In the world of agile methodologies, one question that often arises is whether removing committees can significantly reduce time to market. Some claim that this can lead to a reduction of up to 50%. But is that really true? My experience suggests that while the figure may be exaggerated, the impact of committees on decision-making and agility is profound.
The Myth of the 50% Reduction
Let’s be honest: the idea that you can cut time to market by half simply by eliminating committees sounds a bit too good to be true. As the saying goes, “Lies, damn lies, and statistics.” The reality is that while the exact percentage may be questionable, the detrimental effects of committees on decision-making are very real.
The Problem with Committees
In my current engagements, I’ve observed that both formal and informal committees often slow down the decision-making process. Here’s how:
Decision Delays: When a decision is needed, it often requires the input of multiple stakeholders. This can lead to lengthy discussions, disagreements, and the need to involve even more people. The result? Prolonged decision-making that stalls progress.
Stalled Teams: While committees deliberate, teams are left waiting. This not only affects morale but also impacts deadlines. Teams need clarity to move forward, and when they’re held up by committee processes, they can’t deliver value.
A Real-World Example
Let me share a specific example from a recent engagement. We were tasked with creating new procedures and policies to support a new way of working. The team on the ground wanted to use modern document management systems like SharePoint or Google Docs for collaboration. This would allow for quick feedback and iterative improvements.
However, the committee insisted on a more traditional approach: sending a final draft for review to a long list of stakeholders, who would then provide feedback through a cumbersome process involving Excel sheets. This not only delayed the project but also stifled innovation and responsiveness.
The Cost of Traditional Practices
The difference between these two approaches is stark. With modern collaboration tools, we could have produced a near-final document in a matter of days. Instead, we faced a drawn-out process that could take six to twelve weeks. This is where the real cost lies—not just in time to market, but in lost opportunities.
Missed Opportunities: Every moment spent in committee is a moment where potential business opportunities slip away. If decisions are delayed, competitors can swoop in and capture the market share that could have been yours.
Agility vs. Staging: Committees represent a traditional, staged approach to management that is at odds with the agile mindset. Agile is about collaboration, speed, and adaptability. Committees, on the other hand, create barriers that hinder these principles.
The Need for Change
It’s clear to me that committees need to be re-evaluated in the context of modern business practices. The agility of a team can be severely compromised by outdated decision-making structures.
Empower Teams: Instead of relying on committees, organisations should empower teams to make decisions. This not only speeds up processes but also fosters a culture of accountability and innovation.
Adapt to Change: In today’s fast-paced environment, the ability to adapt quickly is crucial. Companies that cling to traditional practices risk falling behind more agile competitors.
Conclusion
While the claim that removing committees can reduce time to market by 50% may be an exaggeration, the underlying truth is undeniable: committees slow down decision-making and hinder agility. The real question is, how many opportunities are you willing to let slip away while waiting for a committee to make a decision?
If you’re in a traditional organisation, consider how you can streamline your processes and empower your teams. The future of your business may depend on it.
Thank you for reading! If you found this post insightful, please like, follow, and subscribe. I’m always open to discussions about agile, scrum, or DevOps, so feel free to book a coffee chat with me through Naked Agility.
So the question is, it’s said that you can reduce time to market by up to 50 simply by removing committees. True or false and why?
Um, I would say that the 50 is probably false, right? Somebody’s just made up, you know, it lies, damn lies in statistics, right? Or was it, um, 99.32 of all statistics are made up on the spot, right? Kind of thing.
Um, but committees, and I’m seeing that in engagements I’m currently in, that the committees of people being brought together, whether formal or informal committees, right?
Um, to make decisions result in those decisions taking long. It results in those decisions taking longer. You know, we need to make a decision.
Uh, we need to decide that, I don’t know, um, decision, right? But we need to be a bad decision and, um, all right, in order to make this decision, you know, we need Bob and we need Allison and we need Jamie and we need Roberta and, you know, we need Maria. We need all these people together in order to make this decision, and suddenly you’ve got disagreement and they’re pulling in other people.
Sometimes you just need to make a decision, right? And if it’s the wrong decision, we’ll fix it later.
But we need to move forward because while they’re collaborating on this, um, you’ve got a bunch of people sitting about not doing anything because the team is sitting there waiting for the decision to be made so that they can do the work, and they have their deadlines as well.
Um, what? Oh, I just thought of a kind of generic but specific example, um, from an engagement I’m working at the moment.
Is that there’s quite a lot of, um, procedures and policies that need to be created, more rules, right? The procedures and policies need to be amended, created, or adopted for a new way of working.
And what one group of people would like to do, the people doing the work, right? The people doing the work on the bottom would like to be able to do is they’d like to be able to just use a document management system like, uh, SharePoint or Google Docs, right? Put the doc in there and then send a link to the people that need to collaborate on this doc, and then they can come in on that link and add comments and collaborate and make sure, you know, make the little changes that we can then accept using the review functionality of these documents, you know, modern document management techniques.
But the people on the other side were like, “No, no, no, no, no, no, we’re not, we’re, we don’t work that way. We’re not going to do it that way.”
You send us your final draft for the document, and then we’ll take it off. We’ll go around all of the people that in our organization, right? And you don’t know how many that is. That could be hundreds of people need to, will be emailed this document and have their input, and then we’ll have a group of people who maintain an Excel sheet with a list of all the changes and issues in the document, and then we’ll give you that back and you can, you can, you can make your change.
First way, modern document management techniques was specifically designed and developed to solve this problem, right?
But they don’t want to do that, so that’s a policy and procedure or a way of working that is getting in the way. That committee is getting in the way of delivering value, and I would say in that circumstance, it’s way more than 50, uh, of the time to market is increased by having, by removing that capability, right? You could have a quick collaboration on a document, and in a couple of days of a little bit of back and forth on this document, come out with something that is 99 of the way there.
Um, or we can spend six to twelve weeks going around with this other way of working where it’s more, we do our bit, we hand off to you, you then do your bit, you hand that back, we make the changes, and then hand it back to you, and then you do your bit, right? That’s that difference between collaborative and agile and staging in traditional, right?
So I think, um, committees are part of that story. Committees are part of that staging traditional management practices.
Um, and they really, really, they need, they need to go as a concept.
Um, committees and steering and all of these kind of things.
Um, so yeah, I fully think that 50 is not unreasonable, but I think it’s definitely underselling the effects or the impact of, um, or committees on your ability to get decisions made and take advantage of business opportunities, right? Think about all of those business opportunities that are floating by that if you just had a team that was able to take advantage of that business opportunity, but you can’t because the document’s tied up in committee.
How much money, how much additional capability, not just time to market, but how much, how, forget time to market, how many opportunities does your business lose out on?
Because by the time the decision is made, it’s no longer an option, or your competitors got there.
And especially if you’re a big traditional bricks and mortar organisation, like I mentioned Royal Bank of Scotland before, right? Like the Royal Bank of Scotland, uh, and you’re having to compete with the likes of Monzo, right?
Small, nimble tech-based organisations that are able to move a lot faster. They don’t even have to move a whole hell of a lot faster; they just have to move faster than you, right? That’s all they have to do, move faster than you to build a market for themselves and start stealing your customers.
Thanks for watching the video. If you enjoyed it, please like, follow, and subscribe. I always reply to comments, and if you want to have a chat about this or anything else, agile, scrum, or DevOps, then please book a coffee with me through Naked Agility.
