Recap over my month-long 1:1 experiment

I concluded my month-long 1:1 experiment with Korean engineers last week. Of 16 people that signed up, I ended up talking to 5. I learned three lessons.

First, this format scales linearly. Sixteen hours a month was the most I could spend without affecting my work or my personal life. I loved talking 1:1, but it is also very time-intensive.

Second, the attendance was poor. Many people (11 out of 16) didn’t show up, so I ended up wasting valuable opportunities to talk to someone else. I was so disappointed. I hope this could be solved by adjusting my availabilities and sending notifications.

Finally, most conversations revolved around these three topics: how to become a “Senior Engineer,” how to solve technical problems they face at work, and how to find jobs abroad.

I am planning another month-long experiment at the moment and will share it next week.

Empathetic Persuasion

One bad habit of mine is to share materials to make a point instead of making a point myself. But my attempts usually weren’t successful despite the merits of those materials. I wondered why people didn’t see the “light.” But, recently, why sharing articles, reports, or some data rarely persuades anyone clicked in my head.

Persuasion and following commitment do not originate from our rational mind especially if the problem space is complex and the benefits and the costs are not obvious. Rather, they happen at the emotional level. So you change behaviors when you have others feel your pain.

For example, if I want to avoid slow review turnaround time and resulting big pull requests, the best way to persuade is to vividly describe how I feel that longer review cycles slow down my projects.

It is not easy to do, I know. I also keep forgetting this. But next time I feel the urge to share an article, I will take a step back and think about the pain I have at the moment.

English as Second Language Colleagues

Recently I was appalled to hear that my friend, who is a software engineer, was denied an internal transfer because his potential manager did not want a non-native English speaker on his team. As a native Korean speaker myself, it was unsettling to hear such a story. I thought that in this day and age, especially at Silicon Valley, we have figured out how to work together with those from different backgrounds.

I realize I don’t see many conversations around how this lack of fluency impacts some of us. I suspect that’s because most writers and speakers are already fluent in their languages. So we don’t talk about this issue and put the onus on the individuals.

We can’t expect people who spent most of their lives in different languages to understand all connotations and cultural subtext. It is not going to happen no matter how hard they try. Even some native speakers have a hard time communicating well. If we believe that communication is a two-way street, we have to meet in the middle.

Yes, I get that it makes communication more difficult. But we, collectively speaking, hired each of us because everyone was deemed qualified to do the job. Then, it is on all of us to create an environment where we all can be successful.

How? I admit I don’t have a great idea. But I will start by setting up 1:1s to build the relationship and the context. That will provide a sometimes necessary bridge for the lapses. If I notice how well or badly we communicate, I will share that too. And I will always try to remember that none of us is perfect. Language proficiency, or the lack thereof, is just another imperfection some of us have.

Promise.any and Promise.allSettled

One benefit of Javascript proposal process is that there are always new things to learn and to make things more interesting. Promise.any and Promise.allSettled are not revolutionary but they will enable a new, more concise way to code. You can read more about them from here.

A caveat I found is that Promise.allSettled will never reject. It does make sense but at first I found myself thinking, “so when does it reject and what does it reject with?” I am interested to see how this behavior will be typed in Typescript.

Don’t Just Link, Summarize

This came up during a meeting to review how we organize our work (basically JIRA).

In this day and age, everything is linkable; whether it be a Slack thread, a Zendesk ticket or a Google Doc. So in order to give “context,” it is tempting to just throw a link in a conversation. But you can do more than that.

I wouldn’t say linking does not have its own value because discovery is a real problem. However, every one of us is overloaded with information. We can’t be expected to go down every rabbit hole of links. So, help us out a little. Give us a link, and summarize it a little for us: What’s in it? Why do you think this context is useful? This will save us good 10-20 minute for every link and we will appreciate you going extra mile for us.

When there is only one single-line text input field in a form, the user agent should accept Enter in that field as a request to submit the form.HTML Spec

I was looking into a bug that an embedded form would die due to the security restriction when you press enter inside the input. It turns out this random behavior was causing the issue 🤷

(I concede that we should handle form submit properly though)