Imagine your team as the engine of a car.
If one piston doesn’t perform to full capacity, the engine keeps running but suffers from notable power loss and performance struggles.
And just like one failing piston can drag down an engine, one contributor who doesn’t pull their weight unfairly strains the rest of the team. Forward progress will continue but with much less efficiency and at the expense of those working harder (both in general and to make up the slack).
As an engineering manager (EM), you either have already faced this issue or are going to. Unfortunately, it’s inevitable. I like to think of this as the reliable/casual contributor dynamic.
Understanding this dynamic
Failing to realize this dynamic is happening on your team or why will cause (or may have already caused) many issues for you and others.
The first step in resolving this problem is thinking about monkeys.
Who’s got the monkey?
In these kinds of situations, I often share William Oncken, Jr. and Donald L. Wass’ “Who’s got the monkey?” analogy. It’s a useful tool for illustrating the dynamics of task ownership.
The basic concept is that the monkey is the task someone carries. The person carrying the monkey approaches another for guidance or help and passes the monkey to them.
You can probably see where this is going.
The person who took the monkey becomes overburdened with extras. Additionally, the person who hands the monkey over never develops because they don’t learn how to deal with monkeys themselves.
Your job as an EM is to make sure everyone is carrying their own monkey. To do so, take the second step, which is learning who reliable or casual contributors are.
Reliable contributors
Your reliable contributor is your consistent hard worker. They:
- Continuously deliver
- Need little oversight
- Are proactive
- And take accountability for their tasks (and mistakes)
Good people like this are usually more than happy to help others when needed – lending a hand is natural for them.
But there’s a thin line between helping someone and them taking advantage of you. And some reliable contributors find it hard to say no or simply don’t realize what’s really going on.
Either way, their good nature can lead to helping at the expense of themselves, such as impacting:
- The length and enjoyment of their personal time
- Timely task completion
- And task quality
When these issues happen, the person they’re helping has crossed that thin line whether they intend to or not.
So, part of your job is protecting them and looking after their best interests because they’re not always good at doing so themselves (most of us aren’t). But we’ll talk about this more in the “What you can do” section.
Casual contributors
Then, there’s your casual contributor. They may seem like they’re doing work, but they often rely on others to do the heavy lifting. They will:
- Offload tasks
- Wait for others to solve problems
- And avoid taking accountability
They might, for example, approach a reliable contributor who they know is proficient in their work and say, “I have to integrate an API. But it doesn’t work, and I don’t know what to do. Can you show me how to do it?”
Other times, the casual contributor is more subtle. They may say, “I have this task, and I’m at a loss. I’m worried because I’m going to miss my deadline.” They haven’t directly asked for assistance or handed their work over – they can even say, “I didn’t ask – they offered” – but the result is the same. One person is doing an unfair portion of the work.
Casual contributors wouldn’t be as big of a problem if it was easy to spot them quickly, but it’s not.
After all, most people show off their best selves:
- At an interview
- During a trial period
- Or when under scrutiny
There’s a telling sign for this type of person, though – they’re always happy!
Until they’re challenged.
When this happens, they defend themselves by blaming:
- The process
- The team
- Their manager
- Or something other than themselves
There’s a great saying for this, which is, “A poor workman blames his tools.” A casual contributor will lay the blame anywhere else other than at their own feet.
They may also take some accountability, but only as a shield to prevent further consequences. Nothing will change on their end for long or at all.
However, don’t make the mistake of treating casual contributors as simple slackers – sometimes, there’s more at play.
Environments create products
It can be easy to assume casual contributors are simply lazy.
Some are, but many times, their previous work environments shape their behavior. They learned what they could get away with (again, intentionally or not), and they might not even be aware what they’re doing is a problem or that they’re doing it at all!
This happens much more in large companies because workers often become like cogs in the machine. You’ve probably experienced this yourself if you’ve ever worked in one before. And with so many contributors, it’s easy for some to coast. They can:
- Attend a bunch of meetings
- Offload tasks to others here and there
- And blend into the crowd
Again, noticing this isn’t always easy, especially if their supervisors focus on task completion and not individual responsibility (or if they can’t).
In smaller teams, however, this just doesn’t work. An individual’s contributions are much more visible, and there just isn’t as deep or as strong a network to support those who don’t put in their fair share.
An example
Let’s say a designer wants to fix the misspelled text of a button. In a large company, the process would look like this:
- They have to file a ticket
- Someone else has to review it
- Then, it gets approved potentially by a:
- Lead designer
- UX copywriter
- Or frontend lead
- Then, it gets processed
- And then, they get the stamp of approval
Only then can the designer start work.
Likely, there would also be multiple meetings to discuss this change. Suddenly, a relatively simple task now takes up to two weeks.
But let’s say this took place in a smaller company. There, the EM spots the misspelled text on the button. So, they go to the designer and ask them to fix the issue.
This stuns the designer. They say, “Hey, we need to have a process!” to which the EM replies, “No, just fix it.”
This collision of different worlds, needs, and norms creates conflict between what the designer is used to and what they need to get used to. This takes time and is a hard adjustment for anyone, especially if they’ve experienced very little allowance for personal responsibility elsewhere.
Again, not all casual contributors are created from this issue, but some are. Help them make the appropriate changes to their work methods and expectations so they don’t fall back into old habits. But only do what’s necessary to get them started – don’t let yourself become another reliable contributor who does too much.
What you can do
Leaving the reliable/casual contributor dynamic unchecked can have huge ramifications. Letting the second group drag down the first encourages them to slack off as well or even leave!
To address this dynamic, the reliable and casual contributors need different approaches. Here’s how to address both types of contributors successfully.
Casual contributors
To help correct this type of work ethic, I suggest taking these steps:
- Assess: use your skills of observation to figure out if they’re actually trying to avoid work or just struggling
- Define responsibilities: explain the fair division of labor and get them to take ownership of their tasks
- Be proactive: encourage them to solve problems themselves instead of going to others
- Coach: use it as a learning exercise to help develop them
But, as you can probably guess, this is going to be a difficult, painful process for them. After all, who wants to take on more work and responsibilities when they’ve been getting paid for less?
Empathy helps. Instead of blaming or yelling at them, help them feel seen and heard. Show them that you get it’s tough and it’s not all their fault (although some of these issues are). Maybe even share some of your own struggles.
But, sometimes, you won’t be able to coach people out of this way of doing things. In that case:
- Continue making them aware of expectations
- Continue holding them accountable
- And let them go if they continue not meeting them
This is also hard, but they’ll never be a valuable member of your team. It happens sometimes, and it’s okay – you can’t solve every problem.
Reliable contributors
Make your reliable contributors aware of the situation and support them in fixing it. Solving the issues of this dynamic isn’t solely their responsibility, but they need help:
- Spotting when they’re being taken advantage of
- Getting more comfortable saying no
- Upsetting their relationship with their coworkers
- And understanding that doing so won’t impact their careers
To help, talk to them about the following:
- Consequences: explain that if they don’t start taking a stand, they can become overburdened, fall behind, and even burn out
- Boundaries: help them set and stick to limits on how much help they give others
- Assess: watch out for signs of burnout and have check-ins to assess their workload and well-being
- Support: offer resources and provide emotional support if needed
But keep in mind there’s only so much you can do for reliable contributors as well. Help them as much as is reasonable for you to do, and let them figure out the rest (or deal with the consequences if they can’t).
The short version: be proactive in ensuring a balanced workload
The reliable/casual contributor dynamic is a very hard one to monitor.
I recommend you trust your instincts and listen to any doubts. Investigate if:
- Someone takes too long to complete a task
- They aren’t around when you want to talk to them
- Or they avoid answering questions
Because left unmanaged, an unbalanced dynamic between a reliable and casual contributor causes serious long-term problems.
So, look for the signs that your reliable contributors are being taken advantage of, such as:
- Tiredness
- Being overwhelmed by the workload
- Procrastinating on reviews or tasks
- Drop in performance or quality
- And hints of disengagement or frustration
For casual contributors, look for the following:
- Lack of accountability
- Offloading tasks
- Frequently going to others for help
- And defensive behavior
Use your empathy to understand why they’re in that situation or why they’re making certain choices and help them course correct. And, if all else fails, make the hard choice and let them go. Your reliable contributors will be better off (as will your results).
Coming up
On Friday (March 14), I’ll be exploring more ways introverts can leverage their natural strengths to enhance their management style. Subscribe below so you don’t miss out on this or future updates.
See you then!
Want more tips on leading effective software engineering teams?
Join my newsletter if you’ve found this content useful
Originally published on Medium.com
Content in this blog post by Alex Ponomarev is licensed under CC BY 4.0.
