u/BearyTechie

When we first switched to the new IAM system, it was a bit of a struggle, and even after many years I still feel like the existing test environments aren’t always enough—especially when you want to experiment with a new configuration, integration, or use case as a proof of concept. Existing configurations can conflict with the changes you’re trying to test, and IAM setups aren’t always easy to reproduce and test locally.

How do you handle this in your teams, regardless of whether the IAM solution is SaaS or on-prem? Do you have a separate environment, process, or approach for running POCs and validating IAM changes before they reach higher environments?

I work in tech and have noticed that some hiring managers seem to favor internal candidates. In some cases, those candidates also require visa sponsorship, which has made me wonder whether companies sometimes interview external candidates primarily to satisfy company policy or other hiring requirements before selecting the internal candidate.

For example, I've had interviews with a panel of three interviewers where only one person asked questions. The others barely participated, and the conversation felt more like a formality than a genuine technical interview. It left me wondering whether the hiring decision had already been made.

I don't know exactly how these hiring processes work, so I'm curious: Is this something that actually happens, or am I reading too much into these experiences? If it does happen, are there any signs that a company already has a preferred internal candidate so I can avoid investing time in interview processes where the outcome is essentially predetermined?

What mindset shifts do engineers and engineering leaders need to make to succeed in product management?

Leads and managers: how is performance typically distributed across your teams? For example, how many developers are exceeding expectations, meeting expectations, or needing additional support?

Given that not everyone can be a top performer, how do you approach managing and developing your team to maintain performance and morale?

I’ve mostly worked within tech organizations that have a relatively flat structure. In those environments, I’ve seen some directors who actively work with their teams to align day-to-day activities with broader strategy. I’ve also encountered directors who don’t provide clear direction, which can make meetings feel unproductive or confusing.

What has your experience been with flat versus hierarchical organizations, and how have different leadership styles impacted your work?