I've had some time to think and reflect since the frenetic pace of my last permanent role and I thought I'd share some of the lessons learnt over the years. These thoughts relate to hiring and expectation management - Numerous other hiring managers adopted the process I developed due to it's success in finding the right people; I've even been recommended because of it. I spent a lot of the beginnings of my career working at consultancies so I got to see a lot of different IT & development departments.
I took those experiences into the latter half of my career and built on them in ISV's and online gambling & gaming firms. After I left my last employer a number of people there approached me about grumbles and for career advice so maybe if you're thinking about getting on your bike, some of these observations from the last 15 years may help you make sure that bike's in good working order before you need it...
So What's Physics Got To Do With It?
Relax, I'm not about to yell "In the NAME of SCIENCE!!", wave a sword in the air and the lead nerd equivalent of the charge of the light brigade. In simple terms, inertia is simply defined as "a body's resistance any change in motion". So if a body is already moving, that body won't change direction unless something forces it to. For example, if there was no gravity or air-resistance on a tennis ball, Nadal's returns would never bounce in but just continuing to travel on at their fantastic speed.
That's some pretty boring tennis.
In terms of the people that you have working for you right now, at what point does their reluctance to change career direction become inferior to the options, choices or influence to move to the next stage? They will be the forces that eventually inspire them to change course and jobs, their inertia overcome.
For example, we've probably all worked for companies at one point or another that fail to deliver on promises and end up only inspiring dissent. I'm sure we've all see the kind of offices I'm talking about - The last drops of enthusiasm drain away at around 10am on Monday mornings, where senior management just weren't interesting in keeping you happy, would often take credit for yours & your teams achievements as their ideas - often right in front of you. The kind of places where it's very difficult to conceal what's happening from your team. Your superiors are making your job even more difficult then criticising you for not hitting those moving targets. But hey - that's the same in any company to a greater or lesser extent so we just learn to deal with it better!
A simple exercise in shared ownership and expectation setting for team members can mean that what the seniors do above you is irrelevant to your team members. It can also ensure that senior management get the ammunition to laud amongst their peers and their seniors whilst your people further build a sense of achievement and self-worth.
So let's look at inertia, and that seeming reluctance to take that next step. The deciding factor there is levels of personal happiness.
Happiness Is Not An Illusion
Even your own happiness shouldn't be measured by short-term pressures such as "how do I keep my boss from getting angry?" or "how do I make sure I don't get fired?". Both those questions conceal underlying issues about your relationship with your line manager that you need to review. Maybe you need to think about how to set expectations more realistically, or maybe that boss refuses to have his or her expectations set any differently and you need to define delivery plans differently.
No-one is going to fix it for you - you've got to take charge and do it yourself. Your boss will be impressed if you resolve a problem via initiative anyway and relying on other people for your own happiness is a bad idea.
For example, I could define my own happiness at work measured against certain criteria. So if those criteria included whether I can be in a position where I'm learning something new (or how to do something I already knew better) and I'm able to contribute to the organisations mission statement, that satisfies my own happiness criteria. There's nothing complicated there and it's pretty easy to keep that learning mode switched on.
I've been fortunate enough to work for two great organisations in the last six years who have enabled a massive personal leap forward in both technical and business acumen. My reasons for leaving both organisations were to springboard into a specific career channel on my own for the next ten years, and I'm incredibly grateful to both companies for the immense wealth of experience gained.
For my personal happiness the problem at my most recent employer was that it's a thankless, hard-working environment where politics are constantly at play - There's someone trying to pull the rug from under your feet all the time, listing all of your smallest shortcomings alongside none of your major achievements to the heads of department and above. Most of the senior management originated at the same group of companies and there's little longtitudinal career travel. However, the amount I learned and the various performance and security concepts I got exposure to combined with the great technical people I was fortunate to work with outweighed all those negatives instantly. Overall I'd actually describe the entire experience as extremely positive and constructive but then I'm known for having a very optimistic approach!
On one project we worked from October through to January missing out Christmas and New Year entirely. We got the project live with 30 seconds to spare (failure would have meant the company ceasing trading in certain countries) and I finally celebrated xmas / new year with friends in February. I really enjoyed the vibrancy and energy across the teams but the level of effort isn't sustainable for any length of time. Some of the developers involved were getting serious grief from wives and partners as a result, others just reaching the end of their tether entirely. Around five percent of the department handed their notices in over the following eight months.
Of course, whilst I could have stayed at my present employer for many years there was nothing there to provide any kind of objectives or markers of success. Crucially, the exposure to new things or improving things stopped over the course of a quarter. I'd already learnt how to do push-ups in space and I'd be stuck in the same career situation for the foreseeable future; fantastic experience but no longevity. It's a shame because the business itself is a global success.
If you've ever read
Soul of a New Machine by Tracy Kidder you'll get an idea of what the environment could be like in places. Sometimes the development department delivered requests even the CTO thought impossible to implement, other times we'd fix live security issues that few people seem to have ever heard of. All sorts of people wanted to consult with us ranging from a very large software company from Seattle to security departments in national government. The company has it's own patents, creates relationships with specific ISV's in order to get feature requests and help develop those products. Almost all the companies in the same market sector viewed this organisation as the target to aim for and we were used to building software that would come under attack every minute of every day.
So the inertia here - the reluctance to move on - was big but the force enacting a change in career direction was much bigger. It took quite a lot to make me think about moving on despite an extremely tough working environment with a very high turnover of staff but after going through two or three relationships and having all your friends make some very unsubtle comments your perspective is adjusted. Forest. Trees.
It's a personal thing and defining your own happiness is very much up to you.
Moving on from recent examples, some places do have an entrenched management structure that all used to work together at whichever organisation(s) they all came from - usually only creating glass ceilings for everyone else, or bring in people who won't question them. It's very difficult to make your way through that structure although it is possible with the right strategy. There's an element of that in most organisations to a greater or lesser extend though, more so in family-run businesses.
A good friend of mine whom I've known for many years went from working in a call centre to working in banks, then on to being an accountant. In his case, happiness is defined as caring about the people you do business with (as well as being able to use his brain!). He couldn't do that in a call centre, and banks generally have too much internal politique for good people like him. It took years but he's happy - it's still hard work but it's the sense of achievement and associated rewards that provide him the next objective.
That inertia was overcome by a desire to improve himself and his quality of life combined with the determination to succeed - An admirable level of tenacity.
Should I Stay Or Should I Go?
Perhaps it's more about the Psychology of Staying - At what point do you assess your own happiness and realise that your current situation falls far short of your expectations? How many times will you grumble about leaving then never get round to it because "the time isn't right"? How many holiday requests will get refused before you (and your partner) start having serious issues?
I think we've all had difficult situations motivating staff where they've seen the grass on the other side (especially when you have contractors as well as permies) and are struggling to justify their current life choices as a result. Your aim should be to take care of their best interests and create more feathers for their cap. Give them something "for free", like a new programming technique or methodology, and you'll see an increase in enthusiasm. They're going to get that "new thing" one way or another, so you may as well get the perceived credit.
An occasional pat on the head, perhaps a bonus or a payrise a little over the rate of inflation may keep someone quiet for a while but eventually it'll be the same situation and same grumbles again. Remember that no pa-yrise is the same as a pay-cut and there's no such thing as a "job for life" in information technology so don't assume long-term loyalty. As an employer, the people that come to you threatening resignations unless they get a pay-rise will only do the same to you again in a year. Making your people feel valued is worth far more than any pay-rise or bonus in the long term (although they can help), assuming your paying fairly for the market to start with.
Beating people with a stick then criticising them for not being stick-proof is not a good approach. I remember on a particularly large and difficult project being told that I wouldn't be given any project management or architectural resources. I spent some time with my boss explaining that growing the perm team by another 50% in six months, taking care of the BAU tasks and covering live issue support was plenty (along with my actual day job). Doing all the project planning and architectural support within the team wasn't possible at that stage, and wouldn't be until we could hire or promote some senior developers. A massive redevelopment project, in a proprietary development environment on bespoke frameworks was going to be tough enough on everyone..Never mind doing it on our own.
Both myself and members of the team had to work 60-80 hour weeks for over a year to make sure we got the job done. I was denied requests to promote within the team or find senior developers on the market so nominated technical leads to perform the senior dev functions. Kudos to the guys I put in those roles, they achieved an incredible amount and it's a huge credit to them that the products and frameworks were delivered.
Following what became a tricky product delivery I was ironically pulled up for planning and architectural criticism. Don't take that as shifting blame though, it was my responsibility to ensure delivery and mine alone. By the way, that taught me that "I told you so" comments need to be very carefully phrased :)
Back in the world of physics, impulse is defined as force multiplied by time. Essentially, a large force for even a short time creates the same amount of change as a smaller force for a much longer time.
In people-terms, impulse is far more dangerous. One person leaves and starts telling their former colleagues about the benefits (the "grass is always greener" effect). They start making impulsive decisions about their futures that you have no control over and cannot convince otherwise. All it took was a little extra nudge to focus those existing thoughts and ideas.
It's a visible indicator of your working practises when your people start leaving in numbers, especially in the current market where perm developers can almost name their price.
Sound-Bite Summary
In order to get closer to that state of equilibrium, start at the beginning; the recruitment cycle for your growth or replacement phase. Usually it's better to wait to find the right people - the people that have a particular vocation or love of a job - to fill a vacancy than shoe-horning in a bad fit. Long term it'll save you (and them) a lot of pain. No-one checks all the boxes but if you can find someone with an attitude that fits your working environment and is hungry for it, the situation will be more constructive for both sides. In fact, far more constructive than a star player [prima donna] who needs to be the centre of attention all the time (and whom the rest of your team will probably hate).
Contractors don’t matter - they're just there to see you through until you've built your teams the way you'd envisioned it. That's not being mean or heartless, I'm a contractor myself coming from a development management and development background and I know where I stand.
Whilst the axiom of "A happy workforce is a productive workforce" rings true, what you're really doing is preparing and training people for their next job. The only choice you have to make is whether or not that next job is going to be within your organisation or your competitors.
