Here the needs and concerns of practitioners who are in service to Business, UX, and Tech exist apart from one another. This leaves room for gaps (in understanding, and execution) to manifest, which can negatively impact outcomes, team health, and perhaps even exacerbate feelings of isolation that team members might already be feeling.
Here’s those same three concerns operating when a critical mass of shared understanding has been reached. There are less gaps, and practitioners in any one of the three domains have greater overlap with the needs and constraints of that which exists outside their zone.
If you’ve worked on dynamic cross-functional projects you might be thinking that shared understandings evolve throughout the entire project. In our experience, you’re 100% right! Understandings do need updating and re-qualification throughout. However, just because they change doesn’t mean that you can’t be more effective by striving for a “critical mass” of alignment early. Here’s a handful of reasons why:
We’ve found that in order to fast-track the path to a unified mental image, a few things need to be in place:
Here’s a list of obstacles you may encounter on your quest, and some suggestions for how to sidestep them:
Getting aligned can be tough if you don’t know exactly what it is that you’re talking about! Setting aside access to the right users and stakeholders for a moment – collaboratively building a dictionary of terms and core concepts can go a long way to improving alignment in the first weeks of your project.
Tech teams often experience pressure to appear as if they are being productive in easy-to-measure ways on day one. This pressure often manifests as rushing into code or wireframing. It can be a real dampener for reaching alignment, and often ends up manifesting as increased learning debt across the life of the project, inferior outcomes, and poor team health.
Talk to your teammates and superiors about the value of starting slow to go fast, avoid learning debt by making the practice of active learning visible early, and nudge your collaborators in the direction of making your alignment-generating efforts both valued and measurable. The cost of dealing with last-minute gaps can get a lot more expensive that the effort you put in here!
If you’re in a team dynamic where tasks are handed over the fence to you (waterfall model, we’re looking at you), it can be hard to find a holistic sense of what it is y’all are working on. Gaps arise, the blame game sets in, you may have experienced how the rest of that story goes...
Talk to one another, and talk often. Check out our thoughts on the value of working synchronously, and be sure to dive in to Shamsi Brinn’s excellent No-Handoff Manifesto.
You may practice your craft in an environment where formal, polished presentations are highly sought after. These certainly have their place. But if you’re not careful, overemphasising on bulletproof presentations can slow your journey to common ground.
Can you skip the prep time required to make polished thing, and instead opt for sharing your unvarnished work and thoughts in a quick huddle? It might just bring you closer to a solution and build more trust while you’re at it.
Our instinctive reaction to the knowledge gap is to seek more information. We confuse understanding with information.
Steven Bangay, Executing Strategy
Documentation can play an important role in how shared understanding is created within a team. However, there can be be subtle, yet meaningful differences between (a) documentation in service to advancing understandings, and (b) documentation in service to specification. The former can be very helpful for improving alignment (and these kinds of artifacts often lose relevance and value as shared understanding increases, while the latter is often better suited to situations where things are less likely to change.
If you’re reaching for a documentation effort – ask yourself which of the two outcomes you’re in service to. When your cause is in service to advancing understandings – use tools that are accessible to all disciplines in your team to find flow faster.
Many of us have struggled with imposter syndrome in some way, shape, or form. One could argue that it’s both a symptom of, and contributor to, all the preceding items in this list!
Creating a psychologically safe environment can take time and genuine effort. It’s hard to offer a prescription for achieving this within the bounds of this article; but if you’re able to make progress on some of the other obstacles throughout your next project – re-check your vibes at the end. You may just find that your team feels safer and more excited about what’s next. That’s a good sign that trust and safety are on the improve.
Every project brings its own unique variables to bear on what “enough shared understanding” might look and feel like. While there’s no one-size-fits-all solution to lean on, this doesn’t mean you can’t find your own way to confidence and consensus. Here’s some questions you might like to ask yourselves in order to evaluate the state of your team’s hive mind:
If you’re interested to learn more about how we apply these principles at Thinkmill, checkout The Thinkmill Method. If you’re running a project and feel like you’d benefit from seeing this way of working applied in a more hands-on, context specific manner, we can augment your delivery team and help improve your delivery culture while we’re there. Get in touch to learn more.
Credits and recommended reading
The following resources have made a valuable contribution to the way we reason about effective collaboration within cross-functional software environments:
article
· 7 min readarticle
· 1 min readarticle
· 4 min readarticle
· 3 min readarticle
· 9 min readarticle
· 9 min readHave a chat with one of our co-founders, Jed or Boris, about how Thinkmill can support your organisation’s software ambitions.
Contact us