The Story is the Story: On Management #40

Or a story

The holidays were fun and long, and I’m glad we’re all still here.

Please allow me to be the last person to send out a 2019 recap, and a little something new.

Thank you for inviting me to your inbox.

2019 in Review

The newsletters:

Are norms really normal? (P.S.), Ready for your intervention? (P.S.), Minimum Viable Passion (P.S.), Always be coaching (P.S.), and Ask (better) questions (P.S.)

The Soundcloud playlist for my 2019 audios is here. I also appeared on Ashley Milne Tyte’s The Broad Experience, episode 140; we talked about coaching.

Newsletters for supporting members (paywalled):

Dead (White) Men Talking, Audio Transcript, CV Harquail on Feminism and Business, Wheels within Wheels, Audio Transcript, Jane Watson on the Toronto Tech Study, So I've been thinking, Audio Transcript: Fobazi Ettarh on Vocational Awe, Problematics, I Kind of Want A Revolution, Audio Transcript: Ask (Better Questions), The Women's March, and Burnt(Out) Offerings.

If you’re Deaf, hard-of-hearing or otherwise require an audio transcript, I will make one available upon request.

The story was the story

The central drama of the workplace is when a manager and team members fail to agree on what needs to be done. Or so I say.

In the early ‘10s, I started noticing storytellers speaking at conferences. Giving workshops. Writing books. Talking TED.

I wondered, what if I were to frame the central workplace drama as, actually, a narrative problem? Would it mean that managers should be better storytellers? Possibly correct, I guessed.

And yet this didn’t quite sit right with me; storytelling wasn’t the right intervention. I moved on.

Fueled by abundant capital, the decade wore on. An emerging narrative gained strength: organizations should grow, fast. Collateral damage be damned, go for Total Market Domination.

And, It Will Be Worth It.

Almost every blitzscaling org that I have seen up close has a lot of internal unhappiness. Fuzziness about roles and responsibilities, unhappiness about the lack of a clearly defined sandbox to operate in. “Oh my God, it’s chaos, this place is a mess.” The thing that keeps these companies together…is the sense of excitement about what’s happening and the vision of a great future. Because I’m part of a team that’s doing something big…the pain will be worth it.”

Reid Hoffman quoted in Blitzscaling, by Tim Sullivan at Harvard Business Review

We were promised flying cars, but that was a long time ago.

More recent promises include driverless cars, and worlds where no one a) feels alone, and b) ever has to say goodbye too soon.


Who’s the narrator?

“Brash young creative geniuses KILLING IT” gave way in 2019 to “Bad Apples have been running things around here, but we’re gonna fix it now.”

So far, “unsustainable business model” is not a terribly popular story.

In 2016, Reid Hoffman said, “You fix the things that will get investors to give you more cash.”

So, in a Bad Apple’s wake, do you fix the company, or fix the story? Both? And who’s telling the story anyways?

After the 1987 stock market crash, an acquaintance reported that her stockbroker boyfriend felt guilty. As the market tanked, he had profited by executing sales trades. For clients who had bought the stock from him.

Of course, this was his job.

When an idea, company or person gains momentum, there’s all kinds of media on the buy side. They’re also there on the sell side, when things crash and burn.

And as we click and share, we make the market. Yes, there are reliable narrators. We still have to interrogate them.

Look for the author

When it comes to the narratives on work, we don’t see an author. We see beliefs.

That you should learn to “code.” Hustle.

That it’s ok to work full time and not be able to support yourself. Ok to be paid less than the guy next to you for doing the same job.

That very particular great men (even men’s men) have been people management innovators, rather than observers and adapters of common practices that are the accretion of generations of knowledge and practice, for better and for worse.

That you should meditate.

Like God — or A God — or the market — we only see outcomes.

Is #MeToo a battle between author and narrator?

Optimistic Me: Maybe #MeToo is a triumph. Finally, here are the stories of some who have been silenced.

Cynical Me: Don’t just sit back and watch the story go by. So many problems with our narrators, gatekeepers, and people who are meant to ensure justice.

There’s a lot of work to do.

Because we’re seen this movie before, too.

If you’re here, I’m guessing you’re a reader

Here’s another story: The Liberal Arts are Dead.

Maybe students should securitize themselves in exchange for vocational training. Say, learning to program computers. The sort of on-the-job training that their parents completed on their employers’ dime and time.

Our best offense may be the ability to critically engage a text — whether it’s this newsletter, your CEO’s pitch, or a story in the media outlet of your choice.

Long live the liberal arts.

Who gets to tell stories — about tech?

Lizzie’s literary genius rests not just in her acres of quotable one-liners…but in her invention of what was really a new form, which has more or less replaced literary fiction — the memoir by a young person no one has ever heard of before. It was a form that Lizzie fashioned in her own image, because she always needed to be both the character and the author.

Author David Samuels, quoted in Elizabeth Wurtzel, ‘Prozac Nation’ Author, Is Dead at 52

An entry-level employee spends a few years in a few tech/startups. Then she writes a singular memoir.

Anna Weiner’s Uncanny Valley: A Memoir (library) (Indiebound) brings a young woman’s narrative voice to a world largely peopled, authored, and narrated by men.

Weiner sees “the ecosystem” and its structures. Gently, dreamily, deftly, she opens them to wider scrutiny.

And she gets it. The -preneurship, the meritocracy, the employee-number-upsmanship.

One passage stopped me short. Then, I took a screenshot and immediately slacked it to someone I worked with a few years ago.

We had seen this movie. It was called Snack Monetization. Or maybe it was called Snacks as Comp. Snack Entitlement?

(I’d share my former client’s response, but I signed an NDA.)

In the months since I read Uncanny Valley, it has stayed with me. It’s a different story from other literary memoirs I’ve loved. Weiner is not eclipsing her origin story, and/or healing from trauma.

She’s not a victim, survivor, or hero: she’s a passenger on the luxury bus we call Tech. It’s navigated and driven by young men. Gas and upkeep, to a point, are funded by older men.

As readers, we’re along for the ride.

Anna’s writing about what it means to belong and grow at work, and what it means to wake up to the story.

Again and again, reflecting on Uncanny Valley brought me back to Lost in Translation. So I watched it again.

Recent college grad Charlotte is a guest in a luxe Tokyo hotel, traveling with her husband John, who’s there for business. Left to her own devices as John works, Charlotte connects with a weary middle-aged film star, Bob.

I can't tell you how many people have told me that (they) just don't get "Lost in Translation." They want to know what it's about. They complain "nothing happens." They've been trained by movies that tell them where to look and what to feel, in stories that have a beginning, a middle and an end.

“Great Movie: Lost in Translation,” Roger Ebert

Nothing much happens, indeed.

Trapped in structures constructed by, and for, the privilege they enjoy, Bob and Charlotte exercise little agency.

Their souls are starving; it’s time for karaoke.

Roger Ebert’s piece on Lost in Translation is lovely and flawed: Ebert sees Bob at the center of the story. Director Sofia Coppola is playing a bigger game, though, radically placing Charlotte’s perspective on equal footing with Bob’s.

If “business memoir” existed as a literary genre, the template would be a Great Man’s success story, a tale of overcoming. Or maybe vindication.

Male voices infuse the narrative groundwater of business, tech, and work.

To me, shouting so loud that my first drafts of this very piece led with an exegesis of a man’s 1980’s memoir of his entry-level years in the newly-hot industry of that age, finance.

As I edited, news broke about Elizabeth Wurtzel’s death. I remember her from when we were both young. She was Controversial; the media loved-hated her.

I hadn’t bothered. Or maybe hadn’t deigned.

Jumping from Wurtzel’s obituary, to pieces about her, and by her, today I see a contemporary who spoke plainly about both hard and frivolous things. A woman who didn’t appear to care what people thought.

I berated Current Me. Had Younger Me allowed internalized sexism to stop her from reading Elizabeth’s work?

Then, I forgave Younger Me. She desperately needed to be seen as Likeable — by the right people — to maintain her tenuous purchase on the next rung of the corporate ladder. Wearing heels and a skirt.

I didn’t have time for someone who didn’t care if we liked her: I couldn’t afford to…relate.

(Lost in Translation’s) cinematography by Lance Acord and editing by Sarah Flack make no attempt to underline points or nudge us. It permits us to regard.

“Great Movie: Lost in Translation,” Roger Ebert

Mary Karr says, “In some ways, writing a memoir is knocking yourself out with your own fist, if it’s done right.”

Anna doesn’t bash or cheerlead for tech, or for herself.

Instead, she permits us to regard.

(Disclosure: I requested and received an advanced reader’s copy of Uncanny Valley, which comes out on Tuesday, January 14.)


So many endeavors and questions don’t lend themselves to the boundaries of a year, a review cycle, or even a decade. I’ve been thinking about continuity.

Last year I put a few questions out here:

  • How am I responsible for unintended consequences?

  • What am I not seeing, and how can I see it? Do I see anything that I can render more visible?

  • How can we develop and advance a better understanding of business history?

I’ve spoken indirectly to these questions, and there’s more to be said.

I’ll come back to this, along with another question — why does any particular organization need to persist?

New for 2020

There’s a certain “circling the drain” quality to viral workplace stories.

Commentary pours in. Wise, inane, comedic, otherwise. Then, it surrenders to gravity, volume, and the shape of the bowl.

In June-ish, I wrote and posted something every day behind the paywall. When I stuck my toe in the water on a recent viral story, I thought back to that exercise*.

For 2020, supporting members will get my occasional Sunday morning “warm takes.” They’ll be short and sweet, like one that I just unpaywalled.

Later this month, I’ll raise the subscription price for new supporting members — if you’re already a member, nothing will change.

*(Here’s a June 2019 piece I unpaywalled, about WeWork.)

New Year’s Rulin’s

“32. Make up your mind.” Thank you, Woody Guthrie.

Many thanks to everyone who has read, shared, or contributed to my newsletter.

I love receiving email — bits and pieces of our conversations wind up in the compost of my mind, and always make what I share here smarter and better. So if you have feedback, questions, or suggestions, please use this link to send me a note.

Thank you so much for reading the newsletter, and happy new year to you and yours,

Anne Libby

P.S. If you’re reading this online, it’s been polished since I sent it out by email. Not to perfection, lol.

Roger Ebert’s review of Groundhog Day correctly places Bill Murray’s character at the center of the story. #pedantic

Warm Take: Away with her! December 13, 2019

There are no management prodigies

I have my own story about being about 30, and being tapped to lead a team that had experienced explosive growth. Everyone was tired, our customer service team had a huge backlog of work, and we were understaffed and unable to respond within reasonable timeframes.

Update, January 12: I unpaywalled this sample of my Warm Takes, periodic brief posts that I’ll send out on (some) Sunday mornings in 2020, to folks who pay to receive the newsletter.

Read on!

The leader of the CS team, “Lily,” reported to me. She was in over her head. (And tbh so was I, but that’s another story.) She had even declared periods of “mandatory” overtime, which we did bring to an end after I joined.

I’ll tl;dr this to keep this brief: had our experience happened today, my managers and I might have been dealing with social media pressure to fire Lily. Plenty of my own behavior back in the day could have landed me in hot water on the internet.

So let’s talk about the exiting-CEO of the travel bag company, and the internet controversy about what an awful manager she was two years ago, and maybe still is.

What none of us know:

  • Is "Head of Supply" at a 1-year-old startup a team leader/people manager, or an individual contributor/analyst?

  • Did Away's CEO have any management experience?

What none of us know:

  • Did Away's CEO ever say anything nice?

  • Did she ever support her employees?

  • Is she objectively a rude, unpleasant person to work with any, some, most, or all of the time?

What none of us know:

  • Was Away's CEO learning to manage people by reading books and Medium posts?

  • How did Jen Rubio, Away’s co-founder and President, participate in these operational leadership decisions?

What none of us know:

  • What does the article’s timing indicate? Was the CEO fighting to hang onto her job even as her replacement was being sought? Did the article influence board members to encourage her exit?

  • How many companies are led by men who behave like this?

Look, I’m not saying that Steph Korey should be the CEO of Away.

What I’m saying is that she wound up as the CEO of Away because investors gave Korey and Rubio money to realize their idea.

During this boom in VC money, it has become a norm to invest in smart, inexperienced people. This flies in the face of common sense (imo) and research, which is starting to show that successful entrepreneurs skew older.

I coach people about management and leadership skills. But in this role, I would think long and hard before I took on an engagement to work with someone with very little experience in how organizational process works.

It’s pretty hard to swim and tread water at the same time. If you also have to learn how to swim, even harder.

Going back to Lily, she wasn’t evil. Or even mean. She was a solid manager given a stable situation. In this case, she was undersupported, and facing an unanticipated challenge she had never seen before. And she was frustrated and trying to solve the problem.

There’s a huge question about why we’re reading so much about failures and bad behavior by women in the VC-funded ecosystem, when the other 98% of CEOs are bound to be making these mistakes, too.

Seriously, for every single story about a flailing female CEO, we should be reading 49 about a CEO who is not a woman.

But that’s not how this works, is it?

Also, when you’re a young, inexperienced founder who gets VC money, there’s an even bigger question about what your role really is.

And how you can play it, well, without inflicting a lot of damage to your relationships and the well-being of the people around you.

Aaahnd, making one (last) update, the morning of January 13, 2019:

On Management #39, P.S.

Written while working at a different speed

I’m grateful you’re here. If you’re a new reader, welcome! And many thanks to people who support my newsletter financially.

Each issue of On Management orbits a theme. Each short P.S. edition (like this one) offers a few (more) good things I’ve found to read, watch, or hear about my last issue’s theme.

On Management #39 was Are norms really normal?

Thank you for inviting me to your in-box.

Get this in your in-box!

Dateline: Now

If you like my newsletter, I’d love for you to use this new Substack button!

Share Anne Libby On Management

Big thanks to readers who shared On Management in your Slacks, FB groups and other online spaces where people talk about the workplace.


I got a note from a reader who had been let go. While I won’t go into their specifics, I want to share some general thoughts about being let go.

Whether laid off, fired, RIF’d: it may be emotionally tough, and hard to find your ground.

One norm to try to maintain: when asked to sign an anything, first have it reviewed by an employment attorney.

Of course you don’t have an employment attorney.

Your best source: someone in your circle who has been laid off. Or, your own attorney, if you have one.

If you don’t have a direct connection:

  • Reach out (quietly) in your alumni network.

  • If you’re part of a community of faith, check in with a leader there.

  • If your library has rich career offerings, a reference librarian may be able to help you figure out how to connect with local resources.

If you’ve experienced discrimination, or been sexually harassed, the Times Up Legal Defense Fund may be a good resource.

People in my circle have FREAKED OUT ON ME when I have suggested talking with a lawyer: “But I don’t want to sue!”

No, you probably don’t.

Working with an attorney does not mean that you need bring a lawsuit. An experienced attorney knows the norms — what’s legal and what’s considered fair — and can help you to navigate unfamiliar territory.

The norms are sometimes, to be clear, not great. This is my opinion, not legal advice, I’m not a lawyer, and so forth.

When you have questions, please do send me a note! I always answer my emails.

Thank you so much for reading,

Anne Libby


Subscribe to the free newsletter

P.P.S. Briefings

Following on the heels of my live-via-Zoom briefing, Manager as Coach, I scheduled “Performance Review Basics.”

It turns out that Monday of US Thanksgiving week was a terrible day for a briefing.

I’ll come back to this 2020. Hit me up if you’d like to be notified about my 2020 briefings. They cost $8, and supporting members join for free.

Get notification of future briefings

Thanks to those who signed up, and please let me know if you have questions or concerns.

Ever curious, I watched Three Amigos.

Loading more posts…