Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Let's circle back to this question.

It starts well, with "X is causing Y", and reminds me of a framework we had at one of my previous jobs - behaviour -> impact -> outcomes (or options?). It's a model to provide developmental feedback, but can be useful to frame other situations. In this case:

"System X is currently way behind our target uptime. As you know, this was caused by the introduction of feature X which your team worked on recently. We need to get back on track and meet our SLOs before it starts impacting revenue."

Tells them everything they need to know. You shared the necessary info and actions to be taken are obvious, but adding a "we need you to focus on this and take the lead on fixing it" will not sound aggressive.

The approach you mentioned is very cloudy in comparison, "driving" something is not a clear outcome, "you have context" is soft blaming. It's just a very polished "it's your fault, fix your shit", and it would sound exactly like that to me. It's precisely the kind of beating around the bush that people scoff at. The message itself can be a lot better.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: