I've been working as a software developer for about ten years, and I've started to get a little annoyed when my manager asks me what I'm gonna work on improving this year. Like what can I say? That I'll try get better at coding? That I'll get better at project management? At some point the marginal utility is just not there anymore. Even if I did get twice as good (whatever that means) at systems design, it's not like there is _that_ much systems design to go around at work that it would actually be noticeable.
What do senior developers say they'll work on improving in their performance reviews?
Instead of talking about skills, or personal efficiency, talk about technologies that you're going to introduce to your product, or some specific difficult problem that you're intending to solve.
Another next career step is to take ownership of things without needing to be asked or told, to create and execute plans, to raise and address problems pro-actively etc. And if your workspace doesn't give you opportunities to do it, and you want career progression, then go somewhere else.
It really shows you're a team player when you take on more work for the same amount of money. Only a possibility of future reward, and _if_ you can spin your performance reviews correctly and _if_ management doesn't inexplicably dislike you.
Talk about technologies you want to introduce can go more than one way. It can make you sound informed or it can make you sound like someone, who is performing CV-driven development. I know the type. Like for example needlessly wanting to push GraphQL into things that are simple REST APIs.
Like all such metrics, the specifics don't really matter. All that matters is that you can tell a story, over the course of the year, on how you've "improved". The goal is to use the story to highlight the work you've been doing while passing it off as evidence. This kind of story telling is something people in management positions tend to be very good at but it's also a skill people not in management should have some proficiency in.
Is your manager really asking about your self-improvement?
Or are they asking about you improving what you can do for them, your team and your company? Your job description is a baseline but if you’ve nailed that, there’s usually more you can do that’s outside of that.
Or you can be content with doing your job well, and make up some bs so your manager can write it on a form. Both are valid.
Your boss needs paperwork to justify pay raises, promotions, etc to their boss & HR. Isn't the whole purpose of that question to leave a paper trail that both you and they can point to?
That's what I've been told, and such I always answer those questions in a way that has a concrete 'goal' that I can point to and either makes ME more valuable to the company OR delivered some thing that is valuable TO the company.
This is the correct thread. It has to be some words that don’t seem too fake and seem to plausibly suggest forward progress.
There has to be some plausible support for decisions, that someone can point to, in order to make a decision. Taking ownership of a decision means having a paper trail where you can deny responsibility for something gone wrong.
Then hopefully the fears of replacing developer jobs are unfounded, and in fact we can expect (hope) for middle management jobs to be replaced instead?
That's the type of culture that made me leave my last job. Feels very inhuman when you see your manager every week, and they still make you fill in robotic questionnaires for potential salary raise.
It's deeply demotivating to learn that your manager doesn't know you all that well and cares more about filling in checklists, at least for me.
I understand that people who like to stay on their job dislikes this kind of questions, and I also sympathize on why tech sector now doesn't have places for them and asking people to keep improving.
However for those who are superstar / plan maker, this discussion is actually beneficial. This is the moment where among all of things available, prioritized items will be officially registered, rather than your manager make assumption on what needs focus / not. The field staffer has more knowledge on that so managers may also missing some points that can be unraveled during this discussion.
> However for those who are superstar / plan maker, this discussion is actually beneficial. ...
I hear all this and it seem useful also. But from what I have seen in last 5-8 years is that immediate supervisor/manager have hardly any power or resources to anything meaningful for employees beyond filling basic HR templates that go nowhere.
This could be different for very early career employees or startups where one's manager could be just the founder or CTO and the like. But for mid career and above employees in typical established business, managers seem merely human timesheet for work done. They have full mandate to get work done creatively , enforce corporate policies from up top but little in term of listening/approving any of their employee's considerations.
sorry you experience it as demotivating. I think this is because your expectation of who has what responsibility is not aligned with workplace expectations.
The thing is, your manager has to fill in some paperwork and other admin processes to get you that raise. The manager is probably willing to do that work for you.
You can make this easier for them by helping them fill in that template. Making your manager's job easier IS part of your job, especially making it easier for them to get you a raise.
So yes, the main part of your job is to do the work explicitly assigned to you. And another part of your job is making sure that the work you've done is easily legible to the company.
family/friends relationships have other 'rules'/courtesies.
A good manager doesn’t ask what you want to get better at, they ask what they can do for you. A manager who asks these sort of dumb questions is just going through the motions, you should do the same, say whatever they want to hear and then don’t think about it again. You can, alternatively, try and make them into a better manager by changing the question but they might not be receptive.
"What you want to get better at" can turn into "what they can do for you", though. Like if a conference or training course would help you start or improve on your goal, and they can approve you to get it paid for.
This is interesting to me because in my job as a senior dev I can tell that there are greater opportunities for me if I can improve my skills. As a result, I think this may speak to your work environment more than the nature of being senior.
It's all bullshit. They have to ask because somebody is asking them how they're going to eke more productivity out of their underlings. It goes all the way to the top (the shareholders).
Just play along and talk about how you want to improve your mentoring skills or some other completely immeasurable platitude.
Ultimately this productivity-eking obsession is the organizational equivalent of free radical cellular damage. It's just a constant process of degradation to the integrity of whatever caused the business to be successful. Like death, it is unavoidable.
Lesson is actually: if you want to blow people's minds then practice secretly. An appearance of effortlessness. Sprezzatura. Whatever it is, it seems to be the only thing that impresses the average person.
Well I agree but clearly some people have ambiguous motives...they want to do what gives them joy but also a little bit in their heart they want to impress
You're on to something here. It doesn't seem like a lot of catches. There's a distinction in juggling between "flashing" and "qualifying" n objects. To flash n objects, you throw and catch them n times. To qualify n objects, you throw and catch them 2n times.
It would be incredible if someone qualified 14 objects.
Reminds me of when I play my mandolin when I’m camping. I’m sure fellow campers think I suck, despite having played for ten years. But I’m not going to play stuff I can play in my sleep, I’m playing stuff that still needs work. So, in consideration of others, once in a while I’ll rip off a fast version of Old Dangerfield or some other song I know really well just in case someone is in earshot.
Why do you think other people want to hear you practicing songs that you're not good at? I'm imagining someone trying to learn the recorder by the campfire.
Why do you think other people want to hear you practicing songs that you're not good at?
I’m assuming people don’t want to hear me at all. To be clear, I’m just sitting at my campsite, not showing up to the campfire circle with “anyone want to hear poorly-played music?” Though if someone else is sporting a ukulele, well, I think all bets are off at that point.
I don't. I'm not playing for their entertainment, I'm playing for mine. I get bored with a song long before I get good at it, and so I divide my time between songs I'm starting to get good at, and songs I'm terrible at. I've never reached good at anything though.
This can easily just be gentle ribbing where the juggler and "critic" are familiar/friendly enough that the juggler understands the dude respects his juggling skills and knows the critic is just making friendly banter when he sees him making more frequent drops.
I can juggle pretty well with three objects, but I have no idea what the next step would be. Four feels like it would be no fun, because it is just juggling two balls in each hand. What is the recommended next step?
I learned juggling in approximately 12minutes with a friend who knew juggling from before. He spotted me like you would spot someone in a gym: he put the balls in my hands, told me to hit one up, caught it mid flight (effectively freezing time), and told me "ok now hit the other ball up and catch this one". After 6-7 tries my brain was reprogrammed, and by the day's end we did juggling in pairs.
I guess the moral of the story is that a great teacher can push your limits way further than you could yourself? Or that it's easier to learn in a group setting?
3 ball is a lot easier than 5 ball. A good teacher helps, but plenty of books exist that are good as well. Most people are not interested enough to try for 10 minutes.
What do senior developers say they'll work on improving in their performance reviews?
Another next career step is to take ownership of things without needing to be asked or told, to create and execute plans, to raise and address problems pro-actively etc. And if your workspace doesn't give you opportunities to do it, and you want career progression, then go somewhere else.
Or are they asking about you improving what you can do for them, your team and your company? Your job description is a baseline but if you’ve nailed that, there’s usually more you can do that’s outside of that.
Or you can be content with doing your job well, and make up some bs so your manager can write it on a form. Both are valid.
That's what I've been told, and such I always answer those questions in a way that has a concrete 'goal' that I can point to and either makes ME more valuable to the company OR delivered some thing that is valuable TO the company.
We’re in a golden era when same busy work has not yet expanded due to LLM influence. Let’s appreciate it while it lasts.
It's deeply demotivating to learn that your manager doesn't know you all that well and cares more about filling in checklists, at least for me.
However for those who are superstar / plan maker, this discussion is actually beneficial. This is the moment where among all of things available, prioritized items will be officially registered, rather than your manager make assumption on what needs focus / not. The field staffer has more knowledge on that so managers may also missing some points that can be unraveled during this discussion.
I hear all this and it seem useful also. But from what I have seen in last 5-8 years is that immediate supervisor/manager have hardly any power or resources to anything meaningful for employees beyond filling basic HR templates that go nowhere.
This could be different for very early career employees or startups where one's manager could be just the founder or CTO and the like. But for mid career and above employees in typical established business, managers seem merely human timesheet for work done. They have full mandate to get work done creatively , enforce corporate policies from up top but little in term of listening/approving any of their employee's considerations.
The thing is, your manager has to fill in some paperwork and other admin processes to get you that raise. The manager is probably willing to do that work for you.
You can make this easier for them by helping them fill in that template. Making your manager's job easier IS part of your job, especially making it easier for them to get you a raise.
So yes, the main part of your job is to do the work explicitly assigned to you. And another part of your job is making sure that the work you've done is easily legible to the company.
family/friends relationships have other 'rules'/courtesies.
Doesn't happen, but hey at least I'm being honest about what I'd like to improve
Just play along and talk about how you want to improve your mentoring skills or some other completely immeasurable platitude.
Ultimately this productivity-eking obsession is the organizational equivalent of free radical cellular damage. It's just a constant process of degradation to the integrity of whatever caused the business to be successful. Like death, it is unavoidable.
(But wrapped in appropriate buzzwords & boss-speak.)
Wow. The wikipedia page has a nice list with links to videos:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juggling_world_records#Balls
is that ... is that juggling at that point?
It would be incredible if someone qualified 14 objects.
I’m assuming people don’t want to hear me at all. To be clear, I’m just sitting at my campsite, not showing up to the campfire circle with “anyone want to hear poorly-played music?” Though if someone else is sporting a ukulele, well, I think all bets are off at that point.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48963122
- Throw one over your shoulder/under your leg/around your back/
- catch each ball with your palm facing down instead of up
- Out->in cascade (throw from outside, catch from inside) instead of the traditional in->out
- 3 columns
- over the top (tennis)
- Any "mess"
- Any "box"
Then all of the above, but with
- 3 clubs
- 3 cigar boxes
- 3 clubs on fire
- while riding a unicycle
That should keep you going for a while
https://libraryofjuggling.com/
All tricks sorted by difficulty with animations. You can find good YouTube tutorials on most three ball tricks.
Whoop
I learned juggling in approximately 12minutes with a friend who knew juggling from before. He spotted me like you would spot someone in a gym: he put the balls in my hands, told me to hit one up, caught it mid flight (effectively freezing time), and told me "ok now hit the other ball up and catch this one". After 6-7 tries my brain was reprogrammed, and by the day's end we did juggling in pairs.
I guess the moral of the story is that a great teacher can push your limits way further than you could yourself? Or that it's easier to learn in a group setting?