Welcome back to Ask Hartley Anything, Episode Three, the podcast where I take your questions and share insights from my journey as an engineering leader. Happy New Year! I hope you're off to a great start. Thanks for your patience as we get back into our weekly cycle. The New Year hit me with a bug, so I wanted to make sure I didn't sound too hoarse when talking to you.

Today’s episode is packed. Initially, I planned to cover two topics: measuring the impact of engineering managers and goal setting. But we’ll focus on measuring the impact of engineering managers and introduce an interesting measure called hospitality quotient.

First, a quick plug: You can ask questions for this podcast at askhartley.com or reach out on LinkedIn. Subscribe on Spotify, iTunes, or hartleyshandbook.com.

Note: This text summary was generated from one of the only AI tools I pay for, AudioPen Prime. I leverage it for taking raw audio and turning it into a solid shortened summary.

Our first question today is from Brett, who says he’s a big fan of Adam Grant. If you don’t know Adam Grant, he’s the author of Originals and a professor at Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania. Brett mentions a podcast where Grant discussed hospitality quotient with a restaurateur and relates it to engineering management. Brett asks for thoughts or metrics on measuring the impact of an engineering manager.

I'm a big fan of Adam Grant. He recently did a podcast with a restaurant owner where the restaurant owner talking about "Hospitality Quotient" and how it's hard to measure. I think of that a lot like Engineering Management. Do you have any thoughts/metrics of measuring the impact of an engineering manager?Here's the transcript

Great question! Measuring the impact of engineering managers can be tough. For engineers, output is clear—you can see their work in repositories and pull requests. But for engineering managers, it’s more nebulous.

Let’s start with the hospitality quotient (HQ). You’ve probably heard of EQ (Emotional Quotient). HQ is similar but focuses on making others feel better when you help them. Danny Meyer defines HQ as the degree to which someone feels better about themselves when they make someone else feel better.

Adam Grant relates HQ to affective presence—the consistent set of habits around emotions you elicit in others. Some people have a positive affective presence; others, not so much. This ties back to empathy and emotional intelligence.

But how do you measure these qualities in an interview? Companies have EQ tests that measure how individuals interpret situations, their empathy, and their attitude. In interviews, asking about recent feedback received and given can be enlightening.

Now, let’s pivot to measuring engineering management. It’s easier for engineers with clear outcomes and outputs but tougher for managers since it tends to be more qualitative than quantitative.

Here are five key areas (the Five Ps) for measuring engineering managers:

1. Personal: How do they show up daily? Are they consistent? Do they display empathy? Are they building systems and ideas effectively?

2. Personnel: Team health metrics like engagement scores and retention rates are crucial. Are team members engaged? Is voluntary attrition low?

3. Projects: Look at delivery metrics like velocity—stability over time is key, not just high numbers. Cycle times and DORA metrics also help gauge project execution.

4. Peers: How do they interact within their peer group? Use 360-degree feedback to understand their role in meetings and collaborations.

5. Process: Challenge them to improve one process annually. Are they proactive in suggesting changes? Do they understand organizational processes deeply?

These measures provide a robust understanding of an engineering manager's performance and readiness for the next level.

Think about hospitality quotient again—how do they make you feel in meetings? Do they inspire confidence or dread? If it's difficult interacting with them, consider performance management steps.

Remember, these insights aren't exhaustive but should give you a solid framework for evaluating engineering managers effectively.

Measuring engineering managers, or any managers for that matter, is a complex task. It becomes even more challenging as you move up the hierarchy. For directors, evaluating strategy effectiveness over the year involves larger time chunks, unlike engineering managers where delivery metrics in two-week cycles provide clearer insights. These time frames expand and complicate the assessment.

Over the years, my approach to this has evolved and become easier with experience. It's crucial to use both quantitative and qualitative data to gauge a manager's performance. How are they performing day-to-day? Sprint-to-sprint? Are they effective? When they are, how do they impact other metrics?

I’m always open to learning new methods for measuring managers. If you have techniques that have worked well—or not—please share them. Let's tackle this challenge together. The more we can quantify performance consistently, the easier it becomes to achieve those targets.

That wraps up this episode of Ask Hartley Anything. Thanks for tuning in. We're back on a consistent schedule—it's you and me on this journey every week. If you have questions, visit askhartly.com to submit them anonymously if you prefer. Just include an email for any follow-up questions and to inform you when your question will be featured.

Thanks again for listening. Have a great week. Until next time, insert tagline here (not a typo, I’ve just not thought of a catchy tagline).

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit hartleyshandbook.com