Collaboration isn’t democracy
I had a long-term client a few years ago who took our approach to cross-functional collaboration quite seriously. They reconfigured the make-up of their teams and worked hard to create a culture that welcomed opinions from everyone. It seemed to work well in getting ideas surfaced and debated. It failed at making decisions. Why? The team took the concept of collaboration to a point where inclusivity meant no one wanted to deny anyone else’s opinion. The teams, well-structured and intentioned, ended up stuck at the most critical moments unable to advance their best ideas. They learned the hard way that collaboration, although a wonderful way to bring forward diverse thinking, is not an exercise in democracy. Without clear decision making, the best collaborations in the world will fail.
Someone has to make a decision
Collaborative teams need a decision maker – a designated individual whose job it is to decide how the team will move forward from its current position. More of than not that person is the product manager. They own the decision. They can participate in the collaboration too but when the time comes to make a decision they weigh the current options and data and choose a way to proceed. Would it be nice to bring the team to a consensus? Absolutely. If you can do that quickly by all means you should. However, if getting everyone to agree becomes arduous or seemingly impossible, the decision maker steps in. This is a crucial role and step in any team’s process.
Choosing a direction doesn’t negate other ideas
Just because someone made a decision doesn’t mean the ideas they chose are bad. The team may have to disagree and commit to the chosen direction but it’s not without its guardrails. Each decision must come with dedicated success criteria and a learning loop that ensures the team is in fact proceeding in the right direction. If it turns out that the chosen idea is not going to work out as expected, the team goes back to the backlog of unused ideas from the original collaboration and begins the decision making process again.
Diverge, converge, repeat
Collaboration is powerful. Often the most successful products come from the collaboration of diverse individuals. It can also slow teams down if they can’t definitely exit the collaboration effort with a clear decision. Diverging initially only provides value if the team can converge quickly. Someone has to make that decision. When it’s coupled with success metrics and short learning loops, those whose ideas were not chosen get onboard with the chosen direction more easily. This is a cycle. Getting through this cycle is crucial for the best ideas to emerge over time. It isn’t, however, an exercise in democracy. Inevitably, someone’s opinion is the one that is executed. As long as that decision is data-informed and reflective of inbound learning our collaborations will continue to bear fruit.
The post Collaboration isn’t democracy appeared first on Jeff Gothelf.