|
|
|
|
|
by DaveChild
3418 days ago
|
|
I've been on both ends of 1:1s. For a manager, they seem great - a regular meeting, a chance for staff to talk about things. But they're not. They're window dressing. If you need the 1:1 to see what mood your staff are in, you're not paying attention. If you need the meeting for your staff to be able to tell you what they could do with to make their work easier, you're not approachable. From the perspective of a developer, they are an unwanted interruption, and a great example of the kind of make-work that gets in the way of productivity. You'll waste an hour in a 1:1, plus whatever time it takes to get back to what you were working on, and that is time that you usually can't spare. |
|
1-1s and being available/approachable are not mutually exclusive. Not every employee is comfortable bringing up nagging frustrations without a formal venue for them. Especially those earlier in their careers.
And in terms of interruptions, some of us would rather have an hour scheduled on the calendar that we can work around than random drive-by interruptions from a manager who wants to "stay in touch". A 1-1 is for those conversations that the employee might not otherwise initiate, and it's for exploratory chats that eventually make it to territory you might not have covered if you were only discussing what's front of mind.