 Cool, I'll open it. Thanks everyone for joining. This is the series about underperformance. Abby's gonna do the introduction in a bit, but I wanna pre-phase that by identifying underperformance is one of the hardest things you have to do as a manager, in my opinion. It's hard to do it in a way that is, timely, and that is, how do you say that? Well, I guess structured to the report. You want to basically arrive almost at the same conclusion for both of you, like this is not working out. These were the requirements and someone has repeatedly failed to meet them. And to get there is really hard. And then the higher the level of a person is the harder that will be. I find it hard and the most common mistakes I may is that I'm too late or that I didn't outline the requirements of the function early enough in a clear enough way. And it's something I think, I don't know anyone who has an easy time doing that. You can get better at it for sure, but it's something I think you're never quite done with. So Abby, thanks for making the Google Doc and please take us to your presentation. Thanks, Ed. Hi, everyone. Welcome to the second management session, as Sid said, on underperformance. I will go ahead and share my screen. Excuse me. So, as Sid said, this is a very difficult subject to talk about and the plan that I want to run through will do a quick recap of what we talked about last week. Very, very quick. And then I want to go to the underperformance page in the handbook and talk through that very briefly to go through the process that we have. I think we can also, as we did with the one-on-ones, make an update to it of some sort to give further help and guidance. I have to say a big thank you up front to Tim and Jacob for allowing me to question them a little bit on some situations and some of their experiences that they like to share and give guidance to everybody else. I have some questions for them, which kind of fall and will hopefully encourage some discussion. And like we did in the previous session, a chance to collaborate on this difficult subject. And then we'll look at what we're going to do for the next session. So, we talked about one-on-ones last week. There is a link there to the video, which is on YouTube. And the same will be with this one. We'll be uploading this video to YouTube also. And Sid also did an update to the video and Sid also did an update to the Handbook page for one-on-ones. I know some of you have already looked at that and it's been really helpful. And as I say, we're hoping to do the same with this session. So, if everyone can go to the Handbook page, I have it open. And I want to just talk through a little bit about the process for underperformance. And I think Marin brought up the question last time about how to spot signs of underperformance and what you should do to address them. The first thing to do would be to offer coaching, either on the one-on-ones that you have with your team members. It may be something that can be quickly fixed by a conversation to discuss a particular issue or something that you've spotted. And it's really important to not let it go and think, oh, it's probably just a one-off. I won't mention it. It'll be fine. That's not what needs to happen, because if you let it, if you leave it and it festers and festers and festers, then it becomes a huge problem. And then it's very, very difficult to deal with later on. So the point there is to, as soon as you spot something that you're not happy with or you think this isn't right, this person, their performance is dipped a little bit. They're not communicating. They may not be managing their time very well. It's important to address it as quickly as possible. Once you've done that and you've given them some time to improve, maybe a week, two weeks, and you've noticed that it's still happening, then the next stage would be to put them on a performance improvement plan. And I want to talk about this a little bit. Performance improvement plans are not, they're designed to help the person improve. And I'll skip down to the template. So this is obviously a formal step where you list out the examples of the work that's not been up to the required standard. You reiterate the fact that you want them to improve and you need them to improve because it's important for them, the team, and you as their manager. You give them typically one month to complete the PIP and you also include some metrics for them to improve on with some timeframes. We usually put the two tasks highlighted here are completed within the first two weeks. At this point, they're encouraged to ask questions to you and obviously to get support and help from you. But the onus is on them to improve. I'll go back to the page. So I really want to try and publicise the PIP process a little bit more in terms that it's meant to be a positive thing. It's not meant to be a negative. Some people may receive a PIP and it is hard for some people to accept the fact that they've been put on a PIP and this is where your role comes in as managers to really support them through it because you've worked with them in the past. This is probably something that hasn't, you know, it could be a one-off thing and they just need a little bit of support from you. So it's important to emphasise that this isn't a negative thing. It's a plan and we want them to improve. And we have an anonymised success story there which I suggest you take a look at and have a read through. Obviously, the PIP process between a manager and a team member is confidential and it should only be between that individual and the manager. And once the PIP is in place, you should review it once a week with them to make sure that they're on track and they're progressing in the right direction. As a member of the PeopleOps team, I'm here to help you with this also. So if you come to a situation with somebody and you're not sure what to do and you need some advice, please come to me or any member of the PeopleOps team and we can help you. Similarly, your manager as well. You can get some advice and guidance from them on how to proceed if you're not sure. And this is something that I think everyone is committed to improve performance. So whoops, I've gone bloody fast. So that's the process in the handbook. What I want to do now is kind of make this a bit more real. And I've picked on Jacob and Tim. No rhyme or reason as to why I chose them, but it suddenly dawned on me that they're both the front end leads. And I think it would be a good chance to get their perspectives on their experiences in general, not necessarily at GitLab but coming from other companies and managing teams in the past to get their perspectives on underperformance. So Jacob, I presume you're there. Can I interrupt for a second? You want to give us this edit for access to the docs too. Did you do that? Sorry, I missed you. Could you repeat that? I just said edit access to the docs for everyone. Oh, I'm sorry. Sorry, Marin, go ahead. Yeah, sorry for interrupting. I just wanted to ask Abby whether it's okay to ask questions now or should I wait with Jacob's and Tim's examples? No, Marin, go ahead. So you mentioned in the section one-on-ones and coaching that you as a manager should coach the employee and then if you give it like a week or two weeks, whatever amount of time is necessary, and then go to PIP. How does that work? It seems a bit unfair to the employee or rather the report if I as a manager am being completely unreasonable. I guess... I'm sorry, did you say something? No, no, continue. Sorry, I guess probably what I should have said as well is that it does depend on the situation and what the issue is because no situation will generally be the same. I guess they're all different. And I think probably you would have to determine how... If somebody's done something particularly serious, then obviously that needs to be treated differently. But if it's something that you think, depending on what it is, if they can show improvement in a reasonable amount of time, it may not be a week, maybe a bit less than that, but I think that might be down to you as the manager to determine what's a reasonable period of time. But can we make this... I wouldn't want to call it a procedure, but can we make this into a thing where you as a people ops generalist actually have to ask the questions for the manager who tells you, I have someone who is being, you know, not performing well, maybe that could be or someone from people ops could actually question me as a manager, hey, why exactly? Or are you being reasonable or unreasonable? Yeah, and actual fact, that's something that I've done when these situations have occurred is I do ask questions about how long it's been going on and what the situation is so that we have a good understanding and what the point is to be reasonable, I think. So yes, I think it's definitely something we can do to make sure we're asking the right questions of managers from people ops, definitely. Cool, great. Thanks, Abby. Right, so Jacob, perhaps let me go to... Let me ask you this question. What lessons have you learned from failing to spot underperformance early on? So in my experience, I think that we're hesitant to say that someone is underperforming in general because we want to think the best of people, but I think that if there's even a doubt, you should investigate it because the process itself can take a long time and it's better to be wrong about it than doing nothing. So even though we want the best of people investigating it, itself doesn't hurt, but it should be clear. To you, it should be clear at that point because you need something improved, you ask for it to be improved and you give them a chance to improve it and if it doesn't happen, then in my opinion, you have underperformance, but then you can also, a lot of times I call Abby and I'm like, hey, what do you think about this? And then we talk about it a little bit because I'm not perfect in my judgment of those situations every time. So that's my opinion about that. Okay, Tim, if I can ask you the same question. Sure. So I also find it very hard normally to basically specify underperformance, but the pin point is really that this is underperformance. I think it normally starts always as a subjective gut feeling and I'm trying to get it as objective as possible, as quick as possible, but honestly, sometimes it's quite hard you need to really go into the content also because coming also from a big enterprise, they just count numbers and count back reports and stuff like that. So I think this is also horrible, but you need to go into the actual content because people can struggle, they can underperform, but it's perhaps not their fault. So basically on paper it says, okay, they have only done two stories in the last four months. Then perhaps it's not actually that they underperform in their actual work, but perhaps they underperform because they are not able to communicate, they are not able to escalate it to another person. So they are blocked by something, they don't bring it up. So sometimes it's also different reasons that it's not really actually that person, but to help actually get the person, to improve the person and get out of this situation. And what I'm trying to do is normally I try to make it objective and say make like a plus minus miss and as soon as I actually see, okay, I have minus there is stuff that I want to be fixed. I need to address them. And as I said before, it normally should go really with the first sign because I also experience it by myself that I've dragged out stuff where you say, okay, it's degrading a little bit, it's degrading and suddenly five months are gone. This also happened to me in the past. And sometimes it's even the person that wants to communicate, but it's not feeling that that has not the self esteem to talk up. So basically the person is underperforming, that simply is relieved that you go to them and say, hey, I saw that you are underperforming and perhaps this person was simply assigned in the wrong area. So they were working in a completely different area that they don't want to work in or where they are not that, not good at, et cetera. And then you can also help them. Okay, does anyone else want to jump in? As I say, I kind of picked on Tim and Jacob to kind of just get the conversation going. If someone else wants to share anything else, please feel free to do so. Otherwise I'll continue to just ask them, ask those two. Yeah, Abby, this is Chad here. Everybody hear him? Okay, thumbs up. Yeah, I just, from my experience, so I'm not super at this. I'm developing as everybody else here, but from my own experience on failures and successes I've had, to me there's a huge difference between a development plan and a performance improvement plan. I think that's a big, big, big disconnect a lot of people have is when you're seeing issues in underperformance, and I'm going to relate it to my world sales, and so that's what I know best. So sales you can look and you can see if there's a rep who's underperforming, meaning not hitting quota or not. The earlier you're able to have that discussion and not focus on the end result, thinking about what those behaviors are that are preventing them from getting to that result, that's the kind of coaching and development that happens on a monthly basis on a one-on-one, and really focusing on that one activity, that one task that you see them getting better at and putting that as a development plan and celebrating the successes, but also acknowledging when they're falling down and talking about that. So if I may kind of put this in the perspective of people, when you talk about performance, so I look at a salesperson, they're underperforming, you're going to look and I'm going to say, okay, are they generating enough pipeline? Do they have enough opportunities? Are their win rates comparable to their peers? Are they closing as their average deal size comparable to their peers? So you kind of figure out what's going on, because they maybe have a great win rate, they may be closing average deal size, but their pipeline's really low. So I want to drill down in terms of why their pipeline is low. What do they control? This is not a marketing issue or a BDR issue. They control. And that's where you start looking at their activity. Are they picking up the phone? Are they emailing people? What does their message look like? What is their targeting or prospecting practices? So there you start focusing on what are the actions they need to change to do that. And so when you're having that conversation, you're letting people know, here's what I'm seeing, and you get that validation. So I want to know if, just pick out a name, Bob, sees and understands the current state as I do. I need them to understand that. And then for them to hear what the expected or desired state looks like, and for them to understand that, and then together we walk through kind of what I'm seeing. And like I said, activities, whatever it is, and they come up, the key word is they come up. I don't come up. They have to come up with that plan. What are the things they need to do differently to actually get there? And that's when we check in on a weekly basis. They may be more frequently than that, depends on how urgent it is, but just kind of see where they're at. And then the performance improvement plan, to me, I mean, that's, I mean, it's all serious, but that's when it's like push comes a shove, like manage, manage out to really say, Hey, we have a big problem here. You haven't been, you haven't been developing over the past, fill it in X weeks, X months on these tasks. And so it kind of takes to this next level. So that's kind of my experience doing performance management, development planning. Okay. Thanks, Chad. So I think we've touched on this, a little bit, but what are the warning signs or patterns of underperformance that Jacob, you've noticed or have noticed in the past? Yeah. So there, like others have said, I think the key thing to remember is that you may, you come up with a theory that something is not going the way that it should. And just because it's not going the way it should, it doesn't mean that that person is doing, you know, underperforming in a way that needs a PIP because we've had people where it's like, you know, a lot of times it's my fault for, because you're scheduling all these things. And a lot of times the person wants to be a hero. They want to get all the things done, but they can't get all the things done because you've given them too many things to do. And that can look like underperformance. And so it's really tricky. So, but that's why I say that like even, and it's not necessarily a negative thing. When you see the signs of someone's not doing what you're asking them to do, doesn't mean that they're doing something wrong. It doesn't mean that, or it doesn't mean that they're doing something purposely wrong. It just means that you may need to realign them. So if you've given someone accidentally, or you know, on purpose, but accidentally too many things to work on, then you can take some of that stuff off of them and see if that pushes them in a different direction. Was that the thing that was actually making them underperform or seem like they're underperforming? Because a lot of times when someone's, not everybody can handle tons of things at once. Everybody has their strengths. I used to say that it's like everybody has a Pokemon card where everybody has their different strengths on that card and you have to figure out what everybody's strengths actually are. And then you can play to those strengths because every single person does things completely differently. And some people can handle a lot of things at once and some people just can't. And so for some people that can't handle the same, a lot of things at once, you can actually give them the same amount of stuff. You just have to give it to them one at a time and don't tell them about the next thing. It's like the mother thing. You just keep all the bad stuff away from them. You just give them that one thing at a time. So in terms of warning signs, I think when you, you can very clearly in the one-on-ones say like, okay, what do you think you can handle? And I like to try and test people on estimating because that's the hardest thing. If you were to estimate, what do you think you can get done? And then we work on that and see what they actually get done. And sometimes in underperformance, people are just, there could be a crazy situation where a person's like, not even working at all. They're doing something completely different. So, you know, you have the things that you've asked them to do. And if they don't, or what do they get done? It's not that they have to get all those things done or something like that, they ask them to do that. And then what's the result of that? And then do they need realigning? Because it's not necessarily a bad thing. It's just a, a figuring out like what, what's the result of you asking this? And if they don't get the time you give them, maybe you give them less or whatever it is. It can be a lot of different things. I'm just using the example of, you know, you know, list of things to get done, but there's lots of different things. So that for me, the really hard part is findings, science and patterns is in the area. So I mean, if you see a sudden drop, then it's much easier because you suddenly see that the person is not showing up or that doesn't answer on stuff, et cetera. So there might be any reason for this. What is really hard for me is normally that this slowly, so that you have over months that someone is like, really putting in less and less and less. Then you really need to get into the content and I'm trying also to get, to get it to the person so that the person knows what my feeling is about their output. And if they see in the same way, if they have the feeling that they also degraded or if they find simply very weird answers that go in a completely different direction. And sometimes it helps to put them on something completely new. So take them off the current topic and put them in something new because they're like, they moved into like a swamp and suddenly it felt like as Jacob said, overwhelmed by everything that happened there or they can't resolve it. So taking them out and putting them on something completely new also sometimes helps to get them out of some patterns when they simply can't cope with all this different stuff of communication, staying on topics, because people are different, especially with developers you have, sometimes you have people who are very open with communication and who can pick up stuff and who are very good at multitasking. And on the other hand, you can have people that are really into coding and can get lost into the code for weeks then you all need to stop them. And this can also be some sort of underperformance that you have what I've seen in the past is that you have people who are like, not able to finish stuff to simply say, okay, this is now the thing and they start to refactoring and you just wanted to basically have a small thing and you suddenly, they come back three months later with a spaceship. That is also some sort of underperformance that can happen especially in the development area that people over architect, over complicated, et cetera. So yeah, that's my story, it's back to Abby. Okay, thanks Tim. Like I say, if anybody else wants to jump in and spread the knowledge around, please do. Another question that I have, I have to say, Jacob and I, we talked yesterday about doing a role play and we decided against it because Jacob had crazy ideas about let's do an example of a pit that went really bad. And I was like, well, yeah, that sounds cool, but we should, it's probably best if we just keep it like this. But who knows, maybe a role play will happen later down the line. I don't know if role plays are encouraged here or at good lab, but we'll see. So my next question, Jacob would be, would be, as we talked about yesterday, how do you present when you've created the PIP and talk us through how you go about delivering it to the individual? Yeah, so again, you're going to have a bunch of different reasons for the PIP, you know, and those reasons need to be defined really, like you're at this point now, this is past all the stuff that Chad was talking about. And you're past all this stuff where you're at the point where you've actually written down. When you're in the one-on-ones, I feel like you should always document everything, like over-document the crap out of everything because, and especially when you're dealing with PIPs because it's a legal process too, like it involves, you know, potentially involve legal situation, you just want to have everything documented down and you really don't want to fly off the cuff. You don't really want to start just coming up with stuff. You really want to stick to a script in my opinion. So the best thing is that the PIP that we have, the example that we have, really documents everything really, really well and it reads like a script. So I just kind of go through and I read through the PIP itself and I ask them, you know, am I, you know, am I completely out base here? What do you think about this? Because we've talked about this before obviously and we're not coming to this like out of nowhere. We've, you know, basically this is reiterating all the points that hopefully we got to on our own so that they're like, yes, this is just a documentation of all the things that we previously talked about. So, you know, and it's so difficult because there's so many different reasons that you can give a PIP and it's not just like all of it's under this same roof of things. And like Tim said, it is a very like, you know, it's hard to figure out like what exactly it is, but you will get to that point and you'll realize that it is that. So then that needs to be documented and the reasons have to be in there. And then because you spent the time documenting it because you spent the time writing everything down, then you should just basically read that back to them. And I think that the important thing is, for me at least is to not come up with other stuff while you're reading the PIP, just stick with those things because if that person then repeats what the PIP was and there's stuff that's not in the PIP, then it can be kind of a problem in that way. And I was gonna say that, you know, you have things like writing, like in my example, because this is what I know, you know, you have things like writing bad code, you've given them the chance to write the good code, you've given them the chance to do the things and then you ask them like, like you go, you do the back and forth and you like, you write all this down, you follow that process. So that PIP is like much farther down the line when you've basically documented everything and you're now repeating all the things that you've already pretty much documented with them. Yeah, document is something very important, but also the other thing is that helped me is talking, talking to people in your management lines or talk to your line manager, talk to other managers who perhaps know the person. At GitLab we have great people, normally my last company was sitting somewhere and you have never heard of them, so this is a huge improvement, but simply as we call it in development, the rubber duck debugging, so that you simply talk to a rubber duck and simply by talking through the whole story and talking through the different points, it can help a lot to actually pinpoint perhaps a strategy or perhaps someone has seen the same pattern in the past or someone has a background on that person. So sometimes it simply helps and especially getting context with your line manager and talking through on the arguments, especially on the PIP that they make sense and are understandable. And then basically with the person itself, get them on the same page and totally intensify basically that intensify completely the one-on-one coaching so that you have basically the person very regularly, like every second, third day and talk them through on stuff based on the PIP stuff so that you can tell them, okay, here's a little bit of feedback about this or how you're doing, et cetera, et cetera. Yeah, that's basically my input on that part. Okay, thanks, Tim and Jacob. The other question I want to put to everyone really is what advice do you have for managing underperformance remotely and in addition to that, do you think there's any difference between no, that's a stupid question. I'll stick with the original one. What advice do you have for managing underperformance remotely? Me? Sorry. To anyone, to anyone. But you are also anyone. So you can answer it too. Remotely? Yeah, it's a little bit harder. I think because you're always in the situation that you have that person completely concentrated on you. I think it is a little bit of an advantage of the actually one-to-one situation because you'll see how the person performs or et cetera. With the remote stuff, I would definitely go for looking at their stories, taking insights on problems that they had. Let them talk you through with them on the actual issues, by example, or perhaps that they had a problem with, they tell you, okay, I wasn't able because this and this was blocking me but you don't see any comment on that this person was blocked by it for three months or so. Then tell them to document it, et cetera. So, yeah. I think also you need some sort of metrics when you're working remotely because, and especially if we let people be super self-sufficient, then you need the metrics. We have that activity log that you can see. Now the activity log isn't necessarily like, they should be doing a ton of stuff in the activity log because somebody could be working on something that's huge. But it should be, I mean, you know, we're smart. We could tell that the activity log should in general or if nothing's going on for a while, you could say like, hey, what's going on? And they could say, hey, I'm almost done this or whatever it is. I think that activity log is a good way to see kind of what's going on in general with them. You really need like some sort of metrics to kind of get, because people can tell you all sorts of stuff that's going on, but unless you know absolutely for sure, then you're never going to be able to act on that. Yeah, and so you have that activity log and then it should just make sense with the work that they're currently doing. But would, for example, leading or asking the report to create their own activity log, for example, in a Google doc, would that be considered micromanaging or actually caring about what the person does so that you can help them out? If it gets to a point of like, I'm concerned about whether the person is doing what they say that they're doing or like whatever it is, I just tell them, you know, let me know, because I think it was, I can't remember who, it was one of the older kid lab people who's no longer with us, told me that, you know, when someone's not doing all this stuff, you give them less and less stuff to do because they should be able to do those less and less things. And so I usually just say like, hey, let me know what you're working on in general because they don't seem to be working on what you're asking them to be working on. And that kind of confirms it really easily. It's not micromanaging. If you did that like all the time, because you, you know, if you did that like every single second of every single day, even when they're doing great, that's micromanaging. But if you can't confirm that they're doing something right, you need to confirm it with something. So you can ask them to make a list. It doesn't really matter, but you have to have that thing. And that's the great thing about asking them to do something because like if they're not doing it, then they, you know, it'll become clear really, really quickly. And this all stinks because, you know, you want to think the best of people and you want them to be wonderful and all the stuff. It's just sometimes they're not going to meet those expectations and you do need some sort of confirmation that they're not doing that. In my opinion. Yeah, this is Chad here. I kind of answered the question of vice of managing performance underperformance remotely. I actually don't, to me, the remote reward doesn't matter in underperformance personally. Maybe because I've always been remote people underperformance is underperformance. I think the question is more around, how do you manage remotely? And when you come to underperformance, the challenge that I found with managing remotely is more of the human interaction that you get in an office. You're walking by somebody. You're kind of seeing how things are doing. So what I would say around underperformance is when you have that issue and no one remote company is remember the human element. Remember the emotional element. And I think it's good to just kind of check in, slack, whatever it is, to say, hey, how are you doing on this? How are you progressing? And just that offering of caring to see where they're at versus waiting to your weekly check in or waiting to every two weeks to just check it in. I think that's the biggest thing I've seen that really works is showing the person you care and you're checking in and you're asking, you're trying to, you're going to get feedback pretty quickly, or at least you're offering up the opportunity to get feedback and give feedback. That's what I've seen the difference between remote. Thanks, Chad. That was kind of why I stumbled a little bit because I think when it comes to underperformance, you're right. I guess it doesn't matter whether you're remote or in an office. It's the same kind of situation. So that's a good point. Is there anything else people want to ask? Can we do examples? Because it's now really abstract, but everyone, I would like to hear stories of the time you messed up most in underperformance and what did you do wrong? So, as soon as a question examples that we have when we messed up managing underperformance or messed up managing a PIP? No, underperformance. And it can be even from your career before it gets loud. We can leave that vague or unspecified. I'll take it off. I think what is hard is that you hire someone. You're mostly the hiring manager for the people or you have to identify underperformance. And you, as I said, you believe in the best of those people and you can't seem to figure out what is making them ineffective. So you reduce the number of tasks. You start giving more feedback. You start being more inquisitive. And if that continues too long, it kind of damages the relation. So it's what I've learned is that it's much more important to set appropriate goals and to set them clear and upfront and to make sure that these are the goals. We can talk about other things that these are the goals and this is what you're accountable for so that it's very easy for both parties to see what it is instead of trying to give advice to help people achieve the goals that can be helpful, but that's not a way to improve underperformance. Then you're starting to do the job for them. And that's detrimental to the relation because now you're kind of this micromanaging person that is annoyingly in people's tasks the entire time. So that's where I set the most, waiting too long, not setting clear goals and then trying to kind of work together to achieve those goals, which I thought were obvious, but they weren't. What about you, Chan? One of my biggest or one of my strongest memories of a failure is actually when I went from being an individual contributor at Return Path to a manager. So basically a first-time manager. And the gap or the learning I had when you looked at underperformance was looking at performance and how to perform based on what I did, what worked for me and expecting that from the other people. And the learning here was there's different ways to go from point A to point Z and allowing them their personality, the way they do things to actually figure out how they get there. And it's not just my way. The story that I remember, it was that aha moment after I kind of messed up is as a top salesperson at Return Path, I'm out with my CEO. We're having dinner later on. And he said the comment of that that was so different than how I expected to go or what I would do, but that was amazing. And I need to remember that again, there's different ways to get to point A to point Z. Your perspective is valid and it's your perspective, but there's also different perspectives and discussions need to happen. Jacob? So I had a VP of engineering from a previous position that we would talk a lot. And his biggest thing, because I had done this before, one of the things I messed up was he said that if you get to know people, and I know like all this stuff I talked about was very like, do this, this and this, but like he said, you have to get to know people and you have to get to know that, you have to go out and have a beer with people, you know, or do a coffee chat if you're remote and do that stuff because you have to get to know people's strengths and weaknesses. You have to get to know like what is the thing that works for them. You just got to basically get to know them as much as you possibly can because then you can actually get what you want out of people if you know them really, really well. And I think before he had said that I was attempting to, like I was hitting a brick wall because I think I had like these five people and one of them was just so completely different than everybody else and I was trying to get him to do stuff and he just wasn't, it wasn't working, it was a hitting a brick wall, whatever it was that wasn't working, it wasn't working. And then I remember I just took him out and we just like had a beer and we just talked and talked and talked and I got to know him a lot better. And I feel like even though I might, it doesn't even, I don't even know if I got anything particularly out of that about how to manage him, but like the fact that like now we have talked, like to know each other, he was much more amiable is that the right word to work together because it wasn't like I was his manager. It was like we were, you know, we knew each other a little more. So I think that was like one of my biggest mistakes was just like, you know, I was just trying to, like I first came in, I was a manager, I'm like okay let's do this, I'm a manager, let's just like, you know, everybody listen to me and that's not always the best, that's not a good method at all. Thanks for that Tim. So my biggest mess up was I hired a junior, he was like quite really, really young, but he was really good at the interview. He solved it in like I think half an hour, an example that normally took two hours or so. So I hired him, he started, he was, he was, he was like a really nice guy and in the first I think two months or so, he was solving issues like this and this and this. So I ramped him up from doing small tasks to bigger tasks and suddenly he was not even able to finish that stuff anymore. So I thought it was my fault and I simply gave him two quick, two big tasks and throw him too early in the water and after five months he still wasn't able to fulfill that stuff. So I was trying to mentor him, I put him on smaller tasks again. I tried to help him, I tried to cover for him because I felt like okay, this is my fault because I throw this really young, poor guy into it and after I think like five months later so I found out basically that he was simply, he did everything to get into the job, he did everything to impress everyone but then after some time he simply was slacking off and doing other stuff and looking around basically. So I think this was my biggest mess up to find this error in the ramp up first, first on my side and didn't try to get into it and since then and I'm not trying to cover up for people which is a very easy thing that you do sometimes but more get into the, that this person solved and this person also takes the responsibility for it. You are there to help the person, you are there to improve the person and stand by their side and I feel responsible for them but on the other hand you shouldn't cover them all the time because then in German you say they are dancing on your nose and that also can happen quite easily. Thanks for that, thanks everyone for joining. I hope to see you at the next session and thanks Abby for organizing and Jacob and Tim for giving some details and sharing stories in chat of course. Thanks everyone.