```yaml
---
slug: reward-and-recognize
published: 2017-10-12T00:00:00.000Z
description: Why your spot bonus program might be hurting, not helping
changelog: ~
---
```

![Pinterest's recognition coins](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/1795/146831832-f140bae4-ef9e-46cf-abc2-3196000051b4.png)
_Pinterest recognition coins. Personal tokens that carried important meaning._

It's deceptively simple. Your employee survey says folks don't feel recognized, and so your HR team helps you develop a bonus program. In rolling it out, you tell your leadership team this bonus is for folks who go above and beyond the expectations of their role. Fast forward a few years, and we're horrified to learn that the bonus program is at best ineffective; at worst it became a point of toxic culture itself! We just wanted to help people feel like their work was appreciated, but nearly every reward program contains one of the following mistakes.

**A Purely Monetary Reward.** Unless the bonus is a very significant amount, bonus reward dollars get lost in the pay stub. As a leader, you owe it to your team to seek out better ways to recognize folks in line with the values of your company.

**Lack of Input.** If we are only recognizing the individuals we see, then we are ignoring a large portion of the work (and the individuals) we don't see regularly.

**Rewarding Above and Beyond.** Finally, the criteria often used to define these recognition programs is incredibly subjective. To make matters worse, we often describe it as going "above and beyond" expectations without defining either "above" nor "beyond". As a result, we end up subjectively picking conditions that may not emphasize the culture we want.

None of these by themselves will kill an engineering organization. But here's an actual cause and effect. A company I wager most folks are familiar with built a spot bonus program where the manager had a $3000 use-it-or-lose-it budget to issue bonuses to any employee they felt was "exceeding the expectations" [sic]. Nearly every manager used this system to reward employees in $500 increments for shipping large projects, regardless of the project's success or adoption.

Today, the company is struggling with leverage and a massive culture of Not Invented Here. Asked to dig into why this was happening, I sat down with the engineers to learn why there was so much value placed on new instead of existing solutions. Immediately, the problems with their bonus program emerged.

1. The $500 award meant nothing to the employees. The "reward" as engineers saw it was a letter they could include in their promotion application which was the key reference point for career advancement.
2. In the larger teams, the extroverted folks were consistently the the ones receiving the recognition.
3. The reward considered "exceeding expectations" as building something new as opposed to using existing solutions.

While this company accidentally made all three mistakes, you don't have to. But if you want to roll out your recognition idea well, the process is going to take both research and time.

## The Reward

The foundation of any recognition program is the recognition, but the vehicle for that recognition is the reward itself. A reward needs to be meaningful, significant, and relevant. If the reward isn't something people actually desire, the program will do a poor job of selling itself. Some of the best rewards reflect the company culture in the award itself.

- Rackspace has a [Straightjacket Award](https://blog.rackspace.com/and-the-straightjacket-goes-to-drum-roll-please), given to only to those who "do whatever it takes to bring Fanatical Support to life."
- A group at Pinterest uses Recognition Coins (pictured at the top of this article) with an antique silver finish, given along with a personal thank you conversation from a skip level manager.
- Blizzard makes sure that employees who stay with the company through the highs and lows of game development take home a [piece of the magic](http://us.blizzard.com/en-us/company/about/service-awards.html) they helped create.

There's no real guidelines on cost here, but seriously, don't cut corners.
If you're having a hard time being creative, sites like [The Noble Collection](https://www.noblecollection.com/), [Thin the Herd](https://www.thintheherdguitars.com/buy-now), and [Ichiban Toys](http://www.ichibantoys.com/) are all great places to start the brainstorming. Involve the team, and you'll end up with something that people want to earn.

## The Visibility

Getting visibility into your organization means doing more than just asking everyone a few days before the next all hands and hoping for the best. It needs to be systematic, consistent, and low friction.

By far, the most common solution to visibility is to get more people involved in the process. With the increased popularity of Slack, tools like [HeyTaco!](https://www.heytaco.chat/) and [Propsboard](http://www.propsboard.com/) make it easier than ever to thank someone. As an added bonus, these newer tools give you a log of every person in the company doing amazing work. (Don't forget that you also need to be using these tools if you want them to become a norm at your company.)

One of the coolest solutions to a lack of visibility I've seen over the years is a physical wall at Pinterest where people pinned up weekly achievements, complete with lighting and sound effects. When visibility is something that feels fun to do, you'll see a lot more involvement from everyone.

Finally, I can't stress the importance of keeping first level managers engaged throughout the process. With weekly 1:1s, and sometimes also being hands-on in the code, these folks have a much better pulse on all the engineering happening in the company and why it matters. Find or make the time in your regular organizational meetings to connect with these folks and feed their information back into whatever universal system for visibility you've adopted.

## The Consistent Criteria

By now, you have something worth earning, and insights into who could be doing things that you'd like to recognize as an organization. It's time for the single most difficult part of the reward system: clear and transparent criteria. It starts with answering the following questions.

- What about this work was significant?
- Who (person or organization) was this work important to?
- If anyone else in the company did this work, would it be just as significant? Why or why not?

What you're trying to do with these questions is identify what specifically is the behavior you are trying to recognize as a company. The number one way criteria systems break down is by rewarding people for going "above and beyond" expectations; it's a vague statement that doesn't consider the value generated or the business importance. The other thing you are trying to do is normalize the criteria. If your company wants to reward leverage, then the criteria for the reward should specifically state that.

Make a spreadsheet if it helps with planning out the criteria. List every criterion down the left hand side. Then, when you evaluate based on this criteria, you can see prior decisions. When (not if) you find a misalignment in your decisions and criteria, flag it, address the difference, and reevaluate everyone with the new criteria.

And if multiple people satisfy your criteria? Then multiple people receive the reward. Consistent criteria ensures you're constantly recognizing people for the right reasons.

## Private Recognition, Occasionally Public

You'll need to select whatever delivery style makes sense for your program and your company. Remember, not everyone wants to be singled out in a company all hands. Before you drag someone up on stage, thank them privately and ask them if it is okay for you to point out their work.

Done right, you can reward the culture you want to become and begin affecting change.


Why your spot bonus program might be hurting, not helping

strong

Link

Document

Reward and Recognize

```yaml
---
slug: redesigns-are-hard
published: 2015-07-07T00:00:00.000Z
description: Don't skip the hard parts of the redesign
changelog: ~
---
```

It began with an image.

![LinkedIn Circa 2009](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/1795/146830399-9ae817fe-5b87-4c08-b63b-a25c182a96db.png)

With a semi-regular cadency, my news feed gets filled with a round of [LinkedIn](http://zeroagency.com/linkedinredesign/index.html), [Twitter](https://dribbble.com/shots/1521386-Twitter-Layout-Redesign), and [Facebook](http://sencerbugrahan.deviantart.com/art/Facebook-Profile-v3-127928634) redesigns. The designs are always rich with new interaction models and tons of cool features. They are individually good pieces; conversation starters for what these products could be. What has always frustrated me about these designs is that they're untethered from the realities of business. Without these constraints, the designs remain purely conceptual.

If you're going to put out a piece that "reimagines" one of these sites, don't skimp on the hard parts.

## Put the Advertising Back In

I hate it. You hate it. It's ugly. It takes away from the visual aesthetic. But those "skyscrapers" and "medium rectangles" (as the IAB calls them) are really important to a company's financials. How important? As of this writing...

- LinkedIn: $480 million per year
- Twitter: $1.55 billion per year
- Facebook: $13.2 billion per year
- Google: $62 billion per year

![iab Logo](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/1795/146830463-40e2b73c-01ae-46da-adb6-23d71750148b.png)
_The iab "rect" advertisement. The bane of any redesign._

To put this in perspective, *a Facebook redesign without advertising is the equivalent of removing the GDP of Iceland from the company's bottom line*. At today's entry level talent rates, LinkedIn would exchange around 4,000 employees for a site devoid of advertising.

Failure to address advertising creates a very naïve and narrow view of the site. If you insist on forgoing advertising, explain why and don't leave the ROI argument in someone else's hands. Better yet, reimagine an advertising unit on the platform; sites like Facebook have enough demand that there is opportunity to bring in interesting and engaging experiences without sacrificing the design's end goal.

## Design Purgatory

With three distinct business lines and [eight different applications right now](https://itunes.apple.com/us/artist/linkedin-corporation/id288429043) in iTunes, there is more to LinkedIn than just the homepage, profile, and companies. Looking at LinkedIn redesigns, however, you'd think the entire site consisted of three views. The same can be said of Facebook, where every designer takes a crack at the Facebook profile and news feed, but few remember to include events and groups.

When only a portion of the product gets redesigned, this creates a "design purgatory": parts of the product that remain in the old design alongside the new effort. I would like to see a redesign that talks about this design purgatory. On large sites, it is unrealistic to redesign everything at once. In a partial redesign, what does the partially modernized parts of the product look like? How will the design create a sense of consistency across both old and new features?

Need a great example? Take a shot at redesigning the emails the company sends. There's no bigger instance of design purgatory than email.

## Use Real Content

Big images are awesome when every one of them comes from Getty. Unfortunately, the majority of users are not professional photographers. Unless you are Flickr, 500px, etc, you don't have enough perfectly focused high resolution images to give away 2/3 of a desktop screen to a beautiful image. And yet, every redesign of a profile seems to emphasize these impossible photographs as the dominant element.

![Facebook reimagined with large used photos, but I substituted in real photos from my phone camera](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/1795/146830525-2ed18e12-8909-412c-a965-7b6a4aeef895.png)
_Put real photos in, not stock images_

Take an example: the [Fred Nerby redesign of Facebook](https://www.behance.net/gallery/Facebook-New-Look-Concept/6504647) from 2013. It's visually engaging. The catch? Nothing in the design represents what a real user's Facebook page might look like. It isn't until halfway down, at the "Rome 2012" album, we encounter something that resembles real user content: 47 photos taken of a couple obsessively in front of a landmark along with awkwardly lit restaurant selfies.

Since most people are terrible content creators, take a moment and sub out the stock photography for everyday iPhone camera pictures.

## Answer Why

The last thing you need to do if you're going to redesign one of these big sites is answer "why".

Why does the site need a redesign? Why does it need **this** redesign?

It sounds deceptively simple, but writing down the rationale for a redesign is hard. Design is a tool to fix a problem, and with no problem spelled out, the whole thing feels like a redesign for redesign's sake. **You can't just put a design out without being clear about what problem the design is solving.**

A good redesign is tested. It reflects reality. It shows a holistic view. It has real content, ads, and knows it has rough spots. A good redesign also writes the thoughts and decisions down for the next generation of designers to follow in their wake.

So let's all agree to put the hard parts in.


Don't skip the hard parts of the redesign

Redesigns are Hard

```yaml
---
slug: coding-interviews
published: 2015-06-22T00:00:00.000Z
description: A rant on interviews that don't assess anything useful
changelog: ~
---
```

We shouldn't need to code in onsite interviews. However, in a sea of resumes, we need some kind of signal to understand how well a candidate understands the job they are applying for. Lacking any better way to answer "do you understand the concept of programming", we're left with technical interviews. We use these questions because we need to establish a baseline for programming competency.

As a company increases in size, our definition of competency changes. This is because as engineers, we are always told to [hire smart people](http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/GuerrillaInterviewing3.html). In response, our once straightforward baseline questions evolve to look for smarter and smarter developers. The cumulation of this process is a complete migration from "show me something you've built" to "reverse a linked list". As we try and find harder questions for candidates, we look online for guidance. We go to Google and we come back with knapsacks.

## Knapsacks in the Workplace

The Knapsack Problem illustrates everything that is wrong with technical interviews and how we conduct them today.

> Given a knapsack size of "n", what is the most valuable combination of items you can place in the knapsack without exceeding the weight limit?

![A knapsack showing a capacity of 15kg, surrounded by several generic blocks with various weights and prices](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/1795/146829910-46154c35-282e-4724-85dd-490cfe2e0d52.png)
_Knapsack Problem Illustrated by Dake ([wikimedia commons](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Knapsack.svg))_

Engineers love this shit.

- The basic implementation isn't "optimal"
- To do it "right" is "hard"
- The solutions on the internet are generally trusted

Hell, the Knapsack Problem even has one true solution and "hints" written by smart people that you can copy/paste right into your company wiki.

Everything about the Knapsack Problem is flawed. When we pick this question, we do it ignorant of why it was a "hard" problem to begin with.

The Knapsack Problem above is known as a Dynamic Programming (or DP) problem. DP was conceived in [1953 by Richard Bellman](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC528332/pdf/pnas00713-0067.pdf) as a way to break a large problem up into smaller sub problems. However, it wasn't until the late 1960's that [Viterbi](http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/login.jsp?tp=&amp;arnumber=1054010&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fieeexplore.ieee.org%2Fxpls%2Fabs_all.jsp%3Farnumber%3D1054010) as well as [Hart, Nilsson, and Raphael](http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/login.jsp?tp=&amp;arnumber=4082128&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fieeexplore.ieee.org%2Fxpls%2Fabs_all.jsp%3Farnumber%3D4082128) created algorithms that applied DP theory to real world problems. It took over 15 years to go from an idea to an algorithm, 15 years by some of the smartest people in our field.

**And we expect someone who doesn't recall the solution from memory to condense 15 years of computer science into a 45 minute window via clever hints.**

That's not just hard, that's unrealistic and unfair. The only way you could complete the programming activity in time is strict recall. This places the Knapsack Problem and its ilk in the realm of what I've been calling Eureka Problems; named for the required "A-Ha" someone has to have in the interview to stand a chance.

## Eureka Problems

The worst programming problems for technical interviews are in the bucket of Eureka Problems. If you don't know what a Eureka Problem feels like, here are a few technical interview questions.

1. Given an array of numbers, find the array range that contains the largest possible sum.
2. Given a grid and a robot at point [X1, Y1], write a solution that calculates the path to its destination [X2, Y2].
3. Given a linked list, write a solution that detects if the linked list contains a loop.

For these problems, it's possible to develop a solution to the problem. Anyone who has done a technical interview recently smells something missing: constraints. With **only a few more words,** these questions become Eureka Problems, containing one true answer.

1. Given an array of numbers, find the array range that contains the largest possible sum **in O(n) time**. (Solved using Kadane's algorithm)
2. Given a grid and a robot at point [X1, Y1], write a solution that calculates the **shortest** path to its destination [X2, Y2]. (Solved using A* search algorithm)
3. Given a linked list, write a solution that detects if the linked list contains a loop **without modifying our objects**? (Solved using Floyd's cycle-finding algorithm)

The restrictions force you to have a aptly named Eureka Moment for these problems. Like the Knapsack Problem above, you're asked to condense the thinking behind a decade or more of computer science into whatever time remains in the interview.

These Eureka Problems are so ingrained in our interview culture that there are [entire books written](http://www.amazon.com/Cracking-Coding-Interview-Programming-Questions/dp/098478280X) on coding interviews. That's right. Entire books center around recognizing the 10 most common Eureka Problems and the 10–15 variants of each. Those questions above are all in the book, along with the Knapsack Problem from higher up.

Once you add the restrictions, you are no longer assessing the candidate's ability to do the job asked of them. Instead, you've created a question that is assessing the candidate's memorization and recall ability. That's not what we want to know at all.

## Towards Pragmatism

"Do I want to be on the receiving end of this person's emails, code, & bug reports?"

This is the question you probably want to answer if you care about the software you are creating. It's also easier to check by asking questions closer to the job at hand. If he is doing browser code, make a multi-column layout. If she is an application developer, have her call a mock of your API and do something with the data.

We say we want a holistic developer who sees the big picture. Someone who asks questions about the business, how it all fits together, and sees opportunity in all the different parts of the role. None of these traits come out in asking someone to recreate a pathfinding algorithm.

Let's ask these instead, for example.

- Given this page on Stack Overflow (in an area your resume says you have experience in) can you help me figure out which answer is the right answer? How do we test it and find out?
- I have a design / product specification here. Can we walk through it and start on a basic proof of concept over the next 30 or so minutes?
- Let's take this code here that I wrote and isn't working. Can you sit over my shoulder as we debug this and help me create working code? We can also add some tests so I don't break it again.

If you can't get away from your attraction to classic Computer Science interview questions, consider accepting the less than perfect solution. You're hiring someone to solve problems and write code, not to design algorithms.
Remember.

"Do I want to be on the receiving end of this person's emails, code, & bug reports?" Because that's the question you need to be answering at the end of the interview.


A rant on interviews that don't assess anything useful

blockquote

Coding Interviews

```yaml
---
slug: the-stairway-problem
published: 2015-05-26T00:00:00.000Z
description: How 12 steps can feel like 12 miles apart
changelog: ~
---
```

One of the biggest transformations a company goes through isn't financial, but physical. Adding, changing, moving, and creating new physical space in an office will change the dynamics of how work gets done. People are at new desks. Things feel fresh. There's reclaimed wood everywhere. There's also 12 steps between two teams that despite their new-found distance are still working on the same goal. It may as well be 12 miles.

Welcome to the stairway problem.

![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/1795/146829468-ef2f5005-8090-43e6-ac9f-bd2957f167fe.png)

The addition of a stairwell in a company is the second biggest physical change a company faces. The largest is moving buildings, but that is more like an organizational blender with four walls and a roof. Physical space separates and divides. As shouting distance becomes impossible, the cracks in communication begin to show. Teams that are autonomous and given enough isolation will evolve independently. Soon the common thread everyone was working on gets lost. You'll find yourself with silos. Most companies solve this breakdown with, you guessed it, a [Status Report](./fix-the-status-report).

## Talent Transfusions

The solution that keeps everyone from building up silos is obvious in hindsight: shifting roles. If a company embraces having people try new things (and creates the means for them to go forth and do so), the silos never get a chance to form.

Transfusion in an organization has some hidden benefits. It forces you invest in onboarding, it makes you have come-together meetings so vision can be shared, and it creates deeper threads that run between the different parts of the organization. You may not have the answer to your scaling problem, but Sally does. And because of transfusion, someone that worked with Sally on another project knows she's a badass and can solve this exact problem you are having. Don't limit yourself to just contributors, either. Management should be moving around as well. Everyone should have the opportunity to see more of the organization.

That doesn't mean moving people ad-hoc and causing disruption. To make transfusion natural, there needs to be some lightweight structure or ground rules.

**Own the transfusion.** Tie up loose ends and provide enough time that leadership (tech and people) can try to find someone else who loves the role you are vacating.

**Be a knowledge bearer.** Understand that not everything is written down. Because you did good work, people will have questions you'll need to answer. There needs to be time made for these opportunities as part of your new role.

## Embrace Your Space
[![The GitHub offices boast casual spaces near meeting rooms, creating accidental spaces for creativity (and communication) to happen. Photo by Ben Scholzen CC by 2.0](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/1795/146829512-4545e15b-2a8d-4f42-9663-0351477c99e8.png)](https://www.flickr.com/photos/dasprid/8148010408/)

Unless you're Apple, you're probably not going to have the resources to create a [campus free of physical space divisions](http://appleinsider.com/articles/15/02/09/exclusive-february-aerial-tour-of-apple-incs-campus-2-shows-spaceship-ring-rising-theater-progress-more). In addition to a healthy transfusion process at the heart of this, you can steal a page from Apple's philosophy. Make happenstance happen. The more chance encounters teams have, the more likely big problems get caught early.

If you're fortunate enough to be able to reconfigure your space, create natural space that people want to spend time in. Small (unbookable) 2–4 person areas will encourage people to go somewhere to talk, away from their team and into the big bold world.

If you can't knock down walls, you can at least put meetings on another floor. Getting out of your area means exploring and learning where other teams are and what they are doing.

## A Daily Habit

Transfusions and changes in physical space share a common goal: communication. Mixing people up through space, teams, and layout all contribute to the mesh of conversation in the company. It requires rigor until it becomes a behavior.

A post-it on your monitor serves as a good reminder. Make an effort every day. Spend at least a half hour making happenstance happen.

You won't fix all of a company's silos, but you can certainly reduce those that interfere with your team's ability to do amazing things.


How 12 steps can feel like 12 miles apart

The Stairway Problem

```yaml
---
slug: pinspiration
published: 2015-05-18T00:00:00.000Z
description: Helping people accomplish something through software
changelog: ~
---
```

Inspiration is a raw material from which great things are made. I will be joining a San Francisco company that is out to make the world more inspired.

Search for ["red chair" on Google](https://www.google.com/search?tbm=isch&amp;as_q=red+chair&amp;as_epq=&amp;as_oq=&amp;as_eq=&amp;imgsz=&amp;imgar=&amp;imgc=&amp;imgcolor=&amp;imgtype=&amp;cr=&amp;as_sitesearch=&amp;safe=images&amp;as_filetype=&amp;as_rights=). Search for ["red chair" on Pinterest](https://www.pinterest.com/search/pins/?q=red%20chair). While Google through its algorithms is able to give me things which are chairs in name and undoubtedly red, something is missing. The results are hollow. By contrast, the Pinterest results are rich and full of life. There is a human quality to every single image you view on the site. Like Google, there are [red chairs](https://www.pinterest.com/pin/242490761158377365/). But unlike Google, there are also [guides to making my chairs red](https://www.pinterest.com/pin/8796161744806580/), settings in which [red chairs look stunning](https://www.pinterest.com/pin/125186064615892091/), and [chairs crafted](https://www.pinterest.com/pin/12173861462220825/) from other red things. You walk away from a Pinterest search full of ideas.

That's the magic of Pinterest.

As a web site, Pinterest's `<title>` tag says "Discover and save creative ideas." This is Pinterest as we know it today. "Discover" neatly captures the searching and browsing facets of the site, while "save" encapsulates the entire pinning ecosystem. The story is not completely told. Every Pin has an end state where a user clicks through the image and is taken off of Pinterest into a world that is significantly less inspiring.

To answer "what do I do with this Pin" is to focus the raw inspiration that Pinterest creates and channel it into action. Organically, this is already emerging through the community as [DIY Pins](https://www.pinterest.com/search/pins/?q=diy) and [tutorials](https://www.pinterest.com/search/pins/?q=tutorial). Through these, people are creating amazing things. The unspoken opportunity is that Pinterest can help facilitate this inspiration into action.

Ultimately, to "put pinners first" is to make them successful. Pinners pin because they want to do something. The ability to help them accomplish their goals rests solely with the company that inspired them to begin with.

That's a mission I feel particularly inspired by and I'm proud to be joining the team at Pinterest.


Helping people accomplish something through software

code

(P)inspiration

Posts during my time at Pinterest, where we helped people discover and do what they loved