{
  "author": {
    "name": "Dylan Fitzgerald",
    "url": "https://dylanfitzgerald.net/"
  },
  "blyg": "0.4",
  "changelog": [
    {
      "at": "2022-07-20T03:13:00Z",
      "note": "Imported from the Ctrl+Shift archive",
      "version": 1
    }
  ],
  "content_hash": "sha256:10eaa4624d86970ef0d06b0b3a3a471b1a977dfae0cb27e315707ed56a4de52b",
  "content_html": "\u003ch1\u003eOptimize \u0026#34;good feels\u0026#34; for what matters\u003c/h1\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWhat kind of \u0026ldquo;complete\u0026rdquo; feels most satisfying for the folks on your team?\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIt doesn\u0026rsquo;t even have to be about explicit metrics or rewards, though those will certainly have an effect\u0026ndash;but if you were an individual contributor, would you feel best about clearing off your own plate, or about collaborating with one other person to get both of your stuff shipped, or about seeing an entire project or workstream brought to a successful close?\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThere\u0026rsquo;s a balance to be pursued here; both the individuated and communal approaches have their tradeoffs.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe upside of encouraging individual \u0026ldquo;task done\u0026rdquo; accomplishments to be rewarding is mostly about frequency: something cut down for one person is likely smaller than a collaborative workstream, and getting a rhythm of fast wins is addictive and encouraging. It\u0026rsquo;s a nice way to keep folks engaged \u0026amp; can reduce burnout. The potential dark side is trying to judge individuals\u0026rsquo; efficacy by widgets created per unit time; if you\u0026rsquo;re not running an assembly line, this is probably counterproductive for you at best.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAside from the smallest of organizations, though, the things you deliver that matter are the result of a series of specialists working together\u0026ndash;not a single person checking off a single task. And if you (even unintentionally!) cause \u0026ldquo;finishing \u003cspan class=\"underline\"\u003emy\u003c/span\u003e work\u0026rdquo; to feel better than \u0026ldquo;finishing \u003cspan class=\"underline\"\u003eour\u003c/span\u003e work\u0026rdquo;, the temptation is for folks to ship something before it\u0026rsquo;s optimized for the next person that\u0026rsquo;ll have to work with it.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFor example: in a product-led organization, do product engineers feel they\u0026rsquo;re accomplishing more if they create and populate general descriptions for eight new features, or if they work with folks that understand the customer needs and delivery limitations to deeply refine a single feature description before anyone even decides whether it\u0026rsquo;s worth working on?\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe \u0026ldquo;pursuit of balance\u0026rdquo; here is continual\u0026ndash;your team probably doesn\u0026rsquo;t have the ideal balance for this today, and even if they do, it\u0026rsquo;s likely to be in flux over time. So keep an eye out, and consider: what feels most rewarding? and what overall purpose does that best serve?\u003c/p\u003e\n",
  "content_md": "# Optimize \"good feels\" for what matters\n\nWhat kind of \"complete\" feels most satisfying for the folks on your team?\n\nIt doesn't even have to be about explicit metrics or rewards, though those will certainly have an effect--but if you were an individual contributor, would you feel best about clearing off your own plate, or about collaborating with one other person to get both of your stuff shipped, or about seeing an entire project or workstream brought to a successful close?\n\nThere's a balance to be pursued here; both the individuated and communal approaches have their tradeoffs.\n\nThe upside of encouraging individual \"task done\" accomplishments to be rewarding is mostly about frequency: something cut down for one person is likely smaller than a collaborative workstream, and getting a rhythm of fast wins is addictive and encouraging. It's a nice way to keep folks engaged \u0026amp; can reduce burnout. The potential dark side is trying to judge individuals' efficacy by widgets created per unit time; if you're not running an assembly line, this is probably counterproductive for you at best.\n\nAside from the smallest of organizations, though, the things you deliver that matter are the result of a series of specialists working together--not a single person checking off a single task. And if you (even unintentionally!) cause \"finishing \u003cspan class=\"underline\"\u003emy\u003c/span\u003e work\" to feel better than \"finishing \u003cspan class=\"underline\"\u003eour\u003c/span\u003e work\", the temptation is for folks to ship something before it's optimized for the next person that'll have to work with it.\n\nFor example: in a product-led organization, do product engineers feel they're accomplishing more if they create and populate general descriptions for eight new features, or if they work with folks that understand the customer needs and delivery limitations to deeply refine a single feature description before anyone even decides whether it's worth working on?\n\nThe \"pursuit of balance\" here is continual--your team probably doesn't have the ideal balance for this today, and even if they do, it's likely to be in flux over time. So keep an eye out, and consider: what feels most rewarding? and what overall purpose does that best serve?",
  "created": "2022-07-20T03:13:00Z",
  "id": "4qy36zvr408d94pq2erbdj3evc",
  "kind": "thread",
  "media": [],
  "origin": "https://dylanfitzgerald.net/blyg/",
  "page": "https://dylanfitzgerald.net/blog/optimize_good_feels_for_what_matters/",
  "transclusions": [],
  "updated": "2022-07-20T03:13:00Z",
  "version": 1
}