At the company I work for PiPs _usually_ lead to issues being solved. There are several developers I've worked with on PiPs (we do specific mentoring and follow ups on the areas of concern) that were able to improve and are now doing great. It isn't always a terrible thing, certainly not comfortable for the person on the PiP but it can be a positive thing in the long run!
Good on your company; PIP should focus on shoring up skill gaps or finding better role fit or invinting someone to take unpaid LOA to work through whatever life challenge they have.
BUT, I’ve only ever seen the “unattainable goal” type.
The Home app now supports a dynamic color option by default which changes based on the sun / lighting in your condition. Seems to work- I think it showed up for me about a year ago or so, so it's pretty new.
I've felt a lot of the same frustrations on iOS projects with swift. Lots of people add tons of extensions and helpers, and folks learning on these codebases don't learn iOS, they learn the playground that the developers of the project made, it's not obvious what's built in and what's custom. The extensions are less composable, harder to navigate, and often end up really ramping up complexity when you end up with constraints and generics and protocols and all kinds of really fancy "nerd stuff" that really isn't needed in an iOS codebase. I used to have a theory that folks did this because, well, Apple has basically "solved" what make an app is. Everything you need is there, it's all pretty easy to use, it's "boring" in a good way. Maybe this is how developers scratch the itch of needing to do a lot of "real programming"? Maybe I'm just getting old!
I learned to play the fiddle the past two years working from home during Xcode's abysmal compile times. Sadly my new M1 max whatever has solved that problem, ha!
swift is by far an easier language, safer language, and has a lot of power and nice functional bits, but _oh my god_ those compile times and the lack of a stable debugger and refactoring tools can make it miserable to work in. That and ever since swift 4 or so I feel like we're leaning towards the c++ "everything and the kitchen sink" kinda problems when it comes to features. Used to be there were fairly obvious "right" or idiomatic ways of doing things, but now it's gotten a lot more complicated. Property wrappers, combine, all the stuff with opaque types and the insane stuff you can do with protocols and protocol extensions, all the fad architectures and patterns. Most swift codes bases I've worked in are highly over engineered and kinda feel like the developer of the project just learned about X cool thing in swift and wanted to use it everywhere. It's amazing how the crash rate of apps I've worked on in swift are like consistently less than 1%, it's easy to learn, very modern feeling. But gosh some days I'm just longing for some classic objective c spaghetti code that compiles instantly and gives me that great debugger I've come to rely on. Oh and don't get me started on the abysmal auto correct, code completion, and error messages. Swift still has a ways to go IMO, but I do think it's the choice for an iOS app in 2021- just be thoughtful about which language features you use and not going bananas with extensions and protocols.
I hated standups until we eventually got a great PM who moved to something like this, and now I try hard and make standup run like this on any project I'm on. Jira has this nice feature where it puts a little dot on something for each day it's in a column. Standups largely turned into scanning for things that had > 2 dots on a ticket from right to left, and discussing what we needed to do to keep things moving through the system. Love it!
interesting to see this becoming part of the tools.
In 2012, I was on project were we used a physical board, and we would make a black circle for everyday on the board and once we started exceeding the initial estimate (it was done in days as opposed to complexity for some reason) we make that in red, then we started discussing the reds
I have a problem cutting people off- I get way to excited about what I want to say and jump in. I really appreciate when people call me out and don't take it personally. I also try to work on it and try to help steer the conversation to other people who have been cut off when I see it happen. So IMO don't be afraid to politely just let someone know! If you don't feel comfortable during the meeting, maybe speak with them afterwards, doesn't need to be a big deal, just let em know. If you don't feel comfortable being a little confrontational, speaking with manager types or even just before a meeting indirectly bringing up that everyone should focus on it can help too.
I know sometimes people cut off others very purposefully or in malicious ways, but it sounds like maybe where you're working that's just how it is- so everyone kind of has to play the game to be heard. In that case, try and change the game! A little bit of discomfort now can lead to yourself and probably others being happier down the road.
Most interrupters are exactly like andrewcarter here, they just get excited. When someone does it they're most likely not trying to be rude, and it's well within your consideration to air your complaint, "I am happy to hear your thoughts, but please let me finish my own before you share yours." It isn't a rude or confrontational sentiment. Nobody likes being interrupted, and nobody likes being called-out as an interrupter. Do that once or twice in a meeting and the over-talkers may all but stop moving forward. Nobody is going to resent you for laying down some fundamental courtesies, especially since it means everyone will have better opportunity to speak without interruption.
I have this issue too, I think it also has to do a bit with cultural background sometimes.
I grew up in a hispanic family in a majority hispanic community, where my everyday conversation with people was people talking over each other. It was common to start making your point while the other person was still finishing theirs.
The difference is, because everyone did it, we would just keep talking, even if we were cut off, and finish our thought. The other person would hear it, while still talking, and the conversation continues naturally. If you were in a group, you had to go louder than the currently speaking person in order to "grab the baton" and get your word in (something I was often too quiet for).
This was my normal throughout childhood.
It was a culture shock when I went to college and eventually someone called me out for cutting people off all the time. It was then that I realized that now, when I cut someone off, they actually stopped talking.
I still struggle with this, because I reflexively expect people to not let me stop them.
"One of the most striking aspects of high involvement style that I found and analyzed in detail was the use of what I called 'cooperative overlap': a listener talking along with a speaker not in order to interrupt but to show enthusiastic listenership and participation. The concept of overlap versus interruption became one of the cornerstones of my argument that the stereotype of New York Jews as pushy and aggressive is an unfortunate reflection of the effect of high involvement style in conversation with speakers who use a different style. (In my study I called the other style 'high considerateness')."
Deborah Tannen, Gender and Discourse. Oxford University Press, 1994
I like this terminology of "high involvement"! My experience with this style is also that if someone doesn't interrupt me I just keep talking, awkwardly, _hoping_ that someone will start talking "with" me (allowing me to pass the conversational baton, and indicating they understand my point), and if no one does I feel like no one must be understanding what I am saying (or worse, that no one is even listening) and eventually feel more and more antsy until I almost have to give up on the whole conversation.
This totally cultural. I am French, and when I was living in Spain, it was very difficult to get a full sentence out, but in Germany, I am often called out for interrupting people all the time (and I master Spanish and German at a similar level, so this is not related to language proficiency).
What I also noticed now that I try to pay attention to it is that I am practically unable to say a word in a German conversation if I try not to interrupt. I seem to be missing the cues that seem to say "you may now speak", and have the feeling I get interrupted all the time. I guess those cues are culture-specific and internalized over time.
That might be relevant to the OP 's question: in a multi-cultural team, one might need to develop a set of cues that are specific to that context. That can only come by discussing the topic one way or another, be it during the meetings, in breaks, at lunch... In my case, telling exactly what I described above, in a "aren't cultural differences interesting" way helped.
Italian here, the exact same experience growing up. It was expected that you had a conversation this way. Why waste time waiting for each other to finish?
You hear them as you speak. Understanding that you are always heard was one of the hardest parts of my own cultural transition from southern US to Italy. (I'm an American-Italian immigrant.)
Unfortunately I developed a kind of intense mix of the two cultures and I have to work hard not to dominate others in (non Italian) conversations. I try to de-interrupt by reminding someone who stopped taking of what they were talking about and asking them to continue. This also isn't ideal because it's forceful but it helps.
You hear them as you speak? You can't effectively do this. It sounds like the people on Jerry Springer to me. Without a mediator, the problem never gets solved because they think they're effectively able to listen and talk at the same time, but they're doing one thing (talking) more dominantly.
Because often it doesn't take someone to complete their sentence for their point to be made. If you pay close attention next time you are in a conversation with people you know well, you will often know what someone is going to say before they have finished saying it. Personally I hate being interrupted and also always wait my turn to speak but at the same time I can get impatient waiting for someone to say what I already know they are going to say.
That's true in some cases, but untrue often enough that I disagree.
In my experience, interrupters frequently assume something entirely different from what was actually being said, or even cut off the speaker before a "but" and wind up responding to the exact opposite of the intended point. This is needlessly annoying and confusing to almost everyone involved.
"I have this issue too, I think it also has to do a bit with cultural background sometimes."
Completely agree. I'm not Hispanic, but I grew up in the south in a household where talking over each other was the norm. A different culture, but culture indeed. College is also where I learned this was considered bad practice / rude
> College is also where I learned this was considered bad practice / rude
I think it's important to note that it is considered bad/rude in most american culture. Manners are relative to the culture you are living in. This style is certainly not rude in Cuban circles, for example.
It's like how belching at a restaurant is rude in the US, but a sign of respect to the chef in Japan.
I agree with you. It's just trading one set of cultural norms for another.
As a side note, when I notice these differences, I like to reason from first principles and decide if I should change my behavior (without completely alienating myself from my peers). A Japanese chef might consider my belch a sign of respect, but how respectful is it to the people around you eating? A gross smelling burp could make me loose my appetite completely.
No, I assure you sane conclusions can be reached with these discussions...
It's just another conversation style, I don't need to hear the end of your sentence to know the point you are making, at a certain point the end of the sentence is likely fluff. If the end is important, I'll still hear it, and if it changes what my response is, I'll probably stop and react mid-stream.
A lot of the time I’m like you, or I see that the person is starting a long train of thoughts based on a faulty premise... why would you let someone catastrophize or take everyone in a magic carpet ride that is based on bad information?
But that is unfortunately not always why. Some people take a very, very long time to get to a point they’ve already telegraphed long before. In a conversation that’s about problem solving, this is wasting everybody’s time, and I will absolutely shove you out of the spotlight and without compunction. Daylight’s burning.
To these people I say, think about your writing style. Do you bury the lead? Do you save your best information for last? Sort yourself out. Give the person permission to stop reading when they get the gist. Then try to do the same with your speaking. Maybe work on noticing comprehension cues from your peers.
The longer we go on a tangent the higher the probability that everyone’s working memory has been reset. If that keeps happening, a good solution is unlikely to arise. And if you don’t have time to do it right you have time to do it over. If you’re accepting defeat at the beginning, just pull the bandaid off, pick any reversible solution and get on to other problems.
The way to address those people is in private, outside a meeting. Behaving the way you do is just rude, and is not acceptable in any workplace I'm part of.
> and I will absolutely shove you out of the spotlight and without compunction
There are times when the stream of thought is the most important thing in the room. Especially in triage situations.
Brevity allows the process to continue. It avoids upsetting the checklists in people's brains. Grandstanding, soap boxing, and shaggy dog stories are actively harmful to this process. These are primarily the situations where my patience for ineffective communication is at its nadir, and we can't stop this process to have an intervention or let you keep interfering.
Also, by unspoken consensus you will quickly find yourself disinvited from these meetings.
My experience is that this sort of approach (pre-empting people who are explaining their point) often results in a "solution" being reached quickly that fails to take into account the nuance that the speaker was trying to explain.
> But that is unfortunately not always why. Some people take a very, very long time to get to a point they’ve already telegraphed long before. In a conversation that’s about problem solving, this is wasting everybody’s time, and I will absolutely shove you out of the spotlight and without compunction. Daylight’s burning.
This is definitely part of my problem. I get excited; I can understand where a point is going; I get impatient, especially when I'm hearing it described in an overly verbose way.
However, I think I probably need to remember that it's worth hearing someone out. Ultimately the team might benefit, even though the problem might be solved at a slightly slower pace.
> A lot of the time I’m like you, or I see that the person is starting a long train of thoughts based on a faulty premise...
When talking about new angles of view it is quite unusual that the whole argument/"paragraph" is 100% logically sound. In fact that is quite an exception when talking. Maybe there is more than one argument for the other position that would still follow.
I think a lot about problems and details at work that have a lot of impact. These things cannot be summarized in single sentences and I don't have the time to follow higher standards in organizing my speech than others. So in the end I often ended up repeating my standpoint through various meetings until managers realized that this is indeed a thing.
> Some people take a very, very long time to get to a point they’ve already telegraphed long before.
Many people often take a very, very long time to troubleshoot problems, perhaps even work overtime because of that. I prefer to solve things by talking when this is possible and spent engineering time on the really interesting things.
(Also it might be an organizational problem if there are no meetings to discuss things in-depth with large rounds. Dailies are surely not the place for that.)
The best thing I can do is attempt to use my natural inclination to help people like OP.
To that end, I'll usually say things like. "I think this is what "president" was saying, am I right?" This both validates to a more quiet team member that I heard them, but also gives them back the floor from someone who interrupted them.
I also attempt to listen to signals from quiet people who have opinions and then ask them their opinion after sharing. If they grunt or make a noise then I can direct it away from people who are more like myself and willing to speak out.
My goal is to not take the spotlight but instead to re-direct. I do this because I used to be SUPER quiet and I worked hard to get away from that. Now I'm considered fairly outspoken but I remember what it's like to be quiet and try to help out by giving them the time they need.
I wonder is some of you here recognizing own interrupting problem have got ADHD symptoms and diagnosis? Isn't it strongly correlated with Primarily Hyperactive-Impulsive trait?
I’m not sure why you’re getting downvoted, because it absolutely is. It’s what lead me to go get tested. I just got so frustrated with myself because I just couldn’t stop interrupting, even when I was consciously working on it. At some point my wife pointed out it was an ADHD symptom, and my immediate reaction was to shrug it off. I’m a CS major, I’ve always held a steady job, and, I’ve never had problems concentrating on complicated problems.
Turns out keeping your attention on something interesting isn’t actually a problem for people with ADHD. It’s the boring stuff that’s hard, and boy do I hate the boring stuff. We pay people to clean our house. I’ve had take away (healthy and organic of course) at least two days a week since I left home. I’ve paid people to do my laundry for as long as I’ve had a decent job. Heh. Long story short, I’m now in the process of being tested for ADHD. I’m not sure the results will change anything, I’ve done fine so far after all, but knowing is better, and it was interrupting people that started it.
> I’ve had take away (healthy and organic of course) at least two days a week since I left home.
Yep, same here. Though if I do cook, it has to be a massive production. If there's not something to be actively preparing the whole time, it's too boring to make. Which means there's gonna be a ton of dishes... that I really don't want to do.
Yes. I have this tendency, and I have ADHD. I know I can tend towards it. I often find myself circling back to someone after a first meeting with them (when I realize I interrupted them a lot) and apologizing, letting them know I am aware that it's a weakness, and to please let me know if it ever gets out of hand (I intentionally ask them to decide for themselves what "out of hand" means, as some people are entirely ok with an interruption packed conversation).
I have ADHD and I do this. I don't want to. I just do it without thinking about it. It's because if I have a thought worth sharing, I want to do it NOW... there's always the possibility I might forget it before I've had the chance to share it.
Also when I talk to someone who has ADHD it might sound strange to neurotypical people. The discussions are much faster and also less - well, I don't want to call it less boring. They are more exciting, but it does not mean that discussions with neurotypical people are boring.
I (rarely) do it too. What I realized is in most cases (if not all) it's all about spitting it out whatever is in my mind without any intention to listen to what others are trying to say and without thinking that I can learn so much from others.
Writing it down won't get you too far, imho. Because you probably still will be in rush just to read what you noted down and eventually miss the chance to learn from others. It's all about listening first.
There was a thread here on HN recently, titled "People with Greater Intellectual Humility Have Superior General Knowledge".[0] I think it's pretty relevant here in this topic. Intellectual humility goes a long way I'd say :-)
> What I realized is in most cases (if not all) it's all about spitting it out whatever is in my mind without any intention to listen to what others are trying to say and without thinking that I can learn so much from others.
Sometimes technical thoughts can be literally founded on faulty assumptions and will teach you nothing unless providing another anecdote of a conceptual mistake is instructive.
Listening in bikeshedding conversations is a wise maneuver, though. Save your forceful thoughts for actual problems.
I wear a rubber band on my wrist and lightly snap it when someone is telling me something and I feel compelled to interrupt. It brings me out of the moment just enough to wait. But, you have to remember that the rubber band exists :-)
Try keeping a stopwatch in your head (think speed chess).
Start it when you start talking, and periodically make it a habit to check ("How long has it been since someone else talked?").
If it's been too long, wrap up your thoughts and pause a while before launching into the next bit.
It's usually obliviousness ("I didn't notice anyone else", in my personal experience), but it can feel very rude to others ("I didn't want to listen to anyone else").
All part of soft skills. We all get better together.
I do it too & I hate it. My worry is that if I don't say it immediately I'll forget my comment/argument. I've tried scribbling it down and raise them later. But not very consistent in this process.
Same here. I often decide that the other person have stopped talking prematurely because they've made a long pause and I was eager to jump in.
However, if I notice that I have interrupted someone too late, I finish my point, and then say "but I've interrupted you, you were talking about X", and then make an effort to listen actively instead of coming up with thoughts of my own.
Sometimes, when we get carried away, I remind the other person of something he had been talking about so long ago that even he has forgotten about it. In my experience, being able not just go with the flow of the conversation, but keeping long conversation "stack traces" in mind so you can go back and actually "return" from a "subroutine" in your conversation is one of the most useful communication skills I have.
I had the same issue where I was always compelled to speak up if I felt like there was something important to be said... It really made me look like an a-hole.
I asked a good friend of mine who was a successful CEO that people really listened to what his secret was...
He said he stays quiet until people ask him for his opinion, then he makes sure what he says is succinct and on point as much as possible. That blew me away. Since I have been practicing that method I have noticed amazing results. It's really something that I continually need to work on, and it doesn't work with family and friends (of course) but try it out...
Also, fight the urge to put emojis in company emails, people will lose respect for you ... :\
In the scenario I mentioned, it doesn't always involve waiting for someone to always ask you to speak before you say anything, It's primarily the art of holding back on saying anything until everyone else wears out their voices, or until they turn towards you for your opinion.
These days a lot of people feel the need to be first and last to talk. This way, you're in the middle, but not overly invested in being heard, but choosing times when you speak, and choosing your words carefully for relevance, for best overall impact.
Eventually after a while of practicing this, people grow into the habit of looking forward to your input, and they always ask you for it, provided you don't screw up things too often.
Reminds me of something I pulled in middle school - back when we delivered papers on floppy disks. I took a garbage binary file and renamed it to `mypaper.doc` or whatever, turned it in on time and got a free weekend to finish it because my disk "was corrupted" :)
