Engineering Communication Skills

This one diagram explains why most leadership teams break at scale. Why “just adding more people” can quietly destroy your performance. At first glance, it’s just dots and lines. But look again and you’ll see why so many leaders feel like things used to be easier when the team was smaller. Every CEO feels it at some point, you grow from 5 to 15… and suddenly, clarity disappears. Decisions take longer. Alignment slips. Energy scatters. It’s not a culture problem. It’s a complexity problem and this image shows why. → 5 people = 10 communication lines → 10 people = 45 lines → 14 people = 91 separate relational dynamics And you’re still hiring. Most CEOs underestimate how non-linear complexity becomes after 10–12 people. They keep adding talent… but don’t redesign the structure. So what looks like a resourcing issue is actually a signal routing failure. Here’s what I tell founders and CEOs of scaling companies: You’re building a system of communication and accountability, and unless that system evolves ahead of your headcount, your org will stall in internal friction. At scale, communication isn’t a soft skill, it’s infrastructure. 📌 CEO Scaling Framework: 1️⃣ Simplify who owns what. If 3 people kind of own it, no one owns it. 2️⃣ Design decisions, not just roles. What gets decided where? What is delegated vs escalated? 3️⃣ Reinforce clarity, weekly. The bigger the org, the faster alignment decays. Reinforce priorities like a system, not a motivational speech. 4️⃣ Train managers early. Middle managers aren’t buffers. They’re your internal transmission lines. Build them like you build products. If your growth is outpacing your clarity, you don’t need another hire. You need to reengineer your operating model. #CEOLeadership #Scaling #ExecutiveStrategy #Communication #LeadershipSystems #Founders #ExecutivePerformance #HighPerformanceOrganizations

Not every professor / CEO likes this idea.  BUT in R&D management, simplicity & open policies win. Tesla's policies can be ‘translated’ into academic labs as follows: 1. NO excessive meetings. Keep only valuable meetings. Duration = shortest time that adds value. 2. At meetings, avoid getting bored. Walk OUT of a meeting when it’s no longer valuable to you. It’s OK to leave. 3. Students (MS / PhD) and postdocs have no hierarchies. A professor leads the group but keeps discussions on equal, facilitating arguments & disagreements. 4. Direct communication between academic labs is crucial. Students should not ask for access to instruments in other groups through their professor. 5. A research group should have its own policies and mission (fitting just 1 page). Policies include: when a study is publishable, how students can give feedback and improve the group, when to go to conferences, etc. 6. No "chains of command". FLAT communication within the group. Personally, I follow these approaches myself (with an exception for some MS and PhD students who need a lot of input at the beginning). But I must admit, it takes time for students & PIs to get used to it. ❗ Basically, my point is: Strong research groups have similar policies everywhere (both in industry and academia): - Open policies for meetings (‘Focus on what truly matters’). - ‘Direct communication’ policies for research & ideation. - Minimization of hierarchies. Q&A: "But my group works very well without these policies?" - Any great research group can be strengthened by such policies. Just try and you will see that the changes will be positive. #research #PhD #university 

My team and I once tried to hand-wave our way past Jeff Bezos with a large headcount request. He asked one question, was disappointed by the answer, and dug deeper. After a weak answer to question two, it was game over. Jeff declared that he trusted NONE of our proposal and sent us back, telling us, "Break down your requests to no more than 2 or 3 heads, tops, per line item. Then explain exactly what these small buckets will do." Once we did this, he went through the request line by line, telling us what we could and could not have. Overall, it was probably the most brutal experience I had with him in my 15 years at Amazon. While some people will read this and feel it was micromanagement, he was entirely right. We thought we had a blank check, so we made a big, broad funding request. We learned very quickly that while Jeff supported our mission, he expected us to spend "his" money carefully. Most people think executive influence happens in the room, by talking slick or having the right alliances. While communication and connections are hugely important, most of your influence is built before the meeting starts. Getting executive buy-in comes from understanding your executives, anticipating their concerns, and structuring your message around what they value. Here are two quick specifics: 1. Preparation If you walk into a key stakeholder meeting without preparing, like I did, you’ve already lost. The first step in preparation is clarity: What are you trying to achieve, by when, and why now? Then, define exactly what you’re asking for: a decision, resources, or permission to move forward. Finally, decode the humans. What does each stakeholder care about? What do they fear? How do they make decisions? Build your case in their language and plan your approach with intention. 2. Focus on Facts Executives are moved by accurate, outcome-driven facts. Shortly after this disastrous headcount audit, I was asked to lead the global expansion of the Kindle Appstore. This required taking 55 engineers away from other executive leaders to staff our rush effort. Our team won support by anchoring on three facts: (1) Kindle’s success in the U.S. was undeniable (2) The holiday deadline couldn’t move (3) Leadership had already approved a one-year draft to make it happen. Those facts aligned perfectly with what executives valued most: growth, timing, and company priority. If you master these skills, you’ll earn trust and support from senior leaders. In large organizations, this translates to success in your projects and success in your career. I've written a much more in depth Newsletter that covers these skills and more: https://lnkd.in/geEBPazP When have you either fallen into hand-waving or had to call your team on it?

I was Wrong about Influence. Early in my career, I believed influence in a decision-making meeting was the direct outcome of a strong artifact presented and the ensuing discussion. However, with more leadership experience, I have come to realize that while these are important, there is something far more important at play. Influence, for a given decision, largely happens outside of and before decision-making meetings. Here's my 3 step approach you can follow to maximize your influence: (#3 is often missed yet most important) 1. Obsess over Knowing your Audience Why: Understanding your audience in-depth allows you to tailor your communication, approach and positioning. How: ↳ Research their backgrounds, how they think, what their goals are etc. ↳ Attend other meetings where they are present to learn about their priorities, how they think and what questions they ask. Take note of the topics that energize them or cause concern. ↳ Engage with others who frequently interact with them to gain additional insights. Ask about their preferences, hot buttons, and any subtle cues that could be useful in understanding their perspective. 2. Tailor your Communication Why: This ensures that your message is not just heard but also understood and valued. How: ↳ Seek inspiration from existing artifacts and pickup queues on terminologies, context and background on the give topic. ↳ Reflect on their goals and priorities, and integrate these elements into your communication. For instance, if they prioritize efficiency, highlight how your proposal enhances productivity. ↳Ask yourself "So what?" or "Why should they care" as a litmus test for relatability of your proposal. 3. Pre-socialize for support Why: It allows you to refine your approach, address potential objections, and build a coalition of support (ahead of and during the meeting). How: ↳ Schedule informal discussions or small group meetings with key stakeholders or their team members to discuss your idea(s). A casual coffee or a brief virtual call can be effective. Lead with curiosity vs. an intent to respond. ↳ Ask targeted questions to gather feedback and gauge reactions to your ideas. Examples: What are your initial thoughts on this draft proposal? What challenges do you foresee with this approach? How does this align with our current priorities? ↳ Acknowledge, incorporate and highlight the insights from these pre-meetings into the main meeting, treating them as an integral part of the decision-making process. What would you add? PS: BONUS - Following these steps also expands your understanding of the business and your internal network - both of which make you more effective. --- Follow me, tap the (🔔) Omar Halabieh for daily Leadership and Career posts.

Speaking Tech and Human: Why Every Team Needs a Communication Chameleon Ever been in a meeting where it feels like everyone's speaking a different language? Not in the literal sense, but in that "tech jargon vs. human speak" kind of way. It happens all the time, especially in cross-functional teams. Engineers, with our love of acronyms and complex terminology, can sometimes leave non-technical folks feeling lost in the weeds. I recently witnessed this firsthand. Picture a late-night meeting about an upcoming AI launch. The tension is high, the deadline is looming, and suddenly, someone asks a seemingly simple question: "So, what exactly is an IDE?" The engineer on the call launches into a detailed explanation, complete with references to command-line interfaces. It's like trying to explain astrophysics to someone who just learned the alphabet. This is where we TPMs (or anyone with a knack for both tech and "human speak") come in. We're the interpreters, the bridge-builders, ensuring everyone's on the same page. In that late-night meeting, I jumped in with a simple explanation: "An IDE is basically the tool where developers write and test their code. It's like a word processor for software." Problem solved! The question-asker got the gist, the engineer learned a valuable lesson about audience-focused communication, and we all got a little closer to hitting that launch button. Key takeaways for clearer tech communication: - Know your audience: Tailor your explanations to the listener's technical understanding. - Focus on the "why": Explain the impact and benefits, not just the technical details. - Keep it simple: Avoid jargon and acronyms whenever possible. - Use analogies (when appropriate): Relate complex concepts to everyday experiences. Effective communication isn't about showing off your technical expertise, it's about building a shared understanding and achieving goals together. And in a world where tech is increasingly intertwined with every aspect of our lives, the ability to translate "tech-speak" into "human-speak" is more important than ever. Have you ever witnessed a "lost in translation" moment in tech? Share your stories in the comments! 👇 #TPMlife #TechLeadership #Google #LifeAtGoogle

The longer I work in Data and AI, the more I realize that communication is the key. It's easy to think that data science, machine learning, or artificial intelligence is all about programming and complex math. While technically true, this is just half the story. 𝐁𝐮𝐭 𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐞'𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐥 𝐪𝐮𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧: Is the value in the technical complexity or in how you communicate it? One phrase I remember from my communication coach now is, "You can always communicate everything." It's a simple phrase, but you can get something from others by communicating it right. How true the word above is reflected in my experience. When working for a client or employed, I was expected to solve problems with my technical expertise. In the early days, I will discuss the solution and result using many technical terms. You know what happens? A mess. Business people mostly do not understand how our technical things work. Many don't even want to know as long as we are solving their problems. Everything is all about the business, after all. When I became a founder, my train of thought also changes: 𝐃𝐨𝐞𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐭𝐞𝐜𝐡 𝐬𝐞𝐥𝐥 𝐢𝐭𝐬𝐞𝐥𝐟 𝐨𝐫 𝐢𝐬 𝐢𝐭 𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐲? Well, I will answer that it's how you package the tech in a nice story. You can even see it yourself: the most engaging technical content has a story behind it. So, communication is important even if you work in technical fields. Here are some tips you can use to improve communication as data people: ✅𝐊𝐧𝐨𝐰 𝐘𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐀𝐮𝐝𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞: Tailor your message to what matters—code for peers, impact for leaders. ✅𝐓𝐞𝐥𝐥 𝐚 𝐃𝐚𝐭𝐚 𝐒𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐲: Structure insights as Problem → Insight → Impact for clarity. ✅𝐒𝐢𝐦𝐩𝐥𝐢𝐟𝐲 𝐒𝐦𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐥𝐲: Use analogies to relate complex ideas without losing depth. ✅𝐕𝐢𝐬𝐮𝐚𝐥𝐬 𝐖𝐢𝐧: A good chart speaks louder than a thousand data points. ✅𝐄𝐥𝐞𝐯𝐚𝐭𝐨𝐫 𝐏𝐢𝐭𝐜𝐡 𝐑𝐞𝐚𝐝𝐲: Explain your project in 30 seconds—what, why, so what. ✅𝐀𝐬𝐤 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐅𝐞𝐞𝐝𝐛𝐚𝐜𝐤: You're on point if non-technical folks get it. ✅𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐟𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐌𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐬: Own your insights—clarity with confidence earns trust. Do you have any experience and tips you want to share? Discuss it below!👇 Want to learn more and get daily data science tips in your email inbox? Subscribe to my Newsletter>>> https://lnkd.in/g639tmpD ——————— You don't want to miss #python data tips + #datascience and #machinelearning knowledge + #AI. Follow Cornellius Y. and press the bell 🔔 to learn together. ———————

📲 Even the most perfect GRC architecture fails when engineers ignore your requests. Introducing the HUMAN API: the missing interface between your GRC program and engineering teams. Your technical systems might be well-designed, but if engineers see your compliance requests as interruptions rather than priorities, you're building security on quicksand. In this week's GRC Engineer newsletter, I break down: - How to design standardised communication protocols that engineers actually respond to - Building translation layers that convert compliance-speak into engineering language - Creating feedback loops that drive continuous improvement - Implementing through "human middleware" – the people who bridge technical divides - Measuring success through relationship metrics (like NPS), not just compliance checkboxes - Transforming adversarial interactions into collaborative problem-solving - Designing interface specifications that balance structure with engineering flexibility The most sophisticated GRC program in the world is worthless if you can't get engineers to implement controls effectively. Your human interfaces matter just as much as your technical ones. This week's entry is packed with insights and practical steps to amend your relationships with engineers and it's dropping TODAY. Subscribe now to get the full breakdown: https://lnkd.in/epvcr3R3 Huge shoutout to SecurityScorecard for being this week's lead sponsor! What communication challenges do you face with engineering teams? Drop your thoughts below 👇 #GRCEngineering #HumanAPI #StakeholderManagement

Ever presented rock-solid research only to hear "Thanks, but we're going with our gut on this one"? Securing stakeholder buy-in is rarely about the quality of your work. It's about something deeper. When you’re dealing with a research trust gap, ask yourself 5 questions. 👽 Are you speaking alien to earthlings? When you say jargon like "double diamond" or "information architecture," your stakeholders hear gibberish. Business leaders didn't learn UX in business school—and most never will. Translate everything into business outcomes they understand. Revenue growth. Customer retention. Cost savings. Competitive advantage.  Speak their native language, not yours. ⏰ What keeps them awake at 3am? Behind every skeptical question is a personal fear. That product manager who keeps shooting down your findings? They're terrified of missing their KPIs and losing their bonus. Have honest conversations about what they're personally on the hook for delivering. Then show how your research helps them achieve exactly that. ❓Are you treating assumptions as facts? You might think you know what questions matter to your stakeholders. You're probably wrong. Before starting research, explicitly ask: "What questions do you need answered to make this decision?" Then design your research to answer exactly those questions. ⚒️ Are you dying on the hill of methodological purity? Sometimes you have 8 hours for research instead of 8 weeks. Being dogmatic about "proper" research methods doesn’t always pay off. Focus on outcomes over process. If quick-and-dirty gets reliable insights that drive decisions, embrace it. 🍽️ Are you force-feeding them a seven-course meal when they wanted a snack? Executives need 30-second summaries. Product managers need actionable findings. Junior team members need hands-on learning. Tailor your approach to each one. You can also use my stakeholder persona mapping template here: https://bit.ly/43R7wom What’s the best advice you’ve heard about dealing with skeptical stakeholders?

Here's the world's simplest presentation tip (when you're sharing to execs). Start the presentation with a summary of your takeaways. "What 4-5 major points do I want my audience to walk away knowing?" I ask myself that before I have any major presentation. I had to learn this lessons that hard way btw... I used to put my takeaways on the last slide. In journalism, that's called burying the lead. I didn't realize it was a problem - until one day a mentor pulled me aside. "Andrew, you're forcing us to do a lot of work to understand your main takeaways. On every slide, we're trying to guess if this is a good story or a bad story!" "Next time, start with an executive summary. Then share more details in the following slides. We'll ask better questions and you'll be more likely to get your resources." That very simple change has made a huge impact when presenting to senior audiences.

Every single tech professional thinks: "My coding skills will speak for themselves." But here's the brutal reality I've seen coaching tech careers: Technical skills are your entry ticket. Soft skills are your upgrade path. I've watched brilliant engineers get passed over for promotions. I've seen top coders struggle in team dynamics. I've coached developers who couldn't articulate their project's value. Why? Because technical expertise isn't enough anymore. Modern workplaces demand: - Clear communication of complex technical concepts. - Collaborative problem-solving skills. - Emotional intelligence in high-pressure environments. - Ability to influence and persuade non-technical stakeholders. Your technical skills solve problems. Your soft skills create opportunities. Consider what top tech companies really want: - Engineers who can explain technical solutions. - Team members who build positive workplace cultures. - Professionals who can navigate complex interpersonal landscapes. But here's what drives me crazy: Most tech education ignores interpersonal development. Most engineers undervalue communication training. Most companies still prioritize technical skills over holistic capabilities. Stop treating soft skills as secondary. They're your career's real differentiator. Want to truly accelerate your tech career? Develop both technical and interpersonal capabilities. Because in today's workplace, your human skills are your most powerful algorithm. #TechCareer #Softskills #Employees #Careertips