitely grate
on others. In spite of this, he was always full of praise with nothing but
positive remarks.

~~~
beambot
One-word redline => 10 minutes of billable hours.

::Shakes fist:: lawyers! ;-)

~~~
noxToken
Because of the line of work, we were contracted with up front costs. We didn't
have billable hours, but hot damn - those little corrections would have added
up quickly.

------
JacobAldridge
I think it's good to note, as Derek does, the distinction between "2 cents'
worth" and larger changes that do require senior input - otherwise you're just
being the manager that the team create ducks for [1].

This is where coaching skills as a manager can prove useful. If you feel there
are some minor changes that could be an improvement, but don't want to impose
your will/opinion, coaching ('ask') can be a better response than managing
('tell').

For example, you might ask "If you had to improve anything, what would you
change?" It's an open-ended question that will encourage your team member to
think. They can reply "Nothing" if they're confident in the final solution, or
they may propose some tweaks they weren't fully happy with - "I'm not sure if
that's the right shade of blue" or "I think that's the right call to action,
but maybe we could get another opinion". If those are reasonable improvements,
empower them to implement the additional change; if you disagree with the
extras they raise, tell them you consider the version they proposed to be
superior, which empowers their original decision.

Just don't be the manager who expects a detailed response and change every
time ... then you're right back to where you started.

[1] See point 5 [https://blog.codinghorror.com/new-programming-
jargon/](https://blog.codinghorror.com/new-programming-jargon/)

~~~
thesz
The open question does not always work. I'd say it never works, even.

If I take "coaching" attitude, I will take attitude of sports coach - observe,
measure and explain why corrective action is needed. The action itself is a
choice, mostly, but manager and coach should present a basis for it.

Continuing my my rant, I emphasize that manager and coach are external to the
team, they view performance from outside (and often prohibited to look under
the hood). This is the reason why open questions do not work - difference in
view points creates difference in the context.

~~~
vanderZwan
I thinks _specific_ questions would work well. To use the bad boss example:

> _I like it! Really good. Maybe just a darker shade of blue there, and change
> the word ‘giant’ to ‘huge’. Other than that, it’s great!_

Let's change this to:

> _I like it! Really good. Can you briefly work me through the design process
> behind it? I 'm particularly interested in how you settled on the colours
> over there, and your ideas behind the word 'giant'._

(This honestly still needs a bit of work, but is getting there)

In this phrasing we show interest in the designer's work, respect their
choices and don't assume our ideas are better than theirs. Instead we assume
they know what they are doing and give them the space to convince us and also
tell us what parts of the design do and do not matter to them, before engaging
in giving proper feedback.

The big issue with the cited bad example is that the boss doesn't say _why_
the design needs a darker shade of blue, or why the word ‘giant’ has to change
to ‘huge’. It doesn't give any other feedback than "this is wrong, this is the
fix". It's not open for debate.

~~~
jnbiche
>> I like it! Really good. Maybe just a darker shade of blue there, and change
the word ‘giant’ to ‘huge’. Other than that, it’s great! >Let's change this
to: >> I like it! Really good. Can you briefly work me through the design
process behind it? I'm particularly interested in how you settled on the
colours over there, and your ideas behind the word 'giant'.

Take note, all ye entrepreneurs! This advice is just as applicable for
software engineers as for designers, extremely so. So many issues could be
avoided with people I do contracts for if they just approached issues in this
way.

Usually, it's "change this, do that". So I have to reply with "OK, well, we
_could_ do that but it'll take 20 days and cost $3000 dollars". The
entrepreneur, displeased yet unwilling to pay that much or give up that much
time: "hrmph. well...".

Automatically, something that _could_ have been a collaborative process has
been turned into a confrontation. If he/she had instead approached the problem
in the way you recommended, I perhaps could have found out what was driving
the desire for change, and recommended a cheaper/faster solution to the
problem. Usually, I'll end up in that place eventually, but by that time what
could have been a collaborative process has turned confrontational, with my
client thinking "ugh, programmers" and me thinking "ugh, idea guys".

That said, this has given me some ideas about how to respond in this types of
situations. Perhaps with something like, "can I walk you through the reasons
why I did/chose this?". Might be worth trying.

~~~
vanderZwan
> _That said, this has given me some ideas about how to respond in this types
> of situations. Perhaps with something like, "can I walk you through the
> reasons why I did/chose this?". Might be worth trying._

Right, there's no reason the designer/software engineer shouldn't take the
initiative

------
tobtoh
As a manager, I tend to frame my feedback/opinions as 'Have you considered
<something>?' or 'Can you explain your thinking behind this
<feature/function/design>?'

Doing it this way, I get an understanding of their rationale and if I still
think my idea is good, I can debate the worthiness of it against my employees
reasoning. I feel this approach fosters a 'best idea wins' rather than a
'manager opinion trumps all'.

I agree with Derek's implied point that 'manager opinion trumps all is bad',
but think it's a discredit to his staff if he doesn't challenge their ideas if
he thinks he has something more worthwhile.

~~~
torrent-of-ions
This post is much better than the article. The manner in which you deliver
criticism is very important. When criticising somebody on their method I find
it is much nicer to say "I like to do it like this..." They will then be
encouraged to try your method and they might like it. You are not attacking
their method.

I find it unfortunate that most people take criticism as an attack, but they
do and choice of language and delivery can soften the blow and bypass their
defences.

~~~
ZoFreX
> "I like to do it like this..." They will then be encouraged to try your
> method and they might like it

The danger here is that this will often be interpreted as "my boss wants me to
do it like this", and they will do it not because the idea stands on its own
merits, but because it was the boss's idea.

------
ojosilva
I find the advice highly condescending.

> Because of that small change, that person no longer feels full ownership of
> their project.

What kind of person is that who 1) thinks the ownership is 100% theirs when
working in a team? 2) can't handle a little nitpicking? 3) feels it's less
their work just because of a little change? 4) can't defend their work and
resist those 2c?

This is advice for managing 2 year olds. As a manager, just be your
_reasonable_ self. The truth is key for a functioning team. Giving people
feedback and letting them know where they stand helps build trust.

> It’s perfect. Great work! Let’s ship it.

Ditto!

~~~
StanislavPetrov
>This is advice for managing 2 year olds.

That's exactly the vibe I got from reading this article. I immediately thought
of someone trying to manage super-fragile millennials who wilt and pout
without constant encouragement and affirmation. If I submit I project for
scrutiny, I _want_ constructive criticism and advice. The goal should to make
the project as good as it can be, not manage the feelings of emotionally
challenged workers.

~~~
derefr
Perhaps it's like SEO, where all the low-hanging fruit is obvious and
sensible, but where further optimization beyond that point is stuff that looks
really odd and counter-intuitive, or like it "couldn't possibly" have any
impact.

Maybe people put out a 1.0 units of effort when you're just a reasonable
person, but put out e.g. 1.1 units when you baby them, and so babying them is
a "win" in some sense?

~~~
StanislavPetrov
>Maybe people put out a 1.0 units of effort when you're just a reasonable
person, but put out e.g. 1.1 units when you baby them, and so babying them is
a "win" in some sense?

I'd contend that any worker that you have to "baby" in a business environment
to get their best effort is a worker you are better off without.

~~~
derefr
Note that I'm talking about _results_ , not _effort_. Someone could be giving
their _best effort_ already, resulting in 1.0 units of output. But babying
them might be the emotional equivalent of blood-doping in a marathon, a
psychological stimulus that actually partially restores or extends the
willpower-resource that is spent internally to accomplish work.

I'm also not talking about a specific kind of person who "needs" babying. I'm
proposing instead that your average neurotypical human brain might have this
effect built in, such that it applies to anyone and everyone. It would just be
an effect that most of the time goes untapped.

~~~
ojosilva
I think a truer kind of relationship is the most significant factor still.
It's the common denominator that will take people to great results for a wider
"audience" (a team here).

But I agree that fine-tuning your feedback and style per individual needs,
even if counterintuitive, may also be productive, as long as it's not
contradictory and leads to situations where one team member feels another is
being babied around more.

------
timv
I think the suggested comment _It’s perfect. Great work! Let’s ship it._ has
its own set of issues.

Firstly, while the conversation started with "I'm looking for input", the
manager has suddenly moved it into a push for delivery.

 _If_ the design was ready to ship, then that won't be an issue, but if all
you're looking at is a mockup, or a slapped together stylesheet, etc, then
what was an attempt an encouragement has just lumped more pressure on.

Also, the comment assumes that the designer thinks it's "done". The request
for input could mean "this is the direction I'm going in, does that look
right". Telling them that you think it's "ready to ship" still takes ownership
from them. You've just moved from being the boss who provides 2 cents on
everything to the boss that wants everything to be done right now without
taking the time to do it right.

Much better to say "I think it's fantastic. Great work! Is it ready to ship,
or do you have more to do on it?"

~~~
cottsak
I think your subtle focus on the semantics of the reply highlight a common
block to agile feedback loops, small batches and generally getting things
done. Sorry if that's harsh but you either missed the point of the article
entirely or just overlooked it, the latter possibly being worse.

The primary point IMO is "don't squash ownership" because the cost of doing so
is often not fully realised. The secondary point is "don't sweat the details".
You've kinda proven you don't get this yet.

~~~
ckastner
> I think your subtle focus on the semantics of the reply highlight a common
> block to agile feedback loops, small batches and generally getting things
> done. The primary point IMO is "don't squash ownership" because the cost of
> doing so is often not fully realised.

^^^ Here's your comment without the pointless condescending remarks. Notice
the difference?

------
jasonkester
I like the way Joel Spolsky describes managers taking this even further at
Microsoft back in the day.

They wanted to make sure the engineers knew that they were the ones designing
the software, to the point where they would refuse to even step in and resolve
a conflict between two engineers about the design. Even when those two
engineers came up and asked for help resolving said conflict.

 _Now you 've got three people in the room: a designer, a developer, and a
manager. Who's the person who knows least about the problem?_

Solve it yourself, guys. Perfect.

[http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000072.html](http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000072.html)

~~~
megablast
Right, but you have the engineer saying that is not important, and the
designer saying this is the most important part of the software and we might
as well not do it at all.

This is where you need a decision from someone else.

~~~
derefr
I don't know if you need arbitration, there, so much as a willingness to allow
each party to "pull in" others to help make their point. Like expert witnesses
in a trial, but just for the sake of convincing.

------
Gustomaximus
Something a very smart person advised me was to "Tell people what you want,
not what to do"

It sounds so simple yet is surprisingly hard to practice. It really puts the
onus on you to think carefully about outcomes you desire and explain it
clearly.

~~~
Swizec
Or as Neil Gaiman put it from the opposite perspective:"When people tell it's
wrong, they're almost always right. When they tell you how to fix it they're
almost never right."

------
ctur
What this article misses is that genuine feedback helps us grow, and being
open to it is as important as being able to deliver it in a way that doesn't
take something away from the recipient. Getting others' input and adapting to
it (or learning when to accept but not heed it) is crucial for getting better
at whatever endeavor one is engaged in.

If you have a suitable level of trust and respect between you and the person
requesting approval or feedback, then your input can be valuable without it
being undermining of their ownership of their creation. In fact, the opposite;
by soliciting feedback (preferably early, not just at the end of a project),
you can help build a sense of ownership from the person giving feedback.

~~~
dietrichepp
I thought that was the point of the article—give people only genuine feedback
that helps, not hassle them with minutia. Giving unsolicited advice to people
you manage can undermine the "suitable level of trust" that you would
otherwise have, if you're not careful.

There is a big difference, after all, between requesting feedback from someone
you respect and getting approval from a superior in a hierarchical power
structure.

What the article is touching on is the tendency for some managers to give
feedback on everything just because they can. Other people in the organization
won't have that privilege, and giving feedback on everything reinforces the
fact that the other people in the organization are subordinates and don't have
that privilege.

~~~
marklgr
Exactly. If this article annoys you, read it again carefully, it does _not_
argue against feedback in general.

------
exolymph
This seems a bit condescending to me. I can take suggestions and feedback
without losing sight of my own accomplishments. Because I'm an adult.

------
guelo
I sometimes convince my boss that he is wrong. I think it's a sign of a
healthy team.

------
fixermark
Related: Parkinson's Law of Triviality, and the Queen's pet duck in Battle
Chess (when developers become aware of management's need to unnecessarily
"finishing touch" all work and begin making slightly-inefficient choices
intentionally to give the work a "shear point" where the management can feel
like they're contributing by removing something obviously incorrect).

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_triviality](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_triviality)

Similar processes have been used for decades by movie and television creatives
to move the Overton window on media censorship---early cuts of a project will
have something _obviously_ grotesque and culturally repugnant, so the censors
lock onto that and miss the risqué thing the creator wanted to get to their
audience.

------
euphoria83
Love the suggestion. So many times have minor suggestions from managers killed
the enthusiasm for a project because it feels like the manager can't think
about or appreciate the bigger picture. In fact, it looks like he is only
trying to own the success of the project by picking on non-important stuff.

------
samscully
Some factors in motivation at work are the level of autonomy, mastery and
purpose in your job.

A coworker giving minor feedback is only contributing to your mastery. A boss
giving you the same minor feedback is cutting in to your autonomy. The
exception is when the purpose is great and sweating every detail is necessary
or when the boss is a recognised master of your craft and their feedback is
almost always correct and regularly helps you improve.

An example of the first case might be engineering at SpaceX and the second
could be Steve Jobs giving engineers and designers product feedback. What I
think a lot of people are missing in this thread is that in most situations
the purpose is relatively uninspiring and the boss is significantly less
skilled than the person she is giving advice to.

------
shocks
I am reminded of the story about the duck!

[https://rachelbythebay.com/w/2013/06/05/duck/](https://rachelbythebay.com/w/2013/06/05/duck/)

------
agentgt
I think the article/blog post is missing a key point in that the employee came
to the manager asking what he thought.

This is a critical role that the manager plays that the article decides to
come up with a unreferenced social psychology manipulation solution when there
is a greater problem at hand.... the employee is nervous about shipping the
product and wants approval.

The reason why this is because a great manager is supposed to protect and
shield employees from the outside so that they can feel at ease with making
decisions and working with out fear of making some mistake that costs there
job (unlike the article I can site like 5 or so Harvard Business Review
articles written by experts that show this is often the reason why employees
come to ask questions like that.. yes I'm being snide but I think "What got
you here want get you there" is basically on overrated Dale Carnegie
rewritten).

Not getting any input sends a message of "I don't really care about your
work". And if you really wanted to coach and you really believe this arm chair
psychology then why not send a link of the article to the employee asking the
advice and say "I would like to give some input but I want to assure you that
I think you own this project... etc etc...".

Education is a powerful thing... manipulation is not.

------
ryanbrunner
The way I've always tried to approach this is by pointing out problems, rather
than offering solutions, especially where I'm in a position that I'm giving
feedback to someone who is more of an expert in the activity than I am.
Expressing things as problems automatically eliminates a lot of the minutiae
about wording, color, etc. (since those are just subjective opinions and not
reflective of a problem), and it lets people still feel like they're owning
the work and not making changes they disagree with because they're forced to.

Example:

Providing solutions: "Move the 'widgets' menu to the top. And make it bold"

Expressing a problem: "So, when I'm using the app, one of the first things I
usually want to do is look at my widgets. It took me a few minutes to find out
how to do that."

The solution to this problem might be looking into whether accessing widgets
is a common use case, or finding different ways of educating users about how
to find widgets, or yes, even moving it to the top. But no matter which
solution is chosen, everyone is going to come out of it with more information
than if they blindly implemented the manager's uninformed opinion.

------
antoineMoPa
My experience with work is that everything can be slightly improved all the
time. You have to stop at a certain point and I think the author has found the
nicest place to stop, at least for employee happiness.

On the other side, if you have been working on something alone, I think it is
a clever idea to accept the feedback of your boss just to have another
perspective.

------
johnwheeler
Dale Carnegie Rule #1: Never condemn, criticize or complain. In general, we're
all not actually looking for input so much as support.

Human nature is such that even when we readily acknowledge someone better at
something, we quietly indulge and seek out advantages we have in other areas.

We engineers like to think we're more rational and accepting of input. Working
as a coder and manager for the last 20 years has shown me there's nothing
further from the truth.

------
tn13
Man! I wish my boss had read it 5 years ago. I could never understand why I
was not motivated in my job at all even though my boss was really brilliant.
It basically reduced to this. No matter what I did the boss always had 2 cents
that had little impact on anything but made be less interesting in doing the
work. But for my next job the boss was much better, instead of saying change
this and change that he would often ask me why I made certain choices and what
inspired me. He would then say "ship it" but the questions he raised made me
wonder how I could make things better.

But the advice is something everyone must learn.

------
epa
Tread carefully between being fake and being sincere. People will stop asking
you if you give a fake answer like the article.

~~~
dietrichepp
People who can't sincerely ignore trivial matters probably should stay out of
management.

~~~
marklgr
I assume GP was refering to the "great work" part, but even then it's just
matter of style; the point was only to show approval without nitpicking, not
emphatic congratulations.

~~~
dietrichepp
Ah yes, it's too easy to think that a comment is addressing one point when it
is addressing another.

------
torrent-of-ions
Ugh. This reeks of "safe space" nonsense.

Part of working in a team is receiving comments and criticism from others. If
you take these negatively and as attacks to you, rather than collective
construction towards the final goal, then you have a problem and need to
consider changing job.

I find that when I design something I become accustomed to early design
choices and then eventually become blind to them. I need someone to come along
with a fresh pair of eyes, see the whole thing and nitpick it. It's absurd to
suggest that it's either perfect or needs to scrapped entirely.

~~~
luke_s
Well, I was going to downvote, but figured it's better to comment.

> Ugh. This reeks of "safe space" nonsense.

What? I have very little idea what you are talking about, so I looked it up on
wikipedia: "In educational institutions, safe-space (or safe space), safer-
space, and positive space originally were terms used to indicate that a
teacher, educational institution or student body does not tolerate anti-LGBT
violence, harassment or hate speech, thereby creating a safe place for all
lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender students."

Which frankly sounds like a good idea, but doesn't seem like it has much to do
with this blog post about managing members of your team.

> Part of working in a team is receiving comments and criticism from others.
> If you take these negatively and as attacks to you, rather than collective
> construction towards the final goal, then you have a problem and need to
> consider changing job.

Yes, except the point of the blog post is that managers should be aware that
comments and criticism they would have been happy to offer as co-workers
suddenly start to look a lot more like commands when they are coming from a
boss. It's a good idea for new managers to be aware of this changed dynamic.

~~~
torrent-of-ions
> > Ugh. This reeks of "safe space" nonsense.

> What? I have very little idea what you are talking about, so I looked it up
> on wikipedia: "In educational institutions, safe-space (or safe space),
> safer-space, and positive space originally were terms used to indicate that
> a teacher, educational institution or student body does not tolerate anti-
> LGBT violence, harassment or hate speech, thereby creating a safe place for
> all lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender students."

It was originally something like that but "safe spaces" just turned into echo
chambers where everyone is only allowed to agree and encourage people and
dissenting opinions are considered "unsafe".

------
bmmayer1
A better way to approach this situation: "That's great! Love it! Out of
curiosity, what inspired you to choose those colors and fonts?" Then, they
still have ownership, but they also are given the chance to justify their
choice and it starts a conversation that could lead to improvements, if
necessary.

~~~
JoshTriplett
Unless you're genuinely curious, that would likely come across as passive-
aggressive undermining.

~~~
_bpo
Even if you are genuinely curious, such inquiries from a boss/"authority
figure" can easily come off as threatening, so tread very carefully with
advice like that.

~~~
hirsin
Indeed - it only takes two or three easy questions like that to become a
pattern, at which point every question is code for "guess what you did wrong",
which is toxic.

------
baddox
Is it not possible to make it clear that your 2 cents is just a suggestion?
This just seems like bad communication, and regardless of whose fault that is,
the boss might as well try to solve it.

~~~
dietrichepp
It's a "suggestion" from a direct superior in a hierarchical power structure.
A little bit of communication isn't going to change the context.

So no, it is not something simple like "bad communication".

I think one of the main problems here is that people in power often feel like
they have to justify themselves by giving technical feedback, even when it's
not appropriate.

~~~
Etzos
But there are ways of eliciting critical thought about the choices made and
even about alternatives that the person in power has.

It is "bad communication" in that the person in power is communicating their
desire in a way that is perceived, even if just a little bit, as being a
command. And I do believe there are effective ways to mitigate this.

~~~
dietrichepp
This conversation is a great example of bad communication, if you want a
reference.

Communication is not just about how you communicate, but when. Good
communicators know how and when to listen, and they keep their mouth shut when
it's appropriate. That's the lesson of this article. If that's not a problem
for you—if you know when to speak and when to listen—then maybe this article
won't help you, personally.

And if my manager was always trying to elicit critical thought about trivial
and mundane matters like font choice and colors on internal tools, then I'd
want them to just shut up for a moment. I'd be glad to hear what your
effective mitigation strategies are for giving unnecessary advice.

~~~
Etzos
I think the issue I have is that the author is taking an all or nothing
approach. Either something is all wrong and a larger discussion must be had or
nothing is worth noting. There is a huge range of things in between there,
many of which may be small opinions.

After reading the article a few more times and the comments here, I'm getting
the impression the author meant "don't add pointless opinions or suggestions
to things." The use of the phrase "my two cents" beguiles the author's intent,
as in many cases that phrase is not used when one has a pointless opinion.

~~~
dietrichepp
Yes, I've heard the "my two cents" phrase used with important or strongly-held
convictions, but that's just an ironic use of the phrase to mean the opposite
of what it usually means, no?

It may also be a dialect issue, like the old "let's table this" problem.

I was definitely not reading "all or nothing" from the article, more of "if
you only have something trivial to say, don't bother." Hence, don't give your
two cents, but put a dollar in when it matters.

------
quadrangle
Oh how I wish I had a downvote ability on this post. The first thing wrong
with this is the fact that the post is nothing more than the author's 2 cents.
The author doesn't know what they hey they're talking about and is just
pontificating.

As someone who does a lot of creative work, I _hate_ it when people just give
useless positive encouragement and withhold actual constructive feedback,
small or large. Only hypersensitive people feel worried about their loss of
ownership because they accepted someone's suggestion.

A situation where a boss having a color preference means that a designer feels
unable to reject the suggestion is a dysfunctional workplace. When the manager
has that type of feedback, they are not being a manager. A good manager makes
it clear that if they have color feedback, that's just their suggestions and
not them acting in capacity as a manager.

~~~
erikb
I have to agree with a lot of what you say, but just as the article I think
you haven't completely thought through what you are writing.

For instance, let's add two points that in real life can't be circumvented: a)
most places that pay you will be dysfunctional work places, and b) you don't
always have a choice of work since you need to pay bills.

And what are your standards for downvoting? I downvote when I think a
comment/link is hurtful for the discussion or people involved. And yes, while
it is not a very well finished article from Derek, it leads to a healthy
discussion and in itself is not a bad/hurtful opinion to have.

~~~
dpark
> _most places that pay you will be dysfunctional work places_

This article is aimed at _managers_. It is advice on how to create a
functioning work place. To the extent it fails to do so, it is entirely
appropriate to say "Hey, this is bad advice for reason X."

It is not interesting to rebut this by saying "Yeah, but reason X isn't valid
if the manager is terrible." The whole point is that the manager shouldn't be
terrible. This isn't advice for non managers and it isn't advice for managers
who aren't trying to be good managers. Managers who don't care about creating
a functioning work environment aren't reading and discussing this anyway.

------
collyw
Reminds me of the designers pricelist.

[http://www.creativebloq.com/career/graphic-designers-
price-l...](http://www.creativebloq.com/career/graphic-designers-price-list-
priceless-91516736)

------
abalone
This doesn't necessarily invalidate the advice, but Steve Jobs clearly did not
abide but it (would critique icons at the pixel level, etc.), so it is
demonstrably not universal advice for building successful companies.

~~~
vxNsr
I would argue that sj only critiqued things that he genuinely felt needed to
be changed. Though he was also demonstrably the worst manager one could have
so I wouldn't draw too many conclusions from him.

~~~
abalone
_> sj only critiqued things that he genuinely felt needed to be changed_

Which included incredibly detailed nuances like pixel-level critiques of icons
and UIs, which is literally what the author defines as "your 2 cents".

 _> demonstrably the worst manager one could have so I wouldn't draw too many
conclusions from him_

Except how to build one of the most valuable companies in the world? Seems
like a fair criterion for good management.

~~~
dilemma
Why did Steve Jobs think the iPhone shouldn't be able to copy and paste?

------
dclowd9901
As an independent contributor I don't want my manager weighing in on my
choices. I see them as out of the loop on the more technical aspects of my job
and they should leave those decisions to me.

If I come to a more technically senior member of the team who is more
knowledgeable, it is to _precisely_ ask for their opinion.

So in my mind: if you're a manager, don't bother; if you're a more senior IC,
do, with the explanation of why your approach is better. You're more of a
mentor at that point than a manager.

Oh, and if your approach isn't really better, just different, keep it to
yourself.

~~~
jacquesm
> Oh, and if your approach isn't really better, just different, keep it to
> yourself.

This really is the heart of the problem, not giving feedback when it is
solicited (unless it is really soliciting for approval rather than feedback).

There usually are many ways to do something, all of them roughly equal and it
doesn't matter who gets to chart the road to take, as long as _a_ road gets
taken and you can move on to the next issue. Way too often the discussion will
center around who gets to claim that their road was taken, which is more often
than not utterly irrelevant.

Office politics is the silent killer of teams, projects, products and whole
companies and this is one of the more immediately destructive manifestations.

------
paulsutter
This is an excellent mini-rule for habitual micromanagers. Like me :)

~~~
jacquesm
Maybe you could use 'good' instead of excellent and a ;) instead of a :)?

------
darkerside
This is a total straw man. There's something in between bikeshedding and
blindly approving work you feel is less than perfect. What if the boss
responded with, "Why did you choose this color of blue?" This indicates
respect for an intentional choice, lets the employee provide a rationale and
be heard, and still moves towards a better final product. There's a false
dichotomy presented in the article, and it's crap.

------
dahart
Honest question - is this idea of individual ownership conducive to team
morale, enough to protect ownership like this? I've seen a lot of examples of
how "ownership" backfires when people are protective of their turf or
disregard others' valid input. Ownership seems to be commonly used to get
people to take personal responsibility as a proxy for motivation, it does help
some people set better examples, but does it motivate a team and make it more
cohesive on the whole?

I have seen 2-cents backfire a lot a well, but I think it's most often strong
personal opinion not backed by good reasons, like evidence or unseen
constraints or dependencies, etc.

This article started by the boss asking for " _non-obvious_ advice", and then
provided an example of advice that was pure opinion without any reason, and
stated as a veiled command rather than offering an alternative option. It can
be important to share actually non-obvious insights, even if it's just 2 cents
worth, so I won't be asking my team to avoid sharing their 2 cents as a
blanket rule, I will ask them to share any important insights they may have,
and encourage them to have a good reason.

------
donkeyd
As somebody who is working himself up the food chain and has a tendency to
give his two cents, this is some real food for though. Thanks for sharing!

------
SudoNhim
Huh... approaching this from the opposite side, when my boss has suggestions I
always take it as an opportunity to let them feel some ownership of the work,
even on occasions where the suggestions don't turn out to be that useful in
practice ("I implemented your suggestion of X, which led me to come up with
Y").

 _Trying to game professional relationships goes both ways I guess :)_

------
visakanv
It's tough to be prescriptive about this sort of thing in a general way. Every
situation is different. It really depends on who you're working with, sort
sort of context you're working in, what sort of expectations you're working
with, etc.

I would say, "make sure you set expectations in advance about how feedback is
to be interpreted and acted upon". My boss gives me his 2 cents all the time,
and I enjoy it. And vice versa. Sometimes I preface my suggestion with "you
don't have to do change anything, but FYI...", and sometimes I say "I feel
quite strongly about this: XYZ" – and even then we have an understanding about
whether or not something should or should not be changed. It works the other
way too. I've shipped things without incorporating feedback, and all was well.

So I think it boils down to culture. Everyone's understanding of what the
norms are, what is expected, etc. (Just for fun: Can you imagine telling Elon
Musk or Steve Jobs not to add their 2 cents?)

------
pbreit
This would need to happen 10 times before I would think I don't own the
project. If I can't take input, I should not have a job.

------
giis
> because it’s not just one person’s opinion anymore — it’s a command!

Spot on. Exactly the reason for quitting my last job. Boss(manager) comes and
adds his 'suggestion' to every task.Even though, I tried to stick to my way to
going about the task. He continued to insist that I should give this view a
trail run first. After a week or so, When thing go wrong, I'll go back
original method and finish the task.

Later, he will complain about I'm being slow to respond to task. When I point
out the unnecessary time-wasted due to his suggestion. Now he will backtrack &
put it as 'I was only giving suggestions, it was your baby anyway'. It
happened 3 or 4 times & I had enough.

Funny thing - During my last day, I took this issue to CEO. To my surprise, he
said, 'Yeah, employee has to take my suggestion, since I'm their boss'!

[to those bosses if you are reading this:] - I don't have any issue with
trying out your ideas - but when thing go wrong, take the responsibility for
your _stupid_ idea.

------
apatters
While I'm normally a fan of Derek's musings, this one is too pithy for me. He
is painting with too broad of a brush. There are all kinds of reasons why you
might tell an employee to make small changes: maybe one small change will have
a big impact; maybe many small changes in aggregate will have a big impact;
maybe the employee doesn't want to take ownership; maybe the employee is too
junior to take ownership; maybe the employee wants to learn the nuances of the
profession in greater detail; maybe the employee is an underperformer; I could
go on like this indefinitely as could many other experienced managers.

Now maybe if you're employing a bunch of independent-thinking artistic,
creative and intelligent types this generalization makes sense. But I'm sure
the global workforce has substantially more than 1 billion members who don't
fit this definition. In that light it seems a little irresponsible to put this
thought out there like it's a zen koan.

------
fmavituna
If your team cannot take your feedback just like taking feedback from their
colleagues, cannot argue with you or veto your idea easily with a legitimate
response, take everything you said as a "command" then you have failed as a
manager anyway.

I assume Derek's advice makes sense for Korean culture where manager and team
dynamics are different.

~~~
ZoFreX
I've seen this happen over and over again in American culture. One of my most
common pieces of feedback to managers centers on this, in fact. Time and time
again I see managers who _think_ they are able to give feedback as "one of the
team" and that they aren't "the boss" or giving people orders... but when you
speak to their reports, they are interpreting it as orders from the boss. Even
if you produce documents declaring your workplace to have a "flat" structure,
people tend to treat any feedback from the person who signs off on their
paycheques as commands.

~~~
fmavituna
2 things:

* It's about how make the suggestion. "How about making this blue darker?" vs. "Do you think making this blue darker would give us more engagement? Are there any studies, or have we done A/B testing on this? I think it fits on our branding better because..." etc. Derek's example is really bad one though. Why would a manager (unless an experienced designer) would make such a pointless suggestion?

* If everything you say is just done without any sort of questioning then it's obvious there is a problem.

So I think any decent manager would notice it.

------
kahrkunne
Maybe rather than avoiding giving helpful feedback, they should work on
fostering better employer - employee relationships

~~~
dietrichepp
I think it's a common delusion for managers to think that this kind of
feedback is helpful, which is the kind of misconception this article
addresses.

"They should work on fostering better employer - employee relationships" is
non-advice, it's just a goal statement. Kind of like telling a runner that
they should try going faster.

------
odabaxok
This reminds me this story
[https://rachelbythebay.com/w/2013/06/05/duck/](https://rachelbythebay.com/w/2013/06/05/duck/)
(Project managers, ducks, and dogs marking territory)

------
55555
I have a similar tip to provide:

When a designer or developer shows you a version that is not nearly done,
don't provide any _specific_ feedback. If you mention specifically that a
button should be red instead of blue, for example, then you are communicating
that they are almost done, and they simply need to make the minor changes you
mention for you to be happy. If the work isn't nearly finished, it's better to
instead say, "Great work so far. I don't want to rush you. I think you should
spend some more time refining the UX. Do a few trial runs as a user and do the
best job you can to make the most perfect UX possible."

As soon as you mention specific things, they mentally move on.

~~~
mangeletti
Absolutely terrific advice.

As soon as I read "_specific_ feedback", my eyes lit up.

Another issue with specific feedback is that "...should be red instead of
blue" type feedback can derail a designers whole thought process, a thought
process which usually doesn't end at the delivery of a draft, which is merely
an optional stop along the way in the mind of the designer.

A designer might have ideas for how to address certain kinds of objections to
a draft. For example, if boss says, "It doesn't match our brand well enough.",
the designer might have some specific ideas that he/she came up with, in case
that was a perceived issue. If, instead, the boss says, "It doesn't match our
brand well enough, so add more blue.", then the designer's route can no longer
be used, and an entirely new route has to be determined.

I use the railway analogy, because I think it actually maps exactly: Imagine
you, as a train passenger, told the conductor (the person you've hired to be
your railway professional) exactly where to go, and there wasn't a predefined
switch for getting there OR the switch for getting to that exact location has
already been passed. The only way to achieve this new route is to backtrack or
build a new switch track, both of which are more expensive than continuing on
the existing route to a location that also solves the passenger's problems.

------
Kluny
As a follow up to this article, I need about 40 examples that illustrate the
difference between manager opinions that are worth two cents, and useful
manager feedback. Or about 10 years of experience, but I'm hopeful that
someone will offer examples.

------
hellofunk
Sorry, but this is just lame. A manager has a job to do, too, and whether or
not they do it well, it is within their prerogative to add comments or
suggestions, even if small, if they think it will improve a product.

Put yourself in the manager's position (which ironically this article seems to
attempt to do). Go further, suppose it is your company, not just your
department. Are you going to let a product ship when something minor could be
improved to make it even better? A sloppy manager might. Or one who doesn't
care. This article almost seems to suggest that managers should care less.

Attention to detail is what often separates good from excellent.

~~~
nostrademons
I think the point is to avoid getting lost in the forest because you want to
climb every tree.

As part of a leadership training program I once did, we had a Q&A with an
executive where we could ask him anything. One of the questions was "What was
the most surprising thing about going from an individual contributor to a
manager to an executive?" His answer was, "I learned that as you get higher up
in the organization, oftentimes you need to seek _a good_ solution rather than
_the best_ solution."

Yes, this means that the product will be less excellent than it could be.
Anyone who has used a big company's product can tell you that this is what
actually happens. And yes, this leaves openings for big companies to get
replaced by hungry little startups. But the alternative is for the big company
to function like a startup that has a few thousand uncommitted people
wandering around drawing a salary while providing input. Imagine working under
those conditions as a founder; you won't get very much done, and people who
work under those conditions in a big company don't get much done either.

If you want the product to be excellent, go quit and make an excellent (if
minimal) product. If you want to work with a lot of other people, then let
them do their jobs.

------
Mz
Maybe "Don't add your 2 cents" is not the best way to frame this, but he is
correct that being the boss means _your opinion is dangerous._ More
accurately, casually tossing out half-baked ideas is dangerous for anyone with
real power or even social influence. When your words carry enormous weight
merely because you said them, you need to be more careful about the things you
say because it will have consequences. If it really is just a casual opinion,
and not something you have really thought about, it is better to err on the
side of not expressing it in such a situation.

------
darkrabbi
Feeling ownership doesn't have to mean managers can't contribute at all,
that's absurd.

Creative labor is unqiue - Depending on the employee, I know I have X changes
I can suggest/propose per project before they start to get annoyed with me,
for some it's more than others. Unsurprisingly when its promo time the guys
who are easier to work with get brought up (even if the difficult divas work
is marginally better) The big thing is trust and respect - earning that early
on is key and once you do things are much easier going forward.

------
codingdave
Your boss' opinion might not be better... but it often does have more
authority.

In my case, I work directly for the president of the company. He owns the
place, he founded it, he built it, it is his. Whether or not his opinion is
better, it does hold complete authority, and it is his right to have his
company run his way.

Now, if you are a low/mid-level manager, the advice from the article may be
more applicable to your situation. But your own corporate structure and
culture will have an impact on the validity of that advice.

~~~
mcguire
Speaking as someone who has been "the technical guy" for 20-odd years, if the
president of the company wants to pick nits like variable names and coding
style, he's perfectly within his rights to do so. But he can do it without me.

~~~
ryandrake
I've worked for those "I'm the CEO, do it my way" guys. They hire you for your
brain but end up only wanting to use your fingers.

~~~
codingdave
There is probably a balance to be struck. Because I've also worked for
milquetoasts whose teams walk all over them, doing whatever they want. The
product suffers, the team suffers, and the company suffers.

------
andremendes
This reminds me of that story about the bikeshed[1] colour: "This is a
metaphor indicating that you need not argue about every little feature just
because you know enough to do so. Some people have commented that the amount
of noise generated by a change is inversely proportional to the complexity of
the change."

[1]: [http://bikeshed.com/](http://bikeshed.com/)

------
virtualized
Wow, what a bad example. That is called constructive criticism and is a very
valuable tool in a company's toolbox of culture.

What I observed to be actually harmful is criticism of how an employee works:
Tools, practices and habits. If your boss tells you that the build tool of
your choice sucks without naming a better alternative or any constructive
advice, that feels really bad and destroys motivation for the job.

~~~
multjoy
No it isn't. The example presented is the manager throwing in his two cents
worth because they feel they _ought_ to contribute something, which is what
the article is arguing against.

------
DavidWanjiru
My two cents: rather than tell someone to change a word here, a colour shade
there, what you should do is give your reasons for WHY. Why is this shade of
blue better than the one I chose? Why is a given call to action better than
another? That way, your opinion becomes, if not data driven, at least reason
or anecdote driven. And that shouldn't demoralize anyone, I should think.

------
jsprogrammer
The boss should not say, "it's perfect!", if the boss feels it is not....which
is literally what this article is advocating.

In the hypothetical situation described, I get the impression that the boss
didn't even look closely at the two weeks worth of work. To then get immediate
flattery feels very disingenuous to me.

------
majkinetor
If your manager asks you to change a color or font or whatever that has 0
relevance to the actual task, you know then that your manager is an idiot and
you should probably start searching for another job or a way to move up over
him.

I had number of such situations. You are almost always better off without that
in your life.

------
jhbadger
Emperor Joseph II from Amadaeus: "My dear, young man, don't take it too hard.
Your work is ingenious. It's quality work. And there are simply too many
notes, that's all. Cut a few and it will be perfect!"

------
meerita
The problem is the initial question, not the manager input. There's a
significant difference between delivering something with facts than delivering
something and asking for approval.

------
patwalls
I like to get feedback from as many people as possible, and take action on
MOST of the [actionable] feedback. In my experience, this always leads to a
better final product.

~~~
collyw
You have obviously worked with more competent people than me.

------
cursivedgreat
I always feel not to add those extra two cent when i'm responsible to
something. You just my words here. Thanks

------
fidz
So as a leader, she/he does not need to get into details and just simply
_ignore insignificant details?_

------
daveheq
Yes, bosses should always say "Perfect work!" so the developer feels full
ownership of the project.

------
werber
I think this is more-so a critique of toxic manager-developer relations, but
that's just my 2 cents.

------
freyir
The correct management approach is to test 41 different shades of blue,
collect $219M.

------
CiPHPerCoder
> “It’s perfect. Great work!”

I cringed. It's not perfect, it's at best _excellent_.

------
jagermo
So if I have an honest opinion about something my coworker or employee asks
me, I should not tell him, so that I won't hurt his feelings?

Is this kindergarten or grown-up life?

Especially in creative areas it pays to let other people look at your stuff
and get feedback. It is simply too easy to just get stuck on a path.

~~~
ZoFreX
The article draws an explicit line between giving feedback as a coworker and
as a manager. If you didn't get that, rather than reproducing the arguments
here I humbly suggest you re-read it.

------
mesozoic
Great advice. Now how to subtly get the boss to read this...

------
johanneskanybal
This makes so much sense yet didn't cross my mind.

------
bambax
Excellent. So simple advice, so obvious, so true.

Works with kids, too.

------
unabst
Huge Sivers fan! With that said, I'd take this advice way further.

> The boss’s opinion is no better than anyone else’s.

All opinions are no better. Does not matter who. Throw out opinions
altogether. In America we are obsessed with "our right to our opinion" and
somehow have confabulated this to equal our individuality, our exceptionalism,
and our success. We're unique to begin with, exceptional is only a hard earned
reputation, and success is just a feeling. Case in point, unique is effortless
because it takes effort to be identical to other people; no one has ever been
exceptional without doing exceptional work; define success conveniently, and
we're all successful.

> your opinion is dangerous

All opinions are dangerous. A doctor doesn't operate based on opinion.
Engineers don't build rockets based on opinion. Programmers don't program
based on opinion. Reality is fact based, not opinion based.

Don't add your 2 cents. Add something that's actually worth something. Faster,
lighter, stronger, cheaper, smoother, more efficient, more succinct, more
obvious, more fun... Better is measurable. If you need progress, you need
facts. And if you start comparing "opinions" and find one is better, you're
already seeking facts. Opinions about opinions is demonstratively far worse.

Of course, this is all professionally speaking. When consequences don't
matter, we're free to indulge in our opinions because we all have them.
They're automatic. But just because you thought something, it doesn't mean
squat. If anything, opinions are funny. Off the clock, do and say whatever you
want. But whenever you need to be real, share what you know, not what you
think. The more you know the better. Never confuse this with the more you talk
or the louder you voice your opinion. Bosses that authoritatively enforce
their opinion are the worst.

And most importantly, know when you know. Because only then can you or anyone
go gather facts before making that important decision. Talking and thinking is
not gathering facts! Googling is.

If you're still wondering why Donald Trump is doing so well, it's because so
many of us still live in an opinion based reality. He is the feel good
candidate for his supporters. Hasan Minhaj just did an awesome piece on the
Daily Show [0]. His supporters don't care what he says, and their opinions are
hilarious. Not to mention they are all wonderful people. If not for politics,
we'd all be holding hands in a circle.

For better or worse, democracy treats facts and opinions equally. But a good
boss won't. They are not equal, and only one leads to true progress.

\----

[0] [http://www.cc.com/video-clips/ukn1y5/the-daily-show-with-
tre...](http://www.cc.com/video-clips/ukn1y5/the-daily-show-with-trevor-noah-
muslims-prepare-for-a-donald-trump-presidency)

~~~
iopq
In terms of design, everything is an opinion. You can't prove one design is
better than the other... unless you ask for multiple people's opinion. It
boils down to opinion in the end.

~~~
Hoasi
You can't prove a design is better than another but you can measure it. You
can use beta releases or focus group and other methods. Abstract things like
feelings and intuition tell you one design is better than another. Relying on
intuition might be what works best if you are alone. But there are also
concrete signs: user feedback, churn rate, etc. Although we can agree that the
best design is not always the most successful. In the long run good design
lasts.

~~~
unabst
Having good taste is the empirical skill for judging the aesthetics or
experience of anything. If you have good taste, you know you can rely on your
intuitions. If you don't, you need someone who has good taste.

> You can't prove a design is better than another but you can measure it.

If you can measure it, you can prove it. The missing key is priority. If you
prioritize what your design needs to be better at, then you have a concrete
reference for scientifically measuring one design against another.

A common conflict is having multiple priorities. If you want a page to look
good, but also want to maximize your ad revenue, well, no matter what you do,
you've lost freedom in both. But if someone accuses you for building an ugly
page, you can show them the numbers, and their opinion will not matter. It
will matter as little as yours. I mean, you probably agree with them.

------
jecyll
Great advice, short but precise!

