Thanks Rayya. Yes, very interesting and personal piece from business agility expert Evan Leybourn where he suddenly finds himself unable to be response-able (even though he is still responsible). Very well worth a read.
On the southern pacific coast of Japan we are sadly expecting a giant earthquake in the next 30 years because it has happened every 100〜150 years and the last one was about 80 years ago. So there are many serious TV shows to make people be informed of what bad things may happen. We need response-ability seriously.
Hi Aoki-san. Yes indeed. It's interesting... some politicians think that having well-planned and widely known contingency plans alarms people. I disagree - I think it builds confidence.
In these days I'm very much into the "effectiveness over efficiency" way of doing things.
Efficiency has value in It, but without being effective at the same time... It's dangerous.
It seems to me that we can say also
"Response-ability over Responsibility".
Responsibility has a value but there Is much more value in the Response-ability (because it encourages a shared responsibility among tema member which are responsible AND accountable at the same time).
Hi Eleanora, great point. You're absolutely correct that 'efficiency without effectiveness' is dangerous. I had this argument decades ago when quality management was being introduced. People used to insist that they couldn't afford to get high quality as they had to make things quickly... but of course it's much better to do it right first time (effective) than spend a lot of time, effort and money fixing things (inefficiency).
Being response-able makes being responsible much easier. Imagine you are responsible for feeding a group of people every day, and you can only cook spaghetti bolognaise. You can do a very good spaghetti bolognaise, very quick, very efficient.. and then someone comes who is vegetarian, someone else doesn't eat gluten, someone else is allergic to tomatos. You're stuck, and you can't discharge your responsibility, If you are response-able you can cook different things to suit different people, so that day you can do an onion and augergine rice dish with chilli. Or whatever. (And by the way the people will appreciate your response-ability too!)
In my past working experience I discovered that 'cross-functionality' Is a triggering. For me, A word Is a triggering when people react to It with their belly turning off for a while brain. And when this happens, conversation could be very tough because goes ideaoligically.
So, the lesson I've learn Is that I should always try to explain things without using "labels" (like cross-functionality), maybe add it later in the conversation when a common ground has already been built.
Long Story short, could we say that a response-able team Is a team that stretch themselves daily in order to avoid single point of failures in it? That in a response-able team skills of the people counts much more than their role (responsibility)?
Pushing your example a bit further to move from individual to a team level.
We are working in a small restaurant and our Brigade (team) Is responsible to serve dinners.
In the team I'm responsible for First Dishes and right now I'm only able to cook spaghetti 🍝. Maybe Is enough for a while, then I need a holiday. In the evenings in which I miss, no more spaghetti in our restaurant. If the team were response-able, this wouldn't happen. I'd have taught another team member (or more than one) how to cook my spaghetti and I could have taken an holiday without headache.
(There Is also the real Life example in which something like this happened, but i like metaphor first)
> in a response-able team skills of the people counts much more than their role (responsibility)?
That's very interesting Eleonora. I don't quite know about daily stretching, but a response-able team will surely need to be able to act beyond their responsibilities. And yes, teaching someone else to cook 'your' spaghetti would be good. If I as the leader I'd be looking to help everyone to do this (over a period of time). Some 'hero' leaders don't do this, because they love to be able to step in and rescue the day themselves. More aware 'host' leaders encourage people to help (and even save) each other.
Yes Eleonora, this is the point. It's why 'host' leading is much more useful. The host leader doesn't need to be the smartest person, but they make sure that the right people are there. It's more of a background role but it does get more out of people by drawing in those with experience to contribute.
Great post, Mark. After reading it I happened on this on LinkedIn and thought it resonated. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/taking-my-own-medicine-evan-leybourn
Thanks Rayya. Yes, very interesting and personal piece from business agility expert Evan Leybourn where he suddenly finds himself unable to be response-able (even though he is still responsible). Very well worth a read.
Nice photo of hanami and your description of it😊
On the southern pacific coast of Japan we are sadly expecting a giant earthquake in the next 30 years because it has happened every 100〜150 years and the last one was about 80 years ago. So there are many serious TV shows to make people be informed of what bad things may happen. We need response-ability seriously.
Hi Aoki-san. Yes indeed. It's interesting... some politicians think that having well-planned and widely known contingency plans alarms people. I disagree - I think it builds confidence.
That's really interesting.
In these days I'm very much into the "effectiveness over efficiency" way of doing things.
Efficiency has value in It, but without being effective at the same time... It's dangerous.
It seems to me that we can say also
"Response-ability over Responsibility".
Responsibility has a value but there Is much more value in the Response-ability (because it encourages a shared responsibility among tema member which are responsible AND accountable at the same time).
What do you think?
Hi Eleanora, great point. You're absolutely correct that 'efficiency without effectiveness' is dangerous. I had this argument decades ago when quality management was being introduced. People used to insist that they couldn't afford to get high quality as they had to make things quickly... but of course it's much better to do it right first time (effective) than spend a lot of time, effort and money fixing things (inefficiency).
Being response-able makes being responsible much easier. Imagine you are responsible for feeding a group of people every day, and you can only cook spaghetti bolognaise. You can do a very good spaghetti bolognaise, very quick, very efficient.. and then someone comes who is vegetarian, someone else doesn't eat gluten, someone else is allergic to tomatos. You're stuck, and you can't discharge your responsibility, If you are response-able you can cook different things to suit different people, so that day you can do an onion and augergine rice dish with chilli. Or whatever. (And by the way the people will appreciate your response-ability too!)
Super interesting example.
In my past working experience I discovered that 'cross-functionality' Is a triggering. For me, A word Is a triggering when people react to It with their belly turning off for a while brain. And when this happens, conversation could be very tough because goes ideaoligically.
So, the lesson I've learn Is that I should always try to explain things without using "labels" (like cross-functionality), maybe add it later in the conversation when a common ground has already been built.
Long Story short, could we say that a response-able team Is a team that stretch themselves daily in order to avoid single point of failures in it? That in a response-able team skills of the people counts much more than their role (responsibility)?
Pushing your example a bit further to move from individual to a team level.
We are working in a small restaurant and our Brigade (team) Is responsible to serve dinners.
In the team I'm responsible for First Dishes and right now I'm only able to cook spaghetti 🍝. Maybe Is enough for a while, then I need a holiday. In the evenings in which I miss, no more spaghetti in our restaurant. If the team were response-able, this wouldn't happen. I'd have taught another team member (or more than one) how to cook my spaghetti and I could have taken an holiday without headache.
(There Is also the real Life example in which something like this happened, but i like metaphor first)
Does It work?
> in a response-able team skills of the people counts much more than their role (responsibility)?
That's very interesting Eleonora. I don't quite know about daily stretching, but a response-able team will surely need to be able to act beyond their responsibilities. And yes, teaching someone else to cook 'your' spaghetti would be good. If I as the leader I'd be looking to help everyone to do this (over a period of time). Some 'hero' leaders don't do this, because they love to be able to step in and rescue the day themselves. More aware 'host' leaders encourage people to help (and even save) each other.
In some environment, information (and skills) are a source of Power.
In my experience, The 'hero' leader Is not always Captain America, some 'heroes' are more 'villain': they need to be the smartest person in the room.
Yes Eleonora, this is the point. It's why 'host' leading is much more useful. The host leader doesn't need to be the smartest person, but they make sure that the right people are there. It's more of a background role but it does get more out of people by drawing in those with experience to contribute.