Skip to main content

Win Forever by Pete Carroll

I just read Win Forever: Live, Work, and Play Like a Champion by football coach Pete Carroll. What did I think? That it’s a must-read for any engineering leader. Even in my 14th year of team management, I still learned new tips from Carroll’s work. Concepts like communicating your philosophy, focusing on work vs. the outcome, and staying positive are all crucial both in sports and in software.

It was refreshing to be reminded that in football, as well as in software, you are your own competition. Staying focused on your work and your customers -- rather than those of your competition -- is what will make or break your company. Pete Carroll also talks about the tightening that takes place when people are uncertain about their abilities or goals:

The only competition that matters is the one that takes place within yourself. It isn’t about external factors. Tim Gallwey and his Inner Game approach to performance has had a huge impact on how I look at the challenges of coaching. Specifically, Gallwey wrote about how human beings tend to enter a state of doubt when faced with the unknown or uncertainty. When that occurs, he wrote, we instinctively “overtighten.” Physically, when we doubt our ability, we will tend to overtighten our muscles. Mentally, we fear failure and can become emotional and distracted.

I have seen similar tightening when people feel micro-managed or put down by their leadership. Believing in your team and making sure they have the support is something you can’t do enough of. Positive energy generally gets positive results.

One of the key quotes in the book is about forcing performance vs creating opportunity for the players:

What if my job as a coach isn’t so much to force or coerce performance as it is to create situations where players develop the confidence to set their talents free and pursue their potential to its full extent? What if my job as a coach is really to prove to these kids how good they already are, how good they could possibly become, and that they are truly capable of high-level performance?

This is great advice -- and I wonder how it would work if applied in a corporate engineering setting.

One of the advantages of this approach is inherent in the context of pro sports: highly competitive games with a readily available supply of players that greatly outstripping the number of spots on the field, even the roster. For instance, all the people who treated football as “just a job” dropped out way before NFL.

The dynamics are slightly different in the software industry; there is a shortage of qualified Software Engineers, so someone skilled -- even if not necessarily passionate -- is still likely to make the cut.  

In summary, Carrol’s book offers some great “plays” that you can adapt to your life, but don’t expect a complete playbook.

-mb

PS: If you liked this post you should check out the Three Pillars of Engineering Management and Emotional Intelligence on Software Teams

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

SDET / QA Engineer Interview Checklist

After interviewing and hiring hundreds of engineers over the past 12+  years I have come up with a few checklists.  I wanted to share one of those with you so you could conduct comprehensive interviews of QA Engineers for your team.

I use this checklist when I review incoming resumes and during the interview.  It keeps me from missing areas that ensure a good team and technology fit.  I hope you make good use of them.  If you think there are good questions or topics that I have missed - get in touch with me!


SDE/T or QA Engineer interview checklist from Mike Borozdin
If you like this checklist you might want to check out these posts:
Emotional Intelligence in Software Teams  and Good-bye manual tester, hello crowdsourcing!

Code versus Configuration

At Ethos we are building a distributed mortgage origination system and in mortgage there is a lot of
different user types with processes that vary depending on geography.  One of our ongoing discussions is about how much of the logic resides in code vs. being in a workflow system or configuration.  After researching this topic for a bit, I have arrived at a conclusion that the logic should live outside of code very infrequently, which might come as a surprise to a lot of enterprise software engineers.

Costs of configuration files and workflow engines First thing that I assume is true is that having any logic outside of the code has costs associated with it.  Debugging highly configurable system involves not only getting the appropriate branch from source control, you also need to make sure that the right configuration values or the database.  In most cases this is harder for programmers to deal with.  In many FinTech companies where the production data is not made readily accessible…

Should this be a microservice?

After having developed several distributed systems and been a part of dozens of architectural discussions I decided to put together a way to frame the microservices debate. Microservices have been fashionable for some time. A lot of it stemmed from the fact that big and successful cloud companies are using microservices.  It seems reasonable that to create a “serious system” one must be using serious tools and architecture, today it’s microservices.  No engineer wants to be called out for creating a solution that “doesn’t scale.”

The definition for a microservice varies, but overall it tends to be a piece of your system that can run somewhat independently (unless of course it depends on other microservices) and has a REST or queue processing interface.  Overall code encapsulation and separation of concerns have all been around for a long period of time.  Current evolution with containers, fast networks and REST API allows people to easily integrate pieces of their system using web se…