How to get people to do things together? Building and doing things in real world.

  • What’s your decision making architecture? What’s your communication infrastructure like?
  • What do we mean by breaking down silos? Are there good silos?
  • How do you slow things down? Add friction. Obtaining management buy-in, lengthy approval process, bottlenecks, limited access to relevant information to make decisions on.
  • Alignment is not just “talking to people”. It’s mostly listening, meeting them in the middle, then relocate any “dislocation”.
  • Silos are boundaries between groups of people, based on the organizational structure and teams they’re working on. Silos exist because humans have cognitive and communication limits.
  • “Breaking down silos” blames individuals for not having a big enough vision and working across boundaries, instead of looking with curiosity at the system and asking why they are doing what they’re doing. It’s expecting people to have your level of perspective without figuring out why they don’t.
  • Maximize collaboration within teams, and minimize collaboration between teams.
  • Communication != collaboration != coordination
  • The US military found that the best way to coordinate groups of people quickly and effectively was to centralize coordination and decentralize decision-making and execution.
  • Step 0: Give budget. Give timeline. Give permission to fail. (added this step)
  • Step 1: Get them to agree on what “the same thing” actually is.
  • Step 2: Get them to define what everyone’s role is.
  • Step 3: Get them to work on it.
  • Pros: Prevent infinite time potentially being spent on reading docs. Sync on timeline, cadence, checkpoints. Efficient for making and agreeing on quick decisions.
  • Cons: Inefficient for makers / executors, but good as a carrot / stick to keep things moving on expected pace.
  • Relative: Brainstorming. Some people are more effective at asynchronous discussion — need time to gather and formulate thoughts.
  • The decisions they have to make are so hard and complex at the most operational level that they need to outsource strategic thinking upwards. AKA blindly following orders.
  • It’s actually the constraint setting you outsource upwards. Commanders set the constraints and the boundaries within which subordinates are empowered to operate (operative constraints). Enabling constraints vs governing constraints.
  • War time x non war time
  • The costs of micromanagement. As speed increased and we pushed authority down further, the quality of decisions actually went up.
  • ‘Thank you’ became my most important phrase, interest and enthusiasm my most powerful behaviors.
  • The term empowerment gets thrown around a great deal in the management world, but the truth is that simply taking off constraints is a dangerous move unless the recipients of newfound authority have the necessary sense of perspective to act on it wisely. Empowered execution without shared consciousness is dangerous.
  • On a single team, every individual needs to know every other individual in order to build trust. But on a team of teams, every individual does not have to have a relationship with every other individual. We needed the SEALs to trust Army Special Forces, and for them to trust the CIA, and for them all to be bound by a sense of common purpose: winning the war.
  • When they understood the whole picture, they began to trust colleagues.
  • McChrystal implemented a profound shift from a need-to-know mindset to a culture of information sharing. The problem is that the logic ‘need to know’ depends on the assumption that somebody actually knows who does and does not need to know which material. Our experience showed us this was never the case. Functioning safely in an interdependent environment requires that every team possess a holistic understanding of the interaction between all the moving parts. Everyone has to see the system in its entirety for the plan to work. We did not want all the teams to become generalists — SEALs are better at what they do than intel analysts would be and vice versa. Diverse specialized abilities are essential. We wanted to fuse generalized awareness with specialized expertise. We dubbed this goal — this state of emergent, adaptive organizational intelligence — shared consciousness, and it became the cornerstone of our transformation.
  • Trust and purpose are inefficient: getting to know your colleagues intimately and acquiring a whole-system overview are big time sinks; the sharing of responsibilities generates redundancy. But this overlap and redundancy — these inefficiencies — are precisely what imbues teams with high-level adaptability and efficacy. Great teams are less like “awesome machines” than awesome organisms.
  • Shared consciousness, empowered execution.
  • Adaptability, not efficiency. Resilient, not optimised. Prepare, not predict.

--

--

This is where I ask questions and talk to myself | Backend web dev, web scraping, Robotics Process Automation | Blogs at http://proses.id

Love podcasts or audiobooks? Learn on the go with our new app.

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store
Theresia Tanzil

Theresia Tanzil

This is where I ask questions and talk to myself | Backend web dev, web scraping, Robotics Process Automation | Blogs at http://proses.id