Companies must be able to react to changes ever more quickly. A basic prerequisite for this is flexible management models with a sensible distribution of roles, such as in SAFe^® or Shared LeaderShift^© are planned. In Part one of this interview series the two experts focused on Barbara Wietasch (BWI) and Werner Siedl (WSI) The first part focuses on the different roles that exist in the two models for restructuring in companies and how they can meet at eye level. The following part two deals with the opportunities that these frameworks open up for companies. The first question is how these new leadership roles can be optimally filled: How do companies find the right leaders for the various roles? Another focus is on the foundations required for change in companies and what the specific challenges are for management and employees.

Note from the TCI editorial teamBarbara Wietasch (TCI Partner) and Werner Siedl (Managing Partner of TCI) conducted the interview, which was originally published as a spotlight on "Führung Neu Denken: Der Shared LeaderShift^© Podcast for companies in transition". To listen to the original interview, please find the stream here on SharedLeadershift.com.

How companies can fill their management roles correctly - Interview with Barbara Wietasch and Werner Siedl

Barbara Wietasch: Now that we have already talked in detail about the two models and the roles themselves, I would like to return to SAFe^® come back. Especially if it is implemented as a hybrid framework, I would be interested to know how the individual participants themselves can keep track of things. For example, how do they know what all these roles actually do, or who they can turn to if they have a question, for example about their own Training and further educationto their qualifications, to the next step in their career or even to conflicts? To whom or to which role do they turn, and how are these roles filled with life?

Werner Siedl: (laughs) Filling these roles with life ultimately always depends on the individual person, and it also depends on all the framework parameters. In my opinion, this is where we as external - or internal Lean-Agile coaches - play an essential role in helping to bring the roles to life, especially with regard to the framework parameters. With SAFe^® there are, as in all large frameworks, something like clear role descriptions of who has to do what. However, this is more of a kind of blueprint in which things are explained, tasks are assigned, which events are carried out, who has what responsibility and so on. In addition, of course, there is always the question: do these people perform this role, do they fulfill their role? Is the allocation of roles "just laid down" or is there real passion behind it? I think this is the really important thing.

There are many employees in companies who have good potential and talent - and care must be taken to ensure that they are allocated correctly. In the large corporations that I work with a lot, I often see that this doesn't work. Sometimes people are assigned to roles that they then take on, but this doesn't actually match their talents and skills. There is certainly room for improvement in this area. Because if people are assigned to the wrong role, then the final collaboration is all the more difficult: if I have a question and turn to the respective line manager or contact person, but these people don't really implement it and live it, so to speak. In my opinion, there is no universal blueprint at this point. Ultimately, the only thing that helps is to use what I call common sense and common sense. You really have to pay close attention to that.

What it means for the company to redistribute (management) responsibility

BWI: That brings us to the next important point: all of this is a profound cultural change, really giving responsibility to the team and empowering the individual. This is also an essential topic at Shared LeaderShift^©: We are of course talking about self-management, about Employee managementleadership in the team and corporate management - but we are also talking about leadership through clear rules, i.e. through governance, which must first be developed, but which is also developed together. These questions are likely to arise with SAFe^® in a similar way, i.e.: who is a good fit for which role, who has the right mindset and can therefore be easily integrated into the team? Scrum or in certain other agile teams?

WSI: In my experience, that really is one of the biggest challenges. It's the new roles, in whatever context they are to be filled, whether we're talking about lean agility or Shared LeaderShift^© or even SAFe^®The new roles and their tasks. To fill these new roles with the right people, you really have to make the effort and take a close look: What are these roles, what attributes are required, and what is available in today's organization. The baseline here must not be to simply say that a manager has to take on a leadership role again, precisely because work and collaboration as a whole are changing enormously.

That's why we have to be prepared to fundamentally rethink. This is a huge change that cannot be completed in a matter of days or months. This change actually takes years, and experience shows that you need constant support during this transition. For example, it's also about helping the management team to let go and to find answers to these questions within the company. In fact, this is one of my key topics for the management team: where can I find leaders? Which role can be taken on by whom? If a person hands over responsibility or delegates it to the teams - and is then no longer the boss and calls the shots, what exactly happens to this manager?

This is a key issue for us at SAFe^® and you also use this with Shared LeaderShift^© specifically with the triumvirate and in particular with the purpose and strategy. It is essential to focus on this - not only strategically, but also with the purpose: How does this succeed? How do companies then retain a manager and a leader? How can someone set an example? This is an exciting topic where there is still a lot to do, especially in Germany. (Laughs)

Elements such as Program Increment Planning unleash unexpected potential

BWI: I would say that this challenge is fundamental for companies in a whole range of countries. For many, this is a completely new journey and change, and the question naturally arises: How do the roles come to work well together in the first place? How do you manage this with the appropriate alignment and guard rails? At Shared LeaderShift^© we have the Purpose & Strategy Leader, which in turn can be fulfilled by a group or an individual or can be included in a role as an area of responsibility. What does this look like with SAFe^® out?

WSI: With Scaled Agile Framework^® this is very clearly defined and there are clear structures for overall implementation, collaboration and alignment. The "magic" of SAFe^® is program increment planning. This sprint planning involves the Scrum team or the agile team together and plans for the next two weeks. At SAFe^® this cycle is not only used for the sprints every two weeks, but there is an additional cycle that is scheduled for three months at a time. So you meet every three months in a program increment, and all those involved who are needed to create value in the program or project come together. This includes the teams and the higher-level roles, such as the product manager, release train engineer and system architect, but also the other roles such as the business owners, i.e. all the stakeholders who have personnel responsibility, commercial responsibility and ultimate decision-making responsibility. All these roles come together for two days and work out a structured plan for the next three months.

In fact, this is something special, because in this day and age we are often unable to reach key people at all. They are simply not available because their calendars are completely full. But when these key people are available for two days, it opens up completely new possibilities. For example, if I need a decision, I can go to the person immediately and get a decision within minutes, whereas otherwise it can take me weeks to even get the relevant people together. Another big advantage is that there really is a room where both top management and ordinary employees can meet. This also enables me to establish functioning communication across several levels. This is also an enormously exciting factor, as I have sometimes seen people who have been working together for 15 years really come together physically for the first time and talk to each other about topics that were previously a major problem. If they discuss this with each other in this setting, it can be solved relatively easily.

This is a wonderful element of SAFe^® and there are of course many special rules, but Program Increment Planning can be described as the core element in which productive specifications are made. Moreover, this is not a one-off event, but an iterative process. You make a draft and present it, then management provides feedback for changes and adjustments. Adaptation takes place immediately afterwards, and employees are also asked directly for their commitment. This is not a top-down approach and there is no irrevocable announcement from above. Instead, the employees each individual person has their own voice. This gives the whole thing a completely new dynamic. That's what fascinated me personally about it and why SAFe^® ultimately captivated me so much that I continue to work in precisely this environment.

BWI: I can well understand what that does when you can really see that something is changing. What happens is that people become stronger, they find their potential and they get involved. And as I said, hierarchies soften in the doing.

The interview on goal-oriented and successful leadership at eye level with SAFe^® and SharedLeaderShift^© led Barbara WietaschTCI Partner, and Werner SiedlManaging Partner of TCI.

Read on directly and delve deeper into topics

Part three of the interview deals specifically with implementation: for example, what does the implementation of SAFe^® in the company, what are the key challenges - and how can they be overcome? You will receive the answers in the continuation of the interview, which is expected to be published on Friday, August 7, 2020.

Read the other parts of the interview!

• Part one: Good management thanks to SAFe^® and Shared LeaderShift^©: Similarities and differences
• Part three: Engage employees properly, increase commitment and drive innovation: here's how!
• Part four: So that companies become better and better: A look into the future

More interesting articles on this topic:

• Agility despite hierarchy: from traditional leadership thinking to new heroes in the triumvirate
• Leadership redefined: How Shared-LeaderShift works in the company and leadership tasks are properly distributed
• What internal corporate communication says about management style and corporate culture!
• Successfully resolving current pain points: Proven solutions in the new TCI-Online event series

(Cover image: © ASDF | Adobe Stock)