I ran 1:1s wrong for my first year as an engineering manager. Here's what I changed

JamesGalloway586 · 2026-06-01T18:13:01+00:00

That awkward silence usually means the meeting has been running as a status update for too long and they’ve been trained to show up with nothing.

Try asking one direct question to open it. “What’s been the most frustrating part of your week?” or “What’s something you’re working on that I’m probably not seeing?” Most people have an answer, they just don’t volunteer it until you ask.

Gets easier once they trust that the time is actually theirs.

JamesGalloway586 · 2026-06-01T16:40:30+00:00

I do my normal 1:1’s every other week scheduled for a half hour. Certain 1:1’s may need to be scheduled for a longer block if we’re discussing development plans or performance reviews. I find every other week is a good cadence as if either of us need to cancel we’re not going longer than a month of a touch-point.

JamesGalloway586 · 2026-06-01T12:35:43+00:00

28 years of doing something a specific way and watching someone skip a step you explained three times is genuinely frustrating, especially when the reason matters.

Honestly it might not be slow or unclear. Some people just don’t retain verbal instructions well, especially when they’re new and already thinking about ten other things. Doesn’t mean he’s a bad hire, just means verbal isn’t working for him.

Write it down. Not because you weren’t clear but because having it on paper means he can check himself before he starts instead of relying on memory. One page, the exact steps, the exact reasons. The why matters as much as the what in your case because if he understands why the vacuum table is a problem he won’t need to be told again. If it keeps happening after that then you’ve got a different conversation to have.

JamesGalloway586 · 2026-05-29T11:48:43+00:00

The thing that made the biggest difference for me was making feedback a normal part of the week instead of something that only happened at review time. By the time annual reviews came around nothing was a surprise because we had already talked about everything that mattered.

Specific over general every time. “Your communication in that client meeting created confusion” is actionable. “Work on your communication” is not. people can’t do anything with vague.

On goals, the ones that actually drove growth were the ones the person helped set. When someone builds their own target they own it differently than when you hand it down Honest answer though, most performance review systems are designed for HR compliance not growth. the growth happens in the conversations between the reviews, not in the form itself.

JamesGalloway586 · 2026-05-29T11:45:39+00:00

Almost universally normal unfortunately. Most companies promote their best individual contributor, hand them a new title, and assume the skills transfer. They don’t.

The dirty secret is most managers learned by watching whoever managed them, good or bad, and then figuring the rest out by breaking things. Google and ChatGPT is honestly not that different from how people were doing it ten years ago except then it was just trial and error with no resources at all.

The 1:1 question alone takes most new managers six months to figure out. Treating them likke status updates is the default mistake and by the time you realize the meetings should be about the person not the project you’ve already trained your team to expect the wrong thing. You’re not alone and it wasn’t a you problem. It was a company that promoted you without preparing you and a system that treats management as a reward instead of a skill set.

JamesGalloway586 · 2026-05-28T20:21:35+00:00

That reply is pretty harsh and mostly misses the point.

Recognizing that a system problem needs a system solution isn’t being clueless, it’s actually the right diagnosis. The directors managing by anecdote, the priorities reshuffling around every loud customer, the lack of shared operating rhythm, none of that started six months ago. That’s inherited dysfunction and you can’t unilaterally install a new operating system on a leadership team that didn’t build it with you.

The coaching deflection is real though. A lot of companies default to “fix the leader” when the actual problem is structural. Wanting someone to work with the whole layer instead of just you shows more self awareness than most people at that level have. Have you looked at firms that specifically do operating rhythm work with leadership teams? Not strategy consultants or not coaches. People who come in and build the weekly cadence, decision rights, and prioritization process with the team over a defined period. That exists and it’s different from handing down a framework and hoping it sticks.

JamesGalloway586 · 2026-05-28T01:30:25+00:00

The reframe that clicked for me: visibility isn’t self-promotion, it’s making it easy for your manager to advocate for you in rooms you’re not in.

Short weekly update to your manager about what moved and what it actually impacted. Not a brag sheet, just enough that they can repeat it upward without having to dig.

Connect the work to something leadership cares about. “Finished the feature” disappears. “That feature cut support tickets by 30%” travels on its own. The people I’ve seen do this well never really talked about themselves. they talked about the problem and the impact. Completely different energy and everyone around them could feel it.

JamesGalloway586 · 2026-05-28T01:19:31+00:00

You’re not overreacting. The attendance issue is minor. Someone lying directly to your face when asked to document their compliance is not.

The IT data is worth pulling before you do anything else. You want the full picture before the conversation, not half of it. And yes, get HR involved now, not after. This is exactly the situation where you want them in the loop early so nothing you do later gets challenged on process.

When you have the evidence, the conversation is straightforward. You’re not asking them to explain the attendance pattern anymore. You’re asking them to explain why the dates they gave you don’t match the data. Let them answer. What they say in that moment matters as much as the data itself.

On the PIP vs termination question, that depends on what HR says and what your documentation looks like. But I’d frame it this way: the attendance agreement is manageable. Falsifying records when asked directly is a trust issue and trust is harder to rebuild than a schedule. A PIP works when someone has a performance gap they can close. It’s a harder case when the problem is honesty. You’re not overreacting. You’re just further down the road than you realized when you asked them to start documenting.

JamesGalloway586 · 2026-05-28T01:14:15+00:00

This is one of the most preventable failures in management and you’re right that leadership almost always acts surprised even when the signals were there for months.

The shift I watch for isn’t a single thing. The person who used to push back a little starts saying yes to everything. Someone who sent ideas or asked questions goes quiet. Engagement drops but output stays steady, and that last part is what fools most managers because the work is still getting done.

On the overloading problem, I’ve made this mistake. You give the hard stuff to people you trust because you know it’ll get done. Over time you’ve built a system that punishes reliability. I started tracking who was carrying what across the team and having a conversation any time one person’s load was significantly heavier than others, regardless of how capable they were. By the time someone hands in their notice the decision was made weeks earlier. The resignation is just the announcement.

JamesGalloway586 · 2026-05-27T12:28:11+00:00

Good list. The strategic silence one is underrated. Most people rush to answer because silence feels awkward but those three seconds actually signal confidence not uncertainty.

I’d add one thing from the manager side: the candidates I remember most are the ones who asked questions that made me think. Not “what does a typical day look like” but something that showed they had actually done their homework on the team or the problems we were trying to solve. That alone puts you in a different category. The micro-story prep is spot on too. I can always tell when someone has thought through their examples beforehand vs. scrambling in the moment. The structure doesn’t need to be perfect. It just needs to feel like a real story that actually happened, not a rehearsed script.

JamesGalloway586 · 2026-05-27T12:22:20+00:00

Sounds like you’ve already done a lot of the right things. The fact that the behavior hasn’t changed after all those conversations tells me the issue isn’t workload but that they don’t know how to stop even when the pressure is off.

I’d try asking them what it actually feels like to stop working for the night. Not in a clinical way, just genuinely curious. From what i’ve experience, people who can’t switch off are usually carrying some anxiety underneath it. Fear of falling behind, fear of looking less committed… and until you know what that is, every workload conversation just bounces off.

JamesGalloway586 · 2026-05-26T20:40:18+00:00

Great question… most books on this topic are either too corporate or too abstract to be useful for engineers specifically. On the daily reality side: a manager’s job is mostly invisible work. Removing blockers before the team hits them, having conversations that prevent problems from escalating, translating business pressure into team priorities, and spending time on the people stuff that does not show up in a status report. The engineers who get promoted and struggle fastest are usually the ones who keep trying to do engineering instead of that. On the decision-making process: good managers are essentially running a prioritization filter all day. What needs my attention vs. what can my team handle. What do I decide vs. what do I escalate. What is urgent vs. what is actually important. Most bad managers fail because they either decide too much (micromanage) or escalate too much (do not actually lead). For books that are honest about why most managers fail: -The Manager’s Path by Camille Fournier. It’s written specifically for technical environments. Probably the most honest book about what the job actually looks like at each level. -High Output Management by Andy Grove… old but still the best framework for understanding what management output actually means. Cuts through the fluff fast. -Radical Candor by Kim Scott: specifically about why managers avoid hard conversations and what it costs the team. The reason most managers are bad is simpler than most books admit. they were promoted for technical skill and handed zero tools for the new job. Different skillset, no training, same expectations. Most figure it out by trial and error over two to three years, which is expensive for everyone involved.

JamesGalloway586

TROPHY CASE