That's beautiful exploration. I'd love to be on that Friday night chocolate tasting.
Who do you think is the “you”? Who did you write this for? Outside of a CEO, who do you think has the vision, the power, and the incentives to rewire today's very different organizations to look more like what you describe?
What I have outlined here, I have co-shaped myself as either part of the leadership team or as someone working very close to the leadership in 3 different large enterprises, but very differently in how it was implemented. The "you" in these 3 cases were different roles at different hierarchy levels. I will describe the cases and then derive principles from them.
A German premium brand car manufacturer that we all know. The CEO in this case is very far away from the teams, there are many different layers and hierarchy levels in between. The car manufacturer has large divisions, I was in two different ones on different engagements. One division is basically something like "IT". There, the go for the transformation came from "above", meaning the top leadership that was responsible for the entire IT. In the Engineering division (meaning the part that directly concerns building the cars), there was also an OK from above but the implementation was left to a different hierarchy level. Roughly 2 levels above team lead. But it has to be said that the mentality and culture in this division is completely different from most organizations. You cannot build cars with a bunch of juniors. Therefore it was normal for everyone involved that very senior people with sometimes 100 people reporting to them were part of a development team and this was not perceived as a career setback, quite the opposite. In this particular example, a new software (head unit with navigation, radio, phone etc.) was being developed on an Android basis on a new chip from a new supplier and in the review it was tested in the car, meaning the developers from 10 teams had to integrate their software parts, put them on the chip, install it in the car and then someone drove around in the premium car and came back with everything that did not work. Every 2 weeks. And this whole thing took place about 10 years ago.
Next example: A world-famous globally operating insurance group. The OK for the transformation came from the top leadership that was responsible for one specific entire German entity. The head of the transformation reported directly below the board. The implementation was commissioned by a hierarchy level 2 levels below the German board. I was part of a leadership team here and we were responsible for 7 teams. So between team member and board there were only 3 hierarchy levels in the operating model and the org chart was gradually aligned to this.
Third example: a world-famous pharmaceutical company. Here I was brought on board by a data platform & AI lead. We implemented the principles differently than in the other examples, but it was still a huge benefit. The teams developed data and AI solutions in a high regulated industry, Germany here is much stricter than the US. Between him and the German board there were initially 2 hierarchy levels and through the successes of the teams there were promotions for everyone and in the end there was one hierarchy level less. The lead was able to implement many things we had developed thanks to his good relationships with the SVP and the teams were also heard, their feedback played a major role.
The principles you can derive: You need an official OK from a level that is positioned relatively high up. But the implementation has to be triggered by someone who is close enough to the teams, I would say maximum 2 levels above team member, otherwise they do not understand at all what it is about. This person needs the freedom to decide on the use of a budget, to decide on team cuts and compositions, and this person needs very good relationships with business departments. In none of the scenarios was anything forced through top-down. The whole thing only works if you get people excited about the cause.
In all cases, you started with one team. And with events that inspire, that are so cool that you feel like you are missing out if you are not part of it.
When one team is successful with the new way of working, it is contagious. When everyone talks about it, it creates a kind of "peer pressure" :-)
The person who triggers this needs the OK from top leadership, so that the resistance, which mostly occurs at team lead or team coordination level, can be addressed together.
In cases where individual team members brought me in as a consultant, it often failed because of the resistance from those leaders who work directly with the team. The lever is too small then.
The person I mean by "you" needs to have enough budget, teams and standing in the company that they can form a leadership team, partly because these are their own people and partly because they can convince the business departments that it brings value for everyone. A single team member cannot deliver that.
But it can certainly be a data / AI leader, platform lead, VP, SVP, program lead or similar. It can also be someone from the business side.
Hey Bianca!
That's beautiful exploration. I'd love to be on that Friday night chocolate tasting.
Who do you think is the “you”? Who did you write this for? Outside of a CEO, who do you think has the vision, the power, and the incentives to rewire today's very different organizations to look more like what you describe?
What I have outlined here, I have co-shaped myself as either part of the leadership team or as someone working very close to the leadership in 3 different large enterprises, but very differently in how it was implemented. The "you" in these 3 cases were different roles at different hierarchy levels. I will describe the cases and then derive principles from them.
A German premium brand car manufacturer that we all know. The CEO in this case is very far away from the teams, there are many different layers and hierarchy levels in between. The car manufacturer has large divisions, I was in two different ones on different engagements. One division is basically something like "IT". There, the go for the transformation came from "above", meaning the top leadership that was responsible for the entire IT. In the Engineering division (meaning the part that directly concerns building the cars), there was also an OK from above but the implementation was left to a different hierarchy level. Roughly 2 levels above team lead. But it has to be said that the mentality and culture in this division is completely different from most organizations. You cannot build cars with a bunch of juniors. Therefore it was normal for everyone involved that very senior people with sometimes 100 people reporting to them were part of a development team and this was not perceived as a career setback, quite the opposite. In this particular example, a new software (head unit with navigation, radio, phone etc.) was being developed on an Android basis on a new chip from a new supplier and in the review it was tested in the car, meaning the developers from 10 teams had to integrate their software parts, put them on the chip, install it in the car and then someone drove around in the premium car and came back with everything that did not work. Every 2 weeks. And this whole thing took place about 10 years ago.
Next example: A world-famous globally operating insurance group. The OK for the transformation came from the top leadership that was responsible for one specific entire German entity. The head of the transformation reported directly below the board. The implementation was commissioned by a hierarchy level 2 levels below the German board. I was part of a leadership team here and we were responsible for 7 teams. So between team member and board there were only 3 hierarchy levels in the operating model and the org chart was gradually aligned to this.
Third example: a world-famous pharmaceutical company. Here I was brought on board by a data platform & AI lead. We implemented the principles differently than in the other examples, but it was still a huge benefit. The teams developed data and AI solutions in a high regulated industry, Germany here is much stricter than the US. Between him and the German board there were initially 2 hierarchy levels and through the successes of the teams there were promotions for everyone and in the end there was one hierarchy level less. The lead was able to implement many things we had developed thanks to his good relationships with the SVP and the teams were also heard, their feedback played a major role.
The principles you can derive: You need an official OK from a level that is positioned relatively high up. But the implementation has to be triggered by someone who is close enough to the teams, I would say maximum 2 levels above team member, otherwise they do not understand at all what it is about. This person needs the freedom to decide on the use of a budget, to decide on team cuts and compositions, and this person needs very good relationships with business departments. In none of the scenarios was anything forced through top-down. The whole thing only works if you get people excited about the cause.
In all cases, you started with one team. And with events that inspire, that are so cool that you feel like you are missing out if you are not part of it.
When one team is successful with the new way of working, it is contagious. When everyone talks about it, it creates a kind of "peer pressure" :-)
The person who triggers this needs the OK from top leadership, so that the resistance, which mostly occurs at team lead or team coordination level, can be addressed together.
In cases where individual team members brought me in as a consultant, it often failed because of the resistance from those leaders who work directly with the team. The lever is too small then.
The person I mean by "you" needs to have enough budget, teams and standing in the company that they can form a leadership team, partly because these are their own people and partly because they can convince the business departments that it brings value for everyone. A single team member cannot deliver that.
But it can certainly be a data / AI leader, platform lead, VP, SVP, program lead or similar. It can also be someone from the business side.