I was writing a comment at work this morning, and I realized that, as a TLM, I end up intentionally using the sort of caveated language that, earlier in my career, I tried hard to expunge from my speech.
Let’s unpack that a little. It is standard career advice for those early in their career that we should purge from our speaking and writing phrases like “I think” or “It might be useful to” or other phrases which make you sound less confident. This doesn’t mean communicating as if you think you are always right. Rather, it’s to take as a given that people know that you are giving your view and will have no problem letting you know if they disagree[1].
Yet as a leader, especially as a manager, it is useful to pull out those phrases again. Even in a culture like Google’s where ICs have a pretty large amount of discretion over what and, especially, how they do things, it is easy for a leader’s suggestion to be taken more seriously than intended. I don’t think that folks at Google take their manager’s word as command — thank goodness. However, it still is received differently that a suggestion from a peer.
Thus, now that I am a lead, when I make a suggestion, I use those caveated phrases. Not to indicate that I am less confident — although, often my distance from the details mean I am less confident in my suggestions — but primarily to communicate that ownership of the decision still belongs to the person I am talking to.
My use of language isn’t exactly the same as in my days as a new SWE. There are important differences between communicating a lack of confidence and a delegation of authority. Still, it is interesting to reflect that our communication style needs are always changing as our role and context changes.
[1] As an aside, I don’t tend to change my communication style much for personal and work communication. At work, I am considered a fairly considerate communicator and in my family, I am considered quite blunt. This amuses me.