1-on-1 Meetings: A Tech Lead's Guide

The Failure That Changed Everything

September 2023, Thursday, 2:00 PM. I have a 1-on-1 scheduled with Max, a mid-level developer. He's been with the company for 3 years, writes quality code, does reviews, helps juniors. A reliable team player.

The meeting lasts 12 minutes:

Me: "Hi! How's it going? What are you working on?"

Max: "Finishing the auth module refactoring."

Me: "Great. Any blockers?"

Max: "Not yet."

Me: "Excellent. Anything else?"

Max: "I don't think so."

Me: "Okay, keep up the good work!"

End of meeting. I thought: "Efficient! Quick, to the point, nobody's wasting time."

A month later, Max submits his resignation.

Exit interview with HR: "Why are you leaving?" — "No growth. I feel stuck. Nothing to talk about with the team lead except tasks. The new company promised mentorship and a clear development plan."

I replayed that recording three times. "There was nothing to talk to you about."

Painful. Frustrating. Fair.

This phrase cost me the best mid-level developer on the team. And taught me more than any management book.

I wasn't an idiot—I just didn't know. I thought efficiency meant brevity. That respecting people's time meant quick meetings. I didn't understand that human connections aren't time wasted but time invested. The story with Max became the most painful but most important lesson in my leadership career.

Since that day, I've rethought my entire 1-on-1 system. Here's what I learned.

Who this guide is for: tech leads and team leads who want to stop being "task managers" and start being "leaders who grow people."

Why 1-on-1s Are Needed (Spoiler: Not for Control)

1-on-1 is NOT a status meeting.

Carrick Rogers, Director of Engineering, calls discussing task statuses in 1-on-1s a management mistake. Why? It "ruins" meetings by creating an expectation of control instead of support among people. The result—employees avoid difficult conversations about growth, fear appearing weak, and lose motivation.

There are standups and planning sessions for statuses. 1-on-1 is time to build trust and careers.

What it is NOT:

About tasks:

• ❌ Mini-standup
• ❌ Progress check on tasks
• ❌ Sprint discussion

About format:

• ❌ Work report
• ❌ Formality for the sake of a checkbox

What it IS:

About the person:

• ✅ Investment in person's development
• ✅ Space for honest conversation
• ✅ Understanding motivation and goals

About results:

• ✅ Early problem diagnosis (before resignation)
• ✅ Building trust

Statistics That Convinced Me

Gallup Research (2022):

• Employees with regular 1-on-1s with their lead are 3x more engaged
• 67% of employees believe 1-on-1 quality affects their decision to stay or leave
• Companies with strong 1-on-1 culture have 50% less turnover in engineering teams

My statistics (before implementing the system vs. after 2 years):

1-on-1 Anatomy: Structure That Works

Tried a dozen formats. Only this one works.

Core Principles

1. Regularity is more important than duration

Why? Context isn't lost, problems are caught early, habit forms.

2. This is the employee's time, not yours

The meeting is on their calendar, not yours. They choose topics. They talk 70% of the time. You listen and ask questions.

3. Protected time

No rescheduling without serious reason. If 1-on-1s are regularly cancelled, the person understands: "I'm not a priority."

4. Personal space

Not in the kitchen, not in an open space. Closed meeting room or Zoom with cameras (if remote).

My Meeting Template (30-45 minutes)

Block 1: Emotions and Mood (5-7 minutes)

Goal: understand the person's current state.

Questions:

• "How are you feeling this week?" (not "how's it going", but "how do you feel")
• "On a scale of 1 to 10, how comfortable are you on the project right now?"
• "What made you happy/frustrated this week?"

Real-life example:

• Me: "How are you feeling?"
• Anna (junior): "Fine."

(Pause. I see she's not opening up. Changing approach)

• Me: "Let's be more specific. On a scale of 1 to 10?"
• Anna: (thinking) "Probably 5."
• Me: "What's preventing you from being at 7-8?"
• Anna: "Honestly? It annoys me that PRs hang for 3 days. I sit and wait. I feel like I'm slowing down the team."

What changed:

• Identified review problem in 2 minutes of conversation
• Implemented reviewer rotation in 3 days
• Anna a month later: from 5/10 to 8/10
• Lesson: "fine" is always a red flag. Dig deeper.

Block 2: Current Work and Blockers (10-15 minutes)

Goal: understand what's blocking, but don't dive into task details.

Questions:

• "What's taking most of your time right now?"
• "Is there anything where you're stuck or unsure?"
• "What could be removed/delegated so you can focus on what's important?"
• "How interesting is the current work? What would you like more/less of?"

Anti-pattern:

Bad: "Tell me how task AUTH-123 is progressing."

Good: "What's your main focus right now? How interesting is it?"

Case:

• Me: "What's taking most of your time?"
• Dima (mid): "Legacy refactoring. Third week already."
• Me: "And how does it feel?"
• Dima: "Honestly? Tired. It's like cleaning the Augean stables. I don't see the end."
• Me: "What could change? Maybe break it into parts, or someone helps?"
• Dima: "If someone took the test migration, I could focus on logic. That's more interesting."

What changed:

• Redistributed tasks the same day
• Dima finished refactoring in 7 days (instead of "no end in sight")
• Mood: from 4/10 to 7/10
• Lesson: burnout is treated not with motivation, but with task change

Block 3: Development and Growth (10-15 minutes)

Goal: understand where the person wants to grow and help plan it.

Questions:

• "What new thing did you learn/try recently?"
• "What skill do you want to work on in the coming months?"
• "What would you like to learn but lack time/opportunity?"
• "What task would you like to try that you haven't done before?"

Example:

• Me: "What skill do you want to work on?"
• Sveta (junior): "I want to learn architecture. I understand how to write code, but don't understand how to design a whole system."
• Me: "Great. Let's find a task. We'll be making a new notifications module soon. Want to design the architecture? I'll review the design, but decisions are yours."

What changed:

• Sveta designed the module in 2 weeks (with my support)
• Presented design to team, got constructive feedback
• After 3 months—independently designs small modules
• After 9 months—became a mid-level
• Lesson: people grow on tasks that scare them but don't paralyze them

Block 4: Feedback (5-10 minutes)

Goal: give feedback and receive feedback.

Structure:

1. What's great (reinforcement)
2. What can be improved (development)
3. Request feedback for yourself

Example:

• Me: "Want to give feedback. Noticed your code reviews got deeper—not just 'LGTM,' but you explain why you suggest changes. That's great, juniors are learning."
• Pasha (mid): "Thanks!"
• Me: "One growth area: sometimes you get stuck in analysis too long. Like with choosing DB for cache—a week choosing between Redis and Memcached. Try timeboxing: 2 hours research, then decision."
• Pasha: "Yeah, I noticed. Okay, I'll try."
• Me: "And I have a question for you: what can I do better as a team lead? What annoys you or is missing?"
• Pasha: (thinks) "Would like more context about product decisions. Sometimes tasks come in, and it's unclear why this is needed for business."

Result: I started sharing product context at planning sessions. Team understood "why" better, not just "what."

How to Create Psychological Safety

Gallup research showed: the key to employee engagement is psychological safety. This is when a person isn't afraid to tell the truth, admit mistakes, and ask for help.

Without psychological safety, 1-on-1 becomes theater:

• Employee says what you want to hear
• Hides problems until they explode
• Fears appearing weak or incompetent

How to create it:

1. "Sandwich" technique for difficult feedback:

Structure: positive → development → positive + support

Example:

"Pasha, your code reviews got deeper—can see you're diving into architecture. That's great. (positive)

There's one growth area: sometimes you get stuck in analysis too long. Like with choosing DB—a week on Redis vs Memcached. Try timeboxing: 2 hours research, then decision. (development)

I know you strive for quality, and that's valuable. Let's find a balance between depth and speed. How can I help?" (positive + support)

2. Show your own vulnerability:

Share your mistakes first:

"You know, last week I messed up too. Approved a feature without architecture review, and now we're refactoring. Learning from my own mistakes."

This lowers the perfectionism bar and shows: making mistakes is normal.

3. Use shared notes:

When an employee sees what you wrote, it's transparency. They can correct, add, make sure you understood them correctly.

4. Respond to honesty with gratitude, not punishment:

If someone said: "I'm stuck and don't know how to solve this"—worst reaction: "Figure it out yourself, you're a mid-level."

Best: "Thanks for being honest. Let's look together. Where exactly are you stuck?"

5. Check psychological safety with a question:

Once a quarter ask:

"How comfortable are you telling me about problems? On a scale of 1 to 10. What prevents you from being at 10?"

Remember: without psychological safety, 1-on-1 is empty formality. With it—a tool for growth and trust.

What My 1-on-1 Calendar Looks Like

Team: 6 people

Total: 4 hours per week on 1-on-1s for a team of 6 people.

Seems like a lot? Yes. Does it pay off? 100%.

Questions That Open People Up (Not Close Them Down)

First 6 months I asked boring questions. Got boring answers. Here's what changed.

Bad Questions (don't ask):

Good Questions (ask these):

For understanding state:

For identifying problems:

For development:

For feedback:

My Top 5 Questions That Always Start Honest Conversation:

1. "What interests you right now, and what's boring?"

→ Reveals motivation. Shows what tasks to give more, which to delegate.

2. "If you were team lead for a day—what would you change?"

→ Exposes hidden process problems you don't notice. People see what the lead doesn't.

3. "What task do you consider the coolest from the last 2 months? Why?"

→ Helps understand the pattern: what energizes the person. That's their growth zone.

4. "Imagine in a year you're leaving the team (in a good way). Where and why?"

→ Shows career ambitions without the direct question "where do you want to grow." Some want leadership, some deep tech, some product.

5. "What should I know but you're not saying because it seems unimportant?"

→ Best question for uncovering hidden problems. This is my main shield from surprises. It removes the person's responsibility for "complaining" and gives permission for honesty.

Rescue Questions for Awkward Silence

Meeting stalled. Awkward silence. Person answers briefly. You both don't know what to talk about. Here are my "lifelines":

1. "If you had a magic wand and could change one thing in our project/process/team—what would it be?"

Switches thinking from "can't complain" to "can dream." Often reveals deep problems.

2. "What do I, as team lead, do that slightly bothers you?"

Ask specifically about "slightly"—it's safer to say. People fear criticizing the lead directly, but "slightly bothers" is okay.

3. "What skill, not directly related to work, would you like to level up, and how can I help create space for it?"

Opens conversation about goals beyond current tasks. Might turn out the person wants to learn public speaking, write articles, or mentor.

Remember: the right question is more important than the right answer. Your task is not to give a solution, but help the person find it.

Types of 1-on-1s: Not All Meetings Are the Same

1. Regular 1-on-1 (weekly)

Goal: maintain contact, identify problems, track growth.

Structure: 4 blocks (emotions → work → development → feedback).

Duration: 30-45 minutes.

2. Career 1-on-1 (quarterly)

Goal: discuss long-term goals, career track, development plan.

Questions:

• "Where do you see yourself in a year?"
• "What skills are needed for the next level?"
• "What's preventing growth?"

Duration: 60 minutes.

Example:

• Me: "Where do you see yourself in a year?"
• Dima: "Want to become a senior."
• Me: "Great. Let's define what's needed. What do you think distinguishes a mid from a senior?"
• Dima: "Senior makes architecture decisions, can work without support, mentors juniors."
• Me: "Exactly. Let's make a plan: in 3 months you'll design 2 modules with my support, in 6 months—independently. Plus take Anna for mentorship. In a year we'll look at results."

Result: Dima became a senior in 14 months. Plan worked.

Tool: Skills Synchronization Matrix

To turn abstract "want to grow" into a concrete plan, use a competency matrix. This is a table with key skills (hard and soft), where you put scores from -2 to +2 once every 1-2 months, based on specific examples.

Example for Sveta (junior → mid):

Why this works:

• Specificity: not "grow in architecture," but "+1 = can design autonomous service"
• Measurability: progress visible from quarter to quarter
• Facts: each score backed by example ("designed module X")
• Shared understanding: employee sees growth criteria, no surprises

In career 1-on-1, you update this matrix together, discuss progress and adjust goals.

3. Problem 1-on-1 (as needed)

Goal: discuss a specific problem (performance, conflict, burnout).

Format:

1. Describe problem specifically
2. Let person speak
3. Find solution together
4. Fix action items

Case:

Problem: Pasha has been delivering tasks late for 3 weeks, PRs with bugs.

Bad approach: "Pasha, you're slow. Pull yourself together."

Right approach:

• Me: "Pasha, let's be honest. Last few weeks you're delivering tasks later than usual, and PRs have more bugs. This wasn't the case before. What changed?"
• Pasha: (pause) "Honestly? Burning out. Third month doing legacy refactoring. Feels like sawing sawdust."
• Me: "Got it. Let's find a solution. What could help?"
• Pasha: "Would like to do something new sometimes, not just legacy."
• Me: "Okay. Next feature is a new module. Want to take it?"
• Pasha: "Yeah, that would be great."

Result: Pasha took new feature, pace recovered, quality returned.

4. Exit 1-on-1 (when person is leaving)

Goal: understand real reason for leaving, get honest feedback.

Questions:

• "What was the best thing about working on the team?"
• "What would you change if you could?"
• "What could I have done to make you stay?" (even if too late)

Important: don't try to convince. Just listen and learn.

Remember: regular 1-on-1s are prevention. Problem ones are resuscitation. Prevention is far more effective.

Mistakes That Kill 1-on-1s

Mistake #1: Turning into Status Meeting

Sign: 80% of time discussing tasks, sprints, statuses.

Why it's bad: there are standups and planning for that.

Solution: if person starts talking about tasks—redirect: "Tasks later. Now about you. How do you feel about these tasks?"

Mistake #2: Talking More Than Listening

Sign: you talk 70% of time.

Why it's bad: it's your meeting, not theirs.

Solution: 70/30 rule. Employee talks 70%, you—30% (questions + feedback).

Mistake #3: Canceling or Rescheduling Regularly

Sign: 1-on-1 cancelled more than once a month.

Why it's bad: person understands "I'm not a priority." Moreover, regularly cancelled 1-on-1 is worse than its absence—it creates an illusion of care while destroying trust.

Solution:

1. Protect the time. Reschedule only in critical cases (incidents, sick leave).

2. When rescheduling—immediately set new time:

   ❌ Bad: "Sorry, can't make it today. Let's reschedule."

   ✅ Good: "Sorry, urgent production incident. Let's move to tomorrow, 11:00? Or is Friday better for you?"

3. Explain reason briefly. This shows respect for employee's time.

Mistake #4: Not Recording Agreements

Sign: after meeting, no action items, everything's in the air.

Why it's bad: person doesn't see progress.

Solution: after each 1-on-1, record:

• What you agreed on
• What employee does
• What you do
• Deadlines

Store in Notion/Confluence. Reread before next meeting.

Mistake #5: Ignoring Emotions

Sign: person says "tired" or "frustrated," and you move to tasks.

Why it's bad: emotions are a problem signal. Ignore emotions—problem grows.

Solution: if you heard emotional signal—stop. Dig deeper. "What exactly is tiring? Let's break it down."

Mistake #6: No Follow-up

Sign: discussed development plan at last 1-on-1, but never returned to it.

Why it's bad: person thinks "he's not serious."

Solution: every 1-on-1 start with: "At last meeting we agreed on [X]. How's it going?"

(Source: State of Engineering Leadership 2024, Plato)

How to Prepare for 1-on-1

Preparation for You (Team Lead)

1 day before meeting:

1. Reread notes from last 1-on-1

   • What you discussed
   • What action items were
   • What you promised

2. Look at employee activity:

   • What PRs closed
   • What reviews done
   • Any tasks in "in progress" status for over a week

3. Prepare feedback:

   • What cool thing you noticed this week
   • What can be improved (specifically)

4. Write down 2-3 questions:

   • What you want to learn at this meeting
   • What development area you want to discuss

Preparation for Employee

Give them a template:

## 1-on-1 Preparation
 
### To discuss:
 
- [ ] Current work and blockers
- [ ] Ideas and suggestions
- [ ] Development and growth
- [ ] Feedback for team lead
 
### Questions for team lead:
 
1. ...
2. ...
 
### What I want to change:
 
- ...

Why this works:

• Person comes prepared
• Meeting is structured
• Less "don't know what to say"

Tools for Running 1-on-1s

What I Use

Notion database:

For each meeting—a page:

# 1-on-1 with Dima — 12/14/2025
 
## Mood: 5/10
 
## Discussed:
 
- Burnout from legacy refactoring
- Wants to work with new technologies
- Interested in trying architecture
 
## Action Items:
 
- [ ] Dima: takes task for new notifications module
- [ ] Me: will find article on event-driven architecture
 
## Next 1-on-1: 12/21/2025

Alternatives:

Confluence — if team lives there Google Docs — simple table Specialized tools:

• Lattice
• 15Five
• Small Improvements
• Fellow.app

Main point: not the tool, but systematicity.

Confidentiality and Shared Notes: Who Sees the Notes?

Top question people ask me. Short answer: depends on culture and content.

Three Types of Notes

1. Tech Lead's Private Notes

What goes here:

• Your observations and hypotheses
• Person's emotional state
• Sensitive topics (conflicts, personal problems, thoughts of quitting)
• Performance assessment (if negative)
• Drafts of difficult feedback

Who sees: only you

Example:

Dima looks burned out. Suspect conflict with Pasha (mentioned indirectly third time).
Plan: ask directly at next 1-on-1.
If confirmed—talk to both separately.

2. Shared Notes (shared with employee)

What goes here:

• Action items (who does what)
• Development agreements
• Topics discussed (in general)
• Career growth goals and plan
• Positive feedback

Who sees: you + employee (shared access)

Example:

# 1-on-1 with Dima — 12/14/2025
 
## Discussed:
 
- Current work: auth module refactoring
- Wants more architecture work
- Interested in microservices and event-driven approaches
 
## Action Items:
 
- [ ] Dima: finish refactoring by 12/20
- [ ] Dima: read article about SAGA pattern (link)
- [ ] Me: find task for designing new module
- [ ] Discuss mid → senior growth plan at next meeting
 
## Next meeting: 12/21/2025

Shared notes benefits:

• ✅ Transparency: person knows what's recorded
• ✅ Accountability: both see commitments
• ✅ Less misunderstanding
• ✅ Employee can add/correct
• ✅ Shows respect and trust

3. Formal Documentation (seen by management/HR)

What goes here:

• Performance review (official assessment)
• Development plans for promotion
• Serious issues (PIP, discipline)
• Raise/bonus requests

Who sees: you + your manager + HR (as needed)

My Approach (What Works)

Rule: by default I keep shared notes.

Exceptions (private notes):

• Sensitive topics (health, personal problems, conflicts)
• Hypotheses and assumptions (not facts)
• Preparation for difficult conversations
• Risk assessment (e.g., "might quit")

How I separate:

In Notion I have two databases:

Database 1: "1-on-1 Shared"

• Access: employee + me
• Content: agreements, action items, topics discussed

Database 2: "1-on-1 Private"

• Access: only me
• Content: observations, hypotheses, sensitive notes

Shared note example:

## Discussed:
 
- Interest in architecture ✅
- Wants to grow toward senior ✅
- Current work seems routine ⚠️
 
## Action Items:
 
- [ ] Dima: design notifications module architecture
- [ ] Me: give design feedback in 2 days

Private note example (for same 1-on-1):

Dima says "routine work"—third time this month.
Risk: might start looking.
Need to give interesting task urgently.
Check: possibly conflict with Pasha (avoids pair programming).

How to Discuss Format with Team

First meeting with new employee:

"Let's agree on how we'll keep notes. I suggest a shared document where we both see agreements and action items. This way we're both aware of what we discussed. Okay?"

Usually answer: "Yeah, sounds good."

When discussing sensitive topic:

"What you just said—that's between us. I won't write this in shared notes. It's confidential."

This is critical for trust. If person shared a personal problem and you wrote it in the shared document—trust destroyed.

What NOT to Write in Shared Notes

• ❌ "Dima works slowly" → this is for private notes + separate conversation
• ❌ "Conflict with Pasha" → sensitive topic, private only
• ❌ "Thinking about quitting" → confidential
• ❌ "Need to work on communication" → sounds like assessment, better discuss verbally
• ❌ Your hypotheses → "suspect burnout"—that's not a fact

✅ What you can write:

• Concrete action items
• Topics discussed (in general)
• Positive feedback
• Development plans (agreed upon)
• Links to materials

Frequent Questions

"What if manager asks for access to shared notes?"

Depends on company culture. My approach:

• Shared notes are between me and employee
• I give manager a summary (without details)
• If formal reporting needed—keep separate document

"Should you show employee what you're writing?"

If keeping shared notes—yes, it's transparent.

If keeping private—say: "I'm recording main points for myself so I don't forget action items. If you want, can share notes after meeting."

"What if employee doesn't want shared notes?"

Respect the choice: "Okay, then I'll keep notes for myself and send you action items in Slack after meeting. Sound good?"

Golden Rule

Trust is built over years, destroyed by one leak.

If someone on the team finds out you wrote sensitive information in shared notes or told another manager—you'll lose the trust of the entire team, not just that person.

Difficult Situations

Situation #1: Person is Silent / "Everything's Fine"

Problem: answers questions briefly.

What to do:

1. Name the elephant in the room: "Feel like you don't really want to talk. Maybe format doesn't work?"

2. Change format: "Let's take a walk?" or "Let's not meet in meeting room but at a cafe?"

3. Give specifics: Instead of "how's it going" → "on a scale of 1 to 10, how comfortable?"

4. Show vulnerability: "You know, I sometimes don't know what to say at these meetings either. Let's try differently..."

5. Use "third person" technique: "Imagine I'm not your team lead, but an outside consultant. What would you tell him about team atmosphere/your workload?"

   This is a psychological technique: removes the "talking to boss" barrier and switches to honest conversation mode.

Situation #2: Person Wants to Discuss Only Tasks

Problem: every time slides into "doing X, then Y, there's blocker Z."

What to do:

1. Stop them: "Stop. Tasks later. Now about you. How do you feel about these tasks?"

2. Explain why: "1-on-1 isn't about tasks. We have standups for that. Here—it's about you: growth, motivation, career."

3. Ask unexpected question: "If you could not do one task from current ones—which would you choose? Why?"

Situation #3: Employee Complains About Colleague

Problem: "Pasha didn't do review on time again, blocked me."

What to do:

1. Listen: Don't interrupt, let them vent.

2. Clarify facts: "How often does this happen? Did you talk to Pasha directly?"

3. Switch to solution: "What do you think can be done?"

4. Offer help: "Want me to talk to Pasha? Or try yourself, and I'll back you up?"

Important: don't take sides immediately. Listen to both.

Situation #4: Person Says They Want to Quit

Problem: "Thinking about leaving."

What to do:

1. Don't panic: "Thanks for honesty. Let's figure out what led to this."

2. Ask questions:

   • "What changed?"
   • "What could make you stay?"
   • "Is this a decision or a thought?"

3. Don't try to convince right away: If person decided—convincing is useless. Better learn the reasons.

4. Offer time: "Let's meet again in a week. Think about what needs to change."

Real case:

• Sveta: "Thinking about leaving."
• Me: (holding back panic) "Got it. Tell me what led to this."
• Sveta: "Don't see growth. Third month doing same type of tasks."
• Me: "What could change the situation?"
• Sveta: "Want to try something new. Architecture, for example."
• Me: "Okay. Let's find a task. If in a month it's interesting—will you stay?"
• Sveta: (thinks) "Let's try."

Result: Sveta stayed. A year later—mid-level. Now—one of key people on team.

Situation #5: Employee Asks for Promotion That's Currently Impossible

Problem: "Want to discuss promotion. Think I deserve it."

What to do:

1. Thank for courage and openness: "Thanks for bringing this up. This is an important conversation."

2. Explain reason honestly and specifically:

   • No budget: "All promotions frozen until next quarter."
   • No position: "All senior positions filled, next opens no earlier than summer."
   • Insufficient skills: "For senior need skills X and Y. Still have gaps in these areas."

   Important: no abstractions. Specifics and truth.

3. Immediately shift to plan: "Let's make a clear 6-month plan for developing skills X and Y. We'll track progress at our quarterly career 1-on-1s."

4. Give guarantees (if you can): "As soon as opportunity appears—you'll be first candidate, and you'll have a ready growth case."

Real case:

• Pasha: "Want to discuss promotion to senior."
• Me: "Great that you brought it up. Let's be honest: all senior positions are currently filled. Next opens no earlier than Q2. But let's not wait passively."
• Pasha: (disappointment on face)
• Me: "Here's what I suggest: senior should be able to design architecture, mentor, and work with uncertainty. Right now you have strong architecture, but little mentoring. In 3 months take Anna for mentorship, run 2 workshops for team on topics you're strong in. In 6 months—design new module from start to finish. I'll record this in performance review. As soon as position opens—you're first candidate with ready case. Deal?"
• Pasha: "Deal."

Result: Pasha became senior in 7 months. Plan worked, position appeared, he had the case.

Remember: person doesn't come to 1-on-1 to tell about a problem. They come to check if they can trust you.

Good 1-on-1 Checklist

Go through this list after each meeting:

• Duration: 30-45 minutes (no less than 30, no more than 60)
• Employee talked 70% of time (not you)
• Discussed not just tasks, but emotions/growth too
• Gave specific feedback (what's great + what to improve)
• Used facts and examples (not abstractions: "task X took 5 days" instead of "you're slow")
• Recorded action items (what employee does, what you do)
• Scheduled next meeting (no rescheduling!)
• Recorded key insights (in Notion/Confluence)
• Person left with sense of value (not formality)

If 6+ checkmarks—meeting went well.

If less—reconsider format.

Main Thoughts

1-on-1 isn't a status meeting. It's investment in a person.

You're not checking tasks. You're building trust, identifying problems before explosion, helping people grow.

Statistics don't lie:

• Regular quality 1-on-1s reduce turnover by 50%
• 67% of developers make stay/leave decision based on quality of communication with lead
• Employees with regular 1-on-1s are 3x more engaged

This isn't time wasted. It's time invested.

4 hours per week on 1-on-1s with team of 6 = 16 hours per month.

One mid-level leaving = 3-6 months for hiring and onboarding new = hundreds of hours lost.

Math is obvious.

Your First Step (Takes 5 Minutes)

Don't postpone. Do this right now:

Step 1: Open your calendar (Google Calendar, Outlook, whatever).

Step 2: Create recurring 30-minute meeting with one of your developers next week.

Step 3: Copy this text into meeting description:

Our Regular 1-on-1

This is our time. We'll talk about you: what interests you, what frustrates you, where you want to grow.

Come with any topics. We won't discuss tasks—that's what standups are for.

Format:
- How do you feel on the project? (scale 1-10)
- What comes easy/hard right now?
- What skill do you want to work on?
- What can I do better as team lead?

This meeting belongs to you. I'm here to listen and help.

Looking forward to our conversation!

Step 4: Send invitation.

That's it. This first meeting will be imperfect. You'll be nervous, maybe something will go wrong. That's normal.

But it will be the point after which you can't go back to formal 15-minute check-ins. You'll have started.

What's Next (When You Get Comfortable)

If you're not doing 1-on-1s yet:

• Scheduled first meeting (above ↑)
• Read "1-on-1 Structure" section
• Prepared 5 questions for first meeting
• Started notes (Notion/Google Doc)

If already doing but formally:

• Reconsider structure: less tasks, more emotions and growth
• Implement 70/30 rule (employee talks 70%)
• Add shared notes for transparency
• Request feedback: "How can we improve our 1-on-1s?"

If already doing well:

• Implement career 1-on-1s (quarterly)
• Teach mids to run 1-on-1s with juniors
• Collect metrics: mood, turnover, growth
• Share experience with other leads

Roadmap: Path from Zero to System

Here's what realistic path of implementing 1-on-1 system looks like with success metrics:

📅 Month 1: Launch and Getting Used

Actions:

• Schedule first 1-on-1 with one employee
• Use basic structure (4 blocks)
• Start simple notes (Google Doc / Notion)
• Explain new format to team

Success Metrics:

• ✅ Held 4 meetings (1 per week) without rescheduling
• ✅ Recorded minimum 3 action items at each meeting
• ✅ Employee talked >50% of time (heading toward 70%)

What to expect:

• First meetings will be awkward—that's normal
• People will slide into discussing tasks—gently return to format
• You'll feel like you're "wasting time"—fight this feeling

📅 Month 2-3: Scaling and Tuning

Actions:

• Add 2-3 employees to weekly rhythm
• Implement shared notes (transparency)
• Start tracking mood (scale 1-10)
• Request first feedback from team

Success Metrics:

• ✅ 3-4 employees in regular 1-on-1 system
• ✅ Employee talks 70% of time
• ✅ Identified minimum 1 problem before critical stage
• ✅ Average mood rating >6/10

What to expect:

• Calendar will start filling up—protect this time
• First results will appear (identified problems, action items)
• Team will start getting used to format

📅 Month 4-6: Deepening and Results

Actions:

• Cover entire team with regular 1-on-1s
• Hold first career 1-on-1 (with skills matrix)
• Implement rescue questions for difficult situations
• Teach mids basic 1-on-1 skills

Success Metrics:

• ✅ Entire team (6 people) in system
• ✅ Turnover <10% (or 0 resignations due to "no development")
• ✅ Minimum 1 employee showed visible growth (new skills/promotion)
• ✅ 80%+ meetings happen without rescheduling
• ✅ Average mood rating >7/10

What to expect:

• 1-on-1s will become habit, not obligation
• Team will start looking forward to meetings (not avoiding)
• You'll see first measurable growth results

🎯 System Maturity Metrics (After 6 Months)

Important: don't try to implement everything at once. Better one quality 1-on-1 per week than five formal ones. System builds gradually, through habit and trust.

Related Articles:

• Onboarding Mistake That Costs You 42% of Team
• Junior Hiring Math: When It Pays Off vs. Burns Money