Scaling without bureaucracy: clarify who decides

At a startup I worked with, the team faced repeated interruptions to its sprints as it began using Scrum. The founder and a close colleague both shaped priorities. They knew each other well. Sometimes the founder changed a decision without coordinating with his colleague.

People had to work out which priorities still applied. We helped the founder and his colleague agree which decisions each could make and when to review the company’s direction.

Start with the decision that keeps changing

#

We first brought them together to plan and focus. Afterwards, priorities still changed. They treated explicit planning and agreements as unnecessary formality for a startup.

Both still needed to agree what each could decide after the meeting.

Make the agreement specific

#

The founder focused on the company’s direction. His colleague could deploy and advance the work.

We used a delegation board to make that division explicit. The board shows decision areas and the level of authority delegated in each.

Both accepted the written agreement. We then shared it with the team. The team could use it to understand whose decisions applied.

For your own team, define which decisions team members can make themselves. Describe who they must consult for other decisions.

Keep the agreement open to new evidence

#

In this case, the founder’s main review of direction came after a major release. He could use data to consider a possible pivot.

We wanted to assess new needs against the available data before changing direction.

For your own agreement, decide how to address important evidence that arrives before a planned review. Name who can decide to change direction.

Scrum allows the team to renegotiate planned work with the Product Owner as it learns. The Product Owner is accountable for ordering the Product Backlog, the list of work needed to improve the product. Changes must protect the sprint’s shared objective, the Sprint Goal.

Check whether the agreement helps

#

After the agreement, we saw sprints proceed without the interruptions and breaks we experienced before. This was the improvement we observed while the team began using Scrum.

That describes continuity of work during that early period. Assessing customer value or business results requires separate evidence.

Sine and colleagues found a positive association between formalised roles in founding teams and revenue in young internet-service firms. The study was observational. It cannot tell you which agreement your company needs. Sine et al., 2006.

In a separate fintech engagement, we worked with company leaders, teams and external collaborators on a lightweight product operating model and coordination across locations.

To try this in your own team, choose one recurring interruption. Write a short agreement that answers three questions:

• Which decision can each person make?
• When must they consult someone else?
• How will you revise the agreement when new evidence changes the decision?

Set a review date. At that review, check whether the agreement reduces the original confusion. Simplify or remove it if it no longer helps.

If growth is making decision authority harder to read, let’s talk about where the confusion starts.