Leadership & Management DefinedTerm

One-on-One (1-on-1)

Also known as: 1-on-1, 1:1 Meeting, One-to-One, Check-in

A recurring meeting between manager and direct report for feedback, professional development, and alignment on priorities and goals.

Updated: 2026-01-04

Definition

One-on-One (or 1-on-1, 1:1) is a recurring meeting, typically weekly or bi-weekly, between a manager and a direct report. The primary goal is to create dedicated space for bidirectional feedback, career development, blocker removal, and building a trust relationship. Unlike standups or status meetings, the 1:1 is explicitly focused on the person, not just the work.

The format was codified by Andy Grove (ex-CEO Intel) in “High Output Management” (1983), where he describes the 1:1 as one of the highest leverage tools for managers: a 30-60 minute investment that can unlock weeks of productivity for the report. The approach was systematically adopted by Silicon Valley tech companies and has spread as best practice in knowledge-intensive organizations.

The key principle: the time belongs to the report. The agenda is driven by the report, not the manager. The manager listens, coaches through questions, offers feedback, and removes obstacles. This inverts the traditional dynamic where the manager “controls” the subordinate’s work.

How It Works

Typical Structure

Cadence: weekly is the gold standard for managers with 4-8 direct reports. Bi-weekly is acceptable for very autonomous senior ICs (individual contributors). Less frequent risks losing relevance and becomes a “mini performance review”.

Duration: 30 minutes for junior/mid-level reports, 45-60 minutes for senior or people in accelerated growth. Fixed on calendar (e.g., every Tuesday 10:00), not “when there’s time”.

Location: ideally in person to build rapport, but remote works if structured (video on, no multitasking). Walking 1:1s (walk outside office) used by some for more informal conversations.

Shared documents: many teams use a shared Google Doc where both add topics during the week. Creates accountability and historical memory. Typical template:

  • [Name] 1:1 notes
  • Wins of the week
  • Challenges / Blockers
  • Feedback for [Manager]
  • Feedback for [Report]
  • Career / Growth discussion
  • Action items

Types of Conversation (Rands Framework)

Michael Lopp (Rands in Repose, ex-Apple/Slack) identifies 3 modes of 1:1, to be balanced:

1. The Update: information exchange, priority alignment. Useful but shouldn’t dominate (max 30% of time). Questions: “What are you working on? Where are you blocked? What’s happening on the team I should know?”

2. The Vent: the report needs to vent frustration. Manager’s role: active listening without immediate problem-solving. Leave emotional space, then possibly shift to problem-solving only if the report requests it. Questions: “How do you feel about [situation]? What would you need?”

3. The Disaster: crisis in progress (burnout, conflict, quit risk, performance issue). Requires immediate action. Manager shifts from coaching to decisional mode, often involving HR or escalating.

Most 1:1s are Updates, with occasional Vents and rare Disasters. The manager must recognize the type of conversation and adapt approach.

Adoption and Benefits

Correlation with retention: a Leadership IQ study (2021) on 8,000+ knowledge workers finds that employees with regular 1:1s (weekly or bi-weekly) have:

  • 23% lower probability of voluntary turnover
  • 31% higher engagement score
  • 27% higher likelihood to recommend the company (eNPS)

The effect size is greater for high performers (+35% retention) and underrepresented groups (+29%), suggesting that 1:1s reduce the “invisible tax” of not having sponsors or visibility.

Manager effectiveness: Google’s Project Oxygen (2008-ongoing) identifies “has regular 1:1s” as one of the key behaviors of top managers. Managers who do consistent 1:1s have team performance ratings +19% higher.

Diffusion: 2023 Culture Amp survey finds that 78% of tech companies have formalized 1:1 practice, but only 43% do them with weekly cadence. Main gap: middle managers with 10+ reports who don’t scale the time.

Practical Considerations

What to Do

Manager preparation: review previous 1:1 notes, check action items, prepare 1-2 specific observations (positive or growth areas). 5-10 minutes pre-meeting.

Report’s agenda: encourage the report to bring topics. If they arrive without agenda, use open questions: “What’s top of mind this week? What do you want to focus on?”

Tactical-strategic balance: 50% of time on immediate blockers/priorities, 50% on career growth, skill development, long-term goals. Too much focus on tactical makes the 1:1 a status meeting.

Document action items: both note decisions and to-dos. Review previous meeting’s action items at the start. Creates accountability.

Bidirectional feedback: manager explicitly asks: “What can I do differently to better support you?” Modeling vulnerability legitimizes upward feedback.

What to Avoid

Frequent canceling: signals that tasks > people. If unavoidable, reschedule immediately, not “we’ll catch up when needed”.

Multitasking: no open laptop (except for shared doc), no phone checking. Signals disinterest.

Only negative feedback: the 1:1 is not a performance review. Balance with recognition of wins. 5:1 positive-redirecting ratio.

Rushed problem-solving: when the report vents frustration, don’t jump immediately to “here’s the solution”. Listen, validate emotions, then ask “do you want to explore options or did you need to vent?”

Using as only escalation channel: if the report must wait for the weekly 1:1 to bring urgent issues, something is broken. The 1:1 is in addition to continuous communication, not a substitute.

Scaling for Managers with Many Reports

10+ reports: switch to bi-weekly for some senior ICs, maintain weekly for juniors or people with performance issues. Alternative: alternate 30min 1:1 with skip-level every 2 weeks.

Group 1:1s: some managers do occasional “team 1:1s” with 2-3 reports together for shared topics, but not a substitute for individual time.

Delegation: senior ICs can mentor juniors, reducing coaching load on the manager. But career conversation and feedback remain the manager’s responsibility.

Common Misconceptions

”One-on-ones are for micromanaging work”

No. If the manager uses 1:1s to control task completion, there’s a trust or delegation problem. Status updates belong in standups, project tracking tools, or async communication. The 1:1 is for meta-conversation: how is work going overall, what hinders effectiveness, how to grow.

”Senior ICs or staff engineers don’t need 1:1s”

False. Senior ICs have different needs (less tactical guidance, more strategic alignment and career navigation at staff+ level). But the need for feedback, visibility on impact, and removal of political/organizational blockers remains critical. In fact, absence of 1:1s with seniors is a quit risk: they feel they’re not a priority.

”Monthly 1:1s or ‘when needed’ are enough”

Ineffective for most reports. Monthly is too infrequent to build rapport and catch issues early. “When needed” in practice means “almost never” because it seems like fire-drill. Regularity signals commitment and creates safe space to bring difficult topics before they become crises.

”The manager must always have answers and solutions”

No. Often the value of the 1:1 is in coaching through powerful questions, not providing ready-made solutions. “What have you considered? What options do you see? If you were in my position, what would you do?” develops the report’s critical thinking. Manager as solver creates dependency.

Sources

Back to Glossary