rowid,title,contents,year,author,author_slug,published,url,topic
250,Build up Your Leadership Toolbox,"Leadership. It can mean different things to different people and vary widely between companies. Leadership is more than just a job title. You won’t wake up one day and magically be imbued with all you need to do a good job at leading. If we don’t have a shared understanding of what a Good Leader looks like, how can we work on ourselves towards becoming one? How do you know if you even could be a leader? Can you be a leader without the title?
What even is it?
I got very frustrated way back in my days as a senior developer when I was given “advice” about my leadership style; at the time I didn’t have the words to describe the styles and ways in which I was leading to be able to push back. I heard these phrases a lot:

you need to step up
you need to take charge
you need to grab the bull by its horns
you need to have thicker skin
you need to just be more confident in your leading
you need to just make it happen

I appreciate some people’s intent was to help me, but honestly it did my head in. WAT?! What did any of this even mean. How exactly do you “step up” and how are you evaluating what step I’m on? I am confident, what does being even more confident help achieve with leading? Does that not lead you down the path of becoming an arrogant door knob? >___<
While there is no One True Way to Lead, there is an overwhelming pattern of people in positions of leadership within tech industry being held by men. It felt a lot like what people were fundamentally telling me to do was to be more like an extroverted man. I was being asked to demonstrate more masculine associated qualities (#notallmen). I’ll leave the gendered nature of leadership qualities as an exercise in googling for the reader.
I’ve never had a good manager and at the time had no one else to ask for help, so I turned to my trusted best friends. Books.
I <3 books
I refused to buy into that style of leadership as being the only accepted way to be. There had to be room for different kinds of people to be leaders and have different leadership styles.
There are three books that changed me forever in how I approach and think about leadership.

Primal leadership, by Daniel Goleman, Richard Boyatzis and Annie McKee
Quiet, by Susan Cain
Daring Greatly - How the Courage to be Vulnerable transforms the way we live, love, parent and Lead, by Brené Brown

I recommend you read them. Ignore the slightly cheesy titles and trust me, just read them.
Primal leadership helped to give me the vocabulary and understanding I needed about the different styles of leadership there are, how and when to apply them.
Quiet really helped me realise how much I was being undervalued and misunderstood in an extroverted world. If I’d had managers or support from someone who valued introverts’ strengths, things would’ve been very different. I would’ve had someone telling others to step down and shut up for a change rather than pushing on me to step up and talk louder over everyone else. It’s OK to be different and needing different things like time to recharge or time to think before speaking. It also improved my ability to work alongside my more extroverted colleagues by giving me an understanding of their world so I could communicate my needs in a language they would get.
Brené Brown’s book I am forever in debt to. Her work gave me the courage to stand up and be my own kind of leader. Even when no-one around me looked or sounded like me, I found my own voice.
It takes great courage to be vulnerable and open about what you can and can’t do. Open about your mistakes. Vocalise what you don’t know and asking for help. In some lights, these are seen as weaknesses and many have tried to use them against me, to pull me down and exclude me for talking about them. Dear reader, it did not work, they failed. The truth is, they are my greatest strengths. The privileges I have, I use for good as best and often as I can.
Just like gender, leadership is not binary
If you google for what a leader is, you’ll get many different answers. I personally think Brené’s version is the best as it is one that can apply to a wider range of people, irrespective of job title or function.

I define a leader as anyone who takes responsibility for finding potential in people and processes, and who has the courage to develop that potential.
Brené Brown

Being a leader isn’t about being the loudest in a room, having veto power, talking over people or ignoring everyone else’s ideas. It’s not about “telling people what to do”. It’s not about an elevated status that you’re better than others. Nor is it about creating a hand wavey far away vision and forgetting to help support people in how to get there.
Being a Good Leader is about having a toolbox of leadership styles and skills to choose from depending on the situation. Knowing how and when to apply them is part of the challenge and difficulty in becoming good at it. It is something you will have to continuously work on, forever. There is no Done.
Leaders are Made, they are not Born.
Be flexible in your leadership style

Typically, the best, most effective leaders act according to one or more of six distinct approaches to leadership and skillfully switch between the various styles depending on the situation.

From the book, Primal Leadership, it gives a summary of 6 leadership styles which are:

Visionary
Coaching
Affiliative
Democratic
Pacesetting
Commanding

Visionary, moves people toward a shared dream or future. When change requires a new vision or a clear direction is needed, using a visionary style of leadership helps communicate that picture. By learning how to effectively communicate a story you can help people to move in that direction and give them clarity on why they’re doing what they’re doing.
Coaching, is about connecting what a person wants and helping to align that with organisation’s goals. It’s a balance of helping someone improve their performance to fulfil their role and their potential beyond.
Affiliative, creates harmony by connecting people to each other and requires effective communication to aid facilitation of those connections. This style can be very impactful in healing rifts in a team or to help strengthen connections within and across teams. During stressful times having a positive and supportive connection to those around us really helps see us through those times.
Democratic, values people’s input and gets commitment through participation. Taking this approach can help build buy-in or consensus and is a great way to get valuable input from people. The tricky part about this style, I find, is that when I gather and listen to everyone’s input, that doesn’t mean the end result is that I have to please everyone.
The next two, sadly, are the ones wielded far too often and have the greatest negative impact. It’s where the “telling people what to do” comes from. When used sparingly and in the right situations, they can be a force for good. However, they must not be your default style.
Pacesetting, when used well, it is about meeting challenging and exciting goals. When you need to get high-quality results from a motivated and well performing team, this can be great to help achieve real focus and drive. Sadly it is so overused and poorly executed it becomes the “just make it happen” and driver of unrealistic workload which contributes to burnout.
Commanding, when used appropriately soothes fears by giving clear direction in an emergency or crisis. When shit is on fire, you want to know that your leadership ability can help kick-start a turnaround and bring clarity. Then switch to another style. This approach is also required when dealing with problematic employees or unacceptable behaviour.
Commanding style seems to be what a lot of people think being a leader is, taking control and commanding a situation. It should be used sparingly and only when absolutely necessary.
Be responsible for the power you wield
If reading through those you find yourself feeling a bit guilty that maybe you overuse some of the styles, or overwhelmed that you haven’t got all of these down and ready to use in your toolbox…
Take a breath. Take responsibility. Take action.
No one is perfect, and it’s OK. You can start right now working on those. You can have a conversation with your team and try being open about how you’re going to try some different styles. You can be vulnerable and own up to mistakes you might’ve made followed with an apology. You can order those books and read them. Those books will give you more examples on those leadership styles and help you to find your own voice.
The impact you can have on the lives of those around you when you’re a leader, is huge. You can help be that positive impact, help discover and develop potential in someone.

Time spent understanding people is never wasted.
Cate Huston.

I believe in you. <3 Mazz.",2018,Mazz Mosley,mazzmosley,2018-12-10T00:00:00+00:00,https://24ways.org/2018/build-up-your-leadership-toolbox/,business
254,What I Learned in Six Years at GDS,"When I joined the Government Digital Service in April 2012, GOV.UK was just going into public beta. GDS was a completely new organisation, part of the Cabinet Office, with a mission to stop wasting government money on over-complicated and underperforming big IT projects and instead deliver simple, useful services for the public.
Lots of people who were experts in their fields were drawn in by this inspiring mission, and I learned loads from working with some true leaders. Here are three of the main things I learned.
1. What is the user need?

The main discipline I learned from my time at GDS was to always ask ‘what is the user need?’ It’s very easy to build something that seems like a good idea, but until you’ve identified what problem you are solving for the user, you can’t be sure that you are building something that is going to help solve an actual problem.
A really good example of this is GOV.UK Notify. This service was originally conceived of as a status tracker; a “where’s my stuff” for government services. For example, if you apply for a passport online, it can take up to six weeks to arrive. After a few weeks, you might feel anxious and phone the Home Office to ask what’s happening. The idea of the status tracker was to allow you to get this information online, saving your time and saving government money on call centres.
The project started, as all GDS projects do, with a discovery. The main purpose of a discovery is to identify the users’ needs. At the end of this discovery, the team realised that a status tracker wasn’t the way to address the problem. As they wrote in this blog post: 

Status tracking tools are often just ‘channel shift’ for anxiety. They solve the symptom and not the problem. They do make it more convenient for people to reduce their anxiety, but they still require them to get anxious enough to request an update in the first place.

What would actually address the user need would be to give you the information before you get anxious about where your passport is. For example, when your application is received, email you to let you know when to expect it, and perhaps text you at various points in the process to let you know how it’s going. So instead of a status tracker, the team built GOV.UK Notify, to make it easy for government services to incorporate text, email and even letter notifications into their processes.
Making sure you know your user
At GDS user needs were taken very seriously. We had a user research lab on site and everyone was required to spend two hours observing user research every six weeks. Ideally you’d observe users working with things you’d built, but even if they weren’t, it was an incredibly valuable experience, and something you should seek out if you are able to.
Even if we think we understand our users very well, it is very enlightening to see how users actually use your stuff. Partly because in technology we tend to be power users and the average user doesn’t use technology the same way we do. But even if you are building things for other developers, someone who is unfamiliar with it will interact with it in a way that may be very different to what you have envisaged.
User needs is not just about building things
Asking the question “what is the user need?” really helps focus on why you are doing what you are doing. It keeps things on track, and helps the team think about what the actual desired end goal is (and should be). 
Thinking about user needs has helped me with lots of things, not just building services. For example, you are raising a pull request. What’s the user need? The reviewer needs to be able to easily understand what the change you are proposing is, why you are proposing that change and any areas you need particular help on with the review. 
Or you are writing an email to a colleague. What’s the user need? What are you hoping the reader will learn, understand or do as a result of your email?
2. Make things open: it makes things better
The second important thing I learned at GDS was ‘make things open: it makes things better’. This works on many levels: being open about your strategy, blogging about what you are doing and what you’ve learned (including mistakes), and – the part that I got most involved in – coding in the open.
Talking about your work helps clarify it
One thing we did really well at GDS was blogging – a lot – about what we were working on. Blogging about what you are working on is is really valuable for the writer because it forces you to think logically about what you are doing in order to tell a good story. If you are blogging about upcoming work, it makes you think clearly about why you’re doing it; and it also means that people can comment on the blog post. Often people had really useful suggestions or clarifying questions.
It’s also really valuable to blog about what you’ve learned, especially if you’ve made a mistake. It makes sure you’ve learned the lesson and helps others avoid making the same mistakes. As well as blogging about lessons learned, GOV.UK also publishes incident reports when there is an outage or service degradation. Being open about things like this really engenders an atmosphere of trust and safe learning; which helps make things better.
Coding in the open has a lot of benefits
In my last year at GDS I was the Open Source Lead, and one of the things I focused on was the requirement that all new government source code should be open. From the start, GDS coded in the open (the GitHub organisation still has the non-intuitive name alphagov, because it was created by the team doing the original Alpha of GOV.UK, before GDS was even formed).
When I first joined GDS I was a little nervous about the fact that anyone could see my code. I worried about people seeing my mistakes, or receiving critical code reviews. (Setting people’s mind at rest about these things is why it’s crucial to have good standards around communication and positive behaviour - even a critical code review should be considerately given). 
But I quickly realised there were huge advantages to coding in the open. In the same way as blogging your decisions makes you think carefully about whether they are good ones and what evidence you have, the fact that anyone in the world could see your code (even if, in practice, they probably won’t be looking) makes everyone raise their game slightly. The very fact that you know it’s open, makes you make it a bit better.
It helps with lots of other things as well, for example it makes it easier to collaborate with people and share your work. And now that I’ve left GDS, it’s so useful to be able to look back at code I worked on to remember how things worked.
Share what you learn
It’s sometimes hard to know where to start with being open about things, but it gets easier and becomes more natural as you practice. It helps you clarify your thoughts and follow through on what you’ve decided to do. Working at GDS when this was a very important principle really helped me learn how to do this well.
3. Do the hard work to make it simple (tech edition)
‘Start with user needs’ and ‘Make things open: it makes things better’ are two of the excellent government design principles. They are all good, but the third thing that I want to talk about is number 4: ‘Do the hard work to make it simple’, and specifically, how this manifests itself in the way we build technology.
At GDS, we worked very hard to do the hard work to make the code, systems and technology we built simple for those who came after us. For example, writing good commit messages is taken very seriously. There is commit message guidance, and it was not unusual for a pull request review to ask for a commit message to be rewritten to make a commit message clearer.
We worked very hard on making pull requests good, keeping the reviewer in mind and making it clear to the user how best to review it.
Reviewing others’ pull requests is the highest priority so that no-one is blocked, and teams have screens showing the status of open pull requests (using fourth wall) and we even had a ‘pull request seal’, a bot that publishes pull requests to Slack and gets angry if they are uncommented on for more than two days.
Making it easier for developers to support the site
Another example of doing the hard work to make it simple was the opsmanual. I spent two years on the web operations team on GOV.UK, and one of the things I loved about that team was the huge efforts everyone went to to be open and inclusive to developers.
The team had some people who were really expert in web ops, but they were all incredibly helpful when bringing me on board as a developer with no previous experience of web ops, and also patiently explaining things whenever other devs in similar positions came with questions. 
The main artefact of this was the opsmanual, which contained write-ups of how to do lots of things. One of the best things was that every alert that might lead to someone being woken up in the middle of the night had a link to documentation on the opsmanual which detailed what the alert meant and some suggested actions that could be taken to address it.
This was important because most of the devs on GOV.UK were on the on-call rota, so if they were woken at 3am by an alert they’d never seen before, the opsmanual information might give them everything they needed to solve it, without the years of web ops training and the deep familiarity with the GOV.UK infrastructure that came with working on it every day.
Developers are users too
Doing the hard work to make it simple means that users can do what they need to do, and this applies even when the users are your developer peers. At GDS I really learned how to focus on simplicity for the user, and how much better this makes things work.
These three principles help us make great things
I learned so much more in my six years at GDS. For example, the civil service has a very fair way of interviewing. I learned about the importance of good comms, working late, responsibly and the value of content design.
And the real heart of what I learned, the guiding principles that help us deliver great products, is encapsulated by the three things I’ve talked about here: think about the user need, make things open, and do the hard work to make it simple.",2018,Anna Shipman,annashipman,2018-12-08T00:00:00+00:00,https://24ways.org/2018/what-i-learned-in-six-years-at-gds/,business