# Dekel Asaf's Manager Readme **Engineering director at Transmit Security** # Mission **Create an environment where people can do their best work, grow faster than they could alone, and deliver meaningful impact — while I take responsibility for the impact of my leadership.** I push for excellence, explain the _why_, and own the consequences — especially when I get it wrong. # Motivation for this document I wrote this document to make working together clearer and more intentional. Management style is often inferred rather than stated, which creates unnecessary friction and guesswork. This README is my attempt to make my thinking explicit: how I operate, what I value, and what you can expect from me. My goal is to reduce misunderstandings, encourage honest communication, and give you enough context to make good decisions without needing constant alignment. This is a living document — if something here doesn’t work for you, that’s a conversation I want to have. You’re encouraged to quote this document back to me — that’s part of why it exists. # My role I serve the team — not the other way around. From the organization’s perspective, I’m measured on: - Delivering meaningful business and technical outcomes - Building teams that can operate independently and sustainably - Maintaining quality, reliability, and long-term health From your perspective, my job is to: - Provide clarity on priorities, expectations, and trade-offs - Explain the _why_ behind decisions, not just the decision itself - Remove obstacles and reduce unnecessary complexity - Push for high standards while owning the human impact of how I do that - Help you grow as a professional, not just deliver tasks I don’t aim to have all the answers. I aim to create the conditions where the **right questions are asked**. If I state an opinion strongly, it doesn’t mean it’s final — it often means I’m thinking out loud. Treat it as a hypothesis unless stated otherwise. # How I think about decisions When I make decisions, I usually optimize in this order: 1. **Customer impact** 2. **Product integrity** 3. **Team sustainability** 4. **Speed of execution** If you disagree — great. Tell me **which layer you’re optimizing for and why**. Good disagreements make decisions better. Ownership matters: once a decision is made, we commit and move forward. You’ll often see me challenge ideas early and explicitly — that’s how I test decision quality, not how I signal a final answer. If you are the Owner, my default is to let you decide — even when I disagree — unless the risk clearly exceeds the local scope. # What I value most ## Ownership I value people who take responsibility for outcomes, not just execution. If something is unclear, blocked, or going sideways — I want to know early. ## Curiosity and thinking I appreciate people who ask “why”, seek context, and try to understand systems — not just interfaces. ## Directness with respect I believe in honest, direct communication delivered with care. Avoiding hard conversations usually makes things worse. # Helping me looks like - Challenging my assumptions respectfully - Telling me when my message landed differently than I intended - Raising issues early instead of letting frustration build ### Things I’m working on - I sometimes forget to pause and celebrate wins - I can interrupt when I’m excited or deeply engaged — please call it out - Under pressure, my communication can become very concise or sharp, If I sense tension or disengagement after a discussion, I may explicitly ask how it landed — not to justify myself, but to learn. If you think I missed the human side of something — tell me. I take that seriously. ## What will frustrate me I don’t expect perfection, but I do expect intent and ownership. Things that consistently frustrate me: - Hearing about problems late that were visible earlier - Doing work without understanding **why now** - Being busy without clarity on impact - Repeated misalignment that isn’t raised proactively Mistakes are expected. **Surprises are not.** # Expectations ## Empowerment & Decision Ownership Even though I challenge thinking and push for high standards, I want to be explicit about this: **I strongly believe in empowerment through decision-making — even when the decisions are imperfect.** In most cases, if someone is the _Owner_ of an area or initiative: - I expect them to make decisions - even if I would personally choose differently - and even if there is a risk of being wrong My role is to: - challenge the thinking - add context, questions, and trade-offs - make sure the decision is intentional, not accidental But **not to replace your decision with mine** , unless: - there is material risk to the organization or the customer - ownership is unclear - or the issue spans beyond the local scope Mistakes are a natural part of growth. What matters to me more than the decision itself is: - how it was made - what was learned from it - and how we improve next time If you felt that I overrode your decision in a situation where you needed more backing — that’s feedback I want to hear. ## Time with me - My calendar is open — book any available slot - If something is urgent or blocking you, don’t wait for a meeting ## Mistakes - Bring issues early — even if the next step isn’t clear yet. Uncertainty is a valid signal - I care far more about learning and prevention than blame ## Definition of “Done” A task is “done” when: - It’s released to production - The impact is understood (metrics, feedback, or validation) - The decision and rationale are clear enough for someone else to pick it up later ## Availability & work style - I start early and am most productive in the morning - I work async and don’t expect immediate responses - Reliability and transparency matter more than constant online presence - If you’re unavailable — make it visible # How to disagree with me I expect disagreement. It’s part of healthy engineering culture. What works best: - Come with context and alternatives - Write things down first if emotions are high - Be direct, not defensive Once a decision is made, I expect us to ** commit** — including me.  Before closing a decision, I’ll usually try to summarize dissenting views — not to reopen the debate, but to make sure they were genuinely heard. # 1:1s - We meet on a regular cadence (weekly or bi-weekly) - The 1:1 is **your time** — you lead the agenda - This is not a status meeting Good topics: - What’s working / what’s frustrating - Feedback (for me or others) - Career growth and skill development - Things you’re unsure about but haven’t said yet If our 1:1s drift into status updates, that’s a signal we should recalibrate. # Personality quirks A few things worth knowing: - I sometimes use strong phrasing to challenge thinking, not people - Silence usually means I’m thinking, not disengaged - I get energized by clarity, ownership, and well-reasoned disagreement - I get uncomfortable when problems are discussed abstractly without ownership or next steps Assume positive intent — but don’t ignore impact. I’d rather know than guess. ## A note on my default style My natural tendency (and something I actively work to balance) is to be very logical, direct, and decisive. I tend to challenge ideas quickly and openly, often by focusing on trade-offs, risks, or what might be wrong. This comes from a place of improving outcomes—not from dismissing people or their ownership. That said, I know this style can sometimes feel intense or final, especially in fast-paced discussions. If my challenging comes across as shutting down thinking rather than sharpening it, I want to know. # Where to focus in your first 90 days **First 30 days** - Learn the system, people, and constraints - Ask “why” more than “how” - Build context before pushing changes **By 60 days** - Take ownership of a meaningful area - Start identifying gaps or improvements - Be explicit about where you need help **By 90 days** - Operate with increasing independence - Contribute to decisions, not just execution - Be able to explain trade-offs and impact, not only solutions If you’re unsure whether you’re doing well — ask early. Alignment beats late course correction.