A More Open World

I’m excited to bring my children up in a world where anyone can learn anything, anyone can invest in anything, where world class software/tools are free to use and customize, and where anyone can contribute to software development regardless of their physical location.

We have made progress on all these dimensions and we’ll see even more foundational progress over the next decade. I hope it will lead to a more open and connected world and empower more diverse groups of people to create amazing things together.

Caveat: To participate, people need access to an internet connected device, and this is still only <60% of people in the world. As internet becomes more widely available and the cost of devices and data goes down substantially, more people will have access to these opportunities and be included.


Open finance

I hope that everyone will be able invest in anything.

New projects will have (near zero cost) legal entities automatically spun up in the background, regulations will allow all of us to invest in products with any amount of money and own equity (with drastically simplified legal agreements). These micro pieces of equity will be liquid and easily to other people and there will be clear, immutable record of all these transactions.

People of any age/location will be able to contribute to projects with their friends with both their time or capital. They will all be able to create and capture value without the need for angel investors or venture capitalists (who currently have to meet accredited investor standards). They will not be excluded from early stage investing.

Syndicates (groups making an investment) are still really expensive and has high friction, despite the progress we’ve made. SPVs on AngelList cost about ~$10k to set up and run over their lifetime and so only make sense for investment rounds of a few hundred thousand dollars (which is a lot of money). Rolling funds can accept much smaller amounts of capital than traditional funds, but are still expensive to run and require capital scale to make sense.

Software will power the legal and financial framework for investing (combined withj adoption of cryptocurrency and smart contracts) and will be able to reduce the overall cost and hide the underlying complexity.

Ultimately, this will provide access to more asset classes to more people at any quantum of capital. This will lead to more projects getting funded, and more people generating wealth through owning equity vs. renting their time.

Open Learning

I hope that anyone will be able to learn anything.

Access to the highest quality teaching materials will no longer be locked in walled gardens and this content will be completely open. Many leading universities are already opening up much of their teaching content (e.g. Harvard, Stanford) and this is the mission statement of the Khan Academy which has helped people learn all over the world, for free.

Students will be able to learn (at their own pace) using whatever format works best for their preferred method of learning (e.g. watching videos, reading text, listening to audio). They will easily be able to then test their mastery with interactive problems and real world applications at no marginal cost. I, personally, learn better visually and orally and that is why I found lectures in college so useful (and why I watch a lot of YouTube videos).

Schools and higher education will need to adapt (culturally and practically) to asynchronous learning, and a more diverse mix of students in each class. One of the main benefits of school and college is the ‘cohorts’ of students who go through the shared experiences (much of which happens outside of the classroom) and I still think it’s important to try and create opportunities for young people to have shared experiences and work in groups.

I hope that higher education, in particular, will preserve the cohort and community aspect but there will be specific focus (v.s. community as a byproduct) on collaborating in groups, building lasting friendships, and creating stuff together.

Open Software

I hope that anyone will be able to build anything (software) and getting started with the best tools in the world is free.

Open source is a very powerful movement and, at scale, encourages global collaboration and development so that software can easily modified to meet local expectations and standards. One of the best examples is WordPress, which powers 39% of the top 10 million websites in the world with tens of thousands of contributors working together asynchronously.

Software is now being developed in the cloud first and new projects are powered by more self serve SAAS tools than ever (Slack, Notion, Figma, Asana, GitHub). I hope that all of these tools start free to reduce the barrier to try out these tools, and also reduces the barrier for projects to start and for people to collaborate. It also puts more pressure on SAAS software developers to build quality products, have quality customer service and continue to improve their products over time.

In order to build a sustainable business SAAS companies will need to charge for features that become necessary when projects evolve into businesses that scale. This could include customer support, security, performance, connectivity with other applications, hosting and payments.

I also hope that more SAAS tools expose more of their information via API (in addition to building integrated solutions) and give project owners more ownership of their data own (so they don’t remain locked into these tools). This will also be better for the ecosystem as more tools will be able to talk to each other and less information will be lost across different tools which will improve the quality and efficiency of software development.

Open Work

I hope that anyone can work from anywhere.

The Covid-19 Pandemic has catalyzed mass adoption of distributed work especially for technology companies. If companies can hire globally it significantly increases their accessible talent pool v.s. the constraint of hiring locally (along with many of other benefits). I’m a big fan of distributed work for software development, and write about it on my blog.

With more open work, people of all ages, races, nationalities will be able to collaborate on projects together, bringing more perspectives to the table. These products will end up being better suited for global audiences, as these perspectives and empathy will naturally make it into the product development process.

Workers will be more focused on collecting skills and knowledge vs. collecting brands. When we recruit now, we use proxies to infer skills or background; where we went to school, what companies we have worked at, or how we were brought up. This should evolve into showcasing our specific skills backed up by actual contributions to specific projects that roll up into a more accurate picture of our whole self. Companies will also become better at assessing skills, knowledge and experience over relying on brands as a proxy for the requirements for jobs to be done.


I’m excited raise my children in a more equitable world where less of their fate is decided at birth and I’m inspired and hopeful at the progress we are making globally.

We will see continued improvement in social and economic mobility, better products from more diverse people and more collaboration across groups with different ages, genders and countries. 

Tools to Power Distributed Work

The way we build software and collaborate is going through an accelerated evolution as more organizations adopt distributed and hybrid (partially in person) work. In both cases, tools and processes will be designed for distributed work first, which can then be adapted to in-person more easily than the other way around.

There is a lot of innovation coming in the tool stack to facilitate these new practices, which I’m personally excited about and plan to follow closely.

The principles that I think will become the most important for these tools are:

  • Asynchronous: Tools should enable both asynchronous and synchronous collaboration seamlessly. This should apply to both short and long-form communication (which should also have separate interfaces). Examples of tools that do this well are WhatsApp and Slack, which are both probably more important to me than email now.
  • Transparent: Organizations will move more towards ‘transparent by default’. This will allow more people to have more context and create more trust in organizations. A challenging problem to solve is information overload, allowing teams to better separate signal from noise, and picking most important things to consume and act on.
  • Connected: Organizations will want to collect and record more data on work created in the organization. Tools will need to be more connected (i.e. use APIs to talk to each other better) and information will need to be better organized and accessible across the organization.
  • Consistent: To be effective, a minimum set of collaboration tools need to be accepted and used by the organization, which can be difficult at scale as it may involve both cultural and behavioral change. This is pretty self-explanatory (I don’t go into more detail below).
  • Measurement: As work moves to the cloud, and we collaborate digitally, we will need more tools to measure productivity and organizational effectiveness, culture and morale.
  • Human: There will be more focus on being human and building broad and deep relationships inside and outside organizations. In person time is still great for driving creativity, serendipity, building trusting relationships, and humanizing work. We will find more ways to simulate these experiences virtually.

I’ll explore these in more detail below.

Asynchronous

Building a culture, a set of tools and a set of practices that allow for asynchronous work is the foundation for distributed teams. It’s more inclusive because it allows for people in multiple time zones (or working hours) to process information and give feedback. Systems that work asynchronously that can be adapted seamlessly to work synchronously (e.g. Slack) are great where communication can be organized around projects, teams or topics.

I think this should apply to audio, video and text. I’ve not come across tools for async Audio and Video (possibly Loom) in the workplace. I used WhatsApp personally for sync/async text and audio the most. We recently took a long (1.5hr) townhall video and ‘chunked’ it down to its components and pulled it together in a blog post so that teams in different time zones could consume it asynchronously. It was very well received, especially as we did it very quickly, so it was ready in a few hours after the presentation (but a tool would help do this faster).

There are arguments that asynchronous work can slow down the pace of iteration or reduce ‘riffing’ off each other to create better solutions. I think that these are fair points, but most of this kind of riffing is useful at crossroads or can happen in very small groups and teams can create synchronous time for this if necessary. I think synchronous collaboration (and in person) is especially effective for new projects which require finding product market fit, where rapid iteration and creativity are even more critical.

Transparent

I think that more companies will work more openly in the future. We will trust our employees with more, and they will have more context for their work. This applies to both short form communication (chat) and long form communication.

In order to enable this (particularly for long form communication) we need a set of tools that allow employees to be able to collaborate in the open. At Automattic we use a tool called P2 which allows us to publish anything openly (structured as a blog post) and for our colleagues to like, ask comments and questions and collaborate in the open (Notion also works well). We’re able to pull in information from other tools and embed them into the post or link to other areas of work that are relevant. We need to make improvements on how this information is organized and the ‘state’ of a post (e.g. is it ‘active’ or ‘closed’? which project does it relate to? how high priority is it?). We’ve tinkered with some ideas but not settled on anything just yet as we were worried about increasing the friction to share with colleagues.

In addition to building systems to share openly, we also need to think through the subscription and notification systems to alert people to the right information they need for their work at the right cadence and the right priority. Different people need different levels of breadth vs. depth depending on their role.

A crucial benefit of working openly and making this information easily discoverable (indexed, searchable) is that the work exists regardless of the organization’s mix of people. As employees move to different teams or companies, or when new people join the company the decisions and the reason behind these decisions is always available.

Connected

Organizations want to control more of their own information. As we rely more and more on external SAAS tools to power our work our internal data is more fragmented than ever.

Organizations need to be able to extract and record information from these tools which is currently difficult and requires a lot of custom integration work. Many SAAS tools make this difficult because they know that we are less likely to churn if we are reliant on their platform as a source of record.

Creating connected tools and workflow that enables data to move between these tools and ultimately be owned and stored by the organization is important. Once this (difficult) part is complete, building a UI (and search tool) to discover this information is a natural extension.

A few interesting companies innovating in this space include: PlaybookOnnaBento, Solve Data and Rock (which is a broader solution).

Measurement and Productivity

We don’t have good systems to track productivity for individuals, teams or projects especially as our teams become more distributed (and tools become more cloud based) and we become more output focused.

Managers need both qualitative and quantitative data to monitor teams more objectively with less bias, but employees also need to feel like they are part of the process and are not being micro-monitored.

Organizations need to log and visualize this data over time and understand that this is an input into productivity and does not tell the full story.

I wrote a detailed post covering this topic here – https://aadil.blog/2020/12/18/measuring-productivity-of-distributed-teams/

Human Relationships

Relationships are important for collaboration and teamwork. Trusting relationships in our immediate teams and around the organization can lead to more productive, more creative work with more candid conversations that get to better outcomes faster.

Even at Automattic, which has been distributed since 2005, we’ve relied on in person team meetups and a global ‘grand meetup’ to help build relationships and foster serendipity in the organization. There is value to seeing colleagues in person, enjoying lingering (less transactional) conversation, and eating and drinking together.

As we move towards more distributed and hybrid models of work, we will need to make sure that we create opportunities to build relationships (deep and broad), humanize our interactions during work, learn from each other and have fun with each other both within and outside our organizations,

A few interesting companies innovating in this space include RemotionLunchclubStart Playing GamesContra and On Deck.

Hiring and Onboarding (Bonus)

Hiring and onboarding of employees also evolves in a distributed environment. Hiring may take longer and leverage more text based (short and long form) collaboration trials versus traditional in person interviews. There are advantages to this process — it feels more two-way than one way, and helps remove more bias, and is more reflective of our actual work.

Onboarding and training employees needs a clear process which can be less rigid than typical onboarding bootcamps at larger organizations (and asynchronous). To achieve this we need better documentation and need to humanize the process as much as possible (e.g. pairing new folks with buddies, recording welcome videos for context etc) while giving employees the tools to onboard and contribute at their own pace (with guardrails, of course).

A few interesting companies innovating in this space include RipplingDonut and SkillMagic.


I remain very positive and excited for the future of how we build software and collaborate as humans. The more we can remove physical barriers to build high quality creative products the more we can improve liquidity in the global labor market and find the right people for the right jobs regardless of their location. This is is an exciting future, and better tools will continue to power this movement.

Measuring Productivity of Distributed Teams

Measuring productivity is hard, especially for knowledge workers and craftspeople who are building software products. 

People are typically the most expensive asset for technology organizations, yet it feels like the internal systems for defining and measuring productivity are archaic and don’t match the methodical approach we use for external product development (iterative, data+gut) in customer facing products. 

As more of our work happens in the cloud (and distributed) we are now able to actually record contribution and interaction in a way that was impossible even just a few years ago. 

This post is not meant to be an ‘answer’ but a set of early thoughts (from someone who runs a distributed team at scale). I’m excited to see how our work evolves, and how our tools evolve to power more productive global and distributed work. 


Defining productivity

  • How do we define “productive”?
  • How do we think about this at both an individual and a team level?
  • How do popularity and personal (and cultural) bias factor into this?
  • How frequently / over what time period should we measure productivity? (Creative work happens in phases)

These are hard questions, and I don’t have clear answers, and I think there is room for improvement across the industry for in-person, hybrid, and fully distributed teams to define and measure all of these better.

In my mind, productivity is a function of volume, quality, and impact. It’s easy to say this, but these are all hard to define, track, and attribute which is why this is still an unsolved problem.

The most productive teams can have no outstandingly productive individuals, and the least productive teams could have exceptionally productive individuals. It’s hard to actually parse individual productivity when running a larger organization.

As managers of managers, we don’t have sufficient tools to be able to understand most of this and most of our information is driven by sentiment and infrequent interactions with individuals on our teams.

For in person teams, productivity is often a function of time spent in the office combined with their team’s sentiment/perception of their work (and likeability) which is imprecise, and polluted by biases and proxies for actual productivity.


Measuring Productivity

To measure productivity of teams and individuals, we should look to both quantitative and qualitative measures. I prefer measures that apply to individuals but can also roll up to both teams and projects.

Quantitative metrics

Quantitative metrics to measure productivity can be hard to pick, measure and implement in the organization. These types of metrics may make employees feel ‘watched’, don’t tell the full story, and could encourage suboptimal behavior to gamify metrics.

Defining quantitative metrics that can roll up from individuals to team level and project level metrics are best, because it allows us to have the most flexible view of contribution and productivity, but these metrics are hard to select.

Here are a few ideas:

  • Volume: A measure of activity across different tools (e.g. Slack messages, GitHub commits, words on internal Wikis). These metrics will vary by team and role, and need to be measurable across tools. I don’t think more activity necessarily implies more productivity but an absence of activity likely implies a lack of productivity.
  • Quality: Quality is hard to measure. There are some heuristics we could use like rejected pull requests, bugs, live issues, comments/likes on internal memos. I don’t have a clear view if these would actually work at an atomic level without running some experiments to figure out if they are actually predictive of quality.
  • Impact: First we need to define impact (e.g. OKRs, trackable metrics). What business or user goal are we trying to achieve? How do we attribute work directly to these goals, especially at the individual level? It’s easier to do at a project or team level, but still difficult to map work to impact accurately.
  • Micro-contracts: I generally work using a series of micro contracts. I commit to a specific scope and timeframe and it’s usually an agreement between me and one other person. It would be valuable to track these micro contracts in a transparent, two player view (vs. separate todo lists) that integrates nicely with my existing workflow (e.g. a Slackbot). This is a feature, not a product, but it would be useful to capture data (e.g. missed, delayed, complete) on this over time across the organization.
  • Engagement: We have an internal tool called P2 at Automattic (replaces email) which we use to write and store long form content and share it transparently with our colleagues. Much of my work as a manager is engaging with these P2 posts, leaving likes, comments and asking questions. We track some of this data internally, but don’t have a great view for managers to look at aggregate views for individuals, teams or projects (which would be helpful). 
  • Project Iteration: I strongly believe that speed of iteration is a sustainable advantage for companies, and many companies lose this speed as they grow. Something which captures progress towards stated project goals, as well as the project state over time, would be very helpful especially when combined with some of the other individual metrics listed above.

I’d start by tracking all these metrics individually (and creating a time series for each) and then worry about creating compound metrics later, for the metrics that are most accepted by the organization.

Qualitative Metrics

Qualitative feedback is important both as a source of positive and developmental feedback for individuals and teams. This feedback contains the most bias, but is the most widely used and accepted form of assessment across our industry.

  • Peer Review: This provides a good view of the person’s capabilities as a team player, and a measure of their ‘popularity’ with their peers. It’s also a good measure of team fit as different teams can have different microcultures.
  • Manager Review: Managers typically write regular (e.g. annual) reviews which are a useful point in time synthesis but have recency bias (something of which I’m certainly guilty). Managers don’t record all the ‘micro feedback’ and ‘micro improvements’ in a transparent way to the organization (e.g. logged in a database) which I think could be interesting to try.
  • Direct Report Review: This is similar to manager reviews, except it’s many to one for the manager. This is useful to check for consistency of feedback, which can be a stronger signal than an isolated piece of feedback which we could over-react to if particularly positive or negative.
  • Self Review: This is an opportunity for individuals to synthesize what they think is most important and impactful retroactively. I personally find it useful, and think it’s also useful to kick off a conversation with a direct report (when there is discrepancy in perception). It’s also a good measure of self awareness (if self view is very different from the others).

In general, storing micro feedback (e.g. positive/developmental plus a string), and periodic summaries (discrepancies, sentiment by group, change over time) would be a good place to start, and then HR teams could perform analysis on the usefulness and predictiveness of each of these inputs over time.


Both this qualitative and quantitative data would be helpful to both the individual and the manager to track their development and journey during their tenure at the organization. It would also make manager handoffs (team switches or people leaving the company) cleaner and easier without losing valuable organizational data.

Open Questions

A couple of additional open questions that I did not have good answers to:

  • Meetings: I almost added meeting time/number of meetings to the quantitative metrics section, but I’m in two minds about them. I think recurring meetings are a ‘lazy’ way to have individuals and groups get together and make up an agenda. Large meetings with lots of passive meetings are also very ‘expensive’ for the organization, and likely better handled via written, asynchronous alternatives. I do think there are a few exceptions (1x1s for direct reports, project kick off, strategy/direction changes) which have their place to drive alignment and build relationships. I personally like short interactions about specific problems spun up in real time but these are hard to coordinate if teams are over-scheduled.
  • Real Time vs. Synthesized: For all of these metrics, how much should available in real time vs. point in time? Real time plus history allows for better trend analysis, but point in time allows for synthesis. Point in time reviews suffer from recency bias and most creative work happens in phases (with natural spikes and troughs).
  • Transparency: For all the quantitative and qualitative metrics how transparent should this be to the individuals affected and the organization? If totally transparent, I worry about gamification but if totally hidden it feels like spying. I think it should be run as a contained experiment to see the impact on the culture.
  • Popularity vs. Objective Metrics: As humans, how do we eliminate bias? We are often biased towards people who we perceive to be similar to ourselves. We are more likely to excuse poor performance for someone we like v.s. someone we don’t. Measuring and accounting for bias is extremely difficult.

After writing this, I was left with more questions than answers, but feel confident that most organizations (distributed or hybrid) are not good at measuring and storing performance over time at the individual, team, or project level. I also think that the appropriate solution(s) will vary by company and its culture. Building tools to track performance and creating a culture of internal experimentation is necessary for organizations to get to better solutions across all levels. 

I’m personally excited about innovation in this space as a manager, and an increased focus on output over facetime and popularity as companies work in a more distributed or hybrid work environment.


As a side note, this was an interesting view on how the folks at GitLab think about this — I appreciate them being open with sharing a lot of their practices in general.

Decentralized Game Development

There has been a movement towards decentralization of content creation in many industries (Youtube for video, WordPress for writing, Podcasting for radio). These creators and storytellers now have the tools to deliver high quality experiences (without massive budgets) and have access to distribution platforms to find and grow audiences, which was very hard to do in the past. I think there will be a movement towards the decentralization of game development next.

The power of games is in the mechanics, the stories and the world. Even for large game studios, the visionary is usually one or two people (also true for Pixar Movies – see Creativity Inc for more). However, most of the cost and the time for games is spent in the ‘production phase’ for AAA studios which means many independent game makers cannot compete with large franchises.

If small, independent teams had access to free/cheap and high quality game engines, reusable off the shelf content (entire rule based worlds + logic), asset libraries (textures, photogrammetry, user generated) and common game mechanic libraries (leaderboard, ELO) then their focus can be on the story, the world, the core gameplay.

Flexible, cross platform game engines like Unreal and Unity are not quite good enough yet to realize this vision although I think we will get there very soon. I spent some time in 2017 making a VR film entirely in Unity and was really impressed by the power and flexibility of the platform.

My mind was blown when I learned that The Mandalorian was made in a single room and all the worlds were created in Unreal and rendered in real time during filming on massive LED screens (short video below).

Game distribution platforms like Steam, Google and Apple App Stores (and communities like Discord) are going to become even more powerful and influential for creators to find players and engage with them (and each other). Franchises will still be very powerful, but independents will be able to access (niche) audiences much more easily than ever before. I think there will be a lot of pressure on app stores to reduce their take rate as 30% feels much too high. Epic and Unreal have the most developer friendly agreement I know (free to use and then 5% after $1M in sales)

I’m particularly excited for young people (even children) to be able to have access to the tools that will allow them to conceive, create and publish games the same way we publish a blog, podcast or youtube video today. Roblox is a great example of a game creation tool that embodies these principles (30M DAU, 7M Active Developers & $600M Revenue) and has exploded in popularity over the last few years, especially with young people. It still lacks the power of Unity and Lua is not that easy to learn for non-technical folks.

There is a lot of innovation on both creation and distribution that will continue to empower creators. Combined with the general trend in ‘no code development’, this will democratize game development which, I hope, will continue to become more mainstream. The game engines and distribution platforms are very well placed to both create and capture value over the next decade if they build for the long tail of creators.

Finally, more of our social lives are now lived online and combined with lasting effects of physical distancing (from Covid-19) this will accelerate the development of games where people can have meaningful, deeper interaction online. For example, I play Fortnite with my nephew in Paris (he’s 9), from America and it’s a really nice way for us to have fun together and hang out.

My family and friends live all over the world, and I’m rarely physically present with them. If we had more options to socialize over games (both simple as well as immersive) maybe even made by us together, that would be pretty dope.

Trends Accelerated by Covid-19

Covid-19 has led to significant changes in how we live, work, and interact with each other. In some cases, they have accelerated trends that were already in motion, and in other cases forced changes that we did not anticipate or expect.

In the next few years, I think we will go through a rapid pace of innovation and re-imagination powered by entrepreneurs, and here are a few trends I’m excited about and interested in exploring further.

Distributed Work

The best summary I’ve read on the acceleration of distributed (not in person) work is this one from the CEO of Automattic, Matt Mullenweg where he talks about change happening slowly, and then all at once driven by this catalyst. Automattic has been fully distributed since its inception, and Matt has been a champion of distributed work for years and the benefits of accessing a global talent pool, and working asynchronously.

The #WorkFromAnywhere Podcast series led by the folks at Greylock is also excellent and CEOs of companies like Box, Quora, Okta, Figma and Zapier speak about their transition to working from anywhere.

I’m particular excited about the tooling that will be developed, both in terms of specific software as a service products to drive much better distributed collaboration, but also the underlying plumbing that ties all these tools together.

ECommerce

This article from Ben Evans on the growth of eCommerce is a must read. The UK went from 20% to 30% eCommerce penetration and analysts say that Covid has accelerated the growth of eCommerce by 5 years. This is dramatic, and will change the way may of us purchase, discover new products, and how creators distribute their products.

This also changes the nature of distribution/logistics and the entire supply chain. Companies like Shopify and Amazon have doubled their market cap (adding over $60BN, and $850BN (!!) of value respectively to shareholders since mid March 2020).

Major Cities

The nature of major cities and concentrated urban areas is going to evolve. I wrote about my thoughts on megacities recently here, and I also liked this piece from Fred Wilson about how a reset was much needed in NYC and how the city could evolve into something better. Many of my friends have ‘accelerated’ moving to their ideal living areas and and left places like NYC and London. My wife and I, having just had our first baby, are asking ourselves the same question – is it worth staying in NYC if we don’t intend to stay longer term? The pandemic has forced a conversation we likely would not have had for a few years.

Flexible Work

I believe that the best creators and experts are no longer going to need a ‘normal job’ and will be able to work flexibly and monetize their unique skills talents much better than before, and this will be socially acceptable and maybe even celebrated. I like the writing from Li Jin (Atelier Ventures) about the Passion Economy and Unbundling of Work from Employment (which I also opined on here).

Startups will create innovative tools, and platforms to help craftspeople to discover projects, collaborators and showcase their work (e.g. Contra). Much of the benefit that we get from a ‘normal job’ (e.g. competitive healthcare insurance plans, retirement accounts, etc) will also be available to creators through saas products.

Building Relationships

As humans, we yearn to build new relationships and deepen relationships with folks that we already know. Traditionally we’ve built these relationships in person with repeated interactions and meaningful collaboration on projects. Being forced into lockdown has forced us to explore alternatives.

I’ve personally been experimenting with platforms like Enrich (curated network of similar executives), Fractal (1×1 matching with other product people), Village Global Events (with startup founders and investors), and am starting the On Deck Angel Fellowship soon. These are all digital communities with fairly niche audiences, which I think will become more common.

I’m hoping that these will lead to meaningful relationships and collaboration and also improve the chance for serendipity despite not being able to spend time with folks physically. I’m excited that these platforms could open up the possibility of meeting interesting people all over the world, and not just limited to my place of residence.

I’m not sure how this will play out with larger conferences, where most of the value is in relationship building and improving the probability of serendipitous connections often through extended hang out time (often over meals and drinks). I expect that recreating much of the value will be possible, but will require some first principles thinking.

In my own recent experience, I wrote about how the funeral for my grandfather was actually much more inclusive and rich because it was virtual and allowed for more people to attend that were close to him (like his sisters).

Personalized Services

Folks who provide coaching, classes or specialized services are all going through a similar, accelerated transition.

Companies like Peloton have successfully taken spin classes and made them virtual, allowing both synchronous and asynchronous (on demand) classes with world class instructors. Each class can now be attended by step function more people which greatly improves the ROI for each class.

Experts providing specialized, personalized services like physiotherapy, child psychology, lactation consulting can all increase their addressable customer base and people who are in need of very specific services can access a larger pool of specialists which is better for both groups. They both need tools to make it easier to discover each other, and improve the experience of booking and transacting (e.g. Ribbon Experiences).

Digitial Payments and Services

Digital payments and digital services (e.g. digital hr, or payroll) to help businesses transact with their customers and run their teams will also see more new users, and increased adoption. I think these products will be ultimately sticky even after Covid-19 because they function better both in person and remotely, and allow for more flexible customer and employee interactions. In my personal investments in these areas I’ve seen increased volumes and good retention through the pandemic.


These are just a few areas where I’ve personally observed changes in my own life or with folks close to me, and I’m excited to learn more and closely track how these trends evolve.

Hiring Product Managers at Scale

In this post, I summarize a process that I recommend for hiring product managers at a midsize or growth company, adapted for a distributed hiring environment (most applicable to a company that will hire multiple product managers).

I’ve hired and trained over 40 product managers over the course of my career, and this draws on my experience as a product hiring manager and team lead.

Internal buy in and scope of role

When hiring product managers (PMs) at a mid size company the most important thing is to have internal support from the executives and the design and engineering partners. There should be a strong desire to hire PMs to help build better products in a better way and to bring in more structure and systems to the product development process.

Once there is buy-in from these stakeholders, organize the teams into sensible working groups (e.g. by user journey such as onboarding/growth or by key metrics such as conversion/retention or by product line).

I prefer a matrix structure (although has tradeoffs) where PMs ‘own’ each of these areas in partnership with a design and engineering lead (with around 5-10 engineers per PM, depending on the project). I also suggest that engineers and designers report into their own functional leads and PMs direct the scope and priorities of the projects.

Hiring process

It’s essential to have a clear hiring process and system both for the sake of your internal team and for the candidates. Most companies are incredibly disorganized about hiring, but a little bit of work can save a lot of time in the future, especially when hiring many folks for the same role.

Internal Team 

  • Recruiter: There should be a consistent point of contact for the candidate during their application process – ideally a recruiter. The recruiter communicates with the candidate, lays out the hiring process clearly, and moves them through the process. They act as a liaison between the hiring manager(s) and the candidate. They often do the initial resume screens and have an essential input into hiring because they get to know the candidate so well. 
  • Hiring Manager: The hiring manager is the person that is hiring for the role. They are the person who ultimately makes the decision to recommend the candidate as a ‘hire’ or ’no-hire’. This is typically a senior product leader.
  • Interviewers: Each interviewer should have a clear set of criteria that they use to evaluate the candidate. The interviewers should be excellent at the functional areas that they are evaluating candidates and hold the quality standard for the organization. The best people should be involved in late-stage interviews and this should be a core part of their job description.

Hiring Process

  • Resume screen: Internal and external candidates should submit a Resume / LinkedIn profile which should be screened upfront (recruiter + hiring manager). Candidates who pass this phase should move to a conversation with the recruiter, followed by the hiring manager.
  • Interviews: Interviews should consist of a standard set of, very well calibrated questions that can be asked by a variety of interviewers representing the different development functions (e.g. design, engineering, product, marketing). A structured hiring guide improves consistency and calibration, and can reduce bias from the hiring process
  • Central Tool/ATS: Interview feedback should be stored in a central place/tool (e.g. Greenhouse or Lever) and each interviewer’s feedback captured clearly (with a hiring recommendation). This allows us to both evaluate interviewers and the candidates – e.g. some interviewers bias towards higher or lower scores.
  • Written Exercise: If you are hiring in a distributed environment, try to find candidates with strong communication skills (particularly written skills) and clarity of thought. All candidates should complete a written exercise as part of their recruitment process which could include:
    • Break down a product you love – what you like, what you don’t like, how you would make it better (1 page)?
    • What is your favorite technological shift and why?
    • Write a ‘product spec’ to address a specific problem that the company has (better if it is a real problem).
  • Trial: If possible, ask the candidate if they would be open to a two-way trial (which is compensated) where they try and solve a real problem and collaborate with an internal team. This is time consuming (20-40hrs for the candidate, 5-10 hours internally) so very few candidates should go through this process if you decide to incorporate trials. You may filter out some good candidates because of the time commitment, but candidates who join are more likely to be successful.
  • References: I think that final candidates should be referenced checked by the hiring manager, especially if there are open questions. Backchannel references are the best (but avoid people at their current company) otherwise, ask the candidate for references. Here are some questions that I like:
    • How do you know the person? (gauge depth of relationship)
    • What are their strengths?
    • What are their areas for development?
    • What percentile would you put them in relative to similar folks in their position?
    • Would you hire them again?
  • Decision: For borderline candidates, the panel of interviewers should have a sync or async discussion – e.g. a private recruiting slack channel for hiring. The hiring manager is ultimately the decision maker. From start to finish, try and keep this process fast (e.g. under one month, and track the throughput).

Candidate experience

Candidates should have a great experience, understand how they are being evaluated and have consistent clear communication through the process.

  • Hiring Criteria: Candidates should understand the criteria by which they are being evaluated and the steps in your hiring process – this should be a templated email or a public blog post that you can send to product candidates.
  • Point of Contact: Candidates should have a clear point of contact (ideally the recruiter), to ask any questions about timelines and next steps.
  • Acceleration: If a candidate performs very well in early interviews or comes in through a trusted referral, they should be bumped up to the top of the queue or potentially skip steps so you don’t lose great people because of slow process.

How to Assess

When hiring, it’s important to be explicit about the skills you are looking for, and get a sense for where candidates are truly exceptional.

Here are the dimensions that I think you should use to assess candidates in the interview process:

  • Analytical Ability: AB Testing, Interpreting metrics, Data-informed decision making.
  • Product Judgment: System design, UX design to solve user / business problems.
  • Leadership: Inspiration, Influence, Empathy, Communication.
  • Execution: Prioritization, Getting things done when you say you will.
  • Technical Ability: Earn trust and respect from engineers as partners. Some roles will have a higher technical bar than others.

Each person on the interview team (3-5 people) should be responsible for evaluating the candidate along a subset of the interview criteria to create a balanced view. Ideally interviewers would ask the same questions to each candidate to calibrate their answers. I suggest that each interviewer test at least 2 dimensions of the list.

I suggest looking for candidates with an exceptional ‘A’ level strength, particularly in harder to learn skills like analytical ability and product judgement. I much prefer ABC candidates over BBB candidates because it’s possible to design complementary teams with AAA skills in aggregate.

Candidates should also demonstrate strong domain knowledge, and passion for the product, company and the customer. If they have prepared, it goes a long way (and it’s surprising how many candidates are ill prepared). If a candidate teaches me something new, or helps me challenge my own assumptions, that is wonderful. 


Appendix: Other resources

Google Criteria

  • Product Design: User experience, Design driven problem solving.
  • Analytical ability: Fluency with numbers, Using data to drive product decisions, dashboard design.
  • Technical ability: Understand technology and fundamental computer science principles.
  • Strategy: Go to market, Competitive analysis.
  • Culture: Googliness, Kindness, Leadership, Empathy.

Facebook Criteria

  • Leadership and Drive: Influence, Self-starting, Motivation, Persistence.
  • Execution: Goals, Metrics, Prioritization. Understand, Identify, Execute.
  • Product Sense: A design exercise to solve a specific user or business problem.
  • Engineering fit: Do engineers want to work with you?

Product Manager Articles

Here are a few articles about product management as an appendix, in case they are useful.

My Home Office Set Up

My current home office set up is a little bit makeshift as we are living with our in-laws (temporarily). I figure that a lot of people would be in a similar situation and thought it would be worth documenting and sharing as I’ve already helped a few friends and family members with their home office.

I’ll share the details of my set up and then summarize some practical tips that apply to most people.

Home office Front View
Home Office Side View

My Set Up

My set up is optimized for using a Macbook Pro 13 inch as the computer, and so this will only really apply to mac users.

  • Monitor: In my opinon, this is the most important part of your setup. I have an expensive LG 5k monitor with a built in HD camera ($1,300). If I had a less generous monitor budget from work, I’d get a 4K monitor, like the Dell one ($500) I recommend below, with an additional HD camera clipped to the top.
  • Keyboard: I use a mechanical keyboard as I like the action, and it makes me feel like more of an old school gamer. I use the Keychron K2 Wireless Keyboard ($80) with a red switch which is a bit quieter than the blue switch (although the louder ones are more satisfying).
  • Mouse: I use the Logitech MX Master 3 wireless mouse ($100). It’s super comfortable, has lots of customizations and is way superior in ever way to the Apple mice in my opinion.
  • Headphones: A great pair of headphones is essential. I use Bose QC 35 II noise cancelling bluetooth headphones ($280) just because I’ve had them for 5 years. They are really comfortable and have great sound, but the microphone sucks so use them with the wired mic if you are not going to get an external mic. If I was to replace them, I’d go with the Sony WH-1000XM3 ($240) which seem to be a one of the better picks in the market right now.
  • Samson G-Track Pro mic: I’d recommend either my Samson G-Track Pro ($130) or the Blue Yeti (Nano, Yeti or X are probably all fine) which are USB condenser mics and easy to set up and use with great audio. Watch out for room echo – if this is an issue, switch to a USB headset mic, like a recommend below.
  • Desk mat: I really like having a desktop mat. They are inexpensive and increase the friction for your keyboard and mouse keeping them in place while giving you a nicer surface to rest your hands. I use this Yikda Leather Pad ($14).
  • Stand for monitor: It’s important to have your monitor a t the right height and I like a stand that lets me put my laptop under the monitor to save some desk space. I just picked one from Amazon and ended up with this AboveTEK Stand ($45).
  • Wireless charger: I use this Anker one ($12) which is useful to charge my phone and AirPods without a lot of additional cable clutter. I like just being able to drop my devices on the pad to charge.
  • Desk plant: Plants can apparently reduce stress and improve mood. I got these succulents from Lula’s Garden as a gift and like having them on my desk as they are low maintenance as well.
  • Candle: I love having candles on my desk. I find them soothing and like the smell. I like the Aquiesse candles ($32) as they are both high quality and last a really long time. Highly recommend.

Note: my desk and chair were already in the house, and repurposed for my home office.

Universal Advice

Here are a few of my most practical tips when setting up your home office:

  • Monitor: Get a decent monitor (4k), you can get pretty excellent ones for the Macbook Pros like this 27 inch Dell 4k (~$500) with a USB-C cable that can be used to both charge your computer and be the display/data connection. I bought this for my father in law and think it’s great. This is the thing you stare at all day, so don’t skimp here. Make sure the monitor is positioned high enough so your eyes are in the center of the screen when you sit upright.
  • Video camera: Good quality video helps you seem clearer because you are! The cameras on Macbooks suck, and are 720p, not even HD, so if you do get an external monitor then definitely get a camera that clips to the top of your monitor. I use my fancy camera or the built in camera on my monitor. The one I see most recommended is the Logitech C920, but I’ve not used it myself.
  • Light source: Face a light source with either a lamp on your desk to light your face or a window. If you are by a window, make sure that the sunlight does not hit your face directly as it’s annoying and distracting.
  • Audio: Good audio is so important for distributed work. I did a full write up comparing a bunch of options here. A wired USB headsets with a mic that is a consistent distance from your mouth is the best option for most people. This is one we recommend at Automattic. Here is another audio comparison from Matt, the CEO of Automattic.
  • Chair: I’m still researching the best value chairs (my current one was lying around the house), so don’t have a practical suggestion but you sit in this all day, so get something comfortable and adjustable that allows you to have good posture. Update: I recently picked up an Aeron chair by Herman Miller which is very comfortable.

The rest of the stuff is really dealers choice in my opinion, and icing on the cake. For a long time I did not have an external keyboard and mouse and just used my Macbook keyboard (or mouse), which worked really well and was space efficient (see below).

Using the Macbook as a second screen and keyboard

I also use a mirrorless camera (see below) but it’s a bit less frictionless so I don’t use it all the time. I set up the camera above my laptop screen, with the camera above the screen because this keeps my eyes closer to the lens without it looking like I’m very close to the floor. It also helps me focus on the conversation better.

With the mirrorless camera setup

Hope this helps you level up your WFH set up, and let me know if you have any tips for me. Oh. and make sure you have good internet, or none of this really matters 🙂

Performance Management

This post will summarize my personal learnings for managing performance in both a distributed and non-distributed environment. I recently hosted a discussion on ‘Remote Performance Management’ with engineering and product leads at other companies (through Enrich) and these were some of the topics we covered.

Performance management in a distributed environment is very similar to working in person, except you need to rely more on measuring actual contribution, and more written communication. 

It can be very draining for a team, and for managers in particular, to deal with performance issues on their teams. If these are not dealt with quickly, they can fester and affect the entire team. It is important to have a clear path to gather data, diagnose and solve for the productivity and for the ‘health’ of your team.

1. GATHER INFORMATION

Start by gathering data to figure out if there are performance issues.

Your Gut: Most of the time, you know if someone is performing well. Trust your gut and use it as the starting point. Write down examples of issues you observe in a document so you can spot repeated patterns. In a distributed environment, it can take longer to calibrate your gut – you can’t ‘feel’ the energy of a person or a team as easily, so you need to rely on the output of teams. The more teams work out in the open (public by default), the easier it is to understand their output.

Team: Ask for feedback from folks who interact with the person closely – peers, direct reports, other functions. This can be more casual or part of a broader discussion if you don’t want to cause ‘alarm’. You can also ask your HR rep to help gather feedback for you as well. 360 degree feedback tools are also really valuable for managers and teammates to give feedback on each other.

Data: Try and figure out objective measures of output – communication metrics (e.g. Slack stats, public posts and comments), projects delivered, GitHub commits can all help paint a picture of productivity. It’s important not to use these metrics as the starting point for performance management – they are simply a useful tool to help validate or invalidate hypotheses. If people feel like they are being ‘watched’ they will not like it, or try to game the system which is not where you want them to focus.

2. DIAGNOSE ISSUE

Once you have established there is a performance issue, the next step is to unpack the why behind the issue.

Capability vs. Effort : I start by trying to understand if there is a capability problem or a motivation problem and use this simple matrix. Folks who are high capability and effort should be rewarded, and folks who are low capability and effort should be transitioned out of the company quickly.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is impact_effort_matrix_brainstorm_-_brainstorm.png

Manager / Team Fit: The individual may just not fit in well with the team culture or have a good rapport with their manager. Once a manager has ‘lost faith’ in someone on their team, it’s very hard to regain faith without a team switch.

Project Fit: The individual may not enjoy or be well suited to the type of work they are doing. This person might have a capability or effort issue, and in most cases this requires a move to a different role or to a different project. 

3. IMPLEMENT CHANGES

Once you’ve diagnosed the issue, the next step is to figure out a path forward. Many new managers simply avoid having these hard conversations because they are awkward and can be difficult.

Communicate clearly: Communicate performance issues clearly with the individual and then lay out a clear path forward with areas for improvement and timelines. This step comes before a formal performance improvement plan (PIP) which is more serious to developmental feedback.

Termination: If you have reached the point of termination, then be clear, direct and kind. Schedule a short in person meeting or video call, and get straight to the point. Often HR is involved in this call, and at some companies they are responsible for this meeting.

Team / Role / Project switch: If the individual is new to the company and has performance issues, and you suspect they are in the wrong role, wrong project or have fit issues with their current manager or team then you should allow one switch to give the person another shot. If the performance issues are persistent, then they should be let go from the company.

Permission to leave: Often, an individual was the right fit for the company or for a role at a point in time but given the stage of the company’s growth, or a shift in the nature of the work this person may not be a good fit any more. As a manager, you can give this person the ‘permission to leave’ and they will be able to find a place outside your team or company where their skills are better suited. It’ll be better both for the individual and the company.


Managing Distributed Teams

At Automattic, I lead a fully distributed product development and engineering team. This post will cover some of my personal practices for managing teams and if/how this is different in a distributed environment. These practices are probably more useful to newer managers running distributed teams for the first time.

I recently listened to Matt (Automattic’s CEO) and Raj Choudhury’s (Prof at Harvard Business School) discussion about the future of distributed work and the ‘Work from Anywhere’ movement which were the inspirations for writing this post.

DISTRIBUTED PRACTICES

The principles of managing a distributed team are the same as managing a team in person, but a few of the practices are different. People are still people, whether they are sitting right next to you or halfway around the world.

Here are a few practices that I’ve found helpful:

  • Trust: Start from a place of trust. Assume positive intent in written communication, and assume your team is working and trying their best regardless if they are sitting right next to you or they are working from home.
  • Expect Asynchronous Communication: Don’t expect a response immediately, even over chat tools like Slack. Learn how to use Slack asynchronously, and set the same expectation on your teams. I deleted Slack from my phone (because I would miss things), and close Slack on my computer when I want to remove distractions. I respond to messages in batches, and use the reminder feature if I need to come back to something later.
  • Focus on Output: Don’t falsely assume someone is more productive because they work longer hours (even when working in person). Focus on the quality and quantity of the work produced by an individual vs. the number of hours worked.
  • Clear Goals, Roles, Expectations: Develop clear goals and a shared understanding of the ‘why’ behind these goals, roles and responsibilities and what is expected of managers (and their teams) in terms of output. Extreme clarity here leads to more empowerment, not less, in my experience (one of my takeaways from Essentialism, by Greg McKeowen, which I recommend).
  • Project Kick Off: For new projects, with new groups of people working together or working across different teams it’s good to get alignment right at the start. I suggest experimenting with a kick off call with project stakeholders and participants followed by a written summary. The call may be difficult to schedule, and less conducive to working across time zones. but project kick offs are infrequent enough that I think these calls are worth it.
  • “Grab a Room”: If you sense a real time conversation is going off the rails in Slack and if it was in person you would ‘grab a room’ to chat it through, do the same over Zoom for 10 minutes. It helps if your team is not inundated with regular meetings so this can happen more seamlessly. I personally also leverage ‘office hours’ to skip level meetings a few times a quarter. 
  • Hiring: When hiring folks who are distributed, put extra weight on the quality of their written communication and their ability to work in a self directed manner. Documentation becomes even more important in a distributed environment.
  • Feedback: Give frequent, specific feedback both positive and developmental over Slack or in your regular 1x1s (both personal and project related). Write up more thoughtful feedback every 6-12 months. We all have recency bias in the longer reviews, so I keep a record of the small pieces of feedback in a running document. At Automattic, we have a tool called ‘Kudos’ which allows folks to send public thank you messages to a few colleagues a month. It’s a nice way to show appreciation.

MANAGEMENT DURING A PANDEMIC

Managing a distributed team during a global pandemic (Covid-19) requires greater care and empathy. Many folks who are working from home had it forced on them and it may have felt jarring. They may have additional responsibilities of looking after their children, caring for sick/old folks or dealing with loss either directly or indirectly. There is also a psychological toil that is hard to quantify, and simply not knowing when we will return to “normal” can weigh on people. As a manager, simply recognizing these issues explicitly and then being empathetic to their circumstance can go a long way.

I would encourage your teams to take the time they need for self care, and be accommodating to more flexible hours. If individuals or teams are going to experience a productivity hit, adjust goals accordingly (and publicly) as long as your business can afford it. It will pay off in the long term with improved happiness, productivity which will translate to better employee retention.

I’ve noticed extra output from some folks who are now simply working more to fill the extra time they have, and less output from others who are more affected. Teams realize and recognize this asymmetric contribution and much like any small community there are times where we need to contribute more to help out our colleagues. That’s ok, as long as it’s not permanent.


For more on this area check out the companion post around managing performance.

This series from Greylock is excellent as well – https://greylock.com/workfromanywhere-podcast/

Better Audio for Distributed Work

tl;dr: A wired USB headsets with a mic that is a consistent distance from your mouth is the best option for most people. This is one we recommend at Automattic.


Many of us have transitioned to working from home, and spend a lot more time talking to people over video and voice – we usually have no idea what we sound like to the people on the other end.

This post will give you some practical advice for sounding much clearer, including the specific products that I recommend. I will list recorded clips of each audio device without any additional processing so you can hear what each one sounds like in its original format.

If you prefer watching a video, check out the YouTube video instead.

Summary

There is a lot of research to show that better video and audio quality can reduce cognitive load and increase our attention span. Ultimately, it gets us closer to being in person and I think it’s well worth the investment to buy a good headset and microphone.

General Advice:

  • Make sure that your microphone is a consistent distance away from your mouth. This makes you sound more clear and consistent.  I think that headsets with an adjustable boom mic are the best (like the Jabra Evolve 65). If you don’t move around a lot you can sound really good on a USB mic like the Samson G-Track Pro.
  • A wired connection is more reliable than a Bluetooth connection, and generally sounds better. I sometimes have Bluetooth connection delays when starting Zoom calls but I like the flexibility of being able to walk around the room on audio calls, so the tradeoff is worth it for me.
  • If you are in a noisy place, or don’t have a headset where the mic is a consistent distance from your mouth (these typically block noise really well) then try software solutions like Krisp AI.

Top 3 Microphones

  1. Jabra Evolve 65: I don’t have strong opinions on this particular headset/mic itself, but a headset mic which is a fixed distance from your mouth is the best option for most people. The sound from the Jabra Evolve 65 mic is clear and consistent, and it blocks out most of the external noise. This is not wired, but sounds decent, and allows me to move around my room.
  2. Samson G Track Pro: This wired USB microphone has the best sound but it’s a little more fussy. You need a quiet room with decent acoustics in your space (soft things, no echo) and you need to tolerate that it’s absolutely massive, heavy and has an industrial look to it.
  3. Apple Airpod Pros: They actually sounded decent and were a big upgrade from the first version of the Airpods (which sounded awful). They are compact, so if you are traveling, or on the go, they are not a bad option especially as they also have built in noise cancellation.

Detailed Comparison

For each of the devices (photos above for scale), I recorded a short clip saying exactly the same thing and did not do any post processing. Here are some photos of each one (my wife added the teddy bear to the shot), the audio clip and a short summary of how I think it sounds.

I’ve ordered these from the best to the worst sounding, in my opinion.

Samson G Track Pro – $130

This microphone sounds leaps and bounds above the rest, but it’s big and needs to be a consistent distance away from your face so you can’t really move around while you are speaking, or it’s really distracting to the other person. The audio quality is fantastic, and makes you sound really clear. I recorded my YouTube video with this microphone.

Jabra Evolve 65 – $160

These sound clear, consistent and generally really good (especially the noise cancelling). The sound is a bit less ‘natural’ to me but all in all I was very impressed. These are my main pair of headphones for Zoom calls, and I’ve used them for around a year. The bluetooth pairing can be really annoying at the start of calls but a recent firmware update has made this much better.

I paid $160 for these last summer (June 2019), but they look to have gone up in price, possibly due a surge in demand as folks transition to working from home.

AirPod Pros – $230

These were surprisingly good despite not being that close to my mouth, but no where close to as good as the Jabras. The noise cancellation is adequate, and not a bad option on the go. They are a massive upgrade in sound quality from the first generation AirPods.

MacBook Pro 13 inch – $1700 (base model)

This does not sound great. It’s echo-ey and boomy and picks up a lot of background noise (although I was in a quiet place). I’d only use this if absolutely necessary.

Bose QC 35 II  – $350

Bluetooth Mic

This sounds pretty bad, and I would not recommend it. The audio is ‘grainy’ and it’s distractingly bad to hear. Please don’t use them.

Wired Mic

The wired microphone is a big upgrade to the bluetooth mic, and would rank above the Airpod Pros.

Apple AirPods First Generation – $130

These also sounded pretty bad, and I had no idea! I have been using them for calls for two years and am pretty sad about it now. I’m happy I’ve replaced them with the AirPod Pros (only last week, due to battery issues).

Beats Studio 3 – $220

In my opinion, this is the worst sounding headset. The audio is echoey, grainy, and overall absolutely terrible. Throw them to the curb or only ever use them for listening (which I don’t love either as they hurt my, large, ears).


When listening to the results, I was quite surprised at how much the audio quality can vary. The more expensive Bose and Beats headsets have really good sounding headphones, but really really bad microphones despite their high costs. I much prefer the Bose QC 35 to the Beats Studio3 for listening, for what it’s worth.

I think it’s worth investing in better audio, and with a wired USB headset with a boom mic it can be relatively affordable. You’ll get your message across more clearly and your friends and colleagues will enjoy your interactions more, without even realizing it.