Ask HN: How can I encourage my co-workers to grow further as engineers?
6 comments
This is not a how-to, but have a look at this (I have this very same problem): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6920376
Now my teammates are completely in the path. Motivation is the key point here, they told me at the beginning "you have just arrived here, you will not be so "willing" when you have some years on your back". But then I showed them I am relentless I have showed the benefits of "doing" and "going further". How? I don't have a clear answer but I believe something like:
1. I study a problem or a path.
2. I try to speak about it to my boss (and I don't usually give credit to what he say since he a "1" type).
3. I do what I think it bets better to the enterprise/team
4. I show it to my boss and colleagues and speak about the issue/problem/technology...
5. They don't give a shit about it.
6. I continue my path (meanwhile they continue their path) until they realize that my path is simpler, funnier, better, or rewarding.
7. They usually want to meet again to "re-speak" about the technology/problem/issue... whatever.
8. They end up learning it and enjoying the path on learning/studying...
So nowadays they are motivated by this path (just a little bit more, old your horses!) but I notice that they are much happier.
But, a BIG WARNING: it might happens that some people may feel threatened about you or your way. When you finish something make them feeling part of the team, congratulate them and so on... This is so much true if you are not their boss (if you are, just fire them).
Now my teammates are completely in the path. Motivation is the key point here, they told me at the beginning "you have just arrived here, you will not be so "willing" when you have some years on your back". But then I showed them I am relentless I have showed the benefits of "doing" and "going further". How? I don't have a clear answer but I believe something like:
1. I study a problem or a path.
2. I try to speak about it to my boss (and I don't usually give credit to what he say since he a "1" type).
3. I do what I think it bets better to the enterprise/team
4. I show it to my boss and colleagues and speak about the issue/problem/technology...
5. They don't give a shit about it.
6. I continue my path (meanwhile they continue their path) until they realize that my path is simpler, funnier, better, or rewarding.
7. They usually want to meet again to "re-speak" about the technology/problem/issue... whatever.
8. They end up learning it and enjoying the path on learning/studying...
So nowadays they are motivated by this path (just a little bit more, old your horses!) but I notice that they are much happier.
But, a BIG WARNING: it might happens that some people may feel threatened about you or your way. When you finish something make them feeling part of the team, congratulate them and so on... This is so much true if you are not their boss (if you are, just fire them).
Assume that each of the categories you have described exists for legitimate reasons and that each individual person has good reasons for optimizing on one of those paths and that their reasons are not yours and that there is nothing broken in them that needs fixing.
The most likely problem is that you're in a place that does not require everyone to be a rock star ninja 1%er. Maybe it's time for you to find a bigger pond. The Harvard of Arkansas ain't Harvard.
The most likely problem is that you're in a place that does not require everyone to be a rock star ninja 1%er. Maybe it's time for you to find a bigger pond. The Harvard of Arkansas ain't Harvard.
As someone who is type 2 and is continuously working toward being class 3, I want to know why your coworkers would even want to be type 3?
For instance, while I'm a type 2 developer, I'm a type 1 musician and a type 1 air hockey player. If I took half the amount of effort I spend on trying to be a better developer and spent it on air hockey and music, I could be type 2 in both of those. I don't care about being a musician or being good at air hockey, so I haven't done those things, but that's just a matter personal taste.
If I wake up tomorrow and discover I love air hockey, why should I keep working toward being a type 3 developer?
For instance, while I'm a type 2 developer, I'm a type 1 musician and a type 1 air hockey player. If I took half the amount of effort I spend on trying to be a better developer and spent it on air hockey and music, I could be type 2 in both of those. I don't care about being a musician or being good at air hockey, so I haven't done those things, but that's just a matter personal taste.
If I wake up tomorrow and discover I love air hockey, why should I keep working toward being a type 3 developer?
This is a good question, but based on my experience, I have come to the conclusion that the mindset that characterizes the three groups really go beyond engineering or computing. It takes a certain amount of curiousity, interest, ability, learning and so forth to have a type 3 mindset and some of that simply cannot be externally driven.
Having said that, encouragement is good. Share what you learn as you do it, talk about the books you've read and what benefit they provide. Sometimes people just need an example closer at hand to see their own potential.
In the end, it really up to each person to decide how they want to approach life.
Having said that, encouragement is good. Share what you learn as you do it, talk about the books you've read and what benefit they provide. Sometimes people just need an example closer at hand to see their own potential.
In the end, it really up to each person to decide how they want to approach life.
I am not a type 3 engineer myself but I too believe it's a matter of mindset. So what you want to do is to help them change their mindset. I have read 2 really, really interesting books on that matter. The first is called 'Mindset' by Carol Dweck and the second one is 'Talent Code' by Daniel Coyle. They are so valuable I believe that from now on we will see a blossoming of talents in the western world never seen before due to such books addressing mindset problems. I hope you take the time to look into them. They will give you hints and advice on how to spark the growth mindset in other people.
I was introduced to the Dweck book some years ago and it made a big impact on me; I essentially had a fixed mindset and needed to "see" it in order to change it. Another really good book is Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi's "Flow", which, for me, anyway, extends Dweck's growth mindset concept to an operational level. I have recommended both numerous times to good effect. I'm not so sanguine about the blossoming of talents; our system of education does not encourage the growth mindset, for the most part, until it's too late and learning it later in life is hard.
Focus less on:
* Comparing them to you
* Changing them
Focus more on: * Identifying and leveraging their strengths * Position your self as a Silvers type leader. Be a first follower to any of their ideas that you think can be tweaked to hold water.
That last one may be non-obvious. Learning to be a first follower promotes humility in yourself, supporting others, and showing others how to lead and follow. When others lead their 'laziness' (I hate that word) begins to dissipitate.
Focus more on: * Identifying and leveraging their strengths * Position your self as a Silvers type leader. Be a first follower to any of their ideas that you think can be tweaked to hold water.
That last one may be non-obvious. Learning to be a first follower promotes humility in yourself, supporting others, and showing others how to lead and follow. When others lead their 'laziness' (I hate that word) begins to dissipitate.
There is a bigger world exist beyond being an engineer. Some of your coworkers are wonder how they can help you to move beyond that mentality.
1. Those who need direct guidance. They perform one task and stop. They don't follow through on their analysis of issues or dig deeper to find underlying cause of problems. There's no high level thought process or context; rather, high level analysis is limited as they don't have the domain knowledge to understand the full system they're working on (they don't care to find out or don't realize the value in understanding the entire system).
2. Engineers in between the above and below groups. Usually fairly technically savvy -- can handle typical engineering tasks with competency, but lack motivation or don't actively seek out how to grow as an engineer. They stagnate without a great manager/tech lead pushing them to the boundaries.
3. Engineers who are extremely proficient. Implementing features and finding the cause of problems is not an issue for them -- regardless of the feature, language, framework, whatever. These engineers go and figure out how to get it done. These engineers are only limited by their dependencies and business requirements. If you told them to implement a time machine in software, they would figure out the closest possible way to do it, and provide you with a full technical analysis of how it works -- and what the shortfalls are.
As a fellow engineer, how do I encourage my coworkers to move from groups 1-2 into group 3?
There is little in the way of technical training at the workplace; if there were, it wouldn't teach the core skill of just plain getting on with it -- dig as deep as you can, find core problems, understand your system, grow as an engineer. In general there is a sense of laziness among engineers and a "wait to be told what to do" mindset.
Any thoughts or advice?