Self-Organizing Teams vs. Self-Managing Teams vs. Self-Responsible Teams in Lean Internal Platform Development

Introduction

When developing internal platforms with lean teams, it's important to understand different team structures. Lean teams are small and focused on efficiency. The way we organize these teams can greatly affect how well they perform. There are three types of teams we'll discuss:

1. Self-Organizing Teams
2. Self-Managing Teams
3. Self-Responsible Teams

Each has its own way of operating, and knowing the differences helps in choosing the best approach for your team.

Self-Organizing Teams

• What They Are: Teams that decide how to do the work assigned to them.
• Key Points: Management sets the goals and deadlines. The team figures out the best way to achieve these goals. Team members collaborate to choose methods and assign roles. They can adapt their processes to improve efficiency.

Example:

An internal platform team is tasked with adding a new feature. Management specifies what the feature should do and when it should be ready. The team decides how to build it, which tools to use, and who will handle each part.

Self-Managing Teams

• What They Are: Teams that decide both what work to do and how to do it.
• Key Points: The team sets its own goals and priorities. They manage planning, resource allocation, and scheduling. Leadership roles are shared within the team. The team is accountable for the results and how they achieve them.

Example:

A lean internal platform team identifies a need for a new internal tool to improve efficiency. They decide to develop it, set their own timelines, choose the technologies, manage the budget, and assign tasks among themselves.

Self-Responsible Teams

• What They Are: Teams that take responsibility for their work within guidelines set by management.
• Key Points: Management assigns tasks and sets the goals. Team members are accountable for their own tasks and performance. They proactively solve problems within their scope. The team aligns with the organization's objectives.

Example:

An internal platform team is responsible for maintaining existing systems. Each member ensures their part runs smoothly and meets quality standards. They follow the processes set by management but take ownership of their work.

Differences Between the Teams

Control Over Goals and Tasks

• Self-Organizing: Team decides how to do the work assigned by management.
• Self-Managing: Team decides what work to do and how to do it.
• Self-Responsible: Team works on tasks assigned by management and focuses on doing them well.

Decision-Making

• Self-Organizing: Team decides on execution methods.
• Self-Managing: Team makes strategic and operational decisions.
• Self-Responsible: Team follows management's decisions and focuses on execution.

Leadership

• Self-Organizing: Leadership may come from outside; the team coordinates internally.
• Self-Managing: Leadership is shared within the team.
• Self-Responsible: Leadership comes from management; the team follows their direction.

Accountability

• Self-Organizing: Accountable for completing tasks effectively.
• Self-Managing: Accountable for outcomes and how they manage the work.
• Self-Responsible: Accountable for individual performance within set guidelines.

Applying This to Lean Internal Platform Development

Self-Organizing Teams

• Pros: Flexibility in how work is done. Can adapt processes to improve efficiency.
• Cons: Limited influence on goals and priorities.
• Use When: Management wants to set goals but allows the team to decide the best way to achieve them.

Example: The team decides the best way to implement a new feature, choosing their preferred tools and methods.

Self-Managing Teams

• Pros: Full autonomy over projects and methods. High level of ownership and motivation.
• Cons: Risk of misalignment with company goals if not communicated well.
• Use When: The team is experienced and trusted to make strategic decisions.

Example: The team identifies a need for a new platform component and takes the initiative to develop it.

Self-Responsible Teams

• Pros: Clear expectations and alignment with company goals. Focus on execution and responsibility.
• Cons: Less flexibility and innovation.
• Use When: Strict adherence to processes is important, and management needs control over goals and methods.

Example: The team focuses on maintaining systems, following exact procedures set by management.

My Perspective

In my experience with lean internal platform development, choosing the right team structure depends on several factors:

• Team Experience

Experienced Teams: If the team is skilled and understands the company's goals, self-managing teams can be very effective. They can innovate and make strategic decisions quickly.

Less Experienced Teams: For teams that need more guidance, self-organizing teams provide a balance. They have flexibility in how they work but stay aligned with management's goals.

• Project Needs

Innovation Required: If the project needs creative solutions and quick pivots, self-managing teams are beneficial.

Strict Guidelines: If the project has strict requirements or compliance issues, self-responsible teams ensure that standards are met.

• Management

Style Trust and Empowerment: If management is willing to trust the team and give them autonomy, self-managing or self-organizing teams can thrive.

Control and Oversight: If management prefers to maintain control over goals and methods, self-responsible teams are more appropriate.

Final Thoughts

In lean internal platform development, the goal is to deliver value efficiently. Choosing the right team structure is a crucial part of achieving this. However, it's important to recognize that in practice, teams often blend principles from different models. You might find that your team uses some aspects of self-organizing teams and some from self-managing teams, adjusting based on the project's needs and the team's capabilities.

Why This Blending Happens:

• Adaptability: Projects and team dynamics are complex. Flexibility allows teams to adapt to changing circumstances.
• Balance of Control and Autonomy: Combining principles can provide the right mix of guidance and freedom.
• Continuous Improvement: Teams may start with one model and gradually incorporate elements from others as they grow and learn.

Applying This in Practice:

• Assess and Adjust: Regularly evaluate your team's functioning and be open to adopting practices from different models.
• Communication: Maintain clear lines of communication with management to ensure alignment while allowing autonomy where appropriate.
• Tailored Approach: There's no one-size-fits-all solution. Customize your team structure to fit your unique context.

Conclusion

Remember, the best team structure is one that fits your specific situation and helps your team succeed. By understanding the different models and being willing to adjust and combine principles as needed, you can create a team environment that fosters efficiency, innovation, and job satisfaction.