Why 1:1 Notes Fail When They’re Just Meeting Summaries
You finish a 1:1, open your notes, and write down what you talked about.
Career goals.
A blocker.
A quick status update.
At the time, it feels responsible. You took notes. You captured the meeting.
Weeks later, you look back...and nothing stands out.
The notes exist, but the signal is gone.
This isn’t a note-taking problem.
It’s a framing problem.
The Summary Trap
Most 1:1 notes are written as meeting summaries:
- What was discussed
- In what order
- Often in bullet points
That’s fine if your goal is documentation.
But as an Engineering Manager, your real goal is different:
- Spot patterns
- Track growth
- Detect risks early
- Prepare for feedback and reviews
In fact, this is the same reason performance reviews fail when you rely on memory.
Summaries don’t help with that.
They tell you what happened, not what mattered.
Why Summaries Don’t Age Well
A few weeks after a 1:1, summary-style notes suffer from the same issues every time:
Everything Looks Equally Important
A minor complaint sits next to a major concern. There’s no weighting, no emphasis.
Context Evaporates
You remember the words, but not the tone.
Was this frustration recurring, or just a bad day?
Signals Get Buried
Early warning signs don’t announce themselves loudly. They show up subtly, across multiple conversations.
Summaries flatten all of that.
What 1:1 Notes Are Actually For
1:1 notes aren’t minutes of a meeting.
They are raw material for future decisions:
- Performance reviews
- Growth conversations
- Promotion readiness
- Support or intervention
If a note won’t help you six months from now, it’s probably not the right note.
This becomes painfully obvious during review season, when managers try to reconstruct months of context from memory alone.
A Different Way to Take 1:1 Notes
The shift is simple but powerful.
Stop asking:
“What did we talk about?”
Start asking:
“What changed, repeated, or stood out?”
After each 1:1, capture:
- Observations: Something you noticed
- Signals: Repetition, emotion, hesitation, momentum
- Trajectory: Improving, stuck, regressing, unclear
These signals compound over time and make later performance reviews far more grounded and fair.
What This Looks Like in Practice
Instead of:
“Discussed workload and current sprint.”
You write:
“Mentioned feeling stretched again (3rd time in 2 months). Workload perception not improving despite scope adjustments.”
Instead of:
“Talked about career growth.”
You write:
“Asked about senior expectations for the second time. Actively seeking scope beyond current role.”
Six months later, these notes are exactly what you wish you had when writing reviews.
The Long-Term Payoff
When your 1:1 notes focus on signals:
- Reviews stop being guesswork
- Feedback becomes specific
- Growth conversations feel grounded
- Small issues don’t become surprises
Most importantly, you stop relying on your memory to connect the dots.
The dots are already there.
Start With One Change
You don’t need a complex system or heavy process to start.
Begin with one rule:
Every 1:1 note must include at least one signal.
One sentence is enough.
Over time, those sentences compound into the kind of context that makes performance reviews feel less stressful and more honest.
Good management isn’t about remembering more.
It’s about capturing the right things while they’re still visible.
About the Author
Carlos Corrêa da Silva is an Engineering Manager and the builder of Ledger, a tool designed to help engineering managers maintain context on their teams. He focuses on making people management more systematic and less reliant on memory.