superzadeh

Looks pretty cool and useful, but how do you prevent it to reinforce biases/unfair practices at work?

yes

Datadog APM, Segment: both key to building day to day products, none first party support. Community libraries exist, but their bus factor isn’t looking good.

FWIW, comparing a misbehaving react hook with the challenges of being a nurse today feels weirdly entitled. Get closer to the reality of their job and you might start to understand why 90% want to leave (90% is a conservative number IMO).

If you’d cut your pay down to 25% of what you make, work 12h a day with a single 30min lunch break (that gets interrupted regularly), including several weekends and nights every month, without guaranteed vacations for holiday season/new year’s eve, work in a team that’s 50% understaff but still needs to deliver no matter what, without any carrer path forward, you’d leave your current SWE job right away. And in comparison, you’d still not be be even to close to what they do (i.e: cleaning up body fluids).

teams at work is a good one: https://bunch.ai/slack-community

nice! I’ve been using this app for a while, feels much smoother now. I’m using it a lot now on M1 mac as well, and pass it to all my team leads that I want to grow into Engineering Managers, super helpful to share mental models and explain how to give feedback

Take a look outside the US, you’d be surprised. The world is not centered around the US.

Shameless plug for the Bunch app, this has been the most useful for me so far on soft skills.

https://apps.apple.com/us/app/bunch-daily-leadership-coach/i...

Bunch.ai | New York, NY & Berlin, Germany | Various roles | Full-time, Remote

Our team is on a mission to make sure everyone has a great manager. The amount of knowledge that exist in psychology research about leadership and teams is mind blowing, but surprisingly enough, almost none of it is used on a daily basis: in your sprints, stand-ups, one-on-ones or performance feedback. We want to change that.

Here's our open roles:

- Product Engineer: https://www.notion.so/bunch2/Generalist-Product-Engineer-248...

- Product designer: https://www.notion.so/bunch2/Senior-Product-Designer-2618dc2...

We are actually kicking off an Android app in January, and we want to keep native app development (so far, we’ve seen that it helps us in building better UX, even if it takes more effort)

Oh yes! Absolutely, it's actually there, but a bit buried, thanks for calling that out, will work it into the top of the article:

Prof. Charles O'Reilly -> https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/faculty-research/faculty/charle...

The model we're using is called: OCP (Organizational Culture Profiling => which measures the norms on individual, team and company level) and here are a few papers that are using it too: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1059601114550713 https://escholarship.org/uc/item/5785r45z

Summary of the model by our team -> On 14 archetypes: https://bunch.ai/blog/14-leadership-types/ On company culture: https://bunch.ai/blog/company-culture/

TLDR; - it's not fixed -> but can vary over time with new jobs, new teams - it's based on the measurement of what matters to you (your norms), not WHO you are acc. to a personality test - it's also more recent research

16 personalities is a typical personality test, based on a trait-based approach: Myers-Briggs (originally based on Jung's theory). The Stanford model we use is based on the work of Prof. Charles O'Reilly, who was studying team and company culture and how that relates to performance and satisfaction at work.

So the model we used in the product basically measures more "what's important to you at work" and what your priorities are rather than "who you are" based on a pesonality model.

That also means that your mindset can change over the course of even just a few weeks, while personality is something more stable.

yeah there are sooo many, you are right to be sceptical, basically we partnered with this Prof. from Stanford (https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/faculty-research/faculty/charle...) and used his model that measures what's important to people at work (aka Mindset Norms) instead of using a generic personality test.

That way it is actually saying something about your priorities at work and is more directly linked to your behavior at work.

Ah good question! Myers-Briggs is measuring personality, which is kinda stable overtime, you can't change it easily, this model measures Norms/Mindset, that is actually something you can influence + there is lots of critique around the fact that Myers-Briggs is just made up and not really actually replicable (so not really reliable/scientific).

Bunch Co-Founder and CTO here.

We built an iOS app for personalized 2-minute leadership tips (think Duolingo for learning how to lead or just work better in teams).

One of the challenges we've run into is the fact that there are several different working styles - there's no universal "right" way to lead. We found an interesting way to solve this problem using a model from Stanford. Here's a quick write up, that I hope you'll find interesting both from a technical perspective and for leading/building teams.

Thanks!

Thank you for the support!

Sound like a really awful experience, if it happened to you, I’m really sorry! I’m not sure if there’s a definitive answer (in psychology) whether someone has the emotional constitution for management that is set in time; it might be a matter of timing for many people.

In any case, one of the things we try to achieve with our app is to help people in this situation: we have tips for resilience, self discovery and emotional intelligence that can help better handle this emotional rollercoaster.

It turns out that many people get pushed into leading a team a specific way (by their peers, mentors or lack thereof), instead of having the tools to find their own leadership style and learn how to grow it. That was one of the main motivations when we started working on the psychology of our app: we need to start by discovering people’s leadership style, and only then recommend content & tips that will help them on the journey

Thanks a lot for the feeback! There’s a couple other people who mentionned it today, so we’ll get to adding username/password (and definitely won’t handle the credentials ourselves ^^)

Thanks a lot for the feedback! I know it’s not always easy to share, but definitely appreciate it. Maybe we can add an opt-in for our analytics: we mostly use them to understand what we should build next (or measure when we do A/B tests in the app), as well as be able to help when people get in touch with a coach via Intercom. All of that can/should be optional though, so I’ll bring that to our board and see if we can do something there.

Also, there’s no harm at all in caring about privacy, rather the opposite, so your opinion is 100% valid!

Sure! We have it on our website, https://bunch.ai or you can even drop your email directly here: https://bunch-ai.typeform.com/to/tXPvy5rA

this is super helpful, thank you for taking the time to share it! for the first point, we also heard this from a couple other people, and actually working on improving it this sprint And we’ll keep your feedback in mind for the second point (maybe sharing it via Slack or MS Teams to co-workers)

Hey Mandeepj, not a side hustle ^^ we’re looking to estbalish a business around it. Our mission is to help anyone to become a great leader, so we want to keep the app free for individuals. We are also working on “team features”, and this is where we plan to make revenue for our business.

Glad it helps! If we didn’t put so much focus on UX (i.e: if we were building a “boring” typical B2B education tool), we would most likely have gone with React Native (we also have a lot of expertise with React in the team). But we talked with people, and realized that they use our app at the same time that they go on IG, Snapchat or TikTok. What that means for us is that our UX needs to be just as good or even better than those big players if we want to compete on “screen time”.

That’s already quite hard to do with a 2 people tech-team, so adding on top of that limitations from cross-platform frameworks would have been shooting ourselves in the foot.

yeah good question, we actually debated quite a bit on this. In the end, we want to build the best UX possible (we realized it's one of the value prop of our product), and we felt that going native would be better mid & long term because at some point, you hit a threshold with those react native/hybrid and it makes more time to polish things out.

Also right when we started (in Feb), we had to implement Apple Sign-in, and the UX around it for React native or Hybrid framework was absolutely terrible.

In the end, I still think it was a good choice: while we compromise and make people wait a bit more for Android, it gave our (small) team a lot more focus. We learn and make mistakes on one platform, iterate faster on it, and once we feel comfortable with what we've done on iOS, we'll roll it out to Android (which we plan to do in Jan/Feb next year).

Sorry it felt abstract! let me know which one it was, and I’ll improve it with the team

Start small, stay constant and make it a habit to improve: chances are you’ll end up a better leader than if you try to “sprint rush” your learning on this topic. It’s also crazy times to live in, people spend a lot of time on their screen. We couldn’t resign to designing a learning app that would make users spend even more time away from their team. Learn a bit, and spend more time applying what you learn with real humans

I would actually love for it to be available everywhere, even offline for people who don’t have access to internet/computers. We want to make it available to everyone, just takes a bit of time (we’re only 2 devs right now in the team). I’m hiring though! So if you’re interested or know someone who might be, get in touch (charles@bunch.ai). I’m looking for backend/fullstack/android people.

Definitely, we actually come from a super nerdy psych background: it took us 3 years and 5 failed products to learn how to make the “science” approachable. We have a partnership with Stanford who developed the psychological model we’re basing everything on (from Charles O’Reilly, https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/faculty-research/faculty/charle...).

As for the rest, we have as many psychologists in house as we have software engineers, if that speaks for anything. Also after building our startup for 4 years now, we have definitely been through the grind (still going through it), and don’t push stuff that we wouldn’t use ourselves.

ohhh, that's a tough one. @StateObject is definitely making things easier, but the trick we've used for now (we’re still targeting iOS 13) is to wrap ViewModels in @State in a parent view, and pass it down to your view as an @EnvironmentObject.

When the subview changes/re-renders, your ViewModel stay the same on the parent view and is not recreated as it is a @State; and your subview can still listen to @PUublished changes.

We've made a generic wrapper for it, and we use almost everywhere:

  struct ViewModelWrapper<V: View, ViewModel: ObservableObject>: View {
    private let contentView: V
    @State private var contentViewModel: ViewModel

    init(contentView: @autoclosure () -> V, vm: @autoclosure () -> ViewModel) {
        self._contentViewModel = State(initialValue: vm())
        self.contentView = contentView()
    }

    var body: some View {
        contentView
            .environmentObject(contentViewModel)
    }
  }