How to Get Leadership Buy-in for Technical Initiatives

How to Get Leadership Buy-in for Technical Initiatives ![rw-book-cover](https://img.youtube.com/vi/oKsz2aBxrf8/maxresdefault.jpg) 🔗 **Source:** [How to Get Leadership Buy-in for Technical Initiatives](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oKsz2aBxrf8) > [!note]+ Document Notes > tags: #leadership #communication #technical-initiatives #engineering-management #executive-communication > author: Rob Zuber > source: CircleCI > reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oKsz2aBxrf8 > date created: 2024-12-28 17:13 > > # 🏷️ Title: How to get leadership buy-in for technical initiatives >  ## 🧰 Action Inbox - [H1] Map organizational influence network and decision-making patterns — understand who has real sway #leadership - [H2] Convert technical problems into business impact metrics with clear ROI — frame in risk/opportunity terms #communication - [H3] Break large initiatives into small reversible experiments with quick wins — build momentum incrementally #strategy ## 🧭 Table of Contents - [[#📝 Summary]] - [[#📖 Main Content]] - [[#🗒️ Notes]] - [[#📚 References]] - [[#🗣️ Paraphrase]] - [[#📰 Newsletter]] - [[#✅ Action Items]] - [[#🧪 Hypotheses]] - [[#📊 Methodology]] - [[#❓ Questions]] - [[#🔮 Future Research]] - [[#💡 Implications]] - [[#🧠 Learning Styles Assessment]] - [[#📊 Accessibility Assessment]] - [[#🌍 DEIB Assessment]] - [[#✅ Logical Validity]] - [[#🛡️ DARVO Analysis]] - [[#🎯 Conclusion]] ### 🔗 References - [How to get leadership buy-in for technical initiatives](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oKsz2aBxrf8) ## 📝 Summary - Rob Zuber (CTO of CircleCI) teaches engineers how to communicate technical initiatives effectively to get leadership approval - Key insight: Engineers think in technical terms (architecture, performance) while executives think in business terms (risk, opportunity cost, customer impact) - Core strategy: Translate technical problems into business language, break large projects into small reversible experiments, and understand organizational dynamics - Primary obstacles: Competing priorities and unclear business value rather than technical complexity - Bottom line: Success requires understanding your organization's decision-making culture and building influence through relationships ## 📖 Main Content The fundamental challenge engineers face isn't technical complexity—it's translation. Engineers naturally focus on system architecture, performance optimization, and technical debt reduction. However, executives evaluate proposals through a business lens: What's the risk? What's the opportunity cost? How does this impact customers? Does it align with strategic goals? The most common misconception is that more technical detail creates credibility. In reality, leading with technical specifics often triggers detailed debates before establishing whether the problem is worth solving. Instead, successful proposals start with clear problem statements and business impact, then work down to technical details. Organizations vary significantly in communication culture—from Amazon's six-page narratives to slide-heavy presentations. Understanding your specific environment's decision-making patterns, relationship dynamics, and risk tolerance is crucial for framing initiatives appropriately. The key breakthrough comes from breaking large, irreversible initiatives into small, reversible experiments. This reduces perceived risk while building momentum and credibility through demonstrated impact. ## 🗒️ Notes #### ⏱️ [00:00](https://youtu.be/oKsz2aBxrf8?t=0) — [H1] Introduction and speaker background - Key idea: Rob Zuber, CTO at CircleCI for 12 years, has lived with consequences of long-term decisions - Evidence: "One of the things that I often say about being in the same role for that long as a leader is you have had lots of time to live with the consequences of your decisions" #### ⏱️ [03:45](https://youtu.be/oKsz2aBxrf8?t=225) — [H2] Everyone has a boss - universal need for justification - Key idea: Even executives must justify decisions to peers, CEOs, and boards - Evidence: "Everyone has a boss. It's kind of a common saying that we have at CircleCI" #### ⏱️ [08:30](https://youtu.be/oKsz2aBxrf8?t=510) — [H1] Translation gap between engineering and executive thinking - Key idea: Engineers focus on technical aspects while executives think about business impact - Evidence: "What my peers are thinking about and what matters to the business and then that frames how I end up thinking about problems" #### ⏱️ [12:15](https://youtu.be/oKsz2aBxrf8?t=735) — [H1] Four key executive concerns - Key idea: Risk, opportunity cost, customer impact, and strategic fit are primary evaluation criteria - Evidence: "What I generally am thinking about from a overall organizational perspective is risk, opportunity cost, customer impact, strategic fit" #### ⏱️ [16:20](https://youtu.be/oKsz2aBxrf8?t=980) — [H2] Common misconceptions in technical proposals - Key idea: Leading with technical details triggers detail discussions before problem validation - Evidence: "When you bring details to the conversation and lead with details, you end up having a conversation about details" #### ⏱️ [22:30](https://youtu.be/oKsz2aBxrf8?t=1350) — [H1] Poll results on confidence levels - Key idea: Most attendees feel neutral to quite confident, none very confident - Evidence: "Nobody in the very confident category, which is fine. I think that's expected, but actually skewing towards quite confident" #### ⏱️ [28:45](https://youtu.be/oKsz2aBxrf8?t=1725) — [H3] Cultural differences in presentation formats - Key idea: Organizations vary from Amazon's narrative approach to slide-heavy cultures - Evidence: "Amazon famous for the six-page narrative... that's a very very different approach to companies that are slide forward" #### ⏱️ [35:10](https://youtu.be/oKsz2aBxrf8?t=2110) — [H1] One-way vs two-way doors framework - Key idea: Irreversible decisions get more scrutiny; break them into reversible experiments - Evidence: "Most one-way doors meaning irreversible decisions can be broken down into a set of reversible decisions" #### ⏱️ [42:20](https://youtu.be/oKsz2aBxrf8?t=2540) — [H2] Poll results on obstacles to buy-in - Key idea: "Higher priorities" is the overwhelming obstacle, not technical risk - Evidence: "A little bit of ROI and budget and a whole lot of opportunity costs. They're higher priorities" #### ⏱️ [48:30](https://youtu.be/oKsz2aBxrf8?t=2910) — [H3] Converting capacity building to business terms - Key idea: All initiatives must have measurable ROI, even skill development - Evidence: "The common denominator of investment in any organization is currency... you should be able to build a case that there will be a return in dollars" #### ⏱️ [55:45](https://youtu.be/oKsz2aBxrf8?t=3345) — [H2] Reactive business environment challenges - Key idea: Quarterly revenue focus requires small incremental wins to build momentum - Evidence: "Quick wins give you one some incremental benefit of some form and two some momentum and credibility" #### ⏱️ [62:00](https://youtu.be/oKsz2aBxrf8?t=3720) — [H1] Reading the room - organizational awareness - Key idea: Understanding who succeeds and why reveals effective communication patterns - Evidence: "Knowing how things get done and who does succeed in your organization is extremely valuable" #### ⏱️ [68:15](https://youtu.be/oKsz2aBxrf8?t=4095) — [H2] Poll on organizational characteristics - Key idea: Most organizations are "a bit of everything" rather than purely data or relationship driven - Evidence: "Most people came in with it's a bit of everything. I think that's absolutely valid" #### ⏱️ [74:30](https://youtu.be/oKsz2aBxrf8?t=4470) — [H1] Influence mapping concept - Key idea: Engineers should learn from sales approach of mapping organizational influence - Evidence: "What I generally got as a response was an org chart... who was an influencer and who was a champion and who was the decision maker" ## 📚 References - [The Phoenix Project](https://itrevolution.com/the-phoenix-project/) - Referenced scene about understanding business perspective - [Amazon's Six-Page Narrative Process](https://blog.aboutamazon.com/working-at-amazon/how-a-memo-changed-the-way-we-do-business-at-amazon) - [One-Way vs Two-Way Doors Decision Framework](https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1018724/000119312516530910/d168744dex991.htm) ## 🗣️ Paraphrase - Engineers naturally communicate in technical terms but executives evaluate everything through business impact, creating a translation gap that blocks initiative approval - The biggest obstacle isn't technical complexity or risk—it's competing priorities, which means you must demonstrate why your initiative deserves attention over alternatives - Large irreversible projects trigger extensive scrutiny and delay, but breaking them into small reversible experiments reduces risk while building momentum through demonstrated wins ## 📰 Newsletter Engineering teams often struggle to get leadership support for technical initiatives, but the problem isn't usually technical complexity—it's communication. Rob Zuber, CTO of CircleCI, shared practical strategies for translating technical needs into business language that executives understand. The key insight: while engineers think about architecture and performance, executives evaluate risk, opportunity cost, customer impact, and strategic alignment. Your proposal needs to start with the business problem and work down to technical details, not the reverse. Most importantly, break large projects into small, reversible experiments. This reduces perceived risk while building credibility through demonstrated impact. Understanding your organization's decision-making culture—whether it's data-driven, relationship-focused, or narrative-based—helps you frame initiatives appropriately. Resources: [CircleCI Engineering Blog](https://circleci.com/blog/tag/engineering/), [The Phoenix Project](https://itrevolution.com/the-phoenix-project/), [Amazon's Decision-Making Framework](https://blog.aboutamazon.com/working-at-amazon/) ## ✅ Action Items #### DevRel - Developer advocacy: Create templates for translating technical initiatives into business impact stories for executive presentations - Education: Develop workshop curriculum on "Executive Communication for Engineers" with role-playing scenarios - Developer experience: Map common technical debt issues to customer impact metrics for easier ROI justification - Developer marketing: Build case study collection showing successful technical initiative approvals with business framing - Community management: Facilitate peer discussion groups on organizational communication challenges and solutions #### OSPO - Policy & Governance: Document decision-making frameworks that balance technical debt with feature velocity - Strategic Alignment: Establish OKRs linking technical investments to business outcomes for clearer proposal evaluation - Developer Support: Provide consultation services for engineers preparing technical initiative proposals - Community Engagement: Share organizational communication best practices across engineering teams - Software Inventory: Create business impact assessments for technical infrastructure investments #### Community - Maintainers: Develop templates for communicating project roadmap changes to stakeholder organizations - Contributors: Create guidance for proposing significant architectural changes with business justification - Sponsors: Establish transparent criteria for evaluating technical investment proposals - Ecosystem: Facilitate cross-project discussions on balancing technical debt with feature development #### WordPress - Core: Develop business case templates for major architectural changes (block editor evolution, performance initiatives) - Core Performance: Create customer impact metrics linking site speed to business outcomes for hosting providers - Core Program Team: Establish clear criteria for evaluating competing technical priorities with business alignment - Marketing: Develop messaging frameworks that connect WordPress technical improvements to business benefits - Documentation: Create guides for communicating technical changes to non-technical stakeholders - Meta: Implement decision-making frameworks that balance technical debt with .org feature development ## 🧪 Hypotheses - Organizations with clear decision-making frameworks approve technical initiatives faster than those with ad-hoc processes - Engineers who map organizational influence networks achieve higher approval rates for their proposals - Small reversible experiments build more credibility than comprehensive technical documentation - Business impact framing reduces proposal review cycles compared to technical-first presentations ### 📊 Methodology - Survey engineering teams on proposal success rates before and after communication training - Track approval time and success rates for initiatives framed with business impact vs technical details - Analyze correlation between organizational influence mapping and engineer advancement/project success ### ❓ Questions - How do successful technical leaders identify and cultivate relationships with key organizational influencers? - What specific metrics most effectively translate technical debt into business impact across different industries? - How can engineering organizations systematize the process of breaking large initiatives into small experiments? ### 🔮 Future Research - Comparative analysis of decision-making frameworks across high-performing engineering organizations - Development of automated tools for calculating business impact of technical initiatives - Cross-industry study of communication patterns that correlate with technical initiative success ### 💡 Implications - Practice: Engineers need business communication skills as much as technical expertise for career advancement - Policy: Organizations should establish clear frameworks for evaluating technical vs feature trade-offs - Education: Engineering curricula should include organizational dynamics and executive communication modules - Funding: Technical initiative budgets should include time for proper business case development and stakeholder engagement ### 🧠 Learning Styles Assessment Reading level estimate: Grade 12-14 (Professional/Academic) #### 👀 Visual learners - Present: Speaker slides with clear frameworks and poll result visualizations - Improve: Add decision-making flowcharts, organizational influence maps, and before/after proposal examples #### 🔊 Aural learners - Present: Full workshop audio with speaker explanations and audience Q&A - Improve: Provide downloadable audio summary and companion podcast episode #### 🗣️ Verbal learners - Present: Clear definitions of business terms, analogies between sales and technical communication - Improve: Add glossary of executive terminology and communication phrase library #### 🧩 Kinesthetic learners - Present: Interactive polls and chat exercises throughout presentation - Improve: Provide proposal rewriting exercises and organizational mapping worksheets #### 🧠 Logical learners - Present: Clear frameworks (one-way/two-way doors, four executive concerns) - Improve: Add decision trees for choosing communication approaches and ROI calculation templates #### 🧑‍🤝‍🧑 Social learners - Present: Live audience interaction and shared experiences in chat - Improve: Create peer review groups for proposal feedback and mentorship matching #### 🧘‍♀️ Solitary learners - Present: Self-assessment tools and individual reflection prompts - Improve: Add personal communication style assessment and private practice scenarios #### 🌿 Naturalistic learners - Present: Organizational ecosystem thinking and environmental awareness - Improve: Connect technical decisions to sustainability impact and business ecosystem health ### 📊 Accessibility Assessment #### Screen reader semantics - Present: Clear heading structure and descriptive content organization - Improve: Add alt text for slide content and ARIA labels for interactive elements #### Keyboard navigation - Present: Standard video player controls with keyboard support - Improve: Provide transcript with timestamp navigation links #### Contrast and readability - Present: Clear slide design with sufficient contrast - Improve: Verify all text meets WCAG AA standards and provide high contrast version #### Text resizing and reflow - Present: Video content scales appropriately - Improve: Ensure transcript text reflows properly at 200% zoom #### Media and captions - Present: Full transcript provided - Improve: Add synchronized captions and audio descriptions for visual elements #### Forms and interactions - Present: Simple poll interactions with clear labels - Improve: Ensure all interactive elements have appropriate ARIA roles and error handling ### 🌍 DEIB Assessment #### Cultural breadth - Present: Acknowledges different organizational cultures and communication styles - Improve: Include examples from diverse cultural contexts and non-US business practices #### Inclusive language - Present: Generally uses accessible business terminology - Improve: Provide plain-language alternatives for business jargon and avoid idioms #### Neurodiversity support - Present: Clear structure with consistent framework presentation - Improve: Add content warnings for high-pressure scenarios and provide multiple processing speeds #### Representation - Present: Speaker acknowledges limitations of single organizational experience - Improve: Include diverse voices and examples from different company sizes and industries #### Psychological safety - Present: Acknowledges common communication challenges without blame - Improve: Explicitly validate engineer perspectives and provide safe practice environments ### ✅ Logical Validity #### Strong reasoning - Deductive strength: Clear logical flow from communication gaps to specific solutions - Inductive strength: Uses pattern recognition from organizational success stories - Causal reasoning: Links communication approach to initiative approval outcomes - Analogical strength: Effective comparison between sales and technical communication #### --- ## Full Transcript [00:12] Hello folks, [00:14] welcome. I'm going to give this a minute [00:16] or two while uh while the numbers climb [00:20] up a little bit. I think people are just [00:21] having a chance to join. [00:24] Um but welcome. Uh, I'll I guess I'll [00:28] I'll stall a little bit with some just [00:30] intro words uh while I wait to see uh as [00:34] a few more people join. Um, I'm Rob [00:38] Zuber, CTO of CircleCI. Um, and today [00:42] we're here to talk about um, I think at [00:46] a high level getting leadership buyin. [00:49] Um but if you break that down a little [00:52] bit uh all kinds of communication that [00:55] we have as engineers with leaders [00:57] whether it's our engineering leaders or [01:00] executives in an organization [01:02] um you know there's lots of different [01:04] ways that that that can break down um [01:07] and it can feel challenging to uh to get [01:10] the results that you want to to drive to [01:12] outcomes um and uh so yeah I just want [01:16] to spend some time working with you all [01:18] to figure out um you know the the things [01:23] that you can change, approaches that you [01:24] can take um help you with that a little [01:26] bit uh based on some things that I've [01:27] learned in my career uh and in my [01:30] current work. Um, yeah. So, uh, by means [01:34] of Oh, I guess I have an intro slide, so [01:35] I'll I'll jump to that. But by means of [01:37] introduction, again, I'm I'm Rob. Uh, [01:40] I'm the CTO of CircleCI. I've been in [01:41] this role for, uh, coming up on 12 [01:45] years. Uh, which is an interesting point [01:48] because, uh, one of the things that I [01:49] often say about being in the same role [01:52] for that long as a leader is you have [01:54] had lots of time to live with the [01:57] consequences of your decisions. um when [02:00] you're an IC, you know, feedback is [02:02] generally pretty quick. Uh when you make [02:04] large organizational decisions, they [02:06] take a lot longer to play out. Um the [02:08] flip side is particularly on the topic [02:11] of of executive communications. Um I've [02:15] been working with the same people or a [02:17] lot of the same people for a really long [02:18] time. Um, and so you I'm going to talk a [02:22] lot about what what I found to work. Um, [02:25] either communicating with me for, you [02:27] know, IC's or or leaders in my [02:29] organization or for me communicating [02:31] with other people. Um, and then we'll [02:33] talk about this specifically a little [02:34] bit later, but um, that's my world and [02:38] my world has been consistent for a [02:40] really long time. So um, you know, some [02:42] people some people end up working a lot [02:44] more different organizations and maybe [02:46] have different exposure. So, it's [02:47] something to to keep in mind as we um as [02:49] we talk through this. So, I'm not going [02:50] to read you this slide, but a couple [02:52] things that I think are also worth [02:53] highlighting. Um, everyone has a boss. [02:56] It's kind of a common saying uh that we [02:58] have at CircleCI. So, even as an [03:00] executive, I have people that I need to [03:02] work with, my peers uh on the executive [03:05] team um who generally have very [03:06] different perspectives uh than [03:08] engineers. um our CEO, our board of [03:11] directors. Um so while it probably can [03:15] seem like at some point you get past the [03:18] need to, you know, to uh [03:22] substantiate your decisions or or to [03:24] make the business case for the work that [03:25] you do. Uh it's never actually true. You [03:27] always have to to justify it to someone, [03:29] even if it's just justifying it to [03:30] yourself. Um and then last thing I would [03:32] say is this is my first time doing a [03:34] virtual workshop. I've done a bunch of [03:36] in uh in-person workshops at um [03:39] different lead dev conferences um which [03:41] is obviously a very different [03:42] environment a little easier to you know [03:45] talk directly to people and engage uh I [03:47] can't see any faces um so I'm hoping to [03:52] use the the chat and the polls and the [03:54] Q&A as much as possible throughout this [03:57] um the the goal is for this to be an [03:59] opportunity for you all to learn [04:02] uh and I want to be you know talking [04:05] about things that are relevant to you. [04:06] So, um Q&A will be open the full time. [04:11] Feel free to drop questions at any time. [04:13] Um I'll either try to weave in answers. [04:15] If I don't get to them, I'll talk about [04:16] them at the end. Um and uh we're going [04:20] to do some polls along the way and some [04:22] chat based exercises to try to get uh [04:25] you all thinking about things and then [04:27] putting them out there so that others [04:28] can see and share uh from from all of [04:31] your experiences. again I'm just I'm [04:33] just one experience. So um hopefully [04:37] that's a good good background and as I [04:39] said you know this is framed as [04:41] technical decisions kind of you know [04:43] which can feel big uh but a lot of what [04:46] we'll talk about and think about and [04:48] discuss today is really about [04:50] communication at all levels from the [04:52] simplest thing that you might be um [04:55] talking about to maybe like really big [04:57] formal proposals that feel like they [04:58] have a lot of weight uh or a lot of [05:01] impact in the organization. [05:05] Okay. So, here's a basic outline of uh [05:07] of what I want to want to talk through, [05:09] but as I said, um I'm looking for as [05:11] much feedback from you all as possible [05:12] in terms of directing this. So, if we [05:14] get into something and you want to know [05:15] something else, absolutely just drop it [05:17] in the chat, throw a question in the [05:18] Q&A. I'm open to all kinds of uh [05:20] feedback along the way here. Um so, I [05:23] want to talk about kind of translation [05:25] in general. You know, how engineers [05:26] think and speak versus how executives [05:28] think and speak. uh how that would apply [05:30] in your organization and how to figure [05:32] out what what matters in your [05:34] organization um and then a few tips on [05:36] putting it all into practice and leave [05:38] some time at the end uh for additional [05:40] questions and discussion if there if [05:42] there is any. So um I guess I said a lot [05:47] of this already everything is open for [05:49] your feedback along the way. Um, and [05:52] this is really like for folks who feel [05:55] like they have a good sense of things [05:57] that need to happen, but they struggle [05:59] sometimes to to make that happen. Now, a [06:02] lot of what we'll be talking about here [06:03] is about communication. There's really [06:05] two parts to this though in my mind. [06:07] One, yes, it's important to be able to [06:09] communicate and um and express the value [06:13] of things that you're thinking about, [06:15] but two, it's really important to [06:17] listen. um you know the thing that [06:19] you're proposing might not actually be [06:20] the right thing for the organization and [06:22] by listening and sort of paying [06:23] attention to signs of what's happening [06:24] in the organization the feedback that [06:26] you're getting um you know you'll have [06:28] the opportunity to figure out and then [06:31] tune right your goal is not always [06:35] it may never be to get permission to do [06:38] the thing you want to do your goal is to [06:40] figure out what the most impactful thing [06:41] will be for the organization and then [06:43] drive that right so listening and taking [06:45] feedback is is a big part of that [06:47] process [06:49] Okay. So, uh I'm going to kick things [06:52] off um again in the framing of sort of [06:55] proposals and getting work done uh with [06:57] a just to get a sense of of everybody [06:59] that's out there. Um I'm going to launch [07:01] a poll. uh you all can participate [07:05] um and put your feedback in there and [07:07] really trying to get a sense of how [07:08] people feel about their ability today to [07:13] um [07:15] to get their initiative supported when [07:18] you when you have a good idea do you get [07:20] support for it um do you know how to [07:22] express that to leadership so that you [07:24] can get the buyin that you need so I'm [07:27] going to launch this [07:30] and uh you should see [07:32] um a place to put some input. [07:36] Um [07:41] all right. [07:44] Well, thank you for your quick [07:46] responses. Trying to add up the Doesn't [07:50] look like it's moving anymore from where [07:51] I'm seeing it, but uh Oh, no. Still [07:55] moving a little bit. I'll give you a [07:56] couple more seconds to think about it. [07:58] Um, [08:04] good spread. Good spread. Let's see. [08:08] Don't they [08:13] All right. Uh, it doesn't look like it's [08:14] moving anymore. So, thank you for that [08:16] feedback. And then let me share. [08:20] Um, so y'all should be able to see [08:24] where we're at. So, um, nobody in the [08:29] very confident category, which is fine. [08:31] I think that's expected, but actually [08:33] skewing towards, [08:35] uh, quite confident, which is good. Um, [08:39] and I'd love to get some actually just [08:41] early feedback if anyone who's in the [08:43] the quite confident category [08:46] um has [08:49] uh any any thoughts about either what [08:52] makes you confident or [08:55] what what drew you to come ask you know [08:57] come listen to a little bit more [08:58] discussion about how to communicate. um [09:01] you know, if you if you feel like you're [09:02] pretty successful, what sorts of gaps [09:04] are you still seeing that you are hoping [09:06] to get some feedback on? Because maybe [09:07] we can we can tailor a bit towards that, [09:09] you can use the the chat. Um anybody [09:13] who's in that category, I'll keep going [09:14] a little bit, but if anyone has anything [09:16] they want to say specifically about [09:18] that, that would be super helpful. Um [09:20] and then of course it goes all the way [09:21] down to the um [09:24] you know, the not very confident. Of [09:25] course, the neutral specifically with [09:27] like I haven't really thought about it. [09:29] um is an interesting category because [09:31] maybe after some thought you'd end up [09:32] spreading out into one of the other [09:34] spots. But um okay, cool. So again, I'll [09:36] invite you to to share anything in the [09:38] chat. Uh but I'm not seeing anything [09:39] yet. So I'm just going to cruise on if [09:42] anybody has any thoughts they want to [09:43] share in there on, you know, what [09:45] specifically they're looking for. Uh go [09:47] for it now or as we go. [09:50] All right. So um to start things off, I [09:53] want to talk a little bit about [09:55] translation. Uh and what I mean [09:57] specifically by that is um the things [10:01] that we think about as engineers, as [10:04] technical folks um and then what [10:07] executives think about and how they [10:09] frame um [10:14] uh how they frame [10:16] their thinking, their questions and sort [10:19] of the mismatch between those two [10:20] things. Um and [10:24] I guess so great question. um in the in [10:26] the chat. So, let me comment on that [10:28] super quickly. Uh and maybe it'll come [10:30] up a little bit more later. Um the [10:34] the experience Oh goodness. All right. [10:36] Now, now there's a lot. So, um I'll I'll [10:39] take one and then I'll I'll sort of like [10:41] feed them in as we go. So, thank you. [10:42] This is awesome. Um specifically like [10:46] format. Um so, the question is I guess [10:49] everyone can see it, but I'll just talk [10:50] about or be clear about what I'm what [10:51] I'm speaking to. Uh my experience is [10:54] that a lot of detail is expected on [10:55] slides, not how I would normally create [10:57] a a PowerPoint or a slide deck. Um I [11:00] think my experience and I said that I've [11:02] I've been at the same company for a long [11:04] time, but I also work with a lot of [11:05] different companies and have seen other [11:07] people working in other companies. So I [11:08] know like it's a very very cultural [11:11] thing. And in the second section where [11:13] we talk about seeing what works in your [11:15] organization, it's actually a really [11:17] good point uh that I wasn't planning to [11:19] address, but I do think it's a good one. [11:20] So, you know, at the at the extremes, [11:23] you have um [11:26] uh Amazon famous for the six-page [11:29] narrative, right? We don't use slides [11:31] here at Amazon. We write narratives. We [11:34] I don't work at Amazon, but like that's [11:35] the story that you get when you become a [11:37] when you work at Amazon. and everyone [11:39] sits in a meeting and reads the [11:41] narrative at the beginning of the [11:42] meeting to make sure that everyone is [11:43] caught up and can and then can have a [11:45] discussion which is a very very [11:47] different approach um to [11:51] uh I'm not going to name another company [11:53] but you can think of plenty of companies [11:55] that are slide forward and storytelling [11:58] and pictures or great detail written out [12:01] on slides and I do think that's very uh [12:03] culture specific. There was a I think [12:06] that the clarification on that was that [12:07] it was respect with or with respect to [12:09] presenting to the board. Um I won't go [12:12] into great detail about our board [12:13] presentations but um we do use decks and [12:17] the technology stuff tends to be lighter [12:20] than for example financials right when [12:22] we talk about financials is often like a [12:24] spreadsheet sort of screen captured onto [12:25] a slide. Um but that's mostly because [12:28] that level of detail is is pretty [12:30] critical there. And so I think that's to [12:32] bring it up a level. [12:34] Um narrative and storytelling versus [12:38] data is a thing that you really need to [12:40] understand in your organization. Uh and [12:43] again we'll get into that a little bit [12:44] in the organizational section, but [12:46] knowing what works in your environment [12:48] and how to support that um is is a good [12:52] thing to at least be paying attention [12:54] to. So good good for noticing that. Um, [12:58] I think trying to push counter to it, [13:01] uh, is often not the path to success. [13:04] Um, you know, within your domain, you [13:06] might be able to to have people work a [13:08] little bit more the way that you want, [13:09] but then if you're if you're presenting [13:10] to stakeholders, you know, presenting in [13:12] a manner that allows them to get the [13:14] information they want is usually the [13:16] goal. Um, [13:20] I'm going to take a look at one more [13:21] here. Yeah. Okay. So, uh, I'm looking at [13:24] Albert's comment. uh not confident [13:25] because most of the time when I propose [13:27] something it doesn't seem to get get [13:28] anywhere. So that's the goal of this. Um [13:30] would love to get further feedback as we [13:32] go. Um I I told you all to put stuff in [13:35] the chat which is awesome. I'm not sure [13:36] how I'm going to keep track of all these [13:37] comments but I'll make it work. This is [13:39] amazing. Thank you so much for the [13:40] feedback. All right, so let's let's get [13:41] into some content before I spend the [13:43] whole time talking about the chat. But [13:44] you know it's all it's all related. So [13:45] I'm excited about where the questions [13:47] are coming from. So one of the things [13:49] that this is like a pretty basic [13:51] translation layer, right? But um when I [13:55] I witness this a lot with with engineers [13:57] and I I I am an engineer in my [13:59] background. Um I still think like an [14:01] engineer. I don't necess I'm not [14:02] necessarily building all the time but [14:04] it's a thing that I had to change in the [14:06] way that I communicate over time which [14:08] is that as engineers we tend to have [14:11] very deep domain knowledge and this is [14:14] not specific to engineering. Other [14:16] people have very specific domain [14:17] knowledge in their worlds. Um but at an [14:21] executive level and even as a technical [14:23] leader and executive team like my peers [14:25] are not technical leaders for the most [14:27] part, right? Um I need to think about [14:30] what my peers are thinking about and [14:33] what matters to the business and then [14:34] that frames how I end up thinking about [14:36] problems and therefore the disconnect [14:38] when people bring them to me from within [14:39] the engineering organization. And so [14:42] while I understand these things on the [14:44] left, architecture, reliability, [14:46] performance, you know, reducing [14:48] technical debt, [14:51] correctness, quality of the system, [14:53] those sorts of things. Um, what I [14:55] generally am thinking about from a [14:57] overall organizational perspective is on [15:00] the list on the right, which is risk, [15:03] right? What sort of risk do we have [15:05] today? and what sort of risk am I being [15:08] exposed to by choosing to pursue a path? [15:11] Um, opportunity cost, right? Which is [15:14] what am I choosing not to do if I choose [15:17] to do this, right? In we I think we're [15:20] at an interesting time where we all [15:22] think [15:23] and in some cases it's true, we have a [15:25] lot more capacity than we used to. Um, [15:29] but you always have opportunity cost, [15:32] meaning [15:34] no matter how much capacity you have, [15:37] you could always be doing something else [15:39] with that capacity. Um, and so that is a [15:42] big like when when it's easy to take [15:44] proposals in isolation and make them [15:46] sound good, it's extremely important to [15:49] be clear about what your Oh, I'm g get [15:52] rid of this poll for I just realized [15:53] it's still up there. Sorry. Um [15:58] therefore, uh it's important to present [16:02] it in the context of what what you're [16:03] trading off, not just um that something [16:08] is, you know, is positive, right? Like [16:10] the act I'm doing it versus not doing it [16:12] is one thing. If I'm if I'm doing it, [16:15] what am I not also not going to be able [16:17] to do? uh customer impact probably [16:20] sounds obvious but doesn't always come [16:22] out um in in sort of any sort of [16:26] communication it's I think everything [16:29] from [16:30] uh my favorite example of this is is an [16:33] incident handling right um where there [16:36] tends to be or even how we look at [16:37] dashboards and metrics we tend to look [16:39] at system metrics [16:43] um and lose sight of what the customer [16:45] is feeling or experiencing right now. [16:47] Um, and for pretty much anyone else in [16:49] the organization, that's going to be the [16:50] thing that and for your customers, [16:52] that's going to be the thing that [16:53] matters. And then strategic fit, right? [16:55] Everyone has a bigger picture of where [16:57] they're trying to go, what they're [16:58] trying to achieve as an organization. [17:00] Um, and if it doesn't fit into that, [17:03] it's going to be less likely to succeed. [17:06] Um, and that might be true about what [17:08] you're thinking of that it doesn't fit, [17:10] or it might be that you're struggling to [17:12] express the fit. And so figuring out how [17:14] to get make that clear becomes really [17:16] important. [17:21] Um [17:22] so a few common misconceptions uh [17:25] designed to be a little bit [17:26] light-hearted but I this is what I often [17:29] see um in sort of very technical [17:32] proposals. And again I I'm thinking [17:34] about things that might be bigger right [17:37] we're trying to do a big thing therefore [17:39] we've written up some reasoning and some [17:40] documentation justification. Maybe we're [17:43] presenting at a meeting. Um, that's not [17:46] always the case. Sometimes these things [17:48] are very lightweight just in your, you [17:50] know, in your standup or your sprint [17:52] planning or whatever it might be. I [17:54] think we should work on this. I think we [17:55] should work on this. It's debate between [17:57] EM and PM or engineers and product [17:59] managers, whatever. Um, you know, the [18:04] there's always some form of negotiation [18:06] and justification happening. Um and so [18:10] what I typically tend to see is these [18:13] perspectives like if I just put a lot [18:15] more clarity around this then I I'll be [18:20] able to get my point across and [18:22] sometimes [18:24] getting into the details first of all [18:26] particular solutionoriented details can [18:29] come across as being fixated on a [18:31] solution as opposed to talking about the [18:33] problem. Um we have some guiding [18:36] principles at CircleCI and the first one [18:38] is understand the problem like focus on [18:40] what the problem is that we're trying to [18:42] solve. Look at that from a customer lens [18:44] etc. Once that's clear and we've agreed [18:47] that it's a problem we're solving that [18:48] we're going to have a much better time [18:49] discussing potential solutions to it. [18:52] Um, and I also find that when you bring [18:56] details to the conversation and lead [18:59] with details, you end up having a [19:00] conversation about details and you [19:04] particularly if it's a technical leader [19:05] who understands the details in great [19:07] depth, you're going to end up talking [19:09] about details before ever getting to the [19:11] point at the end have them say, "Oh, but [19:13] we shouldn't even be solving this [19:14] problem," right? And you just burn a [19:16] whole bunch of time. So, making sure [19:17] that you start with the problem and work [19:19] your way down. [19:21] um [19:23] proposing change is is a good thing. Uh [19:26] but it needs to be focused, right? Like [19:29] if everything is something that could be [19:30] better and we're always pointing out [19:32] this could be different, that could be [19:33] different, this could be different [19:34] without understanding this one here is [19:37] where the real impact is. Um it starts [19:40] to feel like we're not able to focus and [19:42] get things done. So knowing like this is [19:44] the high lever thing that we could be [19:47] changing and being clear about that as [19:49] opposed to just everything could be [19:50] better uh is really important. Um [19:54] trying to create credibility through a [19:56] lot of technical detail. Um [19:59] for a lot of folks just makes it sound [20:01] complicated and expensive. Uh and [20:03] clarifying and bringing up the um things [20:07] to the surface I think is is really [20:10] important. And then last sort of um [20:14] storytelling. I mean I'm a big fan of [20:17] narrative but um narrative can be quite [20:21] concise. Um when we're talking about [20:25] significant business impacts um it's [20:27] important to be really clear upfront [20:30] about the problem we're trying to solve [20:33] and maybe the recommendation and then [20:36] provide the detail. And then very last, [20:39] for those who are interested, this is [20:41] how we got here. Um, I think the the [20:45] most clever version of this that I've [20:46] heard is uh is telling campfire stories [20:49] like starting at the beginning and sort [20:51] of at some point we're going to get to [20:52] the point where we actually talk about [20:54] what the problem is. Um, and at that [20:57] point you've lost your audience. Uh, and [21:01] so being really really crisp about this [21:03] is a problem. this is the impact on the [21:05] business and we have a proposal or we're [21:07] looking for the time to go figure out [21:08] the proposal um can be really critical [21:11] in that in that stage. Taking a quick [21:14] look at questions, thank you for raising [21:16] them. Um I'm going to go backwards. So, [21:20] what framing do you recommend for [21:22] engineers and managers to cut through [21:24] noise? I mean, a lot of these things on [21:27] the Well, I guess it's not the things on [21:28] the right. It's the opposite of of this. [21:30] Um, let me jump ahead and see like the [21:33] the things that I think stand out right [21:37] as for me and for many executives and [21:40] again we'll talk a little bit about how [21:41] to figure this out in your organization [21:43] because I think that like the context [21:44] really really matters. um [21:48] risk [21:50] uh meaning if I'm proposing something [21:54] then usually I'm looking for a proposal [21:56] that's low risk or where we have a good [21:58] understanding of risk and how to [22:00] mitigate it. Um I want the opportunity [22:03] cost to be low right like this this [22:06] needs to be the most important and most [22:08] impactful thing. So if I can describe [22:10] impact then I can offset the questions [22:13] of opportunity cost strategic fit does [22:16] it align with what we're trying to do [22:18] and then and then customer impact right [22:20] what does this mean for our customers [22:22] and like you know to the point of the [22:24] opposite of the campfire story being [22:26] really clear about those things upfront [22:30] right if you can establish those things [22:32] um then [22:35] you're going to have a it's going to sit [22:37] above okay I guess is described as the [22:40] noise, right? Like there's a lot of [22:41] people trying to do a lot of things. I [22:44] think um [22:47] you could walk into any organization, [22:49] look around and say it feels like we're [22:51] probably taking on too many things and [22:53] be right. So finding something that is [22:56] really high impact that sort of sits [22:57] above all of that noise. um is is about [23:01] framing but but also I mentioned this at [23:03] the beginning listening right like [23:04] really understanding the organiz [23:06] organizational context and what matters [23:10] um is going to help you get there um [23:14] there's a question about capacity [23:16] building [23:17] for example advocating for projects that [23:19] have limited ROI and dollars but allow [23:22] the people to build skills in a [23:23] particular direction so [23:26] I say this pretty regularly I think uh [23:30] when communicating [23:33] um [23:35] it the question says dollars I'll call [23:38] it currency regardless of where you are [23:40] euros pounds uh I don't know pick pick [23:43] something doesn't super matter the the [23:46] common denominator of investment in any [23:49] organization is currency so while you [23:54] may not see [23:57] an immediate return return on investment [24:00] from a revenue perspective, [24:02] you should be able to build a case [24:06] that there will be a return in dollars. [24:08] And so when you talk about capacity [24:10] building, building skills, etc. Like you [24:14] have to ask yourself the question, why [24:16] do we believe in that? And I can think [24:19] of a couple examples. I'm sure there are [24:20] better ones. I'm just trying to work the [24:22] numbers a little bit. two that come to [24:24] mind would be um well I guess in [24:28] capacity building right we're building [24:29] skills so that we can move faster right [24:32] I think that's a really concrete good [24:35] example but I want to turn that into [24:39] where where is that hurting us today [24:42] right what's the pain that we're feeling [24:43] and how are we going to shift that and [24:45] therefore we create more features in the [24:49] product down the road we get better [24:51] return from are engineers because they [24:54] deliver more whatever that might be [24:56] right you should be able to work some [24:58] numbers there and I'm not talking down [24:59] to pennies like you're wrong by a lot [25:03] right but order of magnitude we're going [25:05] to spend this much money and we expect [25:06] this return right in terms of [25:09] acceleration of development increased [25:11] capacity that's one model that you can [25:13] think about another model is retention [25:16] right engineers take time to train it [25:19] takes time to get them the context of [25:21] your organization ganization and they're [25:24] difficult to hire the process the work [25:26] of going out and finding people and [25:27] getting good fit. So if you have people [25:30] who are a good fit for your organization [25:33] um and who uh are contributing [25:36] effectively but feel stalled in their [25:38] growth for example then opportunities to [25:41] build new skills, explore new projects, [25:43] whatever that might be is going to be a [25:46] retention model and you can model out [25:48] the cost of replacing engineers in your [25:52] organization due to attrition that was a [25:55] result of of them sort of stalling in [25:57] their career. So ultimately [26:01] I think my my answer is there are no [26:03] things that don't have a an ROI. The ROI [26:05] might not be super positive. Um you know [26:08] it might not be the biggest thing. Um [26:11] but you know you can also associate risk [26:14] with that right again if I take the [26:15] attrition example um where people feel [26:18] stalled in their growth here because [26:20] we're not giving them time to learn new [26:21] skills. We're going to risk attrition of [26:23] those folks. Then we have to go spend a [26:24] bunch of money. lose maybe you know [26:28] subject matter experts all those sorts [26:30] of things. So I I think you can always [26:35] uh you can always convert [26:39] those things into uh dollars. It might [26:42] take a little bit more work but if you [26:45] can do that and sorry I'm using dollars [26:46] generically uh for your currency of your [26:49] choice. If you can do that, then you're [26:52] going to have a much better conversation [26:53] with folks in your organization uh that [26:56] are out outside of your team. I mean, e [26:59] even that help your engineering leaders. [27:02] That doesn't even have to be talking to [27:03] finance or talking to anybody else in [27:04] your organization. Like, help your [27:05] engineering leaders build that that [27:07] case. Um [27:12] I'm looking at one more question here uh [27:14] that just came in and then I will uh [27:17] move on a little bit. [27:19] I'm going to read it out loud because I [27:20] don't know what you all could see but uh [27:22] so similar Maros a lot of businesses [27:23] have been struggling for revenue [27:25] executive leadership or measured on [27:26] revenue. Therefore the question is how [27:28] much money will this make us in the next [27:31] quarter? [27:33] If engineering initiative ROI is [27:34] realized so they don't really care for [27:36] it. Oh I see. [27:40] How do you convince a business that has [27:42] become reactive? [27:44] Um yeah that's [27:48] definitely contextual. Um the question [27:50] is if sorry I stopped reading because I [27:52] wanted to make sure I digested it. Uh if [27:56] your organization has become very [27:58] reactive particularly I think if it's [28:00] quarterly revenue you know in a in a [28:02] public scenario that's going to be the [28:05] most um beholden. [28:08] Um, [28:10] I mean, if your expectation is that your [28:11] executives are going to be gone before [28:13] anything pays off, um, I'm not, that's a [28:17] tough one to navigate. But I do think, [28:20] and we'll, we'll talk about this in a [28:21] second [28:23] on the risk [28:25] perspective. [28:27] Um, one of the things that I'm always [28:29] looking for is risk mitigation, smaller [28:32] experiments, like off-ramps, the same [28:35] sorts of things that we do when we think [28:37] about product, right? Like how do we do [28:38] this work iteratively in small [28:41] increments so that we can see the [28:43] benefit of those increments. Now, [28:47] mid migration, mid transition, depending [28:49] on what kind of work you're talking [28:51] about, um, can be the most expensive [28:56] point. So, a bunch of projects that got [28:57] abandoned halfway because you decided to [28:59] go do something else is not does not [29:01] longterm add up for the business. Um, [29:04] but I think in that sort of scenario, [29:09] uh, a series of quick wins that are both [29:14] incrementally valuable to the [29:15] engineering organization, I mean, I [29:17] don't know what the specific problem is, [29:18] but I it's the work that I do all the [29:20] time is taking those big problems and [29:21] breaking them down into small problems. [29:24] quick wins give you um one some [29:27] incremental benefit of some form and two [29:31] some momentum and credibility [29:34] to then build a case for something [29:36] slightly bigger. Right? So if you know [29:40] if the the one thing that you're [29:42] thinking about is [29:45] I don't know we're going to like tear [29:46] down our monolith and turn it into [29:48] microservices which is the migration [29:49] that everyone's been on for the last 10 [29:51] years and it's still going. You know [29:54] laying out a 10-year plan is not going [29:56] to be the thing that's going to work in [29:57] this environment. But if you can find [30:00] small incremental wins within that, [30:03] right? If we isolated this little piece [30:05] of infrastructure, then that would be [30:07] really beneficial to our customers for [30:09] this reason. We have these performance [30:10] issues. There's capacity constraints [30:13] because no one knows how to work on this [30:14] part of the system. And you do something [30:16] really small and then you prove that it [30:20] had an impact. Then that gives you [30:22] slightly bigger windows to have. and the [30:24] the impact does have to come back to our [30:28] ability to deliver and therefore to [30:29] drive revenue. Um [30:32] that's the best that I can come up with. [30:34] Um I think you know if it's no one is [30:38] willing to do anything because we just [30:39] have to glue the next feature on the [30:42] side tomorrow. Um [30:45] I don't know. I guess f find me after [30:48] it. I'm happy to try to break down the [30:49] specific scenario. That's that's the [30:50] best that I can come up with is I would [30:52] try look for small wins, try to build [30:53] some momentum and some credibility and [30:55] demonstrate how that's impacted, right? [30:57] It can't be a long like a huge thing [31:00] that oh, in two years this is going to [31:01] make us better at at delivering because [31:03] that's not going to work for any [31:04] business, even a really effective one. [31:06] All right, I'm going to uh move along a [31:08] little bit lest I run out of time taking [31:10] all the questions, but I do love the [31:12] questions. Thanks. I'm going to clear [31:13] some. Um, okay. So, this is a little bit [31:19] what we were what we were just talking [31:20] about in the in the concept of that [31:21] question actually. So, super handy. Um, [31:24] when I talk about breaking things down [31:26] into smaller pieces, one of the things [31:28] that I'm always looking for and I think [31:29] everyone is looking for um and this [31:31] oneway door, two-way door model, I [31:33] mentioned Amazon earlier, I think was um [31:36] first sort of stated by by Jeff Bezos or [31:39] someone from Amazon. Um when decisions [31:43] or work again at any scale are [31:45] irreversible, they tend to get a lot of [31:49] scrutiny. A lot more meetings, a lot [31:52] more discussion, a lot more debate, a [31:54] lot more documents get written with [31:55] streams of comments on the documents [31:57] that never get resolved and nobody can [31:58] ever come up with an answer because it [32:00] feels too scary. Right? If we don't [32:03] really know, we're going to spend a lot [32:05] of time talking about whether or not we [32:07] should do this because we don't know how [32:09] to come back from it. But most [32:12] two-way doors can be or sorry most [32:14] one-way doors meaning irreversible [32:16] decisions can be broken down into a set [32:19] of reversible decisions, right? Like [32:21] what is the experiment that we can take [32:24] on? What is the small piece of work that [32:25] we can try that's going to give us [32:28] better information and put us it's going [32:30] to give us some incremental value and [32:32] it's going to give us better information [32:34] about whether or not we should continue [32:36] down this path whether customers like [32:38] this whether it improves our work again [32:40] sort of like I was just describing can [32:42] we take a small piece of that I'll use [32:44] this monolith and microservices example [32:46] can I take a small piece of that and [32:48] pull it out and see the impact right are [32:51] we able to work more effectively or is [32:53] there more overhead head because now [32:54] we're worried about, you know, contracts [32:57] between systems instead of one code base [32:59] where we have everything at our [33:01] fingertips, right? And so that, you [33:04] know, you could pull out a service and [33:06] then say, "Wow, this model of a service [33:07] is really terrible. It's caused all [33:09] these other problems. Let's put it back [33:11] in. Let's figure out a different [33:12] pattern." Instead of, "Okay, everybody [33:14] go off and turn all of your pieces into [33:16] new services." Um, which if anyone has [33:19] tried, uh, is a is bound for failure. Um [33:22] and so finding ways to break those big [33:26] scary irreversible decisions down into [33:29] smaller testable ideas uh is a huge [33:32] piece of of the process. So um I got [33:36] some feedback in the uh in the chat [33:38] which I'm going to have a read at read [33:39] of while I put up this second poll. Um, [33:42] and I want to talk about or just get a [33:43] little bit of an understanding of uh [33:46] what is getting in folks ways, folks [33:50] getting in the way for people when they [33:52] try to um when they try to get something [33:57] uh done, try to get buy in for a [33:59] particular initiative. And again, these [34:01] can be really small or they can be they [34:03] can be quite big. Um, all right, launch [34:06] this one. [34:14] Clear winner that one so far. [35:13] All right, that looks like it's settled. [35:15] Thanks for everyone who uh who put [35:17] something in there. Um [35:20] all right, wrap that one up and share [35:22] it. It's uh pretty astounding. [35:27] So that's good to see. [35:31] Hopefully everyone can see that. So, uh, [35:34] a little bit of ROI and budget and a [35:37] whole lot of opportunity costs. They're [35:40] higher priorities. Um, nobody [35:44] with it feels too risky. Uh, which is [35:47] interesting for sure. Um, and nobody [35:50] with tried this before. Uh, [35:54] that's interesting also. I guess it's [35:56] the number one um that that people hear. [36:00] So um [36:03] again if if anyone has any specific [36:05] thoughts that they want to share on the [36:07] higher priority it's not super [36:09] surprising [36:11] um I'm going to guess knowing what I [36:15] know of many engineering organizations [36:17] that the things that are getting traded [36:20] are um you we want to make this [36:23] technical investment but we have to [36:25] deliver these features like the priority [36:27] is product over engineer. ing. I don't [36:30] know if that's true. If people have [36:32] other examples, uh that seems like the [36:34] easy the lowhanging fruit to knock off [36:36] the table, but if people have other [36:37] examples of ways their experience, the [36:39] priorities, um that's super that would [36:42] be super valuable to throw into the [36:43] chat. Um and then [36:46] I uh I'm interested [36:50] uh as well in you know in any specific [36:52] examples of of where that's happening. [36:55] And then the thing that I would say is [36:59] kind of goes to the strategic fit point [37:01] but less like globally strategic. I'm [37:04] going to stop sharing because I think [37:05] you all have seen this. Um [37:08] is understanding the priorities and the [37:11] motivations and figuring out [37:14] again on the small increment. Is there [37:16] something that we could do that's going [37:18] to help us succeed in meeting the [37:21] priorities? Right? like linking those [37:23] things together, not you know uh omnibus [37:28] like just jamming things in that don't [37:30] fit, but associating success with [37:35] against the priorities of the [37:37] organization with the types of work that [37:40] you think will help you get there. Um is [37:44] an important model for for framing [37:47] um the investments that you do want to [37:50] make. Um, and [37:57] okay, sorry, I'm just taking a look at [37:58] the chat. There's a little bit off of [38:00] that in terms of higher priorities, but [38:02] the complexity of getting buy in from [38:04] other stakeholders is an interesting um, [38:09] that's a really interesting one. Uh, [38:12] because Oh, but I just noticed there's [38:15] someone dropped in the Q Q&A. All of the [38:17] above. So, I guess I get that. like but [38:18] the top one that's coming out is is is [38:20] the priorities right um [38:23] I think you know there's an opportunity [38:25] in that it's it's an interesting thing [38:27] to understand right like really [38:29] understanding okay we need buyin from [38:30] this person that person that person's [38:31] like I'm willing to go get that buy in [38:33] or maybe you're willing to go get that [38:34] buy in right um but help me or help me [38:37] understand why that feels like it [38:39] wouldn't be worth it right do you not [38:41] believe like what one of the one of the [38:44] hidden signals in there might be I don't [38:45] actually believe in this I'm not willing [38:47] to go fight for this. So help me [38:49] understand what why that would be the [38:51] case. Right? Or [38:53] those people we're not going to be able [38:56] to convince them even though I believe [38:58] in it. That's a different story, right? [38:59] Like so trying to understand that to [39:01] understand a little bit more about the [39:02] dynamics of the organization I think [39:03] would be really um valuable. Okay. Um [39:09] I'm going to start moving a little bit [39:11] faster I think. So um this is an example [39:14] that is admittedly a bit contrived. [39:18] um of but actually not far off of some [39:20] things that I've read in terms of a [39:23] written technical proposal. And what I [39:25] wanted you all to take a look at is just [39:28] where in this do you lose interest uh [39:31] and feel like you're not really sure uh [39:33] what we're trying to achieve. And you [39:35] can drop in the chat like at this point [39:37] um [39:39] just say like this is where I stop this, [39:41] you know, this sentence, this paragraph, [39:43] whatever. [39:45] Give you a couple minutes or maybe a [39:47] minute to read it and throw in some [39:49] comments. [40:58] Yeah, admittedly, uh, to Marco's point, [41:01] this is hard to I mean, I had a hard [41:02] time reading it. this was sort of [41:04] fabricated um at a little more extreme [41:06] than some of the things that I've I've [41:08] read but um but not that far off in the [41:12] sense that there's a lot of technical [41:14] detail without getting to a certainly [41:16] without starting with a clear point uh [41:18] and without getting to a clear point. Um [41:21] so uh I want to do [41:25] yes uh I will [41:29] I don't have a you know an internal [41:31] example that I'd be willing to use. So, [41:33] it took some effort to or some took the [41:35] minimum effort path to create, you know, [41:36] the most obiscated sort of description. [41:38] But now, I'd like you to change your [41:41] thinking. And some people sort of did [41:42] this a little bit already, but um I'm [41:44] going to put it back up on the screen [41:47] and ask yourself the question, how would [41:50] you convey the intent in a way that you [41:53] think would [41:55] um would land better that would start to [41:58] get your point across? like what what [42:00] would you focus on [42:02] um to try and again it assume that [42:06] you're in an organization that's going [42:07] to use a written proposal for the [42:08] purpose of this but you know it could be [42:10] framed verbally or any other [42:51] All [43:04] right, great. Some very good suggestions [43:06] there. Now, thank you. Um, definitely [43:08] just shorter non-technical. [43:11] Um, [43:12] right, there's a bunch of comments about [43:15] latency, timing, etc. [43:19] most people, you know, as as has been [43:21] commented here, even technical leaders [43:24] without having to sit down and go [43:25] through the system aren't going to [43:26] really understand what the impact is. So [43:28] like how does that impact our customer? [43:30] How does that impact our revenue? You [43:32] should be able to link those things [43:33] together. Um you we talk about [43:38] uh or use terms like business impact, [43:40] but I mean I would say I I said earlier [43:42] currency is the is the common [43:44] denominator, right? So, you want to get [43:46] to the point of customer impact, which [43:49] might be churn, frustration, time we're [43:51] spending talking to those customers. Um, [43:54] could be SLA violations where we're [43:56] paying them, you know, whatever that [43:58] might be. Um, it could be depending on [44:01] your business, [44:03] uh, failed checkouts, you know, that [44:05] sort of thing. Um, and really trying to [44:08] tie that back. And then well I guess [44:11] we'll get into the the structure in a [44:12] little bit. So let me let me jump ahead. [44:14] But how you would then turn that into a [44:16] proposal is going to be what comes next. [44:19] So quick wrap up. Even your engineering [44:22] executives want you to put things in [44:24] business terms because that helps them [44:25] put things in business terms. There was [44:27] um [44:29] uh comment somewhere. Oh up further [44:31] above when we were talking about [44:33] confidence. Someone said they were [44:35] confident with their work for their own [44:37] team and getting buyin for that, but [44:38] trying to get their boss to sort of [44:39] bring other teams into something was [44:41] harder. Um, and you know, I think a huge [44:45] amount of that is helping them frame [44:46] impact to the business, right? Because [44:48] someone's going to ask them why they're [44:49] choosing to do things. Um, and if they [44:51] have that framed in the right way [44:53] already, then they don't have to do as [44:54] much work. Makes it easier to get them [44:56] to to buy in and say yes. um you know [45:00] these four points risk, opportunity [45:01] cost, customer impact, strategic fit, [45:05] and breaking things down into smaller [45:07] iterations that we can test as a [45:09] hypothesis instead of having to go all [45:10] in uh is always going to help get things [45:12] moving along. All right, so I've said [45:15] this a couple times. I've been at [45:16] CircleCI a long time. I have worked at [45:18] many other places, but this is my [45:20] experience. Your organization might be [45:22] different. Uh there was a great question [45:23] about slides and kind of, you know, how [45:25] just how communications are formatted. [45:27] All of these things matter. Um, and [45:30] while it's helpful [45:32] to uh, you know, to have some [45:35] frameworks, it's also extremely [45:37] important to know what you're trying to [45:38] get done in your particular organization [45:40] and what works. So, um, I think I pretty [45:44] much said this already. I'm just going [45:45] to jump on to the next one. [45:48] Want to talk a little bit about reading [45:49] the room. Um, I use this expression a [45:51] lot and it might be like specific rooms [45:56] quote unquote in your organization like [45:58] different teams, different departments [45:59] have different ways of of thinking and [46:01] working. Um, it's situational awareness [46:03] and context. But just if we go up to the [46:05] higher level of your organization in [46:07] general. Um, knowing [46:10] how things get done and who does succeed [46:14] in your organization um is extremely [46:17] valuable. Um, part of that I think, you [46:20] know, I think the [46:22] the easy way to write that off is [46:26] everything is political and, you know, [46:28] people who have favor get things done. [46:29] But I I I think if you take a little bit [46:32] more time and give it a little bit more [46:34] of a generous definition, you'll witness [46:37] specific behaviors that tend to be more [46:39] successful. And looking for those um is [46:42] going to give you a clue to how to think [46:43] about applying these things again in [46:45] your organization versus my [46:46] organization. um you know uh who who [46:50] gets the things that they're looking [46:52] for? Is it the is it the loudest person? [46:55] Um is it someone who brings a lot of [46:57] charts and graphs and a lot of data and [46:59] technical detail? I mean, we sort of [47:00] just talked about how the technical [47:02] detail is not where you want to frame, [47:03] but maybe a lot of substantiation in [47:07] data um is going to get you a better [47:10] result um than what sort of seems like [47:13] feelings. um who specifically like what [47:16] you know again you can look at their [47:17] specific like communication style um [47:21] what what do they do like what work do [47:23] they do outside the room um yeah are to [47:28] the next point are decisions made in [47:30] meetings or are they made before [47:31] meetings and I think it's generally true [47:36] that if you're trying to get what you [47:40] need in a big formal meeting structure [47:44] you've probably already lost. Um, you [47:46] want to walk into that room knowing that [47:49] you have all the support and the buyin [47:51] that you need. Um, and it's an [47:53] opportunity to clear up any issues. Um, [47:56] and then are you in a you know a speedy [47:59] organization or a cautious organization? [48:01] Right? There was a great question [48:01] earlier that I was uh responding to [48:03] about [48:05] the nature of the business right now [48:07] like are we revenue driven right now? I [48:10] mean most organizations are revenue [48:11] driven but are we reactively revenue [48:13] driven? Are we trying to compensate for [48:15] something or are we in a position where [48:17] we're getting good natural revenue [48:18] growth and this is a time where we can [48:20] make bigger investments right like what [48:23] what case am I trying to make even in [48:25] this particular business cycle of my [48:27] business let alone the organization that [48:29] I'm in compared to other organizations. [48:32] Um, so I'm gonna throw this up just as a [48:34] quick poll to get uh some interest or [48:37] like some perspective I guess probably [48:39] better way of describing it. um of just [48:42] how you feel your organization [48:44] uh functions today. [49:24] All [49:36] right, I'll give it a couple more [49:37] seconds, but the all of the above choice [49:40] might have been a mistake. [49:42] There's a lot of nuance in this, so uh [49:45] there's a lot of leaning towards I'll [49:47] wrap it up there. um [49:50] and share. Most people came in with it's [49:52] a bit of everything. I think you know [49:55] that's absolutely valid. [49:58] Um oh there's a specific example though. [50:00] It's like it's not all the things. Um [50:03] but we're a cautious organization and [50:05] relationships matter. Um I was sort of [50:08] laughing to myself about how low the [50:10] relationship number was. uh because I [50:12] think that's a thing that um that [50:15] engineers think about differently than [50:17] many other um many other disciplines. Uh [50:21] and we'll come back to that in a in a [50:23] few minutes. Um but okay, so data speed [50:26] I mean a little bit of the others uh I [50:29] guess in in the example [50:32] um the example of combination of [50:35] caution. So there's one vote a half a [50:37] vote for caution. Not a lot of caution [50:39] right now. I think that might be market [50:42] related, right? Everyone is feeling a [50:44] sense of urgency. Um, a sense that [50:47] someone around them is going faster than [50:48] them. Um, and so the slow cautious model [50:52] might just might not be the right thing [50:53] right now. Um, and then let's see. [51:00] Oh, I see. Yeah. [51:03] Um I if I understand [51:08] oh I don't know if everyone can see this [51:10] but if I understand uh the last comment [51:13] be a great outside perspective. So it [51:16] that's absolutely it's a great point. [51:19] You can be a little too close to your [51:22] own organization. I made the comment [51:24] about politics earlier to just feel like [51:26] I don't even know how anything gets done [51:27] around here. It doesn't make sense. It's [51:29] always these people but that doesn't [51:30] make sense. you know, finding out from [51:32] someone else um who maybe has witnessed [51:35] or you know, just getting other [51:36] perspectives inside your organization, [51:37] but also getting them outside the [51:38] organization um is usually a really good [51:44] um eye openener. [51:47] Um you know, if you there's scenarios [51:50] where that would happen for sure. [51:53] Over time, we've had a few different [51:54] people come into our organization to [51:55] help us out with things and sort of play [51:57] back stuff that was surprising to me. [52:00] Um, so it definitely happens. [52:03] Um, [52:07] I think I got a little bit of this [52:08] already uh in comments, but if anybody [52:10] else wants to add something [52:13] really the point of this was to have you [52:14] think about it for yourself. So maybe [52:16] because there was so much uh and thanks [52:19] Marco for leading the charge but because [52:20] there was so much combination if it if [52:23] anybody wants to put in like it's this [52:26] and this uh it's this and this like [52:29] these are kind of the two or three [52:31] factors as opposed to you know it's it's [52:33] just some combination. Um I think that [52:35] would be that would be helpful to get a [52:37] broader perspective but really the goal [52:39] is to have you think about it so you can [52:40] think about how to take on your next uh [52:43] your next conversation. [52:45] I'm gonna keep uh rolling on while you [52:49] do that. [52:51] Fair enough. Um [52:55] although I I mean I'm very serious [52:57] question. I feel like um sorry for [52:59] anyone who doesn't see Andrew's comment [53:01] that anything with AOI in it will get [53:02] approved. I think that was 2025 [53:06] and 2026 is becoming [53:10] the year of measuring AI. uh it's [53:13] probably on a spectrum across different [53:15] organizations but meaning okay we spent [53:17] all this money and what are we getting [53:19] for it like are we actually making use [53:21] of it do we need to optimize etc etc so [53:23] there's a little bit more of a metric [53:26] orientation around AI usage depending on [53:29] again where you are in that cycle um I'm [53:31] curious if that lands for for anybody [53:33] else so we're definitely doing more [53:36] justification and I certainly I get that [53:37] feedback from other engineering leaders [53:40] um okay so Again, overall ideas, a rough [53:44] sketch, understanding your organization [53:46] is really key. Um, you know, you can [53:48] think about it in these categories, but [53:50] as I said, looking at [53:53] um who's succeeding in your organization [53:56] and being honest with yourself about why [53:58] you think that is, what tactics they're [54:01] taking, um what uh what approaches, [54:05] um how they communicate, how they [54:08] structure their thinking, who they talk [54:10] to. You know, there was some comment [54:11] about one-on-one relationships. So, like [54:13] what relationships do you need to build [54:16] in your organization, which is something [54:17] that we're going to get to uh [54:20] in a second. So, here we go. Um, [54:26] yeah, thank you. Uh so [54:30] the influence map this this always when [54:32] I when I talk about engineers versus [54:33] other disciplines the way that I I think [54:35] about this the most or the thing that [54:37] really flagged this for me let's say was [54:39] um sales folks uh whether they're [54:44] leaders individual sellers etc. you know [54:47] I earlier in my career and still I spent [54:50] a lot of time uh with customers as a you [54:54] know a technical representative right [54:55] I'm I work at CircleCI we sell a very [54:57] technical product so I I spent time with [54:59] customers and when I I think early in my [55:03] career I was always surprised when I [55:04] would talk to a salesperson and ask them [55:07] what I might need to know about the [55:09] account that we were going to meet and [55:11] what I generally got as a response was [55:13] an org chart not like a necessarily a [55:16] picture sometimes a picture but a lists [55:18] of names and roles and who was an [55:22] influencer and who was a champion and [55:25] who was the decision maker in the [55:27] organization. Now this is you thinking [55:29] about this from the perspective of [55:30] selling a product into an organization [55:32] but [55:34] um oh I read a great book actually in [55:37] the last couple years called everybody's [55:39] in sales or to sell as human or I forget [55:41] the name of it anyway [55:43] something like that basically describing [55:45] the fact that everybody's job is sales [55:47] in some form like it's you know when you [55:49] talk about negotiation it's sales like [55:50] that's what when we talk about [55:52] communication [55:53] particularly lobbying for um for work to [55:57] get done lobbying for base for your [55:58] teams to learn and grow skills like [56:00] whatever that might be. you know, you're [56:02] selling and understanding [56:06] relationships in your organization, [56:07] understanding who has influence, [56:09] understanding [56:11] um how people how those people think [56:17] is um is a super valuable exercise [56:21] um in figuring out how to navigate your [56:25] organization and how to create your your [56:27] own influence, right? And again, I'll [56:29] I'll keep saying it's also important to [56:31] listen, right? Because the thing that [56:33] you're thinking about might not line up [56:34] with the strategic goals. You might just [56:36] learn something that will reshape how [56:38] you think about what the problems are. [56:40] There's a great scene in the Phoenix [56:43] project if anyone has read it. Um, where [56:47] I think the IT team goes to meet the COO [56:50] or the CFO and just says, "Tell us how [56:52] you think about the business." Like what [56:54] how do you frame your view of what [56:57] matters? and they come away with a super [56:59] dense understanding of what they could [57:02] be doing that would really shape and [57:04] drive the business effectively. Right? [57:07] So, it's not just going to them and [57:08] saying, "I I want to get this done," but [57:10] really understanding how they think [57:11] about the problem, but give you new [57:12] ideas about how you can pursue things. [57:15] So, these are some examples. Try not to [57:17] put like titles or whatever on them. Um, [57:20] because it's not like the budget owner [57:22] could be someone in finance. It could be [57:24] your boss, right? and they might have [57:26] specific things that they're trying to, [57:28] you know, lay that out for or apply it [57:30] to. Um, but knowing that there are [57:32] particular skeptics in the organizer, [57:34] some people are just skeptical of [57:36] everything. Um, and they carry weight or [57:40] they don't, you know, knowing that and [57:42] knowing what drives that in a way that [57:45] you can prepare yourself for it, that [57:47] you can speak to them outside of the [57:50] room. I keep using the room as if [57:51] there's always a big meeting. It doesn't [57:52] have to be that way, but um to to get [57:56] their input, right? Like I think a lot [57:59] of people [58:01] have different personas publicly, [58:04] meaning in large groups, than they do in [58:07] person and spending real time with [58:08] people in person is a great way to [58:11] figure out how your organization [58:13] functions and how to get, you know, your [58:15] ideas across better. [58:18] And one thing that I would highlight in [58:20] that, and this is I've been thinking [58:21] about this since my, you know, solo [58:24] engineering days, um, thought balloons [58:27] are really cheap. And what I mean by a [58:29] thought balloon is just like floating an [58:31] idea, right? So, if you have the [58:33] opportunity to meet with someone [58:34] one-on-one who's going to be a, you [58:36] know, a key stakeholder in something [58:38] that you're thinking about or whatever, [58:40] rather than bringing them a five or 10 [58:42] page proposal, [58:45] uh, which, you know, going back to one [58:46] of the earlier slides, this person's [58:48] already super invested in this. How am I [58:51] going to walk them back? Now, I have a [58:52] different conversation that I need to [58:54] have just floating an idea like, I've [58:56] sort of been thinking about this [58:58] particular problem. Like, is that [58:59] problem interesting to you? Right? Um, [59:02] one, [59:04] you'll get more honest feedback, I [59:06] think, because you don't seem as [59:07] invested and you're probably not as [59:10] invested. You haven't spent as much time [59:12] like detailing it out and thinking [59:13] through all believing that you have [59:15] thought through all the angles and [59:17] therefore when the feedback is I don't [59:19] think about that. That was that's not [59:21] something that we would pursue for the [59:22] following reasons, your ability to take [59:25] that feedback is going to be much [59:26] better. Right? And I think people are [59:30] what I describe generally and I your [59:33] mileage may vary in your organization [59:34] but people are generally [59:37] quite nervous about taking the time of [59:41] executives and feeling like maybe [59:43] they're wasting their time and there's [59:44] like the pre meetings and the [59:46] preparation and whatever. But the the [59:49] reality, and again I can only say this [59:52] for myself and my my fellow execs at [59:53] CircleCI, but the reality is I would [59:56] much rather [59:58] get a really small idea early in order [60:01] to have some opportunity to give some [60:03] feedback and get it on the right [60:05] trajectory than have to walk back [60:08] something that people have invested a [60:09] huge amount of time in, right? And so [60:13] building that kind of relationship [60:14] taking it was whatever it could be [60:16] coffee, it could be any reason, right? [60:17] like like the water cooler chat if [60:19] anyone's still going to an office [60:20] whatever that might be you know donut [60:23] pals if you do that which is just like [60:25] random meetups of people in your in your [60:27] company um taking the opportunity to [60:30] float small notions and get early [60:33] feedback on them is going to one give [60:35] you an opportunity to build relationship [60:36] with folks two have them feel like they [60:39] participated somehow in sort of building [60:41] out that um that idea and three again [60:45] give you an opportunity to just walk [60:46] something back before you really put a [60:48] lot of time and energy in it because if [60:49] it's going to run a ground early, um I [60:53] would invest as little time in it as [60:55] possible because you've got other things [60:56] to do, right? [60:59] All right. [61:01] So, uh next poll. [61:05] Hopefully people have examples for this. [61:06] Um, but you know, the last thing that [61:10] you tried that didn't work out, uh, I [61:12] got stalled somewhere. Looking to get [61:14] thoughts on, um, where that might have [61:17] gone wrong. You know, is there is there [61:20] a persona or a particular uh, character [61:24] involved uh, that prevented you from [61:27] from succeeding? [62:39] All right, this one's this one looks [62:42] like it's slowing down. That's good [62:44] enough. Uh there's definitely Let me [62:47] just share [62:49] some uh leaning towards the skeptic, [62:52] which uh makes sense. Makes sense, but a [62:55] a good spread. Um [62:59] and nobody saying, "Yeah, I did all of [63:00] this." So that's hopefully that's some [63:02] some good takeaways for folks as well. [63:04] Um but a good spread definitely leaning [63:06] towards the skeptic uh which I guess is [63:08] not super surprising people that are [63:10] going to um [63:13] uh show up. And I guess I mean feel free [63:16] to throw this in the comments or in the [63:18] chat or whatever, but I'm curious if [63:20] those those people that folks are [63:22] thinking of as skeptics are consistently [63:25] skeptical or just happen to be skeptical [63:27] of the thing you were trying to do. Um, [63:31] and if it's the former, then that tells [63:34] you one thing, right? Like, how do I [63:36] figure out how this person thinks? How [63:38] do I frame things? Who, you know, what [63:40] have they accepted in the past? [63:43] Sometimes the only thing they accept is [63:44] their own opinion, which I don't really [63:46] have a great answer for, but um, other [63:48] than inception, uh, you know, which is [63:50] actually half joke, half real. um [63:54] getting people to the point where they [63:55] feel super bought in and feel like they [63:58] created that that direction as much as [64:01] you did. Um sometimes it feels like, you [64:04] know, you really want to get credit for [64:06] your work. Uh and that can be [64:07] frustrating, but on the other hand, if [64:09] that's what it takes to get something [64:10] done that's right for the business, it's [64:11] not the worst approach. Um but yeah, if [64:14] anyone has any specifics on the the [64:16] skeptics, again, you know, always [64:19] skeptical or just skeptical of of your [64:21] idea. And then if it's just skeptical of [64:23] your idea, you know, is there anything [64:25] that you learned? And feel free to put [64:28] this in the chat. What I really want is [64:29] for you to think about it for yourself. [64:30] Is there anything that you learned from [64:33] that exercise about how you would [64:35] approach that person or someone like [64:37] them? Um, [64:39] and [64:41] I guess were you surprised that they [64:45] were skeptical? like would you know who [64:47] to [64:49] address [64:50] and whose skepticism to address in [64:52] advance next time? That would be the [64:54] thing that I would I would want you to [64:55] take away from this. Um [64:58] uh yeah, great question um from Marco. I [65:03] I wish I knew if you all could see the [65:04] questions, but I'll just um I'll just [65:07] read it. So, how do I personally make [65:10] space for people to engage with smaller [65:12] thought balloons? I mean, I don't have a [65:14] perfect answer. I think I there was a [65:18] there was certainly a point um in my [65:21] time at CircleCI when I learned that [65:23] people were putting way too much energy [65:24] into preparing to speak to me. Um it [65:27] takes a lot of energy and effort to [65:29] build those relationships with folks in [65:31] the organization. Um I do my best to put [65:35] that work in but it's not evenly [65:38] distributed across the whole [65:39] organization. Um that's you know [65:41] obviously depending on the the size of [65:43] your organization that can be um hit or [65:45] miss. Um and I also do my best to [65:52] um to put out that message. But I think [65:54] that the more important thing for [65:56] leaders [65:58] um is how you then respond, right? Like [66:02] if someone has a great experience coming [66:04] to you and asking for input on something [66:07] um then they're going to tell their [66:09] friends. uh and if they don't and it [66:12] feels really cumbersome or they feel [66:15] I don't know belittled like like pick a [66:17] an outcome that would be negative then [66:19] then that word is going to spread right [66:21] like I think as a leader you have to [66:23] recognize that conversations are [66:25] happening that you're not in and mostly [66:26] they're you know like most of your [66:28] reputation happens when you're not in [66:30] the room uh I guess that's true about [66:32] everybody but it's particularly true in [66:33] that case so you know those are the [66:35] things that I at least strive for uh but [66:37] I won't stand here and tell you that [66:39] that I'm perfect at it. I don't know if [66:41] that question was aimed at how to do [66:43] that for people that are under you or [66:45] how to figure that out for the people [66:46] that are above you. I guess the other [66:48] realization I've had in my whole career [66:50] is most people are just people. You [66:52] know, I've met lots of people that I had [66:55] whether it's like famous people or [66:56] people who are just like phenomenal in [66:58] the particular thing that they do or [67:00] people that were just mythical for some [67:01] other reason. Every time I get a chance [67:04] to meet someone who seemed terrifying, [67:07] uh, I learned in the end that they were [67:08] just another human being. Uh, and they [67:11] had their own interests and their own [67:12] faults. Um, and just approaching them as [67:15] a human being turned out to be, uh, the [67:18] best way to to handle that. All right. [67:22] Um, [67:24] so take some chances, I guess. Um, so I [67:27] guess uh, one quick thing to to knock [67:29] into the chat. I'm going to keep going [67:30] because I'm keeping an eye on the time. [67:31] um and want to be respectful of all your [67:33] time, but if you if you have something [67:34] you're working on now, now that you've [67:36] had a chance to think about this, is [67:38] there somebody um that you think you if [67:41] you got their buy in would be really [67:44] helpful to sort of getting your next [67:46] thing done? Um and if anyone has any [67:48] specific questions about, you know, how [67:49] to tackle that, then throw that uh throw [67:52] that into the chat or into the Q&A as [67:54] well. Um, [67:58] so yeah, just looking for role, you [68:00] know, if I had the CFOs, but it doesn't [68:02] even have to be executives. Uh, could be [68:04] wherever you are in your organization. [68:07] Um, [68:10] security, that's a fun one. Um, feel [68:13] free to elaborate on that one. I mean, [68:15] in as much as you can publicly. Um, [68:23] product is a common. Okay, let's [68:40] got it. Good spread. Good spread. [68:44] Um, [68:49] does everybody that puts something feel [68:50] like they have a plan, a better plan for [68:52] how they're going to do that? [68:56] Feel free to write while I I wrap up [68:58] this section. I think we head into just [68:59] a little bit of time for some discussion [69:00] in in Q&A. So, um, yeah, I, you know, I [69:06] I often use [69:09] I'm trying to think of good metaphors. I [69:11] guess at the end of the day, most [69:13] decisions are not made in a giant [69:15] meeting um where everyone sits around [69:19] and talks about it and works it out, [69:20] right? Like the the the conversations [69:23] that go well, the the work has already [69:26] been done. And so, um you know, there's [69:29] like long-term effort here, which is [69:32] building those relationships so that [69:33] when you need them, um you can go have [69:36] that conversation really easily. um or [69:39] working through the people that you do [69:41] have good relationships with to get the [69:43] buyin from folks. Like you might not [69:45] know the CTO or the CEO. I'm just [69:48] picking Albert's comment from the end [69:49] there. You probably know them, but you [69:52] might not have a good enough [69:53] relationship, but you might have a great [69:54] relationship with, [69:56] you know, [69:58] I don't know, principal engineer who [70:00] knows the CTO really well, right? and [70:02] and and going to that person and saying [70:04] not just you know would you support this [70:07] but [70:09] uh or alternatively [70:12] what will make me successful in this [70:14] conversation right like you have a great [70:15] relationship with this person how do [70:16] they think what sorts of questions are [70:18] they going to ask how do I um how do I [70:22] make sure that I'm prepared for that [70:23] conversation [70:25] um you know all the way back to [70:26] communication format like do they want [70:28] slides with lots of text on them do they [70:30] want me to write them a document that [70:31] they can read in advance, are they going [70:33] to ignore it and just show up in the [70:35] meeting and ask me why I'm there? Like, [70:38] that happens, right? And if you spent [70:41] your weekend writing a document that [70:43] your CTO or CEO didn't read because [70:47] they're busy and they didn't get it with [70:48] enough time or they just like to, you [70:51] know, freewheel and whiteboard, you [70:52] know, that can sort of throw you off [70:54] your game a little bit. Um, again, I [70:57] don't really want it to be that formal, [70:58] but sometimes that's it, right? And so [71:00] knowing their personality and how to [71:02] interact with them uh is really valuable [71:04] and being able to ask someone who you do [71:06] have a good relationship with to sort of [71:07] build ladder your way up there um is a [71:09] good strategy. So uh know who the [71:12] characters are in your organization like [71:14] honestly [71:15] sit down and map it out a little bit. [71:17] Who do I need to get right? Who do I [71:19] need to get to? How can I get to them? [71:21] Those sorts of things. I mean this is [71:23] hang out with your sales people. This is [71:25] all they do all day long. Uh assuming [71:26] you have them. Um, also you should spend [71:28] time with your sales people anyway [71:29] because they can tell you what people [71:31] love and hate about your product. Um, [71:34] yeah, and try to, you know, find the way [71:37] find the way to get those casual [71:38] conversations, float your thought [71:39] balloons, get early feedback. You know, [71:41] the more invested you are in something, [71:43] the more disappointed you're going to be [71:44] when it doesn't work out. And so, if you [71:46] get those signs early, you can either [71:48] adjust to get it onto a track where [71:50] you're going to get some support. Or you [71:51] can take that feedback and say, "Okay, [71:52] well, this maybe this isn't the right [71:54] thing for the business right now. what [71:55] did I learn given that information? What [71:57] would I do that is maybe going to be a [71:59] better thing for the business? [72:01] As I said at the beginning, the goal is [72:04] not to get the things done that you want [72:07] done. The goal is to figure out what's [72:08] going to be most impactful and get that [72:10] done, right? So, it's a it's a two-way [72:11] street. You're a participant in that. [72:14] Okay. So, uh last sort of notion in here [72:19] and how I think about these things and [72:21] where I see people succeed. Uh the first [72:23] two uh you've got is is this notion of [72:27] like pros and cons um and how to present [72:30] options. Um I I would say my experience [72:34] again your mileage may vary understand [72:36] your own your own folks. My experience [72:38] is that executives feel a sense of [72:41] responsibility for decision-m and this [72:43] can be very different in different [72:45] organizations. Um, and so [72:49] presenting a yes or no decision doesn't [72:52] leave a lot of options, right? And when [72:55] I see when I often see things framed as [72:57] pros and cons, they're like the [73:00] opposite. The cons are just the opposite [73:02] of the pros. So, all I get is a list of [73:04] reasons that this a good thing to do. We [73:05] should do this for the following reasons [73:07] that make it good. Um, [73:10] then I have to sort of figure out for [73:12] myself whether I think this is a is [73:14] positive or not. The other thing is that [73:17] there's a conscious an unconscious [73:18] choice that everyone is making today [73:20] which is to not do the thing. Right? [73:23] Most people aren't thinking about it and [73:24] therefore they're unconsciously meaning [73:27] unintentionally deciding to not do that [73:29] thing and haven't considered the impact [73:31] of not doing it. So the way that I tend [73:34] to reframe this is with options right [73:37] one of the options is to do nothing and [73:39] then frame each of those options [73:41] typically with some risks. Right? this [73:43] is the risk of this of not doing [73:45] anything. This is the risk of taking [73:46] this approach. This is the risk of [73:47] taking this approach. And I can compare [73:49] those across and then again your mileage [73:52] may vary. I've been saying a lot but [73:55] give a recommendation. Right? Yes, most [73:59] I think most executives feel a [74:00] responsibility to to participate in [74:02] decision-m but if you bring a [74:06] recommendation, it feels more like [74:08] you've done the work. Um, and so [74:12] this is an example kind of going back to [74:14] the event driven architecture thing. Uh, [74:16] a little less a little less AI generated [74:19] to try to make it real, but like and [74:21] trying to format a little bit around the [74:24] the customer impact, right? Like in [74:27] right now if we do nothing, we have a [74:29] bunch of internal calls that are fragile [74:30] and that results in 3 to 5% checkout [74:34] error rate, right? We're getting errors [74:35] as people are trying to check out buying [74:37] on our e-commerce platform, whatever [74:39] that is. And so we currently have 4%, [74:43] it's probably higher actually in a real [74:44] business, but this be a really good [74:46] business. Nobody ever abandons their [74:47] carts unless there's an error. But 4% [74:49] customer cart abandonment. Like that is [74:52] a real business metric that we can talk [74:55] about. And we believe that if we pursue [74:58] a pilot where we focus on the domain of [75:02] checkout, which is where the problem is, [75:04] and we cap it in a particular size and [75:07] we have some check-ins along the way, [75:08] then we'll expect to see a reduction in [75:12] um cart abandonment down to basically no [75:15] never for errors, but just because some [75:17] people abandon their carts that actually [75:18] happens. Um, and that will give us also, [75:22] this is meant to be 10 point like 10% [75:25] increase in our innovation investment [75:27] because we're no longer chasing broken [75:29] issues and dealing with incidents and [75:31] getting on customer calls, etc. Maybe [75:33] we're probably not getting on customer [75:35] calls if we're an e-commerce site, but [75:36] you get the idea. [75:38] And then there's like the all-in full [75:40] adoption two-way door model, which is [75:42] we'll get there faster to the end state, [75:45] but we won't have the opportunities to [75:47] offramp and say, you know what, this [75:48] actually isn't working that well. It's [75:49] not producing the results that we [75:50] wanted. So, this is how we would go [75:52] about that. We think we'll get again the [75:54] whole thing there faster. More people [75:56] will have increased space to innovate. [75:58] Um, but we've lost the offramps. [76:01] Therefore, our recommendation is we [76:03] pursue option two. We do 30-day [76:05] check-ins where we look at really how [76:08] honestly how are we doing? Are we seeing [76:10] the impact that we expected? You have an [76:12] opportunity as an exec to pull the chute [76:14] or like like stop the project if it [76:16] doesn't feel like it's having that [76:17] impact. And uh and we've thought about [76:21] it. Now I might present these ideas and [76:23] have someone say, "Cool, but actually [76:27] there's this way bigger business impact [76:29] that I need you to go focus on." like [76:30] yes, we have 4% customer card [76:32] abandonment, but it turns out, you know, [76:35] top of funnel, we're losing all of our [76:37] customers right now because search isn't [76:38] working because AI took over the world. [76:40] Like, we need to go focus on that [76:41] instead. What I was that's great. I [76:44] didn't have that context when I came to [76:45] this discussion. I shouldn't feel bad [76:47] about the need to go redirect somewhere [76:49] else. I mean, it would have been nice to [76:50] know that earlier, but now I know it and [76:51] I can go do something with it, right? [76:53] But laying this out. So that's like the [76:56] weird option that you know that's going [76:58] to come up that you didn't bring to the [76:59] table. But laying this out and then [77:01] having or having someone say [77:04] actually I'm 100% convinced let's go all [77:07] in because you know it's not worth being [77:09] cautious is also possible right or can [77:13] we take option three and get it done in [77:14] less time like what would it take to do [77:15] that and there's lots of conversation [77:17] that you can have about this because [77:19] it's not we do this or we don't. [77:23] what not doing it looks like is [77:24] understood and what doing it looks like [77:27] um is is understood. All right, we have [77:30] about 60 seconds left. So, I am going to [77:33] skip this last poll. I'll just leave it [77:35] up here so that you can think about it [77:36] for yourself. Um and uh because what I [77:41] want you to take away is that you should [77:44] think about those things and think about [77:45] structuring, but think about how [77:47] decisions get made in your organization, [77:48] how executives want to be involved in [77:50] those decisions. particularly this list [77:52] of folks that you feel like you need to [77:53] have buyin from like how do they think [77:56] how would they want to be involved and [77:57] then the last thing I'm going to do is [77:59] just [78:01] because I can get this perspective which [78:04] is how are you feeling now and if you [78:07] want to just throw some comments into [78:09] the uh into the chat at the same time um [78:12] that would be that would be awesome [78:16] um [78:18] still nobody in five maybe Next time, [78:21] come to a lead dev conference. We'll do [78:23] this in person. We can talk more about [78:25] it. Bring me your problems. Um, see if I [78:28] can help you. Um, [78:32] awesome. [78:34] All right, I'm going to end that one [78:35] because we're at time. Uh, hopefully [78:37] that's helpful to y'all. It's been great [78:40] hanging out with you. Hope you have a [78:41] great rest of your day. And, uh, [78:47] yeah, I'll leave it at that. All right. [78:49] I'm not going to type in the chat, but [78:51] uh you're all very welcome. Uh it's been [78:53] fun to hang out and uh come to another [78:56] one or come to a conference. As I said, [78:58] uh do some workshops in person. They're [78:59] all super fun. All right. [79:03] Thanks y'all.  📄 **Full text:** ![[Full Document Contents/Articles/How to Get Leadership Buy-in for Technical Initiatives.md|How to Get Leadership Buy-in for Technical Initiatives by YouTube]] ## Highlights - with other people. Um, and then we'll talk about this specifically a little bit later, but um, that's my world and my world has been consistent for a really long time. So um, you know, some people some people end up working a lot more different organizations and maybe have different exposure. So, it's something to to keep in mind as we um as we talk through this. So, I'm not going to read you this slide, but a couple things that I think are also worth highlighting. Um, everyone has a boss. It's kind of a common saying uh that we have at CircleCI. So, even as an ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01kqzfjx9v3q6j1jtw98fzwesx)) - Tags: 👻 ai highlighted - in your organization and how to figure out what what matters in your organization um and then a few tips on putting it all into practice and leave some time at the end uh for additional questions and discussion if there if there is any. So um I guess I said a lot of this already everything is open for your feedback along the way. Um, and this is really like for folks who feel like they have a good sense of things that need to happen, but they struggle sometimes to to make that happen. Now, a ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01kqzfjxah2wr23fvw4m67phdd)) - Tags: 👻 ai highlighted - lot of what we'll be talking about here is about communication. There's really two parts to this though in my mind. One, yes, it's important to be able to communicate and um and express the value of things that you're thinking about, but two, it's really important to listen. um you know the thing that you're proposing might not actually be the right thing for the organization and by listening and sort of paying attention to signs of what's happening in the organization the feedback that you're getting um you know you'll have the opportunity to figure out and then ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01kqzfjxb34qe08ncjgww6jt1d)) - Tags: 👻 ai highlighted - tune right your goal is not always it may never be to get permission to do the thing you want to do your goal is to figure out what the most impactful thing will be for the organization and then drive that right so listening and taking feedback is is a big part of that process Okay. So, uh I'm going to kick things off um again in the framing of sort of proposals and getting work done uh with a just to get a sense of of everybody that's out there. Um I'm going to launch ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01kqzfjxbyyvb7j0yrxhr9samp)) - Tags: 👻 ai highlighted - uh, is often not the path to success. Um, you know, within your domain, you might be able to to have people work a little bit more the way that you want, but then if you're if you're presenting to stakeholders, you know, presenting in a manner that allows them to get the information they want is usually the goal. Um, I'm going to take a look at one more here. Yeah. Okay. So, uh, I'm looking at Albert's comment. uh not confident because most of the time when I propose something it doesn't seem to get get anywhere. So that's the goal of this. Um ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01kqzfjxdecszgztdmrs18n087)) - Tags: 👻 ai highlighted - proposals. And again I I'm thinking about things that might be bigger right we're trying to do a big thing therefore we've written up some reasoning and some documentation justification. Maybe we're presenting at a meeting. Um, that's not always the case. Sometimes these things are very lightweight just in your, you know, in your standup or your sprint planning or whatever it might be. I think we should work on this. I think we should work on this. It's debate between EM and PM or engineers and product managers, whatever. Um, you know, the ([View Highlight](https://read.readwise.io/read/01kqzfjxf9wzp92j0r4fgx8z37)) - Tags: 👻 ai highlighted