In today’s dynamic business landscape, “agile” and “nimble” are more than just buzzwords; they are essential qualities for organizational success. The shift in economic power towards the customer necessitates that businesses prioritize customer satisfaction and value delivery above all else. Price competitiveness alone is no longer a sustainable advantage. Vendors are increasingly being held accountable not just for product functionality, but also for ensuring tangible business value for their clients.
This new reality demands enterprises to be exceptionally agile and nimble, capable of making rapid, targeted, and adaptive decisions in response to ever-changing market dynamics and specific customer needs. The real challenge lies in achieving this agility at scale. Departments like marketing, customer success, and professional services have grown into substantial entities, with their operational scales and budgets rivaling those of product development and sales divisions. The increasing emphasis on vertical market specialization further complicates the organizational structure. For global corporations, the imperative is clear: these diverse organizations must seamlessly collaborate and coordinate to maximize value delivery to customers and stakeholders. With such intricate matrix structures, numerous stakeholders, and relentless time pressures, the question arises: How can that elephant ever learn to dance? This “Elephant Dance,” representing agility in large organizations, is the key to thriving in the modern business environment.
The path to enabling this “elephant dance” begins with establishing single points of accountability. In a matrixed organization, for every recurring and significant decision, there must be one, and only one, individual designated as the steward of that decision. The term “steward,” while perhaps not commonly used today, accurately describes this role. A steward is someone empowered by the organization to take ownership of a specific outcome. They are not autocrats; they cannot achieve the desired result single-handedly, nor can they dictate how other departments should operate. Instead, they must leverage the collective strength of the entire enterprise to address the situation at hand. This necessitates consultation and collaboration before making definitive choices. However, they are granted decision rights within their area of responsibility – essentially, the authority to make the final call when and how they deem most impactful.
The concept of decision rights warrants careful consideration. Think of a football quarterback. The coach designs the play, and the entire team is crucial for its execution, but the quarterback is responsible for calling the play in the huddle (time is limited due to the game clock) and ensuring its successful implementation. A key aspect of their empowerment is the ability to call an audible at the line of scrimmage, changing the play in real-time. Regardless of the play, the quarterback is ultimately accountable for the outcome. Of course, if other players fail to execute their assignments, the play might fail, and those players are accountable for their part in the failure. While the coach addresses individual player performance, the quarterback’s primary role is to maximize team performance in the moment. They are the steward of the team’s success. This responsibility is reflected in their compensation and their ownership of decision rights.
This model incorporates an escalation mechanism. If a team member believes a play is fundamentally flawed, they can call a timeout. Similarly, in business, if a delivery organization is asked to undertake a task it cannot or should not perform, the relevant leader must escalate the decision. This action effectively halts agile response in favor of a potentially higher-value consideration. However, escalation should be an exception. Frequent escalations indicate systemic issues. Typically, the designated steward makes the decision, the team executes, and the outcome leads to either success or valuable learning.
In business, this learning process occurs during account reviews and quarterly business reviews. These sessions are where the single accountable person must be prepared to answer four critical questions:
- What was the anticipated outcome?
- What actually happened?
- What lessons were learned from the experience?
- What adjustments would be made moving forward?
In performance evaluations during account reviews, it’s beneficial to have “two in a box” – often the product owner and the sales owner – address these questions. However, even in this setup, a single accountable individual remains, typically the salesperson or account owner. If multiple account owners encounter similar product-related challenges, then the product owner becomes accountable – but this is a subsequent accountability, not during the immediate event.
Why implement this structure? In time-sensitive situations requiring agile responses, it prevents hesitation and delays. Decisions are not stalled for approvals, responsibility is not shifted, and decision-makers are not second-guessed. Effort is not withheld due to differing opinions on the best course of action. Instead, there is a collective recognition that serving customers and stakeholders effectively necessitates empowered decision-makers guiding actions in real-time. This is best achieved by granting decision rights to a single individual and fully supporting their decisions to the best of everyone’s ability. This is how the elephant learns to dance: by empowering individuals to lead with clear accountability and decision rights, fostering agility at scale.
That’s my perspective. What’s yours?
Follow Geoff on LinkedIn | Geoffrey Moore Mailing List
Geoffrey Moore | Zone to Win | Geoffrey Moore Twitter | Geoffrey Moore YouTube
