
Rands in Repose: How to Run a 1:1 - filament
http://www.randsinrepose.com/archives/2010/09/22/the_update_the_vent_and_the_disaster.html
======
trunnell
_When the Vent begins, you might confuse this for a conversation. It's not.
It's a Vent. It's a mental release valve and your job is to listen for as long
as it takes. Don’t problem solve._

This is one of the most important things about conversations I've ever
learned. When someone comes to you with a problem, you need to detect if that
person wants 1) your help with problem-solving, or 2) commiseration.

#1 tends to be a calm, analytical conversation, while #2 can be emotionally
motivated.

When someone is looking for commiseration but you offer problem solving, you
might actually add to their frustration by your lack of compassion for their
situation.

If they're looking for problem solving but you commiserate, you might actually
add to their frustration as they wonder why you're doing so little to help
them.

Identification is the first step to being an effective conversation partner.

~~~
lincolnq
Thanks for this. I have definitely frustrated friends who come to me
complaining, in exactly the way you describe, because I offered only problem
solving when they wanted commiseration. I think I can identify commiseration
(they come complaining about something stupid, and then reject my sensible
suggestions), but I don't know how to solve it -- how do you effectively
commiserate with someone?

~~~
trunnell
_how do you effectively commiserate with someone?_

I think people want their suffering to be understood. All that's necessary is
to let them know you identify with their problem. Just validate their
complaint.

For example, saying "oh man! that sucks!" might be all that's needed. Or, "I
can't believe he said that!" Or, "you can't be expected to read their mind!"
etc.

You'll know you're effective if such comments start to relieve your
conversation partner. If you're wrong and problem solving is actually called
for, people will explicitly ask you for solutions-- especially if it's a
conversation at work, as in the OP.

~~~
j_baker
Better yet "That happened to me this one time..."

empathy > sympathy

~~~
philwelch
That's risky, because it might come across as implying you don't care about
their own problems because you have/had your own.

------
mathogre
If you want to actually make this happen, read the book, "Parent Effectiveness
Training" by Thomas Gordon. Get over the title and understand this is about
active participation in a conversation with two people. You listen. You let
the other person talk. You don't try to solve their problem, at least until or
unless they want it. Let them express, and sometimes that alone is enough. It
works whether in business, personal relationships, or even parental
relationships.

Brilliant Rands blog entry.

------
bluesnowmonkey
The article is a bit overly prescriptive. "These are the three kinds of
conversations you will encounter, and here is how you should respond." Human
interaction is not that easily codified.

The book _Behind Closed Doors_ superbly describes approaches to conducting
weekly one-on-one meetings, in addition to IT management in general.

Oh, and "1:1" is a ratio.

~~~
j_baker
In any one on one, there _is_ a 1:1 ratio of managers to managees.

~~~
bluesnowmonkey
Two-on-two is also a 1:1 ratio.

Really, you get 3 points for that, and I get -2 points for a valid criticism
and a book mention? People don't like dead trees? If you care about being a
better manager, get the book -- it's a much better treatment of the subject.
Actually I think ol' Rands here ripped off a lot. See page 12.

------
brown9-2
Anyone read either of Rand's books? I see a new one just came out last month:
<http://www.beinggeek.com/>

Also thanks to his wikipedia page, I just learned for the first time that the
magical software company that Rand describes with smart and attentive managers
is Apple.

~~~
edanm
I read Managing Humans a while back, when I was a programmer, and liked it.
Then, a year later, after I'd started working as a manager, I read it again
and found it _amazing_. Seriously, having seen how things work as an actual
manager, I was able to relate much more to all his stories and characters,
which are spot-on, and got a lot of help from this book.

------
mberning
My experience has been that engineers tend to resent this kind of stuff. Many
of them would consider it 'fluff' that essentially distracts them from
important work.

I have one on one meetings with my team, but I don't force a lot of structure
on it. If it takes 2 minutes fine. If it takes an hour thats fine too. If
nobody wants to do it during crunch time then we don't do it.

Not saying one on ones are not important, but given a certain kind of team and
a certain kind of employee they are not necessarily required or a productive
use of time.

~~~
dLuna
I'd still say you need to book at least 30 minutes. If your staff don't
want/need more than 2 minutes, then fine. The important thing is telling them
"this time slot I'm all yours".

------
rubashov
Ugh. A thirty minute status meeting every week? I'd be updating my resume.

~~~
sriramk
Most 1:1s shouldn't be meetings. Think of them as 'bonding' time. This is
where you get a pulse of each other. In the manager's case, find out whether
your report is happy or on the verge of burning out.

One recommendation I would do is to not do the 1:1 in a typical office
setting. Some of the most effective managers I know do it outside - from the
cafeteria to a nearby restaurant. A friend of mine had a great manager who did
1:1s while doing joint grocery shopping for the Friday evening team
meeting/casual get-together thing.

~~~
rubashov
If we're not boozing and cracking jokes it's a "meeting", and I've got better
things to do.

> where you get a pulse of each other ... find out whether your report is
> happy

Mature adults want a business relationship at work, not a psychotherapist.
Everybody does their job and gets paid, the end.

This whole idea sounds like those "Please rate our service" surveys you get
from businesses. I'll rate your service with my wallet, thanks. If you can't
figure out how to make sure things are running smoothly that's your failure,
and I'm positive survey results won't help. It really shouldn't be that hard.

Really, if a manager can't see what's what with who just from the day-to-day,
then I assure you the place is screwed up and some stupid weekly meeting will
be useless.

~~~
andrewf
I think most adults will fail to meet your standard for maturity, from time to
time.

