[loughnane]

The most productive teams I've run have been when using OKRs or OKR-like schemes.

They're hard to get right though. Its easy to add too much process, make planning too much of a burden, or not regularly check-in.

One concept that's helped lubricate things is "task-relevant maturity", which I first heard about in Andy Grove's _High Output Management_. It's a gross phrase but essentially means to that people who could accomplish a goal in their sleep need less help than someone who is facing something new. Accordingly, I've cut more slack to the former when laying out OKRs.

Its hard to overstate how valuable that is. Senior engineers who've been in the same space for eons chafe at having to do the same pedantic things as a junior engineer, and rightly so--they've seen a million managers and fads come and go.

To the point of the article I _really_ like the concept, but I'm wary of demanding another step for fear that it won't take. Usually I try something out by myself but keep it optional for a year or two---or forever.

[gcanyon]

You might resonate with Situational Leadership. The basic premise is almost exactly what you say above about senior engineers. In SL they break it down into four stages:

    1. Beginner: you tell them exactly what to do and how to do it.
    2. Novice: you mostly tell them what to do and encourage them to learn and experiment.
    3. Experienced: you consult with them on what to do, and they mostly manage how to do it.
    4. Expert: you give them the goal and mostly just ask them how they'll approach it and how long it will take.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Situational_leadership_theory