|
Hey Reader, Tuesday's post had a template. Four columns. This is the 1:1 where I first used it for real. Early 2024. A tech lead on my team wanted the next level. Let's call him Harry Potter. Not his name, obviously. But Harry was strong. The kind of engineer you hand the hard thing to and stop worrying about it. Harry believed he was ready. I did not. The worst place a manager and a report can beNot a bad rating. A gap between what each of us thought was true. Every 1:1 after that would have been a quiet argument. So I did not argue. I sent him the doc. Rate yourself against the next level. Fill in all four columns. Come back. He came back with every line marked ready. Not one gap. I read it. Then I said one thing. Rate yourself at the lowest value you can defend. And attach an example to each point. If you cannot attach an example to it, that point does not stand. He went away again. Version twoSome points dropped. We went back and forth on the rest. He pushed. I pushed. Each point had to survive a "show me". Here is the part I did not expect. Some of the gaps were mineHarry had not led work across teams because I had not given him work across teams. That gap was there because of how I had allocated projects. Not because of his skill. It went on my list, not his. We ended with a short list we both agreed on. His gaps. My gaps. Dates next to each. I did not promote him that cycle. I knew I could lose him over it. Strong people have options. He stayed. Six months later I put him up. He got it. He stayed on my team for about a year and a half after that. Why the rule worksThe template is not the point. The rule is. Lowest defensible value, with an example. It turns "I am ready" into a list you can act on. It also turns "you are not ready" into a list your manager has to act on. Both sides get homework. That is what makes it fair. Do this this week
Reply and tell me which point of yours dropped first. I read every reply, and the common ones will shape a future issue. Next Thursday: the fastest way to get rejected in my system design rounds. It is not a wrong answer. Either way, keep going. The effort you're putting in will compound. TheGuidedGrowth. |
Ex-Google | Stanford LEAD | Ex-Founder | Sr. Engineering Manager. Career systems for engineers who want FAANG offers, faster promotions, and leadership roles. 650+ interviews conducted, 1,100+ engineers mentored. Read by 178,000+ engineers across platforms.
Hey Reader, I study every single day. You might assume I have a free hour somewhere. I don't. My workday is full, and my evenings have calls. So I don't look for a free hour. A book I am reading right now says it in one line. You don't need more time. You need better systems. The book is How to Be Good at Life, by my friend Ben Meer. I am part way through it, and it has 40+ systems like the one I am about to show you. You can get it here. Here is my system. It has 3 slots. The gap after...
Hey Reader, Two weeks ago I posted: build your exit on day one. This is the day it paid off for me. I had joined Flipkart a few months earlier. I was not looking. I was still learning where things were. A Google recruiter messaged me on LinkedIn. Then called. Would I interview? They offered me two months to prepare Most people take it. I had a reason not to. I had a medical procedure booked about three and a half weeks out. Recovery would take time, and I was not going to cut it short for...
Hey Reader, Over the last two weeks I posted how WhatsApp works, in four blocks. This is what I see when I ask someone to build it in an interview. I sit on the other side of that table often. What follows is a composite. Not one person. A pattern. It does not matter what I ask Design WhatsApp. Design a parking lot. Design a URL shortener. The question changes. The failure does not. The candidate nods. Then, inside the first two minutes: load balancer. Database. Cache. Queue. Each word is...