Oh my gawd! I can't believe I've just read a post that says "When everyone’s responsible, no one is" in 2024!
Rafa, I sympathize with your worries. But you should replace "ownership" with "blame" in your article. Your whole article confuses "blame" with "ownership" and with "responsibility"!
Let's face it, EVERYTHING in the world is a shared responsibility. You and your wife share responsibility for your shared life!
The Bystander Effect that you mention is MUCH MORE LIKELY TO HAPPEN, when only one person is responsible (that's the "it's not my job" quip we so often hear in our teams).
So, no. I don't agree, and I think that the illusion is that in a system (like a software team, or company) that putting the "blame" (that's the word you are implicitly referring to with the car example) on some individual will magically motivate them to be perfect in their job! NO!
As Deming put it: “The problem is not the people; the problem is the system. If you want to improve performance, you must work on the system.”
It's the management responsibility to make sure that shared ownership works, because in a team, all the code is shared, the delivery is shared, and the quality is shared. It's inevitable!
The DRI culture that Apple started is a cop-out by managers who want IC's to be responsible for their own failures to create a system where teams can excel!
Hey, Vasco! Thank you for sharing your perspective. I really value the opportunity to dive deeper into this topic.
First, I want to clarify that my article IS NOT ABOUT BLAME but about ownership as a tool for clarity and accountability. If you focus on blame, you might be thinking about failure; I'm thinking about success. CLEAR OWNERSHIP ensures tasks don’t fall through the cracks, NOT to assign FAULT or expect PERFECTION, as you mentioned.
My article highlights the dangers of shared ownership: ambiguity, inaction, and the Bystander Effect. However, it doesn’t argue against shared responsibility for values like quality, collaboration, or team success. In fact, one could argue that clear ownership enhances team-wide responsibility because it creates a structure for accountability.
Regarding the Bystander Effect, I see it arising when responsibility is ambiguous or overly distributed. Clear accountability helps combat this by ensuring someone steps up to drive progress. I'm honestly struggling to understand how you can disagree on this point.
I agree with Deming's quote! And that's exactly what a process (system) like the DRI solves. I view it as a tool to reduce confusion, not shift blame. It ensures tasks have a clear driver while still relying on collaboration and team effort.
Thanks again for your comment—while you misunderstood my point or we fundamentally disagree, it’s clear we both care deeply about building thriving teams. I’d love to hear more of your thoughts!
I’ll think through this and come up with my take on the DRI, and why I think that it does exactly the opposite (creates confusion, disenfranchisement, and ultimately failure).
But that will be a bigger post, I think. So I’ll ping you on it.
Full disclosure: I worked with managers in Apple’s geo vicinity that tried to copy the concept from Apple to another company, and have first-hand experience on the consequences of that concept as applied in practice. So I also have some strong opinions (some might say allergy) about that concept in the first place :)
That sounds like a great idea. Please let me know once you wrote it.
While I stick to my values and principles, I'm always open to challenge my ideas, processes and systems, which I always adapt to the company and environment I'm working on. Definitely, what it works in X doesn't have to work in Y company.
Oh my gawd! I can't believe I've just read a post that says "When everyone’s responsible, no one is" in 2024!
Rafa, I sympathize with your worries. But you should replace "ownership" with "blame" in your article. Your whole article confuses "blame" with "ownership" and with "responsibility"!
Let's face it, EVERYTHING in the world is a shared responsibility. You and your wife share responsibility for your shared life!
The Bystander Effect that you mention is MUCH MORE LIKELY TO HAPPEN, when only one person is responsible (that's the "it's not my job" quip we so often hear in our teams).
So, no. I don't agree, and I think that the illusion is that in a system (like a software team, or company) that putting the "blame" (that's the word you are implicitly referring to with the car example) on some individual will magically motivate them to be perfect in their job! NO!
As Deming put it: “The problem is not the people; the problem is the system. If you want to improve performance, you must work on the system.”
It's the management responsibility to make sure that shared ownership works, because in a team, all the code is shared, the delivery is shared, and the quality is shared. It's inevitable!
The DRI culture that Apple started is a cop-out by managers who want IC's to be responsible for their own failures to create a system where teams can excel!
Hey, Vasco! Thank you for sharing your perspective. I really value the opportunity to dive deeper into this topic.
First, I want to clarify that my article IS NOT ABOUT BLAME but about ownership as a tool for clarity and accountability. If you focus on blame, you might be thinking about failure; I'm thinking about success. CLEAR OWNERSHIP ensures tasks don’t fall through the cracks, NOT to assign FAULT or expect PERFECTION, as you mentioned.
My article highlights the dangers of shared ownership: ambiguity, inaction, and the Bystander Effect. However, it doesn’t argue against shared responsibility for values like quality, collaboration, or team success. In fact, one could argue that clear ownership enhances team-wide responsibility because it creates a structure for accountability.
Regarding the Bystander Effect, I see it arising when responsibility is ambiguous or overly distributed. Clear accountability helps combat this by ensuring someone steps up to drive progress. I'm honestly struggling to understand how you can disagree on this point.
I agree with Deming's quote! And that's exactly what a process (system) like the DRI solves. I view it as a tool to reduce confusion, not shift blame. It ensures tasks have a clear driver while still relying on collaboration and team effort.
Thanks again for your comment—while you misunderstood my point or we fundamentally disagree, it’s clear we both care deeply about building thriving teams. I’d love to hear more of your thoughts!
Love it, Rafa! Thanks for the the comment back.
I’ll think through this and come up with my take on the DRI, and why I think that it does exactly the opposite (creates confusion, disenfranchisement, and ultimately failure).
But that will be a bigger post, I think. So I’ll ping you on it.
Full disclosure: I worked with managers in Apple’s geo vicinity that tried to copy the concept from Apple to another company, and have first-hand experience on the consequences of that concept as applied in practice. So I also have some strong opinions (some might say allergy) about that concept in the first place :)
Thank you, Vasco!
That sounds like a great idea. Please let me know once you wrote it.
While I stick to my values and principles, I'm always open to challenge my ideas, processes and systems, which I always adapt to the company and environment I'm working on. Definitely, what it works in X doesn't have to work in Y company.
Agreed 💯
There is no such a thing.
Even with the concepts of Responsible and Accountable are problems because fluid communication is needed 😅
Exactly! Effective communication is key! Thank you for your comment, Marcos!