Great point here: "One simple jewel of advice given to me by one of our senior software engineers, Joseph, was that if we shared our motivations as decision makers (e.g. "We're working on this project to generate revenue in the short term, instead of infrastructure improvements because we're trying to hit a short term revenue goal
of X") it helped him understand why he was working on a project, and which aspects of that project to spend time thinking about improving."
Sources of Power by Gary Klein[1] is a great read about decision making and there's a whole chapter about communicating intent and motivation.
"When you communicate intent, you are letting the other team members operate more independently and improvise as necessary. You are giving them a basis for reading your mind more accurately."
The U.S. Army actually uses a Commander's Intent statement, which was streamlined into:
- Here's what I think we face.
- Here's what I think we should do.
- Here's why.
- Here's what we should keep our eye on.
- Now, talk to me.
Obviously this can be applied to any organization. It's always in your best interest to tell someone why they should be doing something and not just what they should be doing.
This is how I build consensus or vet out ideas with a team. I make a statement for a solution based on the information I have, and ask for a better solution from the team, for them to poke holes in it or simply ask "please tell me why this wont work".
Invariably, you get a lot of good thought.
The reason I have found over the years is that great designs are iterative and by giving out a starting point - even if it is wildly wrong, the team can use that to build upon.
If you simply say "give me a design" you get a lot of hesitancy, especially when in a group environment like a whiteboarding with the team.
If you say "here is an idea, whats wrong with it" you get a lot more engagement from the team because the people involved don't have anything at risk, instead each individual only stands to gain should they be able to improve the design.
If there is a headstrong tech in the group who is divergent in opinion, this approach can provide him with an opportunity to say exactly why his opinion differs and an alternate plan inclusive of his comment can be drawn in parallel and then either direction can be taken. with the other plan as a backup.
Sources of Power by Gary Klein[1] is a great read about decision making and there's a whole chapter about communicating intent and motivation.
"When you communicate intent, you are letting the other team members operate more independently and improvise as necessary. You are giving them a basis for reading your mind more accurately."
The U.S. Army actually uses a Commander's Intent statement, which was streamlined into:
- Here's what I think we face.
- Here's what I think we should do.
- Here's why.
- Here's what we should keep our eye on.
- Now, talk to me.
Obviously this can be applied to any organization. It's always in your best interest to tell someone why they should be doing something and not just what they should be doing.
[1] http://www.amazon.com/Sources-Power-People-Make-Decisions/dp...