[KTallguy]

I disagree. I approach 1:1s as an opportunity to just shoot the shit if that person is interested, or if there is something on their mind they can choose to chat about it. As the article states, it's that person's chance to completely dictate the conversation.

I think the best is to personalize things as best you can (depending on your team size). Some personalities are less interested in talking, which is fine―I just try to make sure nothing is blocking them or they're not dissatisfied. Some people love to talk about their life, and I usually have to time-box that.

I genuinely care about how my team is doing and want to help them grow, so 1:1s are my main opportunity to figure out how I can help them... especially in the era of remote work.

[lnsru]

I am glad for your team, that you genuinely care. There are enough people stuck in management positions that should sit locked in the basement instead of managing people and making their lives miserable. Currently my one-on-ones are 20 minutes meetings once a year where manager reads from paper what he thinks about my performance last year. I have no right to question his decision. I could open a case with HR to review my review, but it will not improve anything for sure. As long my reviews are good I am good.

[KTallguy]

I get it. I've had my share of bad managers.

What you described sounds like a performance review... I think 1:1s should be monthly or weekly, depending on the team.