Mac shortcuts are exactly the use case for this. Menu bar, ask for a prompt, run script. I was always wary of shortcuts, but they're quite powerful and nicely integrated with the OS in the latest versions
Agree with all the advice that doing it internally will likely be easier (per the "When you're doing something new, don't do something new" maxim).
That said, changing companies can enable rapid evolution. It'll (potentially) make it easier to be the manager you want to be, as opposed to the manager they think you'll be. In many cases it's likely better to do it where you are, but wanted to advocate for the benefits of the alternative, it's not guaranteed to be worse.
My path involved switching to a combo IC & manager at a place where I was an experienced IC, but my skill as a manager didn't really develop until I switched companies.
Who is going to hire someone to manage when they've never done it before, though? I certainly have never and would never taken a risk like that, it's hard enough to hire decent managers when you're looking at people who have proven histories, whereas when picking from internal candidates you at least have a sense of personality already and can guess who reports will trust.
I don't think I know any managers who didn't start doing it at a company they'd already been ICs at.
I 100% would - Better to find someone who wants to do that job than someone who has organizational knowledge but isn't really compelled by the work (or who would better serve the team in an IC role).
- shedding of responsibilities (no longer an expert)
- shedding of preconceptions (new people, new me)
- being new means that people are looking for you to bring your new perspective, which isn't always the case at an existing role
- working with all new people polishes management skills as you can't rely on built up relationships
And then there's the choices you make when interviewing about what kind of company culture/new manager/new team you're going to. Like, if I care a lot about DEI/4-day work week/etc, and my current company doesn't, do I want to work to make that happen (if even possible), or go to a place that also cares about that which allows me to learn and iterate on something that I care about.
If they both want to work, then child care should be affordable for the dual income family. Generally it's not which is why schools are required to fill that care gap and be in sync with working hours.
There's a bit of a math problem there, though. It's hard to make things work out so that the child care is affordable for the parents, the teachers get reasonable compensation, and you're meeting reasonable (and, depending on where you are, legal) standards for child-caregiver ratios.
Doubly so if "affordable for the parents" means "affordable for parents who are in the same income bracket as your average pre school teacher."
True, although kids are only of childcare age for a few years, so if all adults share the cost burden of childcare for everyone throughout their working lives rather than just paying for their own needs for a few years, the math works out a lot easier. (IE, childcare paid or subsidized by the government.)
The other piece of the puzzle though is that there need to be sufficient providers, which can't happen instantaneously. So you'd have to scale up such an initiative in a sensible way.
