Esther Derby posted a tweet
recently about imagining a company “where every employee was trusted to use her
best judgment to act in the interest of the customer and the company.” I’m
guessing that I rolled my eyes and sighed when I first read it because I can’t
imagine this world.
How many of you go to work, look around, and think that every person belongs there? If you do, congratulations. Don’t ever leave that job! I’m generalizing, but a lot of us go to work, look around and think, “How did that person ever get that job?” I certainly wouldn’t trust some of my coworkers to act in the best interests of the customer or the company.
Then the Twitter
conversation turned to the Retrospective Prime Directive.
Regardless of what we discover, we understand and truly
believe that everyone did the best job they could, given what they knew at the
time, their skills and abilities, the resources available, and the situation at
hand.
Shouldn’t I think the best
of people? Shouldn’t I assume that everyone is trying really hard to do all
that they can? I think the answers are yes and yes. The Prime Directive can be
a meaningful reminder to focus on the positive instead of placing blame. But I also
believe that it can do more harm than good.
Namely, it can provide an
excuse for not dealing with staffing issues. Don’t worry about Bob; he tried
his best this iteration. He’s just having a hard time understanding how our <insert
technical jargon> works. We overlook the fact that Bob’s been on the team
for a year and if he doesn’t understand it yet, he probably never will. We
don’t want to admit that maybe we hired the wrong guy.
It’s abused even more around
personality conflicts. Be patient with Jill; she didn’t mean to be rude. She’s
just having a rough time adjusting to pairing. We neglect the fact that the
team has been pairing for 6 months and Jill has been ornery since the start. She
does not want to be there.
Have we created situations
where Bob and Jill can succeed? Are we helping them or their teams by leaving
them in their current situations? I think the answers are no and no. Bob and
Jill are likely fully aware of the mismatches in technical competency and personal
preferences. And the team definitely feels the discrepancies.
So what about the team? Can
they succeed with members that don’t fit? The answer here is maybe. If the rest
of the team is knowledgeable and passionate about delivering value, they can
compensate for the misfits. They can still produce software, but it will take
its toll on team morale over time.
It is challenging to address
situations where our hiring decisions resulted in a poor job fit for an
individual. But is avoiding a difficult conversation worth the cost? Are we
creating the best situations for all of our employees? I guess that’s not my decision
to make.
