)
)
)
Are you looking for a different approach to management to provide more flexibility while fostering trust? The answer might lie in self-managed teams. A 2017 survey of Fortune 1000 companies found that nearly 80% of these companies used self-managed teams at some level of their organization.
Yet self-managed teams can seem like an enigma or uncharted territory for some managers and companies. And the thought might scare you to death. If you’re not watching or supervising employees, how can they know what to do or how to get things done?
These are genuine concerns. But gathering intel and insight into the practice and its benefits could open your organization to broader horizons. So if you want to free up time for other endeavors and kick the baby-sitting to the curb, self-managed teams might be the greatest move your organization can make — if you have the proper personnel to pull it off.
What are self-managed teams?
Self-managed teams are teams without a designated manager. They are self-governing, meaning they come up with their own structures and rules. They rely on each other and working agreements to get their objectives done and hold equal accountability as a group. The onus of functionality, task assignment, delivery of work, and scheduling falls entirely on the team’s shoulders.
Doug Kirkpatrick says that the foundation of self-management is non-coercion and keeping commitments. No one should be able to force the other people to do something just because “the boss said so”, and everyone should have equal commitment to getting the task done.
Who leads self-managed teams?
Self-managed teams are a reaction against the inefficiency of management. Chuck Blakeman points out that the Industrial Age taught us that humans won’t work unless someone is making them. Therefore, every team gets a manager. But many studies point out that managers don’t make teams more productive. When you remove oversight and assume that everyone is a functioning adult on the team, they can lead themselves.
We often expect too much out of leaders, anyway. They must be expert communicators, great with people, subject matter experts, visionaries, highly organized, etc. Very few individuals can have all of these talents. In self-managed teams, the different roles that one leader was expected to play are often distributed throughout the team.
Who is responsible for self-managed teams?
The hierarchical system that many companies employ means that certain responsibilities fall on the shoulders of employees, but can flow upwards depending on the importance of a task. For example, if an employee fails to meet a deadline, they may need encouragement or disciplinary action. This funnels upward to the next level of management and the next until someone has enough authority to terminate an employee or manager or find another solution.
In self-managed teams, responsibility is governed through agreements and commitments. When you start a project, individuals make commitments to each other and agree to what should be expected. When they don’t deliver, the team suffers, and the team can decide to remove someone.
Responsibility for the entire project or results lies with the team as a whole. If a team does not meet its objectives, the entire team needs to be evaluated and their processes and agreements are called into question.
This is not just empowerment
An important idea as a CEO or manager is understanding the difference between self-managed teams and empowered teams. While they seem similar at a glance, they have distinctions which can have an impact on productivity, morale, and how much work you have to do as a business owner or manager
Empowered teams have been given an extra degree of autonomy over traditional teams. You’ve given the go-ahead and authority to certain individuals to make key decisions, take action, and control workflow. But managers still have the reins. You check in, make decisions for the team as a whole, and still maintain control over project management, personnel decisions, and benefits such as vacation days and PTO.
In empowered teams, management also has the responsibility of nurturing and fostering employees to take initiative based on their experience, expertise, and knowledge. Unlike self-managed teams, empowered teams still require a level of supervision, especially if certain leaders of empowered teams lack the decisiveness necessary to function in difficult situations.
Implementing self-managed teams
Trying this idea often goes against the idea of supervision and a hierarchy that’s been proven effective in the past. If you subscribe to the Theory X of management, you may feel that workers need an added level of supervision to get the job done. However, you’ll have to push this doubt aside if you truly want to reap the benefits of a self-management.
While remote work and hybrid workplaces can facilitate and necessitate this change, especially to free up more time for your own work, you have one major obstacle: choosing the right people for the job.
Not everyone is a good fit for these kinds of teams. Some people who have spent all their lives with a boss often find it difficult to know how to function without requesting approvals for every step.
The transition to self-managed teams is not easy, and you should expect some turbulence, as Karin Tenelius mentions.
Candidates for a self-managed team must be self-sufficient, self-starting problem solvers that turn to their own skills before they reach out to others. That isn’t to say they won’t reach out when necessary. But if they have the confidence and drive to succeed on their own, don’t detract from their valuable skills. An open-door policy and regular check-ins may make you feel more comfortable, but don’t undermine the idea of self-management. That’s why you’re hand-picking the best of the best.
Are you sure you are ready?
Not every company is a good fit. It’s all dependent on the complexity of the project, the size of the company, and your level of trust. Without the proper setup, the concept of self-managed teams can be risky and have the potential behavior. Start small, choose the right people, and ultimately, you can build a self-managed team that boosts your productivity and profile of your organization as a whole.
To learn more about self-managed teams, check out these resources:
Are you looking for a different approach to management to provide more flexibility while fostering trust? The answer might lie in self-managed teams. A 2017 survey of Fortune 1000 companies found that nearly 80% of these companies used self-managed teams at some level of their organization.
Yet self-managed teams can seem like an enigma or uncharted territory for some managers and companies. And the thought might scare you to death. If you’re not watching or supervising employees, how can they know what to do or how to get things done?
These are genuine concerns. But gathering intel and insight into the practice and its benefits could open your organization to broader horizons. So if you want to free up time for other endeavors and kick the baby-sitting to the curb, self-managed teams might be the greatest move your organization can make — if you have the proper personnel to pull it off.
What are self-managed teams?
Self-managed teams are teams without a designated manager. They are self-governing, meaning they come up with their own structures and rules. They rely on each other and working agreements to get their objectives done and hold equal accountability as a group. The onus of functionality, task assignment, delivery of work, and scheduling falls entirely on the team’s shoulders.
Doug Kirkpatrick says that the foundation of self-management is non-coercion and keeping commitments. No one should be able to force the other people to do something just because “the boss said so”, and everyone should have equal commitment to getting the task done.
Who leads self-managed teams?
Self-managed teams are a reaction against the inefficiency of management. Chuck Blakeman points out that the Industrial Age taught us that humans won’t work unless someone is making them. Therefore, every team gets a manager. But many studies point out that managers don’t make teams more productive. When you remove oversight and assume that everyone is a functioning adult on the team, they can lead themselves.
We often expect too much out of leaders, anyway. They must be expert communicators, great with people, subject matter experts, visionaries, highly organized, etc. Very few individuals can have all of these talents. In self-managed teams, the different roles that one leader was expected to play are often distributed throughout the team.
Who is responsible for self-managed teams?
The hierarchical system that many companies employ means that certain responsibilities fall on the shoulders of employees, but can flow upwards depending on the importance of a task. For example, if an employee fails to meet a deadline, they may need encouragement or disciplinary action. This funnels upward to the next level of management and the next until someone has enough authority to terminate an employee or manager or find another solution.
In self-managed teams, responsibility is governed through agreements and commitments. When you start a project, individuals make commitments to each other and agree to what should be expected. When they don’t deliver, the team suffers, and the team can decide to remove someone.
Responsibility for the entire project or results lies with the team as a whole. If a team does not meet its objectives, the entire team needs to be evaluated and their processes and agreements are called into question.
This is not just empowerment
An important idea as a CEO or manager is understanding the difference between self-managed teams and empowered teams. While they seem similar at a glance, they have distinctions which can have an impact on productivity, morale, and how much work you have to do as a business owner or manager
Empowered teams have been given an extra degree of autonomy over traditional teams. You’ve given the go-ahead and authority to certain individuals to make key decisions, take action, and control workflow. But managers still have the reins. You check in, make decisions for the team as a whole, and still maintain control over project management, personnel decisions, and benefits such as vacation days and PTO.
In empowered teams, management also has the responsibility of nurturing and fostering employees to take initiative based on their experience, expertise, and knowledge. Unlike self-managed teams, empowered teams still require a level of supervision, especially if certain leaders of empowered teams lack the decisiveness necessary to function in difficult situations.
Implementing self-managed teams
Trying this idea often goes against the idea of supervision and a hierarchy that’s been proven effective in the past. If you subscribe to the Theory X of management, you may feel that workers need an added level of supervision to get the job done. However, you’ll have to push this doubt aside if you truly want to reap the benefits of a self-management.
While remote work and hybrid workplaces can facilitate and necessitate this change, especially to free up more time for your own work, you have one major obstacle: choosing the right people for the job.
Not everyone is a good fit for these kinds of teams. Some people who have spent all their lives with a boss often find it difficult to know how to function without requesting approvals for every step.
The transition to self-managed teams is not easy, and you should expect some turbulence, as Karin Tenelius mentions.
Candidates for a self-managed team must be self-sufficient, self-starting problem solvers that turn to their own skills before they reach out to others. That isn’t to say they won’t reach out when necessary. But if they have the confidence and drive to succeed on their own, don’t detract from their valuable skills. An open-door policy and regular check-ins may make you feel more comfortable, but don’t undermine the idea of self-management. That’s why you’re hand-picking the best of the best.
Are you sure you are ready?
Not every company is a good fit. It’s all dependent on the complexity of the project, the size of the company, and your level of trust. Without the proper setup, the concept of self-managed teams can be risky and have the potential behavior. Start small, choose the right people, and ultimately, you can build a self-managed team that boosts your productivity and profile of your organization as a whole.
To learn more about self-managed teams, check out these resources:
