Since you may not have seen it in your previous career: be aware of politics in companies (that size). Especially when you are interacting with other departments, PMs and positions generally above yours.
I'm not saying its the most important thing or specific to the first days. But getting the dynamics early on will benefit you, your project and the people involved.
Also more specific to day one: have fun and be excited :) good luck!
Along those lines: especially when coming from a technical background and dealing with non-technical stakeholders, wording like "hmm, this would likely be a pretty intensive multi-week project" might have been intended as carrying the benign context "...and the team would be excited if that's what leadership wants to prioritize" but can often be interpreted as "...and I'm going to fight you tooth and nail on this."
Pausing and engaging on the benefits of a proposal can be incredibly valuable, even if your mind has already raced to the considerations about implementation and opportunity cost. Many engineers understand that there's no higher praise than a leader diving into the weeds on something, but many other stakeholders don't have the same context!
Good advice. First step is to identify your enemies. I also would call it “understand dynamics”. Because somebody wanted promotion into your senior position. Somebody just does not like you or someone wants to do things differently. It’s fine. Just know the obstacles before planing the journey.
I get it, but this is just such a cynical take…devoting time & energy during your ramp up to identifying enemies seems to set the wrong tone from day 1. People will take notice no matter how hard you try to conceal it, and that will follow you around. First impressions matter, for you and those around you.
I suggest the opposite: assume good intent from everyone, listen a lot, don’t be afraid to ask dumb questions, identify people who can help your team and identify people who need your help. In leadership, the job is not about you, it’s about setting up your team for success.
> First step is to identify your enemies
The most difficult and political people I know think like this. They never see themselves as the problem. They just think they’re playing defense and playing the meta-game better than others.
If you go into a workplace thinking that your first step is to identify your enemies so you can be on constant high alert to defend yourself, there’s a high risk that you’re going to become the political problem you claim to want to avoid.
What if there are no enemies? What if nobody was denied this role, because it was added headcount to expand the team? Imagine the OP going in on the defense because HN told them to “identify your enemies” as the first step, but really their team just wants to add another person to the group? This type of advice causes more problems than it solves.
What I’m saying is not criticism, I think the word enemies is quite isolating and too negative. It’s definitely true that every place with more than one human has inter-personal motivations and constraints, but I think they often can be fluid and non personal, someone contested the position you got but after the position was granted they realized they’re very much ok with not spending extra work time in the new job for example, or the employee that contested you to the promotion just wanted the raise or the ability to influence more in the company and you didn’t take their dream job. In some of those cases I found I can plaster my coworker name in large font on any work we did together or delegate to them tasks that they really wanted to, and I could win their trust and cooperation even though I got the promotion or something of that sort. It’s super subjective and my own personal experience
Or possibly find your friends and build relationships. Understand the motivations of the people you work with and identify ways to align your goals with theirs. By focusing your energy this way you'll help craft a healthy dynamic rather than be subjected to existing dynamics.
It's probably also worth figuring out who holds power and authority. It's not always based on org or chart.
Communication books can be useful. I've heard good things about nonviolent communication and, while I've not finished it, crucial conversations has been useful