Product Teams: Maximizing Creative Potential
In 1971, the linguist Noam Chomsky debated philosopher Michel Foucault. They discussed human nature and what potential social organizations might emerge as a result. Chomsky stated his belief that a fundamental part of human nature is the need for creativity. He located this creativity in the everyday construction of complex language patterns within human society. Consequently, he asserts the following
“Given a fundamental part of human nature is the need for creative work, creative inquiry without the arbitrary limiting effects of coercive institutions it stands to reason that a decent society should maximize the possibilities for that characteristic to be realized.”
Chomsky concluded that a federated, decentralized system of free association would be a better form of social organization than the one that currently exists.
Chomsky’s articulation of human nature has had a profound effect on my worldview. His statement requires us to have a vision for a more just society based on an analysis of society’s present conditions. It struck me over the past few years how much this resonates with my approach when moving organizations towards product teams.
A product team is a heterogenous group of individuals who self-organize towards solving a problem. The team iterates on both their outputs and processes, seeking to ensure that conditions steadily improve such that all members can maximize their creative abilities. It amplifies individual voices through facilitated activities that promote systematic consensus to arrive at decisions. No one person is superior to another as they each bring an exceptional set of skills to bear on a problem. Collective ownership of the strategy and product, is the ultimate goal.
The product team pushes against arbitrary hierarchies built within the modern firm. They do not believe in development-by-directive, as they are the closest to the users experiencing the problems they are working to solve. Since they collectively work towards a better team dynamic, they do not need guidance from superiors on improvements towards greater efficiency. Given the foundations of mutuality, built on respect for each other’s craft, they do not require traditional notions of discipline to ensure commitment to the corporate cause. They seek to contain all the skills needed to support a product, directly confronting siloed job functions. They work towards dismantling arbitrary systems and are willing to explore alternatives when pain exists.
For me, this is radical. It lies at the core of my thinking and teaching product teams. I view each new group I work with as a project: learning how to overcome arbitrary limiting effects within an organization to maximize creative potential. Creating a space where individuals are free to express their thoughts without repercussions, to determine how they wish to solve a problem, and to build a community of users has a powerful effect. It restores the dignity of people on the product team. Freed from the command-and-control practices within their organization, the product teams I work with enjoy coming to work. They enjoy the rigors of continuous collaboration, and they care about each other. I do not purport to know if product teams are the ideal way of organizing, but it does appear to represent a healthier, more human structure of work.
If product teams have the potential for radical transformation, why would an enterprise organization want to move in this direction? Because I have seen it produce exceptional products, with small teams. The organization requires fewer middle management layers, allowing those workers to retrain and take part in these teams. It restores worker dignity. For unionized organizations or cooperatives it can offer a way to build solidarity across job categories. This arrangement can serve as a unit of radicalism for socially-conscious companies, that could have empowering effects on marginalized communities both within their walls and outside of them.