[HN Gopher] Warm Handoffs
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Warm Handoffs
        
       Author : mooreds
       Score  : 193 points
       Date   : 2024-10-07 11:59 UTC (3 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (luckymike.dev)
 (TXT) w3m dump (luckymike.dev)
        
       | mushufasa wrote:
       | things like these may individually be Very Good Ideas. That said,
       | no organization goes through all of these little practices for
       | onboarding every single new person. And when a firm has a Policy
       | it just sits somewhere and people don't read it.
       | 
       | Oral tradition would work for these things, but even then it is
       | fragile to team turnover.
       | 
       | Part of the appeal of hiring people with work experience at
       | similar companies the expectation that they have all these bits
       | of culture. That's a real value.
        
       | bongodongobob wrote:
       | Nah, sorry but it's literally not my job to redirect someone's
       | question that went to the wrong spot. "Hey, not familiar with
       | that, I'd ask X" is fine. This sounds like extra messaging on my
       | part that the person with the question or request is perfectly
       | capable of handling themselves. It's unneeded chatter or noise.
       | 
       | However, if I do think it falls under my responsibilities but
       | then I find out for some reason it's not after learning new
       | information or hitting a wall, then yes, I'll absolutely fill in
       | whomever it's supposed to go to.
        
         | backbeginning wrote:
         | Concur. Leaning into learned helplessness is not the solution
         | to these problems. At some point, we need people to take
         | accountability and responsibility for themselves. I'm done
         | being developer IT.
        
         | immibis wrote:
         | If it's official workplace policy, then it literally is your
         | job
        
       | seqizz wrote:
       | Honestly I am not convinced. If someone comes to sysadmins
       | channel to ask "hey I randomly get a bluescreen, what should I
       | do?" the solution is to answer "well you can ask #officeit
       | channel". Holding their hand and asking to office IT myself +
       | explaining this to the person who asked the question does not add
       | any extra value, not to mention the extra time it needs.
        
         | williamdclt wrote:
         | You're right that there's regularly cases where the problem
         | really objectively is "not my job" and a cold redirect is more
         | efficient.
         | 
         | However, personally I found that it is incredibly useful to use
         | these sort of things as opportunities. The main opportunity is
         | learning: I'll learn something about BSOD, and about our
         | specific IT setup, maybe some troubleshooting or windows stuff,
         | and all this knowledge builds into strong mental models and
         | often comes in useful even if it's years from now.
         | 
         | It's also an opportunity to build relationship (with the asker,
         | with the IT person). It's a tiny interaction but it makes a
         | difference, you are now seen as "helpful" (and if you didn't
         | know the person at all, you got from 0 to 1 which is huge).
         | 
         | It's also an opportunity to help (sometimes): as a SWE I have a
         | breadth of knowledge, maybe I can help the IT person to have a
         | better config to avoid BSODs, maybe I can help the asker with
         | their specific setup that the IT person is confused about...
         | 
         | There's no question that a warm handoff can be a waste,
         | absolutely. But do it a hundred times and you get so much back
        
           | jabroni_salad wrote:
           | For me its a numbers problem. You help one person and they
           | will tell everyone that you are 'the guy who does stuff'. 2
           | weeks later people are showing up at my desk acting offended
           | that I did not answer the phone (i was already on the phone
           | with a different process dodger and my line is not integrated
           | with any queue system because I am not a CSR) demanding to
           | talk to my supervisor about how terrible I am.
           | 
           | That company had a really strict 'just help anyone' policy
           | and I'm really glad I do not work there anymore.
        
             | hitekker wrote:
             | This is quite key. Performing a service more than once,
             | creates a new role, and with it a new responsibility.
             | 
             | Doesn't matter if my intention was just "I'm just being
             | helpful" gesture. Doing it repeatedly becomes an
             | expectation from others that people rely on. It will be
             | assessed in your performance, and in the bad case, it will
             | become a standard that your team (but not others) are held
             | to.
        
       | kqr wrote:
       | When governments and related agencies implement this it is called
       | _no wrong door_.
       | 
       | I like it. It doesn't have to take any effort. When you hit reply
       | on an email sent to the wrong person, add the correct email to
       | the field with recipients. That's it!
       | 
       | In something like Slack, you write the answer in the correct
       | location for the question. That's it.
       | 
       | These are tiny changes that don't cost anything but can decrease
       | friction a lot, because the nobody has to repeat themselves any
       | time someone has gone through the wrong door.
        
         | fudged71 wrote:
         | I'd love to see a list of all these services-related best
         | practices. Another one I saw recently was "computational
         | kindness"
        
           | bryanrasmussen wrote:
           | https://lawsofux.com/postels-law/
           | 
           | is another, all somewhat circling around the same issues
        
         | __float wrote:
         | It's also been called that in a software engineering
         | context[0], though it looks the post didn't get much traction
         | on HN when it was submitted[1].
         | 
         | [0] https://lethain.com/no-wrong-doors/
         | 
         | [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40450485
        
           | jcoder wrote:
           | That blog is simply saying the same thing as GP--that it's a
           | term from gov agencies, and musing about applying the same
           | ideas in their work.
        
       | neilv wrote:
       | I often try to practice something like this, but context affects
       | how actively helpful/meta I am.
       | 
       | Someone who's new, or seems overwhelmed, or has shown some
       | effort... might get more hand-holding help... than someone who
       | seems to be, say, ignoring the single-source-of-truth-for-most-
       | all-things wiki that was impressed upon them, and just trying to
       | knock off a task as easily as possible, with no consideration for
       | others' time.
       | 
       | A suspected former is more likely to get my best customer
       | service, team player help. "Have you met Jane? I think she's
       | started a new product feature for that, but there's also a
       | related tailoring that Sales has been doing. Let me introduce you
       | to Jane, and we can see which thing you should be you should be
       | working with today. I'm curious myself." (Goals are to unblock
       | this person, have everyone on the right tracks, and set the
       | culture for team-orientedness.)
       | 
       | A suspected latter, I'll play it by ear, for exactly how to see
       | whether they checked the wiki (or did whatever is the thing
       | everyone should know from onboarding they're supposed to do
       | first), and try to nudge them into the right meta thinking if
       | they need it, while also _not_ sending the cultural message to
       | _not_ be very helpful.
        
         | withinboredom wrote:
         | For the latter, I try to be helpful as if they were the first
         | type. Everyone sometimes forgets shit (myself included).
         | Basically, if I can search the docs and find the answer
         | immediately, I will just share that with them. If they keep
         | being "forgetful" or time-wasting I will have a 1:1 with them
         | to discuss the behavior ("don't take my kindness for weakness"
         | type of thing). I will also have a 1:1 with their manager who's
         | job is to deal with that sort of thing. This usually has the
         | intended effect -- eventually removing them from the
         | organization, or teaching them how to use search functions to
         | solve problems themselves.
        
           | Retric wrote:
           | There's also a 3rd option. When something is a critical
           | priority leveraging other people's time and expertise may be
           | considered completely appropriate by the organization. As in
           | not getting something fixed is costing 6+ figures per hour.
           | 
           | Obviously the frequency of such events should be watched
           | closely, but sometimes it's a good idea to drop what you're
           | doing and get more directly involved.
        
             | yuliyp wrote:
             | Yeah there are lots of reasons to go into the warm case: in
             | addition to genuine effort on the asker, urgency,
             | criticality, or relationship building can all tip the
             | balance.
        
       | JamesSwift wrote:
       | And then on the other end of the spectrum you have Ice-cold
       | Handoffs as practiced by Microsoft.
       | 
       | Good luck to any poor soul caught in the spider-web of microsofts
       | online support as they play hot-potato with you while denying
       | culpability, and forcing you to do all the legwork. Sending you
       | through multiple github repos / discord / support forums where it
       | becomes increasingly obvious these teams do not get along and
       | want little to do with each other, let alone you.
        
         | riffic wrote:
         | I was gonna ask how do you do this whole thing if you have a
         | workplace that uses Teams instead of Slack, but I guess you
         | answered in a way.
        
       | satisfice wrote:
       | This feels nannyish to me. And what's with this "enforcement"
       | crap?
       | 
       | If your social policy needs to be enforced, then it didn't
       | succeed in the marketplace of ideas.
       | 
       | If you like this, then do it. It will catch on if it catches on.
       | Meanwhile, there is work to do.
        
         | immibis wrote:
         | Corporations aren't marketplaces of ideas - they're
         | dictatorships.
        
           | satisfice wrote:
           | Yes, so is a family if you are a parent. But IF you are a
           | parent, you know that ACTING like a dictator backfires on you
           | pretty hard.
           | 
           | You think this policy is worth alienating your tech workers
           | for? No. No, I don't believe you do. Certain other policies
           | might. This is unenforceable and a bit insulting.
        
             | krisoft wrote:
             | > You think this policy is worth alienating your tech
             | workers for?
             | 
             | Why do you think this policy would be alienating your tech
             | workers? Or rather what do you think the "policy" is which
             | would be causing this alienation in your opinion?
             | 
             | As far as I see they recommend that if you see someone
             | struggling and "knocking on the wrong door" help them reach
             | the right door and add what context you can add to their
             | situation. That just feels common sense to me. What do you
             | find "insulting" about it?
        
           | culcapb wrote:
           | I think they're more democracies since usually more than one
           | people own all of the stock. Workplaces can't also
           | arbitrarily do anything they want, it must be within the the
           | agreement made previously with the employee. And that
           | doesen't come even close to intangible asset management like
           | perception. Bad optics can destroy a company from within even
           | when everything should be okay on paper.
        
         | mcherm wrote:
         | > If your social policy needs to be enforced, then it didn't
         | succeed in the marketplace of ideas.
         | 
         | > If you like this, then do it. It will catch on if it catches
         | on.
         | 
         | I have often met the kind of entrepreneur who thinks that just
         | building a better product is enough and that no effort should
         | be spent on marketing.
         | 
         | They are wrong. Practices often will be taken up by users at a
         | higher rate if the policies are made "official" and at a vastly
         | higher rate if they are "marketed" via a reminder.
        
           | culcapb wrote:
           | Constantly reminding someone of something they wouldn't do by
           | themselves is perceived as nagging. It gets people to do
           | stuff at the cost of growing resentment, it's not free
        
       | ascendantlogic wrote:
       | The responses here are definitely indicative of who has good
       | relationships with their coworkers and who doesn't. I feel like
       | the point of this exercise is to foster better relationships
       | overall.
        
         | notatoad wrote:
         | i think that's a pretty good indicator of how useful this is
         | though - we don't need communication strategies for dealing
         | with our helpful co-workers who are good communicators.
         | 
         | if you've got an office full of people who have good
         | relationships with their co-workers, don't start adding new
         | policies to your slack. just keep doing whatever is already
         | working.
        
       | yuliyp wrote:
       | Sometimes a cold handoff is appropriate. If the team initially
       | asked has nothing relevant to offer besides a guess at who owns
       | it, having the extra person around in the discussion is just
       | wasted effort and attention. If it's a related team, then sure do
       | the warm handoff to get to a solution more effectively.
        
       | ninalanyon wrote:
       | > "If someone asks you a question you can't answer, take them to
       | someone who can answer it. If you don't know who that is, help
       | find someone who can."
       | 
       | Isn't this just ordinary politeness?
       | 
       | I can believe that it's not as common as it should be but it's
       | what I usually try to do when asked a question I can't answer. Of
       | course the amount of effort I put in depends on how important I
       | think the question and answer might be.
        
         | ElijahLynn wrote:
         | Definitely one would think. Some people are busy, and don't
         | take that extra time, or just aren't that polite like you and
         | I.
        
           | chrsig wrote:
           | Some people have taken the extra time and not gotten it in
           | return, or otherwise been met with negative consequences for
           | helping people.
           | 
           | Bad experiences when trying to be benevolent really take a
           | tole on some people.
        
         | lazyasciiart wrote:
         | I try and do it once per person.
        
         | hansvm wrote:
         | If you haven't explicitly thought about the second-order
         | consequences, something like "I'm almost certain Jane from
         | accounting knows best how to handle that sort of thing, and if
         | not then she definitely knows who to talk to" would seem plenty
         | polite. It solves the asker's problem as best you're able, and
         | it's proactive and friendly.
        
           | DowagerDave wrote:
           | it also indirectly (and unlikely unintentionally) increases
           | your personal value. Triple win!
        
         | travisjungroth wrote:
         | What takes it beyond ordinary politeness is the "take them".
         | 
         | Putting it into physical space, if someone walked into the
         | wrong office and you told them what the right office was and
         | how to get there that would generally be considered polite.
         | Just telling them they're in the wrong office is probably
         | impolite. The warm handoff is the equivalent of walking them
         | down the hall and telling the people in the other office why
         | you brought them there.
         | 
         | Having worked at a high-end hotel and on software teams with
         | high support standards, this is very natural to me. It isn't
         | for others.
        
       | allknowingfrog wrote:
       | When I have this problem, it's usually via a private Slack
       | message. I'm happy to direct people to the appropriate channel,
       | but there's really no good way to link to the original question,
       | even if I wanted to be "warmer". Asking someone to copy-and-paste
       | into an appropriate channel has always worked for me, and I'm not
       | so sure that that isn't the best approach in general.
        
         | throwway120385 wrote:
         | This is the biggest issue I have with Slack. Often I'll have
         | like 5 different conversations involving different people all
         | around the same thing, and the only way to bring them all
         | together is to start a channel which then either sits around
         | forever or eventually gets archived and disappears. There's no
         | way to move messages from one channel to the other to collect a
         | history of comments, so it's not terribly useful for advancing
         | a concern from one group to another as it collects receipts.
         | Instead, the old thread with the old receipt dies completely
         | and the context has to be rebuilt for every new group of people
         | you are talking to.
        
           | rdoherty wrote:
           | I hate DMs in Slack for this and many reasons. One thing I do
           | try is to ask people to move to a public channel unless it's
           | a personal issue. Copy/paste their question and cc their
           | handle.
        
         | ilrwbwrkhv wrote:
         | Ya there is a simpler solution to OP's problems. Stop using an
         | awful, slow piece of software like Slack.
        
           | theamk wrote:
           | Would other chat systems do it better somehow? Which ones?
           | 
           | I'd imagine that "system supports private messages; I cannot
           | link to them in public channels, copy-paste is the only way
           | to share" is pretty universal. Even IRC and ICQ operated this
           | way.
        
             | allknowingfrog wrote:
             | I used Zulip at a previous job some years ago and was
             | pretty happy with it. I honestly don't remember whether it
             | had a better strategy for DMs in particular, but the
             | general policy of "everything is a thread" seemed to solve
             | a lot of problems.
        
           | rrr_oh_man wrote:
           | Software is rarely the solution for bad process.
        
         | dustincoates wrote:
         | Depending on whether it is a single message or not, Slack now
         | allows you to embed messages from private channels or DMs and
         | have them shown to people who don't have access to those areas.
        
       | SpicyLemonZest wrote:
       | I do this when it's appropriate. Where I'm not sure it applies is
       | in the very common scenario of someone asking a question that
       | doesn't really make a ton of sense. If I do a warm handoff, I'm
       | implicitly endorsing their question, even if it's needlessly
       | hostile or poorly formed or based on a misunderstanding. (I could
       | take on the responsibility of fixing every bad question that
       | comes to me, whether or not I'm the right person to ultimately
       | answer it, but then I wouldn't have time to do my job.)
        
       | cck9672 wrote:
       | This is one of the foundational tenants of Apple culture. I never
       | knew there was a word or phrase that identified it.
        
       | boxed wrote:
       | Slack should really implement a "move" feature.
        
       | chambers wrote:
       | Hand-holding colleagues needing help is a nice sentiment. Even
       | better: when leadership rewards that support and when coworkers
       | quietly pay-it-forward. It's heartwarming to see it in action.
       | 
       | That said, I don't think the author's main rule scales:
       | 
       | > "If someone asks you a question you can't answer, take them to
       | someone who can answer it. If you don't know who that is, help
       | find someone who can."
       | 
       | Setting an expectation of hand-holding a request across channels
       | would be quite unpopular with most if not all, the technical
       | support teams I've worked with. It can be quite a bit of effort
       | when you're getting 10+ redirects a week, especially when the
       | requestor hasn't done their due diligence. If my own team tried
       | this, we would quickly become the "goto" for any domain adjacent
       | problem. A real recipe for burn-out.
       | 
       | A lot depends not on the process he's advocating for but on the
       | environment which he doesn't seem to analyze. IMO, there's no
       | results, costs, mistakes, or trade-offs shared, so I'd be
       | inclined to chalk this up as marketing.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-10-10 23:01 UTC)