We serve the function of Product Engineering, and those executing against its roles. Our goal is continuous improvement of the tools and processes (balancing autonomy and focusing on feedback loops).
Expectations / Description
Key Results/Outcomes
ENGAGEMENT:
- The people taking on the roles listed within the Engineering / Development domain, agree or strongly agree to the following statements:
- I know how I’m being evaluated on these roles.
- I receive actionable (meaning timely, frequent, specific, and observation-based) constructive feedback on my performance within the roles identified above.
- I receive actionable (meaning timely, frequent, specific, and observation-based) recognition (public or private) on my performance within the roles identified above.
- I believe I have the tools to meet or exceed the outcomes listed within the roles in question.
- I believe I have the processes and environment to meet or exceed the outcomes listed within the roles in question.
- I believe we are continuously improving in how we go about taking on these roles.
- Note: This SHOULD have a direct impact on the NPS score of engineers (where they select 8+ on a 10-point scale to the question; “I’d recommend a friend come to work here”). However, given that full engagement is more inclusive than their primary roles, it doesn’t feel right to have that as a part of the measure of enablement leads.
QUALITY:
- As measured by staying below a 10:1 regrettable defect escapee to stories delivered ratio
- I would love to make this ratio bigger, but let’s start here for now and establish a baseline before committing to something greater. One of the best measures of a great team is NOT the absence of issues, but how small the issue-to-resolution time. However, the spirit of this measure is that we are actively pushing quality to the left, meaning earlier in the process We will also measure the directed decrease in certain types of defect escapees that are targeted quarter over quarter.
SPEED:
- Points(or stories)/person over time doesn't necessarily mean we're delivering more value. However if points/person is decreasing then it'll very likely make it harder to deliver value continuously. Lean principles of single-piece-flow, collaboration principles that require heavy pairing at all parts of the process, and other strategies might appear to slow down the flow of work, but will help us deliver value more quickly. The idea here is that you as a software development enablement lead are paying attention to how the work is flowing and are making recommendations based on what you are seeing.
Glossary
- Timely
- Within 48 hours of a remark-worthy event
- Frequent
- A least once per quarter
- Immaculate Defections
- Bugs caught by customers and are divorced from any specific project released in the last 90 days.
- Regrettable Defect Escapees
- Bugs caught by someone outside of the squad and is tied to a specific project released in the last 90 days that are priority-1, priority-2, and some priority-3 bugs (we will have to use our discretion when saying if a priority-3 bug is regrettable or not)
- Non-Regrettable Defect Escapees
- Bugs caught by someone outside of the squad and is tied to a specific project released in the last 90 days that are priority-4, priority-5, and some priority-3 bugs (we will have to use our discretion when saying if a priority-3 bug is regrettable or not)
- Regrettable Work Release Defects
- For the squads that test every story, these show up as stories that make it to the remediations lane because they are bad enough that we've decided to not ship with the bug.
- For squads implementing trunk-based/single-piece-flow/fix-forward, these show up as bugs found by testers that we decide to “hotfix” or cause us to pause cloud deployment propagation because they are bad enough that we've decided to not ship with the bug.
- Non-Regrettable Work Release Defects
- Bugs caught by testers, but we've decided that they are low enough priority that we can ship/continue normal cloud deploy propagation with these known bugs
- Cloud Deploy Propagation
- We have three nodes as I write this. US-1, US-2, and US-3. Our current process is to deploy to US-1, but we hold off for a while before we deploy to US-2 and US-3. Sometimes a bug will be caught in US-1, and we will pause the deploy to US-2 and US-3. The act of deploying to one and then another is cloud deploy propagation.
- Trunk-based/Single-piece-flow/Fix-forward:
- As of writing this, the Skills Squad will be deploying every story individually to production (single piece flow). They will also not have any branches outside of the short-lived branches for their stories (trunk-based). Finally, when they encounter issues, instead of rolling back being the default action to restore service, the default action will be to deploy a fix/patch (fix-forward).
Things you might deliver/do
- Though you won't be exclusively responsible for engineers having the best tools and processes to do their best work, you will be heavily relied upon to ensure this is happening.
- You'll search for the “multiplicative effect”: impact multiplied by the number of people
- You'll be proactive by identifying and coordinate meeting common needs across the engineering team such as standards and conventions, documentation, etc.
- You'll be reactive by helping coordinate solutions to problems you hear about from the team, such as on-call support being frustrating, or waiting on reviews taking too long.
- You'll contribute to continually iterating on and improving the Engineer Growth Framework
Requirements
- Dev X Enablement Lead's must have a position with the reach of 3.1 or higher
- Dev X Enablement Lead's must be milestone 2+,Mentorship
- Dev X Enablement Lead's must be milestone 1+,Rails
- Dev X Enablement Lead's must be milestone 1+,Ruby
- Dev X Enablement Lead's must be milestone 1+,Community
- Dev X Enablement Lead's must be milestone 1+,Sense and Respond
- Dev X Enablement Lead's must be milestone 1+,React
- Dev X Enablement Lead's must be milestone 1+,Web Technologies
Configuration Health
- ✅ Has 7 Abilities
- ✅ Is a part of 9 Positions
- ✅ Has been referenced in 4 pieces of public recognition
- ℹ️ No one has reacted to this Assignment
- ℹ️ No one has an official rating on this Assignment
- ⛔️ Last updated: over 4 years ago
- ℹ️ Never conversed about
Examples / Observations
Observation created over 5 years agoI've been feeling a little down on our codebase lately, overwhelmed by the myriad things developers have to remember (and help each other remember in code reviews) to make the stuff we build work properly for our users. So I felt immense gratitude to Ethan for two things this week that will make developers/testers lives easier while helping us deliver better experiences for the folks using our software. But I'm also deeply impressed with how Ethan went about these changes. Change is hard, and the more valuable the change, typically the harder it is to make, or else we would have made it already! But Ethan met these challenges with curiosity, tenacity, and a drive to create clarity in messy situations.
The first example is with
autoprefixer, a tool that automatically adds to our styling code to make things look right in older browsers. For years, we've often forgotten to add this code manually when building new pages, taking up testers' time catching bugs and leading to rework. While Waseem started the effort to introduce this automation tool, it was Ethan who saw the value and ultimately delivered on it in Waseem's absence, picking up the story and diving into an obscure IE bug to make it shippable. And look at this incredible comment explaining the issue, its cause, and what we need to retest: https://app.clubhouse.io/lessonly/story/41159/add-css-auto-prefixer#activity-42233 :chefs_kiss:And then there's the UI Library, a massive project that will make the app more consistent for users and allow us to design and prototype new features at lightning speed. We've struggled for several quarters to prioritize that because it's hard to know where to begin. I'm not sure who all gets credit for the new approach (at least Ethan and Jaki) we're taking of looking at customers' custom CSS for clues about what's most valuable to standardize, but I'm :jazz_hands: to see movement on this project, and just look at the incredible statistical analysis Ethan did to get it moving: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1pQPVfhRd1c-8wZiT7I5XibRwsKplGScaDgpM0Y2179w/edit#gid=72331942
The next time I find myself thinking "X would be so great, but how do we ever start?", I'm just gonna ask myself "What would Ethan do?" 😉True grit.
Observation created about 6 years agoFeaturing:Casey S.We don't wait to be told what to do, we take initiativeWe inspire others to do better workWe get agreementsDevX Enablement Leadhttps://lessonly.slack.com/archives/C927U8ZFV/p1567534294000800
Need I say more?
I think the awesomeness speaks for itself, but the specific things I love are:
1) See a need, fill a need... that policy has been in place for a year, and no one took the time to make sure it was being done and clear... but, you did.
2) Get agreements... in bold, and in a fun clear way, you ask not if you've seen it, but if you agree... masterful!
3) The kindness shown here is both blinding and inconspicuous. Fucking love it.
Observation created about 6 years agoFeaturing:Waseem D.We don't wait to be told what to do, we take initiativeFront-end engineerDevX Enablement LeadSince we didn't have a team meeting yesterday, I wanted to shout about Waseem's recent PR to enable some accessibility checks in eslint: https://github.com/lessonly/lessonly/pull/7075 This is the culmination of months of work upgrading eslint and its dependencies. The benefits of up-to-date software are many (security, performance, reliability) but in this particular case it allowed us to enable some accessibility checks. Sure, linters like eslint help us keep our whitespace consistent, but this is an example of how they can really shine: as teaching tools. As a result of Waseem's work, now when we accidentally write UI code with accessibility flaws that make it harder for some folks to use Lessonly, we'll get a warning that "Hey, we can do better!" (And we'll have to fix it before that code can be merged.) Automation like this scales with our team, and it doesn't just make our code better over time, it makes us better. This gives me confidence that as we grow, we won't be one forgotten Lesson or hurried code review away from falling short on accessibility, but that, at least in these examples, it's guaranteed to be a part of how we build software. Finally, I'm reminded of Nassim Nicholas Taleb's Antifragile (which makes an appearance in Do Better Work), which is about building systems that aren't just resilient to failure, but that get stronger from failure. Here is an example where when we make certain accessibility mistakes, we're guaranteed to learn and grow, getting stronger and smarter as we do. Heck yeah!
Official Dev X Enablement Leads
This section is for Lessonly folks only. Sign your team up to find your Gruuv!
Teams needing a DevX Enablement Lead
This section is for Lessonly folks only. Sign your team up to find your Gruuv!
Positions that reference being a DevX Enablement Lead
This section is for Lessonly folks only. Sign your team up to find your Gruuv!
Conversations about DevX Enablement Lead
This section is for Lessonly folks only. Sign your team up to find your Gruuv!