Seeing system dynamics in organizational change: 3) from survival need to shifting the burden

This is the third article in the series of seeing system dynamics in organizational change. Even though we have agreed on the change vision and is progressing during the norm, we lose the plot when crisis comes.

During the norm

There is always a gap between our change vision and the reality, which is expected.

For example, we envision feature team who would:

• clarify requirements directly with users and stakeholders
• self-organize to coordinate directly with other teams
• develop the feature across components

However, the reality is:

• the quality and efficiency of clarification done by feature team is low
• the quality and efficiency of coordination done by feature team is low
• the quality and efficiency of some component work done by feature team is low

The suggested long-term solutions are:

• build team's capability in clarification via coaching by PO and SM (B2-loop)
• build team's capability in coordination via coaching by SM (B4-loop)
• build team's capability in some component work via coaching by traveller (B6-loop)

Note: traveller is arranged to help feature team increase the knowledge on certain components.

During the norm, we make progress, but it is still not enough to fill in the gap. Then, we hit the crisis.

During the crisis

During the crisis, our survival need increases. We need quick fix, thus we:

• reintroduce an analyst role, in the name of team PO, feature owner, etc. Essentially the old business analyst role comes back. (B1-loop)
• reintroduce a coordinator role, in the name of feature manager, feature coordinator, etc. Essentially the old project manager role comes back. (B3-loop)
• redefine a traveler role, so that the traveller would simply do the component work. Essentially the dynamic resource allocation in traditional project management comes back. (B5-loop)

If only they were temporary solutions!

Unfortunately, over time, we get addicted to:

• external analyst (R1-loop)
• external coordinator (R2-loop)
• external traveller (R3-loop)

We see the same "shifting the burden" archetype in all of those.

Therefore, the change vision is lost:

• team never becomes cross-functional
• team never becomes self-organizing
• team never becomes cross-component

The leverage

For "shifting the burden", the leverage lies in two aspects.

1. During the norm, we shall increase the effectiveness of the long-term solution, i.e. build team's capability via teaching and coaching. As it is long-term solution, we often lose the urgency and focus. We may break the long-term goal into sub-goals, and set time table to achieve those sub-goals.
2. During the crisis, we shall first challenge ourselves - is it really a live-or-die situation? Even if the answer is yes, we make it clear that only do the quick fix to buy time. In order to avoid being addicted, we may put "temporary" in the name of the role, and set specific time limit for the role to expire.

Watch out on how the survival need fails our change efforts!