[Yow! 2019] 3 insights from 4 years at Spotify

(versus 14 years at ThoughtWorks)
Jason Yip
Senior Agile Coach
Spotify NYC
@jchyip
3 insights from 4 years
at Spotify

This talk is about
what I’ve learned at
Spotify over 4 years
(long time for a hypergrowth
company)

Before Spotify, I was
at ThoughtWorks for
around 14 years.
(mostly in Australia!)

I’ve picked 3 insights
that I think might be
most interesting.

Insight #1:
Aligned autonomy is
an ongoing struggle.

Insight #2:
Building teams in the
context of high growth
requires diﬀerent
assumptions.

Insight #3:
Consulting companies
are better at building
high-performing
teams fast.

What do I mean by
“aligned autonomy”?

https://blog.crisp.se/2016/08/23/henrikkniberg/alignment-at-scale-agile-africa-keynote

What’s so hard about
aligned autonomy?

Hypergrowth!
(aka scale)
Politics
(aka people are involved)
“Air Sandwich”

Does the following look
familiar to you?

Clear vision and future direction.
Day-to-day action.

“An Air Sandwich is a strategy that
has clear vision and future direction
on the top layer, day-to-day action on
the bottom, and virtually nothing in
the middle...”
Nilofer Merchant
https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/collaborative-strategy-with-nilofer-merchant/

“We need X,
ﬁgure it out!”
doesn’t
actually work

1 Tribe
~20 people
Multiple Product
Area / Tribes
~200 people(After peeling oﬀ an entire Mission along the way)
2015 2019

AKA more than
doubling every year.
(even with exits and backﬁll)

https://labs.spotify.com/2014/03/27/spotify-engineering-culture-part-1/

“Anything that’s human is
mentionable, and anything
that is mentionable can be
more manageable.”
Fred Rogers

What I don’t think
works for alignment

From Spotify: Plan Do Flush issue 5

What I think works
for alignment

“Catchball”
(back-and-forth dialogue)
“Rhythm”
(aka meetings)
Boundary objects
(shared models and maps)

“Catchball” is a
Toyota/Lean metaphor.

Imagine throwing a ball
to someone, they throw
it back, you throw it
back, etc.

Alignment dialogue
should be like this.

Alignment dialogue is
not one-way.

Alignment dialogue is
typically not just one
back-and-forth...

...especially when it
matters.

This doesn’t get any
back-and-forth.

“I’m sure they know we’re
depending on them.”

“We’ve marked them as
a dependency in a
spreadsheet that none of
us regularly check.”

The following seems to
work…
(at least better)

“We’ve talked directly about this.”
“They have us in their OKRs.”
(or whatever their planning approach is)
“We have a regular sync.”

Serendipity
Informality
1:1
Deliberate
Explicit
n:n

● “R&D” = “research & development” = product development arm of
Spotify as opposed to business operations
● “Squad” = cross-functional team
● “Tribe” = collection of Squads working on a shared mission
● “TPDI” = 4 main functions we have in R&D: Technology, Product,
Design, Insights. They all have independent reporting lines.
● Tribe leadership team - Typical consists of one lead from each of TPDI
but varies depending on context or other circumstances ← (I typically
operate here)
Crash course in Spotify jargon

“Tribe R&D Leads”
Open-ended
Participants Agenda
Key events Problem-solving
Whatever is top of mind
Tribe Leads (TPDI + Coach)

Open-ended
Participants Agenda
Add PMs and CLs

Open-ended
Participants Agenda
Add PMs and CLs
Add Senior ICs

The larger the meeting the
longer it takes to get to depth.

“R&D Leads”
“R&D Leads”
“Tribe Leads”
“Squad Delivery syncs”
Open-ended
problem-solving
Smaller groups
More focused agenda

Started to feel like
meetings were
redundant...

“R&D Leads”
“R&D Leads”
“Tribe Leads”
“Squad Delivery
syncs”
“Tribe Leads”
“OKR sync”
“Squad leads sync”
Open-ended
problem-solving
Smaller groups
More focused agenda
Less redundancy
More focused agenda

The less perspectives in a meeting
the less likely problems are detected.

“A term from the sociology of
science, “boundary object” refers
to an object (physical or mental)
that allows groups with diﬀerent
goals to coordinate their actions.”
Brian Marick
http://www.exampler.com/blog/2011/05/22/business-value-as-a-boundary-object-2/

https://www.jpattonassociates.com/read-this-ﬁrst/glad-we-all-agree-2/

A shared model or
“boundary object”
facilitates real over
fake alignment.

Some shared models
tried/used in 1 Tribe.

Flywheels
This is Amazon’s
ﬂywheel. Replace with
actual Spotify ﬂywheels
that I’m not comfortable
sharing publicly.

“Design hierarchy of needs”
https://medium.theuxblog.com/design-hierarchy-of-needs-the-product-owners-guide-29ceb28205ae

Campaign Setup Segmentation Creative
Editor
Scheduling A/B Testing Rendering User
Protection
Delivery Reporting
Process/Journey Map

Machine
learning
System context diagrams
https://c4model.com/

If the model is too
simple, it’s misleading.

If the model is too fancy,
it’s confusing.

Whatever works is the
right model or map.

What works may change
over time.

Hypergrowth!
(aka scale)
Politics
(aka people are involved)
“Air Sandwich”
Because...

Therefore...
“Catchball”
(back-and-forth dialogue)
“Rhythm”
(aka meetings)
Boundary objects
(Shared models and maps)

What do I mean by
“high growth”?

What’s so hard about
building teams with
high growth?

Can’t rely on
cultural osmosis
Can’t assume
stable teams

This is kind of
straight-forward...

The new people
outnumber the veterans.

Default culture is
NOT what pre-exists.

Default culture
becomes whatever
new people bring
with them.

What I don’t think
works for building
teams with high
growth

“This will eventually
be a separate team
so we might as well
split it now…”

“We need to split the
team because teams
shouldn’t have more
than N members.”

Unclear on mission,
missing skills
Disengage or quit
Fill time with low-value activity
Get bored

What I think works
for building teams
with high growth

Deliberate cultureStructure follows strategy
Organic org design

“Unless structure follows
strategy, ineﬃciency
results.”
Alfred D. Chandler Jr

● “Squad” = cross-functional team
● “Tribe” = collection of Squads working on a
shared mission
Reminder: Spotify jargon

(For us) Tribe missions
are much more stable
than Squad missions.

Tribes should be more
stable than Squads.

Emphasise Tribe identity
over Squad identity

Encourage movement and
collaboration across Squads

NOTE: The point is NOT
“Tribes should be more
stable than Squads.”

Structure should follow
strategy

This is how I
approach splitting
(Squads, Tribes, etc.)

Wait for seams to
appear, that is, clunkiness in
communication ﬂow and interaction
patterns, especially meetings.

Nudge things apart, that
is, separate rhythms and events.

Formalise the split. If
done correctly, this is mostly an
acknowledgement and non-event.

The target reaction
is something like
“Finally!” OR “Well,
obviously!”

1.Wait for seams to
appear
2.Nudge things apart
3.Formalise the split

1. Artifacts
2. Espoused Beliefs and Values
3. Basic Underlying Assumptions
Edgar Schein’s 3 Levels of Culture

There is no such thing
as universal “bad
culture” but a culture
can be incompatible
with a strategy.

1. Diagnosis
2. Guiding Policy
3. Coherent Actions
Richard Rumelt Strategy Kernel

1. I can’t accept the diagnosis
2. I can’t accept the guiding policies
3. Therefore I won’t engage in the
actions because they will seem
nonsensical.
An incompatible culture means...

If you are not deliberate
about culture, you will
have random strategic
problems.

Default culture
becomes whatever
new people bring
with them...

… unless you a much
more deliberate
about occupying that
space.

1. Role modelling
2. Systems (processes, tools, etc.)
3. Symbols
3 tools for deliberate culture

Because...
Can’t rely on
cultural osmosis
Can’t assume
stable teams

Therefore...
Deliberate culture
Structure follows strategy
Organic org design

Why are consulting
companies faster at
building teams?

Revenue is based on
billable hours.

Clients don’t want to
pay for setup time.

Get fast at building
high-performing teams.

What I think matters to
build high-performing
teams fast

Focus on craft,
not mission
Practice teaming
and re-teaming
Same training,
same assumptions

You can hit the ground
running, if you don’t
have to stop to negotiate
roles, rhythms, rituals.

When I started at
ThoughtWorks

“I don’t know you but I
can assume you’re into
XP and Martin Fowler.”

AKA being much more
particular in hiring
(though watch out for D&I)

At some point after I
started: ThoughtWorks
University

https://www.thoughtworks.com/careers/graduates
“You’ll spend ﬁve weeks with
ThoughtWorkers from around the
world, discovering our values,
practices and principles, and
hearing all the best stories.”

AKA much more
involved onboarding
(e.g., 4 - 6 weeks)

“we need teams of
missionaries, not teams of
mercenaries.”
John Doerr, via Marty Cagan

Enthusiasm for purpose
doesn’t compensate for
lack of skill.

Skilled craft doesn’t
excuse participation in
an unethical mission.

Consultants focus on
craft because clients
are typically not that
interesting...

“Time spent on
Open Source”
“How interesting
is the client?”

Craft-building sessions
I think worked

Brown Bag sessions
Facilitate workshops or presentations on
interesting topics over lunch at the client
or back at the oﬃce.

Hack Nights
Meet-up after work to work on personal
or Open Source projects together.

https://www.meetup.com/Progressive-Hack-Night/events/hrkfjryzqbgb/

Coding Dojos
A pair demonstrates how they solve a
problem with an audience.
I especially liked the randori style with
rotation and audience participation.

Mob Code Review
I remember doing this with reviewing
coding submissions. I think this is a
very eﬀective design taste calibration
activity.

How should this
happen when the work
IS interesting?

Still have these kind of
extracurricular craft
events?
(practice vs working)

Modify how work is
done to accommodate
more practice?
(aka regular on-the-job training)

Unless something else
pops up, I’d like to
explore this next year.

Consulting
company
Product
company
Typical lifetime of team
Weeks to months Multiple quarters

“If it hurts, do it more often”
https://martinfowler.com/bliki/FrequencyReducesDiﬃculty.html

Therefore...
Focus on craft,
not mission
Practice teaming
and re-teaming
Same training,
same assumptions

...and non-consulting
companies can do
those things too!

3 insights from 4
years at Spotify

Questions?
Ideas?
Advice?Jason Yip
@jchyip
https://www.spotifyjobs.com/

How does what I said
about alignment ﬁt
with what Gene said
about lunch factor?Jason Yip
@jchyip
https://www.spotifyjobs.com/

[Yow! 2019] 3 insights from 4 years at Spotify

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Tendances

Tendances (20)

Similaire à [Yow! 2019] 3 insights from 4 years at Spotify

Similaire à [Yow! 2019] 3 insights from 4 years at Spotify (20)

Plus de Jason Yip

Plus de Jason Yip (20)

Dernier

Dernier (17)

[Yow! 2019] 3 insights from 4 years at Spotify