“Management as a Service” in Agile

The hierarchy of Scientific Management appears ineffective in many areas. It doesn’t serve the modern Complex environment. It slows decision making by routing decisions through slow escalations. However, we cannot just point out the flaws of a widely-used system. We need an alternative which works better than the traditional approach.

Successful technology companies make teams more independent.  Management needs to support those teams.  This distributed approach to management I refer to as “Management as a Service” (MaaS).

People are probably aware of other “as a Service” concepts, of which “Software as a Service” (SaaS) is the best known. Software as a Service is a model for software distribution.  Traditionally a software user would pay an End User licence and receive a software application.  This would be run locally by the user.  For a small application (for example a spreadsheet) this might be run on a user’s personal computer.  For a larger application, the software would be installed on a local server.  The organization would be responsible for the infrastructure, servers, and the installation and maintenance of the software.

By contrast in a SaaS system, the user, not the organization, is placed at the centre.  The software is installed by a cloud provider who hosts the applications and manages the infrastructure.  The user accesses applications as needed.  Since the cloud provider has extensive infrastructure, these applications can scale to fit the user need.  Rather than gaining access to software only through a local IT team, the user now uses software as needed.  And the software is automatically improved and updated by the supplier.

Traditional management

Traditional management is similar to traditional software installation.  All activities badged as “management” are accessed through the “official channel” – an individual’s single manager.  The assumption is that one manager can supply all functions for an extensive team. This is rooted in Scientific Management ideas that a manager is more experienced, competent and skilled in all areas than their workers.

Agile team activities

However, Agile development looks to use the team’s skills and knowledge. We believe in lowest viable level decision making.  Individuals and teams should be empowered to make their own decisions.  This will improve speed, agility and responsiveness for the organization.  The key word here is “viable”.  The teams and individuals will not be able to do everything unaided.  So we should look at what support they will need in order to succeed.

Some activities will naturally sit with the teams.  For example most people would agree that planning works best with team involvement (despite Taylor’s principles).  Planning benefits from tight feedback loops and delays are very impactful.  Given the choice of integration of planning into the team against having an external expert planner, the integrated approach will generally be best.  There is however an associated cost.  We need to teach our teams to plan, and in most cases we are willing to do this.

For other options, the cost/benefit trade-off may be different.  Should we delegate budgeting to the teams?  Again there is a cost.  We would need to teach the team leads to manage budgets.  We need them to understand about P&L for their team.  There is likely to be some benefit.  Some organizations have gone down the route of teams as micro-organizations with P&L independence.  However, the answer is less clear.  The feedback loops on budgeting are typically slower.  The knowledge is less clearly tied to the team’s day-to-day activities. 

Agile management services

For each service we need to assess this trade-off. Where, and by whom is the work best performed? First of course, we need to consider what these services are. Is there a process model for what management functions exist in the organisation?

This flips round the viewpoint of management to something which fits better with an Agile approach.  Rather than putting the manager at the heart, we put the team at the centre.  We should look at what the individuals and the team may need in order to succeed.  There may be many different functions which management performs. These may need several individuals to support the team. Reversing the traditional direction is key to empowering the team.

Agile development is often seen as a threat to management.  In my view, agile development will lead to a shift in the traditional management role from Scientific Management.  Micro-management and controlling managers will not mesh effectively with agile development.  The key to success is to be very clear what management is in the organization and what it contributes to the teams. A starting point is to understand what functions a manager performs. A model such as Mintzberg (1973) can help here. Then we can decide who in the organisation will deliver each function for the team. 

Organisational culture

A further key role for a manager is the development of the culture and environment within which the team thrives.  This is touched on in some of the Mintzberg roles.  In Takeuchi and Nonaka’s original paper, they pictured a very high level of team autonomy.  They saw the management role as limited to building the environment and slightly steering the team.  This is a process they referred to as “subtle control”.  Rather than being directive or micromanaging, the management role is to ensure the environment for success.

Setting the right environment is clearly an important area for management.  And many of these Plays fall into the category of ensuring the team has the environment they need to succeed.  Takeuchi and Nonaka saw a role for management which included:

• Selecting the right people for the project team, including modifying the team as needed to ensure they have the skills and personalities to succeed.
• Creating an open work environment which encourages collaboration.
• Encouraging engineers to go into the field and listen to customers
• Establishing an evaluation and reward system based on group performance.  Ensuring that this steers teams towards the right behaviour.
• Tolerating and anticipating mistakes and building a learning culture

The historical view would have been that the manager would perform all of these activities.  In Taylor’s view, the separation of worker and management functions was key to success.  This leads to a hierarchical structure.

The “Management as a Service” model reframes this view.  It puts the individual at the centre of the activities.  In this model, each of these areas of activity can be seen as services.  The key role of the manager is to ensure that these services are supplied.  They do not have to perform the services themselves.  Indeed it is unlikely they will be the ideal person to perform every service.

Good practices

Rethinking management structure along Agile lines will never be straightforward. We put teams and individuals at the centre.  Having done that, we need to ensure those teams and individuals are able to access the services they need.  This is part of building the right environment in which the team will be supported.

The first step is to look at what management functions a team might require. Using a standard management approach such as Mintzberg’s work, we might identify:

• Strategic guidance
• Market guidance
• Resource access
• Mentoring and review
• Coaching and development
• Culture and environment

Then we should consider who will supply these functions. Market guidance for example might be best ensured by embedding a Product Owner into the team.  Mentoring and review could be addressed by having an experienced Team Lead assigned to each team.  Peer review might be implemented to improve product quality.  Development of junior engineers might be managed by senior engineers.

There is no “right answer”. Like all of the Plays, you need to consider your own organisation. Whatever you choose, make sure that all management services are covered and ensure team members know where each management service is from.

In some cases services which might traditionally be performed by a manager are delegated to the team (for example some decision making). Make sure there is clear agreement and training when the team are assuming these responsibilities.