Seeing the system dynamic: feature team vs. feature group

Feature group is a temporary group of individuals to deliver specific feature. It is very common in traditional matrix organization, and also called feature project. Meanwhile, feature team is a stable team who takes shared responsibility to deliver feature after feature. The below table from feature team primer summarizes the main differences between them.

Why do organizations make different choices? The below CLD illustrates the system dynamic around it.

Individual efficiency

The main motivation behind looking for the "right" individual to do the work is to create the skill match for individual efficiency. This is reflected by B1-loop, which reads like this:

• the lower individual efficiency
• the more consideration of individual skill in dividing work
• the smaller skill gap
• the higher individual efficiency

However, it creates unintended consequences at individual level shown as R1-loop and R2-loop. Together with B1-loop, it forms typical "fixes that backfire" system archetype.

R1-loop shows the problem with multi-tasking, which reads like this:

• the lower efficiency
• the more consideration of individual skill in dividing work
• the more multi-tasking
• the lower efficiency

Because seeking for perfect work and skill match creates the situation where people are multi-tasking for different feature groups, while multi-tasking is a source of low efficiency, the fix backfires.

R2-loop shows the problem with reduced learning, which reads like this:

• the lower efficiency
• the more consideration of individual skill in dividing work
• the smaller skill gap
• the less learning
• the lower efficiency (with delay)

As people always work on familiar tasks, the learning is reduced, while learning helps increase the efficiency in the long term, the fix backfires.

Team performance

Traditional thinking assumes that team performance is solely or at least mainly decided by individual efficiency, which forms B2-loop by extending B1-loop. It reads like this:

• the worse team performance
• the more consideration of individual skill in dividing work
• the smaller skill gap
• the higher individual efficiency
• the better team performance

Again we see "fixes that backfire" system archetype, this time at team level. It is formed by B2-loop and R3/R4-loop.

R3-loop shows the problem with low interdependency, which reads like this:

• the worse team performance
• the more consideration of individual skill in dividing work
• the smaller skill gap
• the less need for help
• the weaker collaboration
• the worse team performance

The task interdependency enables team collaboration. Once team members perceive little need to help each other, the motivation to collaborate is low. While the team performance is affected much by the level of collaboration, think about the time of integration. The fix backfires.

R4-loop shows the problem with temporary group, which reads like this:

• the worse team performance
• the more consideration of individual skill in dividing work
• the less stable team
• the weaker collaboration
• the worse team performance

Because the work is dynamic, matching work with individual skill inevitably makes team unstable. While it takes time and effort to get a team into performing stage, any member change will bring the team back to storming stage (referring to Bruce Tuckman's model). The fix backfires.

Moreover, we see another "fixes that backfire" system archetype at team level, which is formed by B3-loop and R5-loop.

In traditional thinking, shared responsibility means no responsibility. Thus, it is believed that defining clear individual responsibility helps team performance, which is shown as B3-loop. It reads like this:

• the worse team performance
• the more consideration of individual skill in dividing work
• the less shared responsibility
• the better team performance

R5-loop shows the problem with lacking common goal, which reads like this:

• the worse team performance
• the more consideration of individual skill in dividing work
• the less shared responsibility
• the less aligned goal for different members
• the worse team performance

Members in the feature group reporting to different managers make it even more difficult in having real common goal, while it is essential for team performance. The fix backfires.

Leverage

There is full of resource thinking in the above system dynamics, such as ignoring learning capability, aiming for efficiency and utilization, moving people around, etc. The old mental model plays the essential role in keeping the status quo. Seeing it is a powerful leverage in itself.

Considering to break vicious R-loop and/or introduce B-loop to balance, the below list offers some ideas about where to leverage:

• keep stable team (through organization design)
• ensure dedication (through organization design)
• define shared responsibility (through organization design)
• create task interdependency (through organization design)
• support learning (through coaching)
• align common goal (through coaching)
• increase level of collaboration (through coaching)