Next I’ll … have a sleep

Sometimes, it’s time to break the cycle.

I’ve had a crazy week and a half, and I have another crazy week or two coming. Last night (as so often, it seems) I didn’t get as much sleep as I would have liked – for various reasons, the main of which includes an anxious 9 year old basset hound – and I have a busy day. So many important things to do. And they’re all important, and I need to do all of them. Of course. That’s what I’ve been allowing my brain to tell me, anyway.

So far, I’ve had breakfast, brushed my teeth, shaved, put the washing out, seen two kids off to school, got dressed, and walked the dogs with my wife (who’s about to head off to spend a couple of days with family – she’s been busy, too). I could (should?) get right down to the work that I need to do today. That’s the work that I’ve not already looked at – emails, documents, spreadsheets. It’s just gone 8am, and I don’t officially start my work day till 10:00am (I allegedly finish at 6:00pm).

But I’m going to have a sleep – just an hour, probably no more. The mountain of work (as it seems) isn’t going to go away, but it’s not going to get appreciably worse. And if I don’t take a bit of time, it’ll feel worse, I’ll probably do a worse job of managing it, and I’ll feel worse. An hour, I know, will make all the difference.

The fact that I can do this is one of the benefits of working from home. I’m not going to say “temptations”, because I don’t see it as a bad thing. This is partly because I’m not sure it would be as much as an issue if it weren’t for the fact that I’m working from home in the first place. There’s no easy dividing line between work and home, and there’s no commute to force me to take some time out and do something else, either. I can (and do) start checking my email at 6:05am, and only stop at, well, far later than I should have done. To be claer, I’m not asking for sympathy, but trying to identify the problem, own up, and encourage other people to take it seriously, too.

Sometimes, it’s time to break the cycle, or just realise that a cycle is about to start. We don’t want to be grumpy (grumpier?) with our family, or quietly seethe at our colleagues or work acquaintances, or resent the people on social media who seem to have it all covered (they don’t, at least most of them). We need to take a break, and that’s what I’m about to do. I have work support, and I don’t need to do everything myself, right now. It’s time for a sleep. See you in a while. In fact, do tune it next week: there will be some exciting news.

Eat, Sleep, Wake (nothing but…)

At least I’m not checking my email every minute of every hour of every day.

If your mind just filled in the ellipsis (the “…”) in the title of this article with “you”, then you may have been listening to the Bombay Bicycle Club, a British band. I’ve recently seen them live, and then were good – what’s more, it’s a great (and very catch) song. “You” is probably healthy. If, on the other hand, your mind filled in the ellipsis with “work”, then, well we – or rather, you – have a problem.

When I wake up in the morning, one of the first things I do – like many of you, my dear readers, I suspect – is reach for my mobile phone. One of the first things I do on unlocking it is check my email. Specifically, my work email. Like many of us, I find it convenient to keep my work email account on my personal phone. I enjoy the flexibility of not being tied to my desk throughout the working day, and fancy myself important enough that I feel that people may want to contact me during the day and expect a fairly quick reply. Equally, I live in the UK and work with people across CET (an hour earlier than me) to Eastern US time (5 hours after me), often correspond with people on Pacific US time (8 hours after me), and sometimes in other timezones, too. In order to be able to keep up with them, and not spend 12 hours or so at my desk, I choose to be able to check for incoming emails wherever I am – which is wherever my phone is. So I check email through the day – and to almost last thing at night.

This is not healthy. I know this – as do my family. It is also not required. I know this – as do my colleagues. In fact, my colleagues and my family all know that it’s neither healthy nor required. I also know that I have a mildly addictive personality, and that, if I allowed myself to do so, I would drown in my work, always checking email, always writing new documents, always reviewing other people’s work, always, always, always on my phone: eat, sleep, wake…

In order to stop myself doing this, I make myself do other things. These aren’t things I don’t want to do – it’s just that I would find excuses not to do them if I could. I run (slowly and badly, up to 5 kilometres) 2-3 times a week. I read (mainly, but not exclusively, science fiction). I game (Elite Dangerous, TitanFall 2 (when it’s not being DDoSed), Overwatch, Civilization (mainly V, Call to Power), and various games on my phone), I listen to, and occasionally watch, cricket. And recently, I’ve restarted a hobby from my early teenage years: I’m assembling a model airplane (badly, though not as badly as I did when I was younger). I force myself to take time to do these things. I’m careful to ensure that they don’t interfere with work calls, and that I have time to get “actual” work done. I keep block of time where I can concentrate on longer tasks, requiring bouts of concentration. But I know that my other work actually benefits when I force myself to take time out, because a few minutes away from the screen, at judicious points, allows me to step back and recharge a bit.

I know that I’m a little odd in having lots of activities – hobbies, I guess – that I enjoy (I’ve only listed a few above). Other people concentrate on one, and rather than interspersing blocks of non-work time into their day, have these blocks of time scheduled outside their core working hours. One friend I know cycles for hours at a time (his last Strava entry was a little over 100km (60 miles) and a little under 3 and a half hours) – an activity which would be difficult to fit in between meetings for most working routines. Others make the most of their commute (yes, some people do commute still) to listen to podcasts, for instance. What’s in common here is a commitment to the practice of not working.

I realise that being able to do this is a luxury not shared by all. I likewise realise that I work in an industry (IT) where there is an expectation that senior people will be available at short notice for many hours of the day – something we should resist. But finding ways of not working through the day is, for me, a really important part of my working – it makes me a more attentive, better worker. I hesitate to call this “work-life balance”, because, honestly, I’m not sure that it is a balance, and I need to keep tweaking it. But at least I’m not checking my email every minute of every hour of every day.

Recruiting on ability and potential

Let’s not just hire people who look and think and talk (and take exams) like us

This is one of those more open-ended posts, in that I don’t have any good answers, but I’ve got a bunch of questions. I’d love to have feedback, comments and thoughts if you have any.

This week, it turns out is “results week” in the UK. Here, there are two major sets of exams which most students take: GCSEs and A levels. The former generally are taken by 16 year olds, with around 8-12 in total, and the latter by 18 year olds, with 2-4 in total (3 being the strong median). A level results are one of the major criteria for entry into universities, and GCSE results typically determine what A levels students will take, and therefore have an impact on university course choice in the future. In normal years, A level results are release a week before the GCSE results, but (Covid having messed things up), A level results day is Tuesday, 2021-08-10, and GCSE results day is Thursday, 2021-08-12.

Both GCSEs and A levels are determined, in most cases, mainly by examination, with even subjects like PE (Physical Education), Dance and Food Technology having fairly large examination loads. This was not always the case, particularly for GCSEs, which, when they were launched in the mid 1980s, had much larger coursework components than now, aiming to provide opportunities to those who may have learned retained lots of information, but for whom examinations are not a good way of showing their expertise or acquired knowledge base.

At this point, I need to come out with an admission: exams suit me just fine. I’ve always been able to extricate information from my memory in these sorts of situations and put it down on paper, whether that’s in a school setting, university setting or professional setting (I took the CISSP examination ages ago). But this isn’t true for everybody. Exams are very artificial situations, and they just don’t work for many people. The same is true for other types of attempts to extract information out of people, such as classic coding tests. Now, I know that coding tests, when designed and applied well, can do a good job in finding out how people think, as well as what they know – in fact, that should be true for many well-designed examinations – but not only are they not always well administered, but the very context in which they are taken can severely disadvantage folks whose preferred mechanism of coding is more solitary and interactive than performative.

A family friend, currently applying for university places, expressed surprise the other day that some of the Computer Science courses for which he was applying didn’t require any previous experience of programming. I reflected that for some candidates, access to computing resources might be very limited, putting them at a disadvantage. I’ve made a similar argument when discussing how to improve diversity in security (see Is homogeneity bad for security?): we mustn’t make assumptions about people’s potential based on their previous ability to access resources which would allow that ability to be expressed and visible.

What does this have to do with recruitment, particularly? Everything. I’ve been involved in recruiting some folks recently, and the more I think about it, the more complex I realise the task is. Finding the right people – the people who will grow into roles, and become really strong players – is really tricky. I’m not just talking about finding candidates and encouraging them to apply (both difficult tasks in their own rights), but choosing from the candidates that do apply. I don’t want to just people who examine well (looking solely at their academic grades), people who perform well (who shine at coding exercises), people who interview well (those who are confident in face-to-face or video conference settings). I want to find people who have the ability to work in a team, grow the projects they’re working on, contribute creatively to what they’re doing. That may include people who fall apart in exams, who freeze during coding exercises, or whose social anxiety leads them to interview “badly”.

I’m not sure how to address these problems completely, but there are some things we can try. Here are my thoughts, and I’d love to hear more:

  1. Look beyond exams, and rate experience equally with academic attainment
  2. Accommodate different working styles
  3. Be aware that the candidate may not share your preferred interaction style
  4. Think “first language” and work with those whose native language is not yours
  5. Look beyond the neurotypical

None of these is rocket science, and I hope that the recent changes in working habits brought around by the Covid pandemic have already started people thinking about these issues, but let’s work harder to find the right people – not just the people who look and think and talk (and take exams) just like us.

Intentional laziness

Identifying a time and then protecting that time is vital.

Over the past year[1], since Covid-19 struck us, one of the things that has been a notable is … well, the lack of notable things. Specifically, we’ve been deprived of many of the occasions that we’d use to mark our year, or to break the day-to-day grind: family holidays, the ability to visit a favourite restaurant, festivals, concerts, sporting events, even popping round to enjoy drinks or a barbecue at a friend’s house. The things we’d look forward to as a way of breaking the monotony of working life – or even of just providing something a bit different to a job we actively enjoy – have been difficult to come by.

This has led to rather odd way of being. It’s easy either to get really, really stuck into work tasks (whether that’s employed work, school work, voluntary work or unpaid work such as childcare or household management), or to find yourself just doing nothing substantive for long stretches of time. You know: just scrolling down your favourite social media feed, playing random games on your phone – all the while feeling guilty that you’re not doing what you should be doing. I’ve certainly found myself doing the latter from time to time when I feel I should be working, and have overcompensated by forcing myself to work longer hours, or to check emails at 10pm when I should get thinking about heading to bed, for instance. So, like many of us, I think, I get stuck into one of two modes:

  1. messing around on mindless tasks, or
  2. working longer and harder than I should be.

The worse thing about the first of these is that I’m not really relaxing when I’m doing them, partly because much of my mind is on things which I feel I ought to be doing.

There are ways to try to fix this, one of which is to be careful about the hours you work or the tasks you perform, if you’re more task-oriented in the role you do, and then to set yourself non-work tasks to fill up the rest of the time. Mowing the lawn, doing the ironing, planting bulbs, doing the shopping, putting the washing out – the tasks that need to get done, but which you might to prefer to put off, or which you just can’t quite find time to do because you’re stuck in the messing/working cycle. This focus on tasks that actually need to be done, but which aren’t work (and divert you from the senseless non-tasks) has a lot to be said for it, and (particularly if you live with other people). It’s likely to provide social benefits as well (you’ll improve the quality of the environment you live in, or you’ll just get shouted at less), but it misses something: it’s not “down-time”.

By down-time, I mean time set aside specifically not to do things. It’s a concept associated with the word “Sabbath”, an Anglicisation of the Hebrew word “shabbat”, which can be translated as “rest” or “cessation”. I particularly like the second translation (though given my lack of understanding of Hebrew, I’m just going to have to accept the Internet’s word for the translation!), as the idea of ceasing what you’re doing, and making a conscious decision to do so, is something I think that it’s easy to miss. That’s true even in normal times, but with fewer markers in our lives for when to slow down and take time for ourselves – a feature of many of our lives in the world of Covid-19 – it’s all too simple just to forget, or to kid ourselves that those endless hours of brainless tapping or scrolling are actually some sort of rest for our minds and souls.

Whether you choose a whole day to rest/cease every week, set aside an hour after the kids have gone to bed, get up an hour early, give yourself half an hour over lunch to walk or cycle or do something else, it doesn’t matter. What I know I need to do (and I think it’s true of others, too), is to practice intentional laziness. This isn’t the same as doing things which you may find relaxing to some degree (I enjoy ironing, I know people who like cleaning the kitchen), but which need to be done: it’s about giving yourself permission not to do something. This can be really, really hard, particularly if you care for other people, have a long commute or a high pressure job, but it’s also really important for our longer-term well-being.

You also need to plan to be lazy. This seems counter-intuitive, at least to me, but if you haven’t set aside time and given yourself permission to relax and cease your other activities, you’ll feel guilty, and then you won’t be relaxing properly. Identifying a time to read a book, watch some low-quality boxsets, ring up a friend for a gossip on the phone or just have a “sneaky nap”, and then protecting that time is worthwhile. No – it’s more than worthwhile: it’s vital.

I’m aware, as I write this, that I’m in the very privileged position of being able to do this fairly easily[2], when for some people, it’s very difficult. Sometimes, we may need to defer these times and to plan a weekend away from the kids, a night out or an evening in front of the television for a week, or even a month or more from now. Planning it gives us something to hold on to, though: a break from the “everyday-ness” which can grind us down. But if we don’t have something to look forward to, a time that we protect, for ourselves, to be intentionally lazy, then our long-term physical, emotional and mental health will suffer.


1 – or two years, or maybe a decade. No-one seems to know.

2 – this doesn’t mean that I do, however.

Leaving space, making balance

No substantive article this week.

I had an interesting idea for an article this week (I even took a picture to illustrate it) – but it’s going to have to wait for another time. I’ve got a busy week, and a couple of (non-urgent) medical appointments which have just got in the way a bit. This is one of those times when I’ve decided to set things aside, and not add to my pile of things to do by writing a proper article.

I should be back soon: in the meantime, follow my example and consider dropping a non-critical task and give yourself some breathing space.

Acting (and coding) your age

With seniority comes perks, but it also comes with responsibilities.

I dropped a post on LinkedIn a few days ago:

I’m now 50 years old and writing the most complex code in my career (for Enarx) in a language (Rust) that I only started learning 9 months ago and I’ve just finished the first draft of a book (for Wiley). Not sure what’s going on (and I wouldn’t have believed you if you’d told me this 25 years ago). #codingtips #writing #security #confidentialcomputing #rustlang

I’ve never received such attention. Lots of comments, lots of “likes” and other reactions, lots of people wanting to connect. It was supposed to be a throw-away comment, and I certainly had no intention either to boast or elicit sympathy: I am genuinely surprised by all of the facts mentioned – including my age, given that I feel that I’m somewhere between 23 and 31 (both primes, of course).

I remember in my mid- to late-twenties thinking “this business stuff is pretty simple: why don’t the oldies move aside and let talented youngsters[1] take over, or at least provide them some inspired advice?” Even at the time I realised that this was a little naive, and that there is something to be said for breadth of experience and decades of acquired knowledge, but I’m pretty certain that this set of questions has been asked by pretty much every generation since Ogg looked at the failings in his elders’ flint spear-head knapping technique and later got into a huff when his mum wouldn’t let him lead the mammoth hunt that afternoon.

Why expertise matters

Sadly (for young people), there really are benefits associated with praxis (actually doing things), even if you’ve absorbed all of the theory (and you haven’t, which is one of the things you learn with age). Of course, there’s also the Dunning-Kruger effect, which is a cognitive bias (Trust you? I can’t trust myself.) which leads the inexperienced to overestimate their own ability and experts to underestimate theirs.

Given this, there are some interesting and bizarre myths around about software/coding being a “young man’s game”. Leaving aside the glaring gender bias in that statement[2], this is rather odd. I know some extremely talented over-40 and over-50 software engineers, and I’m sure that you can think of quite a few if you try. There are probably a few factors at play here:

  • the lionisation of the “start-ups in the garage” young (mainly white) coders turning their company into “unicorn” trope;
  • the (over-)association of programming with mathematical ability, where a certain set of mathematicians are considered to have done their best work in their twenties;
  • the relative scarcity of roles (particularly in organisations which aren’t tech-specific) of “individual contributor” career tracks with roles where it’s possible to rise in seniority (and pay) without managing other people;
  • a possible tendency (which I’m positing without much evidence) for a sizeable proportion of senior software folks to take a broader view of the discipline and to move into architectural roles which are required by the industry but are difficult to perform without a good grounding in engineering basics.

In my case, I moved away from writing software maybe 15 years ago, and honestly never thought I’d do any serious coding again, only to discover a gap in the project I’m working on (Enarx) which nobody else had the time to fill, but which I felt merited some attention. That, and a continuous desire to learn new things, which had led me to starting to learn Rust, brought me to some serious programming, which I’ve really enjoyed.

We need old coders: people who have been around the block a few times, have made the mistakes and learned from them. People who can look at competing technologies and make reasoned decisions about which is the best fit for a project, rather than just choosing the newest and “coolest”[3].

Why old people should step aside

Having got all of the above out of my system, I’m now going to put forward an extremely important counter-argument. First, some context. I volunteer for the East of England Ambulance Service Trust as a Community First Responder, a role where I attend patients in (possible) emergency situations and work with ambulance staff, paramedics, etc.. I’ve become very interested in some of the theory around patient safety, which it turns out is currently being strongly influenced by lessons learned over the past few decades from transport safety, particularly aviation safety[5].

I need to do more study around this topic, as there are some really interesting lessons that can be applied to our sector (in fact, some are already be learned from our sector, particularly in how DevOps/WebOps respond to incidents), but there are two points that have really hit home for me this week, and which are relevant to the point at hand. They are specifically discussed with relation to high-intensity, stressful situations, but I think there’s broader applicability.

1. With experience comes expectation

While experience is enormously useful – bringing insights and knowledge that others may not have, or will find difficult to synthesise – it can also lead you down paths which are incorrect. If you’ve seen the same thing 99 times, you’re likely to assume that the 100th will be the same: bringing in other voices, including less experienced ones, allows other views to be considered, giving a better chance that the correct conclusion will be met. You increase diversity of opinion and allow alternatives to be brought into the mix. The less experience team members may be wrong, but from time to time, you’ll be wrong, and everyone will benefit from this. By allowing other people a voice, you’re also setting an example that speaking up and offering alternative views is not only acceptable, but valued. You and the team get to learn from each other, whether it’s when you’re wrong, or when you’re right, but you get to discuss with others how you came to your conclusions, and welcome their probing and questions around how you got there.

2. Sometimes you need to step aside to apply yourself elsewhere

Perhaps equally important is that sometimes, tempting as it may be to get your hands dirty and apply your expertise to a particular problem (particularly one which is possibly trivial to you), there are times when it’s best to step aside and let someone less experienced than you do it. Not only because they need the experience themselves, but also because your skills may be better applied at a systems level or dealing with other problems in other contexts (such as funding or resource management). The example sometimes given in healthcare is when a senior clinician arrives on scene at an incident: rather than their taking over the treatment of patients (however skilled the senior clinician may be), their role is to see the larger situation, to prioritise patients for treatment, assess risks to staff on scene, manage transport and the rest. Sometimes they may need to knuckle down and apply their clinical skills directly (much as senior techies may end up coding to meet a demo deadline, for instance), but most of the time, they are best deployed in stepping aside.

Conclusion

With seniority comes perks: getting to do the interesting stuff, taking decisions, having junior folks make the tea and bring the doughnuts in[6]. But it also comes with responsibilities: helping other people learn, seeing the bigger picture, giving less experienced team members the chance to make mistakes, removing barriers imposed by organisational hierarchy and getting the first round in at the pub[7]. Look back at what you were thinking about the beginning of your career, and give your successors (because they will be your successors) the chances that you were so keen for back then. Show them respect, and you (and your organisation) will benefit.


1 – I think that the “like me” is pretty implicit here, yes?

2 – which, sadly, reflects another bias in the market.

3 – there’s an important point here: many of us older folks love new shiny things just as much as the youngsters, and are aware of the problems of the old approaches and languages – but we’re also aware that there are risks and pain points associated with the new, which need to be taken into account[4].

4 – that really made me sound old, didn’t it?

5 – in large part influenced by the work of Martin Bromiley, a civil aviation pilot whose wife Elaine died in a “routine” operation in 2005 and who has worked (and is working) to help the health care sector transition to a no-blame, “just” culture around patient safety.

6 – this is a joke: if you have ever, ever find yourself in an office or team where this is the norm, and hierarchy shows in this sort of way, either get out or change that culture just as soon as you can. It’s toxic.

7 – I’m writing this in the middle of the UK’s second Covid-19 lockdown, and can barely remember what a “pub” or a “round” even is.

The importance of process (and people and rules)

If there is no process, you can throw technology at it as much as you want, but you are still likely to fail.

Those of us in Europe awoke to the news that the US electoral college have voted for Joe Biden as 46th President of the United States of America. Getting to this point has seemed (at least from the outside) to be a rather tortuous route, but from my understanding of how the US Constitution works[1], this is it: the process is complete and Joe Biden will be sworn in a President of the United States on a (probably very chilly) day next month, at the beginning of 2021. I have no intention of weighing the pros and cons of the candidates, nor even of examining the process (sometime labelled “arcane” by journalists”) by which US presidents are elected, but I do want to spend some time on the fact that there is a process, and thinking about how that works, and what supports it.

This is, first and foremost, a blog about IT security (though I have been known to post on a much wider range of issues from time to time), and so I unsurprisingly spend quite a lot of time discussing technology, but on this occasion I want to avoid doing that, as far as possible. If we look at the process for electing a US president, one of the most striking things about it, we might note, is the lack of technology. Yes, there are electronic voting machines to allow votes to be cast, yes, a myriad computers are deployed by psephologists[2] to forecast the results, but the actual process is lacking in much that we would normally think of as technology.

We often fixate on technology, but if there is no process in place to get from point A to point B, then you can throw technology at it as much as you want, but you are still likely to fail. Those points may be getting from having no president-elect to having a new president, completing a transaction to buy a house or a paperclip, hiring a new CEO or sous-chef, moving from a set of requirements to a working software program, or literally getting from a point A on a map to point B – they all require a process.

What is a process? Google, courtesy of Oxford Languages, offers the definition: a series of actions or steps taken in order to achieve a particular end. This seems like a useful description, but in the contexts we’re describing, it is the fact that the actions or steps are defined which is important. In the world of computing, we might say that there is an algorithm to be followed to complete the process. This algorithm allows a variety of things, all of which are important:

  1. the writing down and codification of the process;
  2. the allocation of different people to different roles in the process;
  3. norms, rules, regulation and/or legislation to be created to ensure the correct following of the process;
  4. the application of technology to simplify, speed up or automate parts of the process.

I don’t want to talk about point 4 particularly – I spend far too much of my time on that in most of my life – and the ways of achieving point 1 are so diverse as to defy consideration in this context, so let’s briefly discuss points 2 and 3.

Allocating people

If you have a process, you can break that process into steps, you can assign roles and responsibilities to those steps. This is useful in a variety of ways, the first of which is that you can start to scale the process by having different people working on different steps – sometimes in parallel. Imagine having one person having to count all of the votes in the US presidential election, or even having multiple people doing it, but having to do so in series: it might work, but it’s going to take way too long. Another benefit is one on which the Industrial Revolution was built: specialisation. Some people will be good at some parts of the process, and others at other parts of the process. You can increase efficiency by putting those with expertise on the right pieces of the process. A third, unrelated to efficiency, is separation of responsibilities. Sometimes, it’s important that certain people, who are experts or certified to perform a particular role, are the ones who do that. Often, it’s even more important that certain people don’t perform those roles. An example of this would be if one of the candidates in an election was the one to perform the final tally of votes and hand the result to the person making the announcement, or if they made the announcement themselves. This is equally true for other types of process: your bank does not want you to be the person who provides the final approval for your loan, and a company does not want a spouse, partner or family member to be providing sign-off for a hiring decision.

Norms, rules, regulation and legislation

In the UK, we have strong social norms around the process of queuing, and you will be subject to social (and sometimes stronger!) censure if you break them. Rules around other processes may be stronger, and sometimes regulation by an industry body or even legislation at the nation level (or multi-national level such as EU or UN) is required to safeguard the appropriate execution of a process. The ability for courts to intervene where vote-rigging may have taken place is a good example in the US election process, but legislation and regulation around anything from wiring a house to what fertilisers are allowed on particular crops provide additional levels of checking and assurance that processes are following correctly (by including censure or punishment for those who have contravened them) or can be remedied when not (through other processes such as legal review or court cases).

Legislation and regulation can be annoying, but without them (or equivalent rules and norms for other types of process), we cannot be sure of what we are getting into, or whether, if we get into it improperly, that we will ever get out of it. People support and are subject to these checks and balances, and without the combination of all of them (not forgetting the technology as well), processes are next to useless.


1 – I am not a lawyer. Nor a constitutional expert. Nor even a US citizen. Basically, do not take my word for any of this.

2 – I love this word. We should use it more often.

Taking some time

I’m going to practice what I preach, and not write.

I’m going to practice what I preach, this week, and not write a full article. I’ve had a stressful and busy few weeks, including needing to spend some extra time with the family (nothing scary or earth-shattering – we just needed some family time), and I think the best thing for me to do today is not spend time writing an article. Let me point you instead at some I’ve written in the past.

On self-care:

On security:

On trust:

Keep safe, and look after yourself, dear reader!

Silencing my voice

Just links. I didn’t write these: others did.

Just links. I didn’t write these: others did.

(Image by Pexels from Pixabay).

7 tips for managers of new home workers

You will make mistakes. You are subject to the same stresses and strains.

Many organisations and companies are coming to terms with the changes forced on them by Covid-19 (“the coronavirus”), and working out what it means to them, their employees and their work patterns. For many people who were previously in offices, it means working from home.  I wrote an article a few weeks ago called 9 tips for new home workers, and then realised that it wouldn’t just be new home workers who might be struggling, but also their managers.  If you’re reading this, then you’re probably a manager, working with people who don’t normally work from home – which may include you – so here are some tips for you, too.

1 – Communicate

Does that meeting need to be at 9am?  Do you need to have the meeting today – could it be tomorrow?  As managers, we’re used to being (or at pretending to be) the most important person in our team’s lives during the working day.  For many, that will have changed, and we become a distant second, third or fourth. Family and friends may need help and support, kids may need setting up with schoolwork, or a million other issues may come up which mean that expecting attention at the times that we expect it is just not plausible.  Investigate the best medium (or media) for communicating with each separate member of your team, whether that’s synchronous or asynchronous IM, email, phone, or a daily open video conference call, where anybody can turn up and just be present.  Be aware of your team’s needs – which you just can’t do without communicating with them – and also be aware that those needs may change over the coming weeks.

2 – Flex deadlines

Whether we like it or not, there are things more important than work deadlines at the moment, and although you may find that some people produce work as normal, others will be managing at best only “bursty” periods of work, at abnormal times (for some, the weekend may work best, for others the evenings after the kids have gone to bed).  Be flexible about deadlines, and ask your team what they think they can manage.  This may go up and down over time, and may even increase as people get used to new styles of working.  But adhering to hard deadlines isn’t going to help anybody in the long run – and we need to be ready for the long run.

3 – Gossip

This may seem like an odd one, but gossip is good for human relationships.  When you start a call, set aside some time to chat about what’s going on where the other participants are, in their homes and beyond.  This will help your team feel that you care, but also allow you to become aware of some issues before they arise. A word of caution, however: there may be times when it becomes clear in your discussions that a team-member is struggling.  In this case, you have two options. If the issue seems to be urgent, you may well choose to abandon the call (be sensitive about how you do this if it’s a multi-person call) and to spend time working with the person who is struggling, or signposting them directly to some other help.  If the issue doesn’t seem to be urgent, but threatens to take over the call, then ask the person whether they would be happy to follow up later. In the latter case, you must absolutely do that: once you have recognised an issue, you have a responsibility to help, whether that help comes directly from you or with support from somebody else.  

4 -Accommodate

Frankly, this builds on our other points: you need to be able to accommodate your team’s needs, and to recognise that they may change over time, but will also almost certainly be different from yours.  Whether it’s the setting for meetings, pets and children[1], poor bandwidth, strange work patterns, sudden unavailability or other changes, accommodating your team’s needs will make them more likely to commit to the work they are expected to do, not to mention make them feel valued, and consider you as more of a support than a hindrance to their (often drastically altered) new working lives.

5 – Forgive

Sometimes, your team may do things which feel that they’ve crossed the line – the line in “normal” times.  They may fail to deliver to a previously agreed deadline, turn up for an important meeting appearing dishevelled, or speak out of turn, maybe.  This probably isn’t their normal behaviour (if it is, then you have different challenges), and it’s almost certainly caused by their abnormal circumstances.  You may find that you are more stressed, and more likely to react negatively to failings (or perceived failings). Take a step back. Breathe. Finish the call early, if you have to, but try to understand why the behaviour that upset you did upset you, and then forgive it.  That doesn’t mean that there won’t need to be some quiet discussion later on to address it, but if you go into interactions with the expectation of openness, kindness and forgiveness, then that is likely to be reciprocated: and we all need that. 

6 – Forgive yourself

You will make mistakes.  You are subject to the same stresses and strains as your team, with the added burden of supporting them.  You need to find space for yourself, and to forgive yourself when you do make a mistake. That doesn’t mean abrogating responsibility for things you have done wrong, and neither is it an excuse not to apologise for inappropriate behaviour, but constantly berating yourself will add to your stresses and strains, and is likely to exacerbate the problem, rather than relieve it.  You have a responsibility to look after yourself so that you can look after your team: not beating yourself up about every little thing needs to be part of that.

7 – Prepare

Nobody knows how long we’ll be doing this, but what are you going to do when things start going back to normal?  One thing that will come up is the ability of at least some of your team to continue working from home or remotely.  If they have managed to do so given all the complications and stresses of lockdown, kids and family members under their feet, they will start asking “well, how about doing this the rest of the time?” – and you should be asking exactly the same question.  Some people will want to return to the office, and some will need to – at least for some of the time. But increased flexibility will become a hallmark of the organisations that don’t just survive this crisis, but actually thrive after it. You, as a leader, need to consider what comes next, and how your team can benefit from the lessons that you – collectively – have learned. 

1 – or partners/spouses: I caused something of a stir on a video conference that my wife was on today when I came into her office to light her wood-burning stove!