[OReilly Superstream] Occupy the Space: A grassroots guide to engineering (and product) strategy when none exists
Download as PPTX, PDF0 likes251 views
The document outlines a grassroots approach to addressing the lack of strategy within organizations, emphasizing the importance of diagnosing problems, formulating guiding policies, and taking coherent actions. It suggests that individuals should step up to fill strategy gaps by drafting, sharing, and deciding on strategies collaboratively, while involving knowledgeable staff and engineers to enhance buy-in and effectiveness. The piece highlights the potential consequences of 'no strategy,' such as confusion and lack of motivation, and offers practical countermeasures to create effective strategies.
[OReilly Superstream] Occupy the Space: A grassroots guide to engineering (and product) strategy when none exists
- 1. Low Sensitivity Occupy the Space: A grassroots guide to engineering (and product) strategy when none exists Jason Yip 6 March 2024
- 2. Low Sensitivity Here’s the scenario…
- 3. Low Sensitivity Low morale “No strategy” Why? Leadership response? Just repeating the vision
- 4. Low Sensitivity Someone needs to step up!
- 6. Low Sensitivity What do we mean when we say “strategy”?
- 8. Low Sensitivity TL;DR Strategy is problem-solving for a high stakes challenge.
- 9. Low Sensitivity Good strategy has 3 parts.
- 10. Low Sensitivity Diagnosis Not just “this is a problem” but also “why is the problem happening?” Guiding Policy Guiding principles for how we believe we can address the problem. Coherent Actions Specific actions we take that are coherent with the guiding policy.
- 11. Low Sensitivity Diagnosis Guiding Policy Coherent Actions Our ML models are not performing well because our legacy system does not capture the data we need to train effectively. Migrate off the legacy system to new services. Focus on migration of traffic over migration of capabilities. Direct all new traffic to new services Explicit migration timeline with target outcomes (not just best efforts) New capabilities built on new services first – even if exception made to also add to legacy.
- 12. Low Sensitivity Therefore, “no strategy” means…
- 13. Low Sensitivity Diagnosis Guiding Policy Coherent Actions ? ? ?
- 14. Low Sensitivity Diagnosis Guiding Policy Coherent Actions ? ? Our ML models are not performing well because our legacy system does not capture the data we need to train effectively.
- 15. Low Sensitivity Diagnosis Guiding Policy Coherent Actions Our ML models are not performing well because our legacy system does not capture the data we need to train effectively. Migrate off the legacy system to new services. Focus on migration of traffic over migration of capabilities. Direct all new traffic to new services No explicit migration targets. Explicit short-term business outcome targets. New capabilities built on legacy system first because most of the traffic is there.
- 16. Low Sensitivity So what? What’s the problem with “no strategy”?
- 17. Low Sensitivity Confusion Lack of motivation Incoherent and competing actions
- 18. Low Sensitivity Countermeasures for “no strategy”
- 19. Low Sensitivity Occupy the Space Draft Share Decide Don’t Sweat Ownership Get Staff+ Engineers Involved Assign dedicated liaisons
- 20. Low Sensitivity Occupy the Space
- 21. Low Sensitivity Profi t Steal underpants Empty space where there should be a strategy
- 22. Low Sensitivity There is an empty space where there should be a strategy Complain about leaders not stepping up You’re capable, why not step up yourself? Only one of these choices is useful. Someone else fills the space with a bad strategy
- 23. Low Sensitivity One of two outcomes Your strategy is accepted… because it’s competent and has buy-in. Your strategy is not accepted… but leaders are forced to correct it. This one is better This one is acceptable
- 24. Low Sensitivity Diagnosis Not just “this is a problem” but also “why is the problem happening?” If you want your strategy to be “good”... Coherent Actions Specific actions we take that are coherent with the guiding policy. Guiding Policy Guiding principles for how we believe we can address the problem.
- 25. Low Sensitivity I’ve yet to see this be a problem… but just in case… You get a “+1” for addressing the strategy gap. The leader who was supposed to provide the strategy gets a “-1”
- 26. Low Sensitivity Occupy the Space When there is a strategy gap, fill it yourself. This will lead to either: 1. Acceptance of your strategy 2. Leaders correct it. Either way, you no longer have a strategy gap.
- 27. Low Sensitivity Your strategy is accepted… because it’s competent and has buy-in. How do you increase the likelihood of this? Draft Share Decide Get Staff+ Engineers Involved Assign dedicated liaisons
- 28. Low Sensitivity Draft Share Decide Draft, share, decide. Starting principles | by Jason Yip | Medium
- 29. Low Sensitivity You can’t get to depth quickly with too many people involved. Strategies created by committee tend to be shallow. Why you can’t have a useful conversation with a lot of people | by Jason Yip | Medium Which is why
- 30. Low Sensitivity
- 31. Low Sensitivity “Without involvement, there is no commitment. Mark it down, asterisk it, circle it, underline it. No involvement, no commitment.” Stephen R. Covey
- 32. Low Sensitivity
- 33. Low Sensitivity #protip Sharing can sometimes be more about buy-in than it is about getting additional insight… don’t make it more complicated than it needs to be.
- 34. Low Sensitivity Draft Share Decide 1. Draft strategy with a small group 2. Share it with a broader group for feedback 3. Decide on the “final” version
- 35. Low Sensitivity Get Staff+ Engineers involved
- 36. Low Sensitivity Target characteristics for “Staff+ Engineers” Been around for a while. Knows a lot about how the systems work. Implicit respect and authority independent of reporting lines This could be you. If not, get that person (or people) involved
- 37. Low Sensitivity Why get Staff+ Engineers involved? They probably have a perspective that should be incorporated in the strategy. Their involvement can sometimes automatically create buy-in.
- 38. Low Sensitivity Get Staff+ Engineers Involved The most senior technical ICs tend to have influence. Exploit this and get them involved.
- 39. Low Sensitivity Assign Dedicated Liaisons
- 40. Low Sensitivity “This is our proposed strategy” “This is our proposed strategy… AND all the dependent groups are bought-in” This one is stronger
- 41. Low Sensitivity Get dependent groups bought-in. Establish good relationships with dependent groups. Assign dedicated liaisons to establish good relationships.
- 42. Low Sensitivity
- 43. Low Sensitivity “Bureaucratic pressure alone is an inherently flawed method for ensuring genuine, long-term cooperation— as no one appreciates being told to play nice with others. When the pressure is removed for whatever reason, cooperation is likely to diminish.” “liaisons offered a completely different channel for connectivity, a human-to-human personal network that was accountable for the creation of cross-boundary, dotted-line relationships among independent entities.”
- 44. Low Sensitivity “The liaison seems well-mannered and intelligent. We must assume the rest of the team is the same.”
- 45. Low Sensitivity Assign Dedicated Liaisons A strategy with buy-in from other groups is stronger. If you want buy-in from other groups it’s useful to have someone dedicated to building relationships with them.
- 47. Low Sensitivity You’ve addressed the strategy gap. Your area is now under control and doing well. This makes your area attractive for someone to takeover and/or steal credit. Empire builder
- 48. Low Sensitivity No strategy… with associated confusion, lack of motivation, incoherent action, etc. Clear strategy… but someone steals credit for it. This one sucks less.
- 49. Low Sensitivity Don’t Sweat Ownership When you come up with a good strategy, it’s possible someone else with more power will show up and take credit. This is still better than having a strategy gap.
- 51. Low Sensitivity Low morale “No strategy” Why? Leadership response? Just repeating the vision Occupy the space!
- 52. Low Sensitivity Occupy the Space Draft Share Decide Don’t Sweat Ownership Get Staff+ Engineers Involved Assign dedicated liaisons
Editor's Notes
- #4: Here’s the scenario… morale is low… people have been complaining about a lack of strategy for a while. The top leadership team has just been repeating the vision with no explanation of why that’s the right thing to do never mind how to get there.
- #6: Someone needs to step up… If you’re listening to this presentation, that someone is you.
- #8: The most useful framing I’ve seen for this is from Richard Rumelt in Good Strategy, Bad Strategy and The Crux.
- #11: A diagnosis of the challenge - not just “this is a problem” but also “why is it happening?” Guiding Policy - guiding principles of how we believe we can successfully address the challenge Coherent actions - specific key actions we take that are coherent with the guiding policy
- #12: For example…
- #14: “No strategy” can mean no diagnosis, no guiding policy, no coherent actions but also…
- #15: … could look like this where there is a diagnosis, but no guiding policy which leads to incoherent actions… or…
- #16: … there can be a diagnosis and even guiding policy but actual actions are incoherent. Any of these combinations can be described as “no strategy”. There’s also just “bad strategy” where the diagnosis and/or guiding policy and/or actions are dumb.
- #18: Mainly confusion which leads to both lack of motivation AND incoherent and competing actions
- #19: So what can we do about it?
- #20: I’ve used 5 countermeasures for this kind of situation that I think are useful.
- #22: This is the visual I have in my head. I’ll sometimes call this “space” a “strategy gap” but I like how “Occupy the Space” sounds better than “Occupy the Strategy Gap”.
- #23: In my opinion, there are 2 bad choices and 1 good choice
- #24: I want to be clear, it’s still okay if you make a reasonable effort to fill the space and it’s not quite there because you’re missing context that was not shared.
- #25: A diagnosis of the challenge - not just “this is a problem” but also “why is it happening?” Guiding Policy - guiding principles of how we believe we can successfully address the challenge Coherent actions - specific key actions we take that are coherent with the guiding policy
- #47: This last one is about organizational politics
- #49: I’m not saying that it doesn’t suck but it sucks less.
- #52: Same scenario but