Decision Making
As an engineering leader, you’re constantly making decisions. But some decisions dwarf all others in their impact. And it’s not always the technically complex ones. Often, the very first decisions – those around who you build with – shape the entire trajectory of a project, a team, and ultimately, your success. This isn't just "people skills"; it's a fundamental aspect of engineering management that deserves deliberate, focused attention.
Consider this: a recent study by Gallup found that employees who feel a strong connection to their team are 50% more productive. That statistic highlights a core truth: building a high-performing engineering team begins before a single line of code is written. We often jump into how to build something before we’ve truly solidified with whom we’re building it. This is a critical mistake. I’ve seen it time and again, especially in startups, but even within established companies launching new initiatives. The initial team – those first few engineers, the architect, the tech lead – sets the cultural, technical, and even philosophical foundation for everything that follows.
Beyond Skills: Ability and Interest
Noam Wasserman's The Founder’s Dilemmas beautifully articulates this point, originally focused on startup founders, but deeply applicable to building any high-performing engineering team. He highlights the crucial balance between ability and interest. It’s tempting to assemble the “best” engineers – the ones with the most impressive resumes and years of experience. But technical brilliance alone isn’t enough.
You need people who are genuinely interested in the problem you're solving. Why? Because passion fuels commitment, drives innovation, and sustains motivation through the inevitable challenges. I’ve learned this the hard way. Early in my career, I inherited a team assembled solely on skill. They could deliver, but they lacked ownership. Every roadblock felt like a crisis, and innovation was minimal. It felt like pushing a boulder uphill.
Contrast that with a later project where I prioritized engineers excited about the underlying technology – a challenging machine learning problem. The technical hurdles were just as significant, but the team attacked them with an enthusiasm that was contagious. They explored different approaches, supported each other, and ultimately delivered a solution that exceeded expectations.
Actionable Advice: When building your initial team, don’t just review resumes. Conduct behavioral interviews that probe for genuine interest in the problem domain. Ask questions like:
- "What specifically excites you about this project?"
- "What aspects of this technology are you most eager to explore?"
- "What problems are you naturally drawn to solving?"
- "What motivates you to tackle challenging problems?"
Building for Control vs. Building for Wealth
Wasserman also discusses the choice between building for "control" or building for "wealth" – essentially, prioritizing long-term vision and ownership versus rapid growth and exit. While this is usually framed in the context of fundraising, it’s surprisingly relevant to team building.
Think about it: are you building a team to execute on your vision, or are you building a team of individuals with strong, potentially competing visions? Both approaches can succeed, but they require vastly different leadership styles and team dynamics.
Here's how it manifests in engineering:
- Control-Focused: This often manifests in a strong architectural vision, a clear technical roadmap, and a preference for engineers comfortable working within established guidelines. It can lead to faster initial progress and a more cohesive product, but it also risks stifling innovation if dissenting voices are ignored.
- Wealth-Focused (Innovation-Focused): This involves assembling a diverse team of talented engineers with a broad range of perspectives and encouraging them to challenge assumptions and explore unconventional solutions. It's higher risk, potentially slower to start, but has the potential for breakthrough innovation.
There's no inherently "right" approach, but you need to be conscious of which path you’re taking and select your initial team accordingly. I've seen teams with brilliant engineers fail because their diverse opinions clashed constantly without a shared guiding principle. Conversely, I’ve seen homogenous teams deliver solid products, but struggle to adapt to changing market conditions.
The Danger of Methodology Over Outcome
It’s easy to get caught up in processes and methodologies (Agile, Scrum, DevOps…the list goes on). These are tools, not goals. Wasserman touches on this when he describes the pitfall of adhering rigidly to methodology at the expense of getting the work done.
I see this frequently with early-career engineering managers. They focus so much on how things are done that they lose sight of the what. The initial team needs to be pragmatic, adaptable, and focused on delivering value, not on perfectly implementing a process.
| Focus on Process | Focus on Outcome | |
|---|---|---|
| High Adaptability | Potential for slow progress, but solid foundation | Fast iteration, innovation, potential for technical debt |
| Low Adaptability | Rigid, inefficient, likely to fail | Quick wins, but limited long-term potential |
Keeping a Positive View
Finally, remember that your initial perception shapes everything. Wasserman encourages focusing on the positive aspects of any situation. Cultivate a belief in your team's potential, not just their limitations. This optimism is contagious and will create a more engaged and productive environment.
In Conclusion:
Building an engineering team is more than just filling roles. It's about carefully considering who you invite to join the journey. Prioritize ability and interest, consciously decide whether you’re building for control or innovation, avoid the trap of methodology over outcome, and cultivate a positive outlook. These early decisions – the initial “who” – will profoundly impact your engineering success.
Take a moment to reflect on your current team's dynamics. How do these principles apply to your situation? Consider scheduling a team discussion to align on values and goals, fostering a foundation for sustained success.