The Delicious Alignment of Distributed Ownership (The Blue/Gold Divide)
Where you once had misaligned roles that created frustration on all sides, the distributed ownership model presents a far more functional setup, where everyone can deliver on the pieces of work that make the most sense for them.
Photo by Sindy Süßengut
Technologists are often put in charge of programs that they don’t have background for, simply because those programs are online or digital in nature. “Hey, you’re the website person, so we’re putting you in charge of this online fundraising campaign.”
Conversely, many people in non-technology roles commonly find themselves in mind-numbing technical conversations that they aren’t prepared for or interested in. Fundraisers who need new features on the website, for instance, might find themselves in meetings with developers about website platforms and security models.
This happens because we’re not acknowledging that there are multiple highly distinct skill-sets required to successfully develop a technology product.
Specifically, you need a key partnership between the technology-driven product owner, and the content-driven product user. We call this the distributed ownership model.
That phrase -- distributed ownership -- can make some people nervous. “You can’t have shared ownership,” they protest. "The boss needs one butt to kick!”
But if we’re honest, the one butt system doesn’t work anyway. No fundraiser or communications staffer has the time to get fully up to speed on the range of possibilities offered by technology. No technologist has time to keep pace with the ever evolving strategic requirements of fundraising, not to mention communications and programs at the same time.
So if you give one person the whole job, they’re destined to fall behind. You have baked-in a fundamental misalignment of goals which creates frustration on both fronts.
However, the distributed ownership model presents a far more functional setup, where everyone can deliver on the pieces of work that make the most sense for them. The digital product owner owns and focuses on the intelligence and smooth function of the architecture and the primary user owns and focuses on the informed prioritization of the functionality that will serve their needs.
So where you once had misaligned roles that created frustration on all sides, the distributed ownership model presents a far more functional setup, where everyone can deliver on the pieces of work that make the most sense for them.
In fact once it’s up and running, it can be hard for people to imagine they ever did it without these roles. An upcoming post ("Flight of the Bumblebee") shows a great example of this in action.
Everyone Likes to Geek Out On Something
Here’s the key underlying principle of the distributed ownership model: let people focus on their areas of interest and expertise. Let people geek out — productively — on the piece of the puzzle where they can make the most impact. And give people on both sides the trusted allies they need to move the ball forward.
There is a divide. We call it the gold/blue divide. And it’s really important.
Some people (namely the product team, which we informally refer to as the blue team) love to geek out on building, improving, and optimizing the living stuffing out of a tool. Give them a problem or an issue with the system, and they love to dig into it, craft some options for how to solve it, compare money and timeline implications, and laser in on the strategic costs and benefits of the possible paths ahead.
Other people (the gold team, informally) would much prefer to spend their time using that tool in service of the strategic objectives of their work — be it programs, fundraising, communications, or anything else. They know the tools are critically important for them to deliver on their work. And they are the de facto experts in what is working with the tool, what needs to be fixed, and what new features might supercharge what they're trying to accomplish. But they have little to no interest in spending hours with developers and designers or working through detailed underlying complexities. They have ideas and strategic direction and they'd love for someone they trust to figure out the how of it.
It’s rare that the same person has the same appetite for both sides of the divide, but it’s excessively common for a person to be assigned to both sides. Management thinks, figure out how to email and then email, it makes sense to put those two things together! But does it? One is developing technology systems, and the other is writing compelling copy for a particular audience. What incredibly distinct skillsets they require.
These are both critically important roles and they must work together harmoniously in order for a product or system to be created and maintained at a high level. When we default to giving someone the full spectrum of both duties — which is the inevitable result without a defined distributed ownership structure — we're setting that person up to fail on one or both sides of the equation.
A great gold team tool user is passionate about the work being accomplished using the tool and constantly paying attention to ways it can be improved. A great blue team tool optimizer is driven to improve the tool to help her gold team counterparts grasp opportunities for greater efficiency or impact.
So that's the key underlying principle of the distributed ownership model: let people focus on their areas of interest and expertise. Let people geek out — productively — on the piece of the puzzle where they can make the most impact. And give people on both sides the trusted allies they need to move the ball forward.
When work is fun for the staff-person and productive for the organization, everyone benefits and you start to see the real superpowers emerge.
Flight of the Bumblebee
At a high level, this "Flight of the Bumblebee" diagram illustrates the beauty of the system working, when the blue team (tool optimizers) and the yellow team (tool users) work in harmony
At a high level, this "Flight of the Bumblebee" diagram illustrates the beauty of the system working, when the blue team (tool optimizers) and the gold team (tool users) work in harmony:
Let's say the gold team person is a fundraiser, or a programs person. They're using the CRM or the website to accomplish parts of their work. Naturally this gold teamer periodically gets ideas about ways the tool can be improved in order to help them execute on their work more efficiently, strategically, or impactfully.
With the distributed ownership model in place, instead of this gold teamer having to try to figure out how to execute on this idea alone -- navigating the confusing world of developers and platforms and limitless technical options -- this gold teamer now knows exactly who to go to for help: the product manager on the product team. The blue teamer.
They sit down and have a conversation. Questions are asked, clarifications are sought, objectives are explained. And then the real beauty of this system happens. The product manager heads off onto the various complex and looping paths required to work through technology complexities, and the gold teamers go back to their work!!! They go back to fundraising, or communications, or programs. Which is exactly what they want to be doing, and what the organization wants them to do. They're spending their time working in their area of expertise.
At some point the parties come back together and discuss options. "Well," says the product manager, "we have three options. Let me explain the costs and benefits and let's figure out the best path from here." They have another productive meeting and decide on next steps. And then more magic: everyone goes back to focusing on their own area of expertise. The blue teamer problem geeks out on solving the technology problem and the gold teamer goes back to fundraising or communications or programs.
The blue teamer, of course, continues to pull in the gold team colleague throughout the process, at each point where their subject matter domain knowledge is needed, and together they move the project forward hitting its strategic mark, each playing their essential part in the opera.
It's such a simple concept, but so profoundly helpful in practice. It's about putting everyone in a position where they know exactly where to go, can work together in service of the organization's objectives, and can spend their time focused on their areas of interest and expertise.
Alignment Dissolves Resistance
When roles are well defined — when people get the support they need and digital products like the website and CMS start to hit a new trajectory of quality and utility — turfiness starts to dissipate.
Concern about turf wars is natural, especially when you're accustomed to pervasive technology dysfunction. Often, turf around tech systems like the website CMS or the CRM database has been grabbed because of the frustration of systems working poorly and making people's jobs harder. Someone gets fed up, leads a temporary reclamation project, and thereafter holds onto their new turf for dear life.
And yet, the frustrations persist. Why? Because it takes real expertise to do more than create stopgap solutions. Yes, you may ensure your contact list isn’t used by another team, but you don’t have the time to build a robust solution that gives you a 360 degree understanding of your contacts. So your contact is safe, but your understanding is incomplete. That would require coordination, collaboration, and trust, as well as an in depth understanding of the different technical options out there in the world and someone to wrangle all the data together. Who’s going to do all of that? Someone who’s already busy with another full-time job? Some external IT consultant clocking in every day with limited understanding and context about your organization?
When roles are well defined — when people get the support they need and digital products like the website and CMS start to hit a new trajectory of quality and utility — turfiness starts to dissipate. Give people a real ally who sits down and really listens to their key concerns… who understands their importance, and dedicates themselves protecting their data and their mission… who helps deliver better products for them to work with and improved processes for their team’s everyday use…. In that scenario people tend to happily come on board. Who wouldn't.
Better alignment is what the entire distributed ownership model is about, and what the entire product team approach is about. How can we find both larger structures and smaller interventions every day, where we can better align the structures and roles so that everyone has excitement and incentive about rowing in the same direction and making each other more effective?