One size doesn't fit all

Your challenges really are unique to your team

In this AI-powered age it’s easy to believe that every problem has already been solved, that your team must be the same as every other team out there, that your problems are common problems that there are common solutions to.

But teams and organisations aren’t machines, they aren’t predictable cellular automata. They’re made up of people. People who have their own individual motivations, experiences beyond their job descriptions, and lives beyond their workplaces.

While technical/process/people challenges in teams might have the flavour of what’s come before, every single challenge is unique because it exists in the context of a group of infinitely variable human beings, and all the infinitely variable human beings who came before them.

As an example, recently I worked on a piece of technology that was being managed completely outside of the tech department at a client organisation. It had built up an organic interweaved technical and editorial process within the editorial department without much involvement or oversight from technology. Why? Because the editorial team was being led by a former software engineer who had brought these skills to the organisation at a time when they were needed, even though they weren’t in this person’s job description.

If I’d just done an arm’s-length audit of what technology existed here and made a recommendation based on a template or playbook, I’d have missed this key human factor - in equal parts strength and key-person risk.

You already have stuff that works - why throw it out?

But the main concern I have with working in a templated way is the need to throw out what’s already working. “Replatforming” is a really popular solution to reworking a tired or broken system or process, but it usually ends up being a project that requires throwing out the old, building the new and then migrating people and data to it.

When I go into a new place and I talk to the people who work with the old and supposedly broken thing, I often find that there are many things about the existing systems or processes that people like, that work well, that actually produce results. Or the old system is already integrated into something bigger - a portfolio, or an enterprise architecture, or a data pipeline.

“Replatforming” often carries the risk of fixing things that aren’t broken along with the genuine benefits it offers.

Very often, replatforming is the right approach, but in these situations great care must be taken to bring stakeholders along - find ways to incorporate the things that were working, the things that increased happiness, into the new system.

Other times, conversations with stakeholders will lead me to the conclusion that replatforming or big bang rethinks aren’t necessary at all. That the main risk or weakness I’ve been brought in to mitigate can be achieved through a series of nudges - fix what is broken, mitigate what is risky.

Building on existing practice

Now, just because every challenge is unique doesn’t mean we can’t build on experience or practices that have been developed by people much cleverer than me.

Indeed, I’m a huge fan of many well documented systems that I bring to my practice. Anyone who has met me has heard me talking about Nonviolent Communication, Thinking Environment, NFRs, the Agile Manifesto, devops culture, feature flags, communities of practice, and many more.

There are so many tools and theories out there that are massively beneficial and many of them will help to solve your problems and derisk your strategy. But you’ll maybe notice the things I’m a fan of tend to be more theoretical in nature and not tailored to specific problems. They’re tools, not products.

Indeed, the amazing marketing consultant I hired (let me know if you want her details) told me I would benefit from packaging my offer more as a product, but I resisted this the hardest. (OK, I do have a recommended process but this is just a recommendation to start from.)

Human means conversation

Ultimately, human-centric just means more conversation. Conversation with the person who hired me, with the team that’s got the challenge, and with their stakeholders and partner agencies and suppliers.

You hire me, you get someone who would rather talk something through and find a solution together. Someone who would rather empower you and your teams to make decisions collectively rather than blindside you with recommendations asking for your approval.

And I’d love to talk to you about your specific challenge on a free 30-minute video call so we can see if Fish Percolator is the right consultancy to help you solve it, or maybe I can direct you to someone else who is.

And it’s just more fun

One more thing: I also prefer to work in a human-centric way because humans are amazing. Every team is full of incredible, passionate individuals with lives that extend way beyond their desks. I want to get to know them, and I want to inject fun into their workplace.

Consultants have a reputation of blustering in, shouting the answers before they understand the questions, and generally bringing everyone on the team down. I want every engagement to leave the team feeling they’ve met someone they like working with, and with me getting to know some amazing people. So far, it’s always turned out that way.

(Oh, PS. I’m far from the only consultant who works in this way. There are loads of awesome people who work in human-centric ways if you know where to look. And I’m so grateful to have so many of you already in my professional and personal networks!)