письмо Кевина

Kevin S.
Fri, Dec 4, 5:49 PM (17 hours ago)
to me

Vlad,

Thanks for taking the time to have such a long conversation Wednesday night. It was useful to reset our progress over the previous number of weeks, and I wanted to summarize some of what we discussed.

I am still seeing some significant gaps between the impact I am seeing from your work and the expectations that we have for an engineer in the role of LMTS on our team. I want to support you in clarifying these expectations, and in identifying and removing any obstacles you might be encountering, to ensure that we have you in a position that is a good match for your skills and interests.

We discussed some of the feedback you had previously shared about feeling isolated and "alien" from the team, which is definitely something that is a concern to hear.
We talked about how you don't feel that people are consulting you regularly for their code reviews, and that you are not getting rapid responses on your code review requests, aside for perhaps from Mahesh. Some suggestions we came up with included continuing to reach out to the whole team, letting me know if needed reviews are not getting responses, and moving forward ensuring you are working on stories closer to the main stream of development. In addition, we discussed how I have gotten feedback from multiple people about resistance to implementing their suggestions in code reviews in the past, which could contribute to reluctance to provide open feedback.
We also covered the feeling you have that people are not listening to your suggestions for technical directions, for example around using mock clocks or removing "fake" tests. We talked about a number of different ways to lobby for support and constructively influence the technical discussion, including reaching out one on one, leveraging architects to align on best practices and priority, etc. Another important theme that we discussed was ensuring that we are judicious with how and where we invest our energies - what is the biggest bang for the buck, what are the areas of highest risk of impact, and so forth - and helping to be in alignment as a team so we are all pulling in the same direction. This is especially important in the area of making a bigger impact as a technical leader on the team.
You had brought up specific concerns about people giving inconsistent feedback, for example around the areas where we might need to have CCX review of user-visible exception messages, where you expressed you felt reviewers had inconsistent or "novel" suggestions. We talked about some specific examples that I felt were similar to these suggestions you were receiving, such as the current exception message work Meena is doing, but if you see this continue please reach out to me and we can discuss.
Finally we talked about feedback you had received from previous management about not giving enough updates on the state of work in GUS work items, and how that could contribute to people not being aware of the work you are doing and contributions that you are making. Using shared team tools such as GUS to have updated status and projection of remaining work can be very helpful in understanding progress and aligning to priorities.

We also spent a lot of time covering areas of focus that I am hoping to see progress from you, which is the key reason we have been following this informal coaching process these last few months. Some of the most important areas here (highlighted in the One-on-One guide we have been reviewing) included:
Effective agile execution for work in the release (Quality Delivery and Agile Execution) - specifically the concern about setting goals for what work should be accomplished in a given time (user stories and bugs we are calling out in each sprint as we do planning). Doing effective decomposition of the user stories assigned into achievable chunks, ensuring we are reaching Definition of Ready and Definition of Done milestones for our work, and tracking progress on those chunks will all be helpful to make both progress and sticking points more clear to the whole team.
Closer engagement with the rest of the team, as a mechanism to increase opportunities to positively influence the technical direction of the team. We will focus as we are planning out V6 work to choose areas that will allow exploration and collaboration within the team and beyond.
Continued focus on establishing needs and tangible plans for Performance Improvement in your role as Performance Representative for the team.

It is critical that we are able to see improvement in these, and I am hopeful that our discussions are able to help in this. For next steps, I would like to continue to have weekly reviews of the goals we are setting and try to reflect our progress there. Please let me know if there is anything from our conversation that was not reflected here, or if you feel there are other areas that I can help in our shared efforts.

Thanks,
Kevin
===============

Как я понимаю, здесь намекают, что я на PIP. Или не на PIP. Или не намекают. Потому что я не понимаю, о какой performance вообще идет речь, например, нашего продукта или меня лично.

Разумеется, попрекать в плохой performance человека, чей вклад в codebase больше, чем вклад всех остальных в команде, вообще-то довольно тупо.

Feel free to study all this closely and come up with wise comments and advice. Что я вижу тут - the guy does not cooperate.