expand_less
How to Play the Triangle
Organizations with enough differentiation between participants can end up struggling with the different desires/goals of those participants. But it doesn’t have to be a struggle, this can be a strength if we can dynamically align together to achieve the balance of our goals/desires.
Take something like the “iron triangle” where you can’t have quality, timeliness, and budget all achieved together (black dot in the middle). Using a tool like Where from Eric Harris-Braun (https://eric.harris-braun.com/blog/2021/09/16/id-377 ), or even just a shared board in physical space, you can say where you want the group to be focusing, where you think the current balance is, and then navigate with others to sense the wisdom of the whole. Without this, it can easily degrade into “so and so is a stickler for details that makes us late on delivery” or “She just seems concerned with money and not on a quality product.” When these are made personal we lose the collective wisdom that can generate our best collective output.
I also encourage people to list the consequences of not holding for one of the points outside, on the opposite angle. This way the group can see what the concern is and choose mindfully between the risks of each.
Can you recall a recent situation in your organization where this was or could be applied? What other tools for doing dynamic alignment have you played with?
How to Play the Triangle
Organizations with enough differentiation between participants can end up struggling with the different desires/goals of those participants. But it doesn’t have to be a struggle, this can be a strength if we can dynamically align together to achieve the balance of our goals/desires.
Take something like the “iron triangle” where you can’t have quality, timeliness, and budget all achieved together (black dot in the middle). Using a tool like Where from Eric Harris-Braun (https://eric.harris-braun.com/blog/2021/09/16/id-377 ), or even just a shared board in physical space, you can say where you want the group to be focusing, where you think the current balance is, and then navigate with others to sense the wisdom of the whole. Without this, it can easily degrade into “so and so is a stickler for details that makes us late on delivery” or “She just seems concerned with money and not on a quality product.” When these are made personal we lose the collective wisdom that can generate our best collective output.
I also encourage people to list the consequences of not holding for one of the points outside, on the opposite angle. This way the group can see what the concern is and choose mindfully between the risks of each.
Can you recall a recent situation in your organization where this was or could be applied? What other tools for doing dynamic alignment have you played with?