Self-managing teams: what are the consequences for your organisation?

For quite some time now I have been advising clients with the implementation of self-managing teams. Actually advising is not the correct word, because that is what an advisor does and I am not an advisor. Instead ‘Facilitator’ is a much better description of my role, even though it might not be a very nice word in itself.  

Working with self-managing teams requires skills that are appealing to me as a person. It encompasses  complex problems, talents that are utilised optimally, employees with far reaching responsiblities, cooperation is inevitable and a clear need for creativity.

However, in my personal point of view and in the process in which my clients and possibly also future clients who want to use my expertise, this is of minor importance. I would even say of no importance at all. My role is, in the first place, to use my expertise by inviting each of the participants to think about the consequences of self-managing teams. What does it apply to the communication between the members of that team and the other colleagues within the company? What happens if a self-managing team doesn’t want to use the quite often expensive tools that are applied by the company for monitoring and responsibility checks? Is that allowed and can they do so? And if not, should new conditions be introduced? If the answer to the previous question is yes, which ones need to be introduced?

Before I train people in lateral and parallel thinking, I ask the question behind the question in my role as facilitator, I raise the question following the answer and the next question. As a facilitator I am the thorn in someone’s side, the respectful devil’s advocate and the crystal clear mirror. And in that role I ensure that my client –and with that his end-customer- is enabled to make it to the next stage.