1-1s are for the weak

1-1s are based on secrecy, secrecy generates distrust - no outstanding team can work in that situation

I used to be a proponent of 1-1s - it was a best management practice I thought. But I don’t think like that anymore. 1-1s are based on secrecy - on the premise there will be an intimate moment for the subordinate to share his concerns.

First, there’s no true fake intimacy at the workplace; Second, it is a place where you are supposed to discuss things that will be kept private between you and the leader - not likely, really. Third, you shouldn’t share certain feedback in public - that is the case when people don’t trust each other and don’t get their team mates’ backs.

You can’t have an outstanding performing team in the above situation. Imagine your favorite sports team training like that in real life - what do you think would happen. Well, why do we accept less than that from our managers and companies? It’s really on their self-interest to outperform the competition. So why don’t they do that?

Now compare: a team were everyone shares information at large bandwidths and trust each other without the need for secret agendas. What one of those teams do you think will be superior? In which team would you like to work? Would you prefer to be trained by Mourinho or by a second class privacy compliant coach? Who would make you give it all for the mission you and your team are trying to accomplish?

Not everybody has those skills. True. But then why are the criteria for chosing a leader so low? I don’t think companies need to treat their professionals like children to be highly productive and innovative. I think the opposite.

The human touch makes all the difference.

Thank you for reading my post.