Whenever I do an introductory phone call with an engineering candidate, I make sure to explain my management style and how my approach directs our team’s process. Our process is agile, but it is decidedly not a formal Agile methodology. It’s not Agile Scrum; it’s not Extreme Programming; it’s not Kanban. Instead, it’s delegated responsibility in a culture of continuous deployment. I delegate the responsibility of something important to an employee–usually in the form of a significant feature–and let them take it from concept through implementation to deployment.
One of our co-founders serves as our product manager, and we have an experience design team that translates spoken words into diagrams and pictures. However, I make it very clear to my team that any text or visual content they receive are merely representations of product vision. We need them to guide us from here to there. The people on the front-lines–the ones doing the actual building of code and product–are the ones most equipped with information. They face the real constraints of the problem domain and existing code base; they have the best insights into how we can be most economical with their time; and they have the capacity to see all the options before us. I’m there to help them sift through that information, when needed, and to be that supportive coach, but my goal is for them to be carrying us forward. I manage, but I aim to lead, not micro manage.
Delegated responsibility is a very common and efficient practice in the business world. However, the practice has largely been abandoned in the software industry by practices and processes that shift responsibility onto a team of replaceable cogs. The team is expected to churn through a backlog of dozens of insignificantly small bits of larger features, which often lack foresight into the constraints that will be discovered and the interdepencies between smaller bits that result in developer deadlock. On top of this, a generalized backlog of small pieces creates room for misinterpretation by omitting full context around features or results in excessive communication overhead (see The Mythical Man Month).
We are most definitely inspired by Agile. We build a minimum viable product iteratively. We build-measure-learn, pair program when needed, collaborate, peer review each step of the way, and let our QA engineer find our leaky parts. However, my team members are individually responsible for their work and ship whenever they have something ready to show the world.
Some candidates would much rather be working on a team with equally-shared responsibility, collective code ownership, and continuous pair programming. I realize some people need this model, which is why I always discuss it with potential hires. However, others thrive with delegated responsibility. They take ownership, require little to no management or direction, make the right decisions, take pride in what they have built with their own two hands, and are extremely productive. Not surprisingly, others understand their code. It integrates well with the code base. They avoid the dangers that formal methodologies try to curtail. Often they are, or are becoming, that 10x developer. They are liberated, thrilled, and at their best working in this environment. It’s a joy to provide it to them.
If this sort of environment sounds exciting to you, please check out our careers page at LearnZillion.
One thought on “The 10x Engineer and Delegated Responsibility”
Join the Hacker News conversation at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7263944