This is the first episode of Consultation Interviews. The person, companies, and business details have been anonymized. This is an edited account of a real consultation rather than a verbatim transcript; the questions preserve the shape of the conversation, while the notes explain how I approached the problem.
You may recognize this situation
- You have joined a new team and are delivering requirements, but cannot yet explain where you can create distinctive value.
- Your manager wants stable delivery while you need room to grow, prove yourself, or take on a broader role.
- You have been given a broad business or growth problem without enough context, ownership, or a clear starting point.
- You want to talk to product or business partners, but worry that asking basic questions will expose what you do not know.
These situations look different on the surface, but they often share the same problem: you are expected to make a judgment before you have the information and support required to make one.
How the conversation started
A had recently joined a new team at a large technology company as a senior technical expert. Two months in, he had delivered a few requirements but had not yet created anything beyond delivery. He wanted to find a new direction, perhaps full-stack work or growth. At the same time, he was anxious: the role came with high expectations, including high compensation, and he worried that delivering only a few requirements would make people think he was falling short.
The concern sounded like a workload problem at first. As we talked, it became more specific: he wanted a visible piece of work that could demonstrate his value. Underneath that was another worry — how other people saw him, and whether he would become the kind of senior engineer who simply settled into doing the minimum.
I did not want to jump straight to “full-stack or growth.” The first question was whether he truly lacked a direction, or whether he lacked enough information and context to judge a direction.
“I have delivered a few requirements. I need something that shows my value.”
A: Most of what I do right now is take requirements and deliver them. But a senior engineer cannot only do that. I need something that shows what I can contribute.
Me: Who are you trying to prove that to?
A: Maybe my manager, maybe the people around me. The role and compensation expectations are both high. If all I have to show is a few requirements, will people think I am underperforming?
Me: So are you mainly worried that there is not enough work, or that there is no visible signal of your value?
A: The second one. I want to find a new direction, maybe full-stack or growth, but I do not have anything meaningful to talk about yet.
I did not give him a list of directions at this point. “I need a highlight” is an outcome he wanted, not yet an executable problem. We first needed to separate a few things: what work he was doing, who assigned it, who could judge its value, what business information he had, and which people he could influence.
Without that map, asking him to design a new direction would only add pressure while he was still operating with incomplete information.
“My manager mainly wants me to avoid disruption and protect delivery.”
Me: Have you spoken with your direct manager?
A: Once. My impression is that he was recently promoted and is playing it safe. The business is still relatively small, so his main message was not to create problems and to protect delivery. He may not have figured out how to manage me yet.
Me: How did you interpret that message?
A: I should focus on delivering the requirements. But if that is all I do, how do I show that I meet the expectations of a senior role? The compensation expectations are not low either. I cannot stay in delivery-only mode forever.
The direct manager had not rejected A’s growth. The immediate priority was simply clear: avoid incidents and keep delivery stable. Given the manager’s recent promotion and the size of the business, that caution was understandable. But A heard another signal: perhaps nobody had yet decided how to make use of him.
This created a tension in the working arrangement. The manager needed stability; A needed a chance to demonstrate value. The manager could currently offer requirements, while A was looking for direction and room to explore. Neither side was necessarily wrong. What was missing was a conversation about goals, boundaries, and how the new hire could contribute beyond assigned delivery.
“The collaboration lead also wants everyone to have something reportable.”
Me: How did the lead for the collaboration area assign work to you?
A: He wanted everyone to have something they could report on. I was given a broad task around improving a core business metric. My background is not on that side of the business, and I do not know the context here.
Me: Was this a clearly defined problem, or a broad direction?
A: More of a direction. There was no specific metric or clear starting point.
Me: Do you know where the metric is currently getting stuck?
A: No. I do not have enough knowledge in this area. If I talk to product or business partners, I am worried they will realize I do not understand the business and that I will expose myself within a few minutes.
At this point, the problem was clearer. A did not lack ability or ideas; he lacked information and context. He was being asked to produce an answer before he had even found the facts the answer would need.
His background was relevant: e-commerce, AI, and consumer-facing business architecture. Those experiences might connect to the metric, but first he needed to understand the team’s business flow, goals, metrics, previous attempts, and constraints. Otherwise, transferable experience could easily turn into an unsupported analogy.
The consultation did not choose between “full-stack” and “growth”
A wanted to find a new direction. But after we separated the pieces, it became clear that he did not yet have the conditions to make that choice.
What he lacked was not a more clever direction. He lacked:
- an understanding of the business goal and historical context;
- a view of the product, business, and collaboration partners’ positions;
- support and authorization from his direct manager;
- facts and hypotheses he could take into a credible update.
So the immediate advice was not “go do growth.” It was to build relationships, gather information, understand positions, and find support before returning to his manager to discuss priority and resources.
Get context before choosing a direction
A: What should I do first?
Me: Ask the collaboration lead to introduce you to the right people. Do not try to align on a solution first. You do not know enough context to make that judgment yet. Start by speaking with the product or business partner responsible for this area.
A: What should I say when I reach out to product?
Me: Be direct. Say that your background is in e-commerce, AI, and consumer-facing architecture, and that you have just joined this business and want to understand the business flow and current problem first. Do not open with “I want to do growth,” and do not pretend you already understand the domain. Ask what they are trying to improve, which metrics matter, what has already been tried, and where the problem is stuck.
A: What if they ask whether I have any ideas?
Me: You can share ideas, but label them as hypotheses. Based on your e-commerce experience, you might look at certain points in the flow. Based on your AI experience, you might explore intelligent diagnosis or investigation. Based on your architecture experience, you might look at the user journey and system capacity. These are starting points to validate, not conclusions to present as answers.
The advice was not “go network.” It was “go get the information required to make a good decision.” A needed to speak with product and business partners about goals, metrics, previous attempts, current problems, and ownership. At the same time, he needed to learn the basics of the domain himself. Not knowing the context did not mean asking other people to provide all of it in one conversation.
Get information, allies, and support
Me: Within the next week, try to meet the people who hold the relevant context. Get information, and get some allies.
A: By allies, do you mean people I might work with later?
Me: Yes, but not only that. Find people who are willing to keep sharing context and help you judge the problem. Then understand their position: do they believe this is worth pursuing, and are they willing to support you as you move it forward?
I broke the next step into layers:
- build a relationship with a key product partner, understand the business need, and determine whether the problem is worth pursuing;
- ask the collaboration lead to help connect people, coordinate, and fill information or resource gaps;
- bring the facts and initial hypotheses back to the direct manager and seek support for the exploration;
- only then discuss time, access, data, and priority.
A: Should I go straight to my manager and ask for time and resources?
Me: Not yet. First clarify what you might be able to explore, what context you have gathered, and what ideas you are considering. Report that first, then discuss the rest.
This was not yet a “please give me resources” conversation. A did not have enough facts or evidence. Asking immediately for time, access, and priority could sound like he was trying to create an extra project for himself.
A better first update would make the evidence visible: what is known, what product and business partners have said, what observations are supported, what ideas come from his previous experience, and what still needs validation. The manager could then judge whether the direction deserved investment.
The organizational boundaries mattered too. The product partner provided the business position; the collaboration lead helped connect and coordinate; the direct manager decided whether A should invest time. A had not spoken with the department head, and there was no reason to bypass his direct manager at this stage.
Where the conversation stopped
A left without a confirmed growth plan or an approved project. We had not yet reached the point where it made sense to choose between full-stack and growth.
His next week was concrete enough: meet the relevant product and business partners, understand the goals, metrics, previous attempts, current problems, and ownership; learn the domain basics; combine that context with his e-commerce, AI, and consumer-facing architecture experience; form a few hypotheses; and report them to his direct manager.
The conversation did not solve A’s business problem. It moved the question from “How do I prove myself?” to “What information do I need to obtain next week?” That was the immediate value of the consultation. When context is missing, gather information first. When a position is missing, build relationships. When support is missing, make the facts and thinking visible.
The direction and outcome can come later, once the missing context has been gathered.
If you are in a similar situation
A consultation may not decide your final direction in one conversation. It can first help you do three things:
- Break “I have no direction” into specific questions, and determine whether what is missing is direction, information, authorization, or organizational support.
- Identify the people you need to speak with and what you need to learn from each conversation.
- Turn scattered concerns into facts, hypotheses, and a next step you can take to your manager, product partner, or business partner.
If you have recently joined a new team and are dealing with “work, but no direction,” send a brief note about your background, current situation, and what you want to resolve. I will first assess whether a single consultation is a good fit, or whether the problem calls for a written analysis or a short follow-up plan.