,
8 tweets,
4 min read
Read on Twitter
Leadership provides two things for a team:
-Goals and objectives (direction)
-Freedom of the team to meet those objectives (autonomy)
These are the factors that determine whether it's possible for *anybody* to make a decision, and then have that decision stick.
1/
-Goals and objectives (direction)
-Freedom of the team to meet those objectives (autonomy)
These are the factors that determine whether it's possible for *anybody* to make a decision, and then have that decision stick.
1/
Leaders good at setting direction can focus their teams on specific problems (assuming the problem is well-understood, this works well). But it can be tempting to over-prescribe solutions, turning teams into pixel-pushers, and micromanaging away their expertise & value.
2/
2/
If a leader can't give their teams direction (the problem/domain is not well understood, or the ICs are deep experts) then giving them autonomy/cover/resources to research & experiment is productive. But some direction is still necessary for a reality check/business outcomes.
3/
3/
A high dose of both strategic direction and tactical autonomy is necessary to create meaningfully empowered teams. But when a hyper-strict top-down direction comes up against an empowered, driven bottom-up initiative, the result can be simply unproductive conflict.
4/
4/
The worst of both worlds is when there are no concrete goals set by the leadership, but also the team is not sufficiently empowered to seek a direction on its own. Tasks are haphazard and short-sighted. Without backing from the top, any attempt to change things collapses.
5/
5/
Many people managers (or product managers) fail to understand that their responsibility is creating an environment in which decisions can be made (h/t @johncutlefish). You do that by either framing the problem yourself, or letting the team frame it - but *someone* needs to.
6/
6/
Fear of risk can keep teams stuck in the "aimless dithering" zone. But most decisions are reversible, and (especially in an Agile environment) should be as small as possible to reduce risk and increase learning. An experiment can never be a failure, just a negative result.
7/
7/
Good leaders know how to recalibrate based on current knowledge & project status. Usually, it's best to start with broad autonomy, reward exploration, and then progressively define focus as the problem is better understood, deliverables are clearer, and you've built trust.
8/8
8/8
