case Studies

When we first arrived at The Company, the organization was grappling with deep-rooted inefficiencies and growing frustrations. The primary cause was a rigid process for managing requirements, driven by either-or thinking. The architects believed that either they controlled every detail through exhaustive Software Requirement Specifications (SRS) or the developers would fail to deliver. This led to a vicious cycle of over-specification, strained communication, slow progress, and a culture of blame.

Shifting from this mindset to one rooted in Both-And-More Thinking—an approach that embraces healthy tensions and integrates opposing forces—was the key to transforming The Company into a more collaborative, adaptive, and innovative organization.

The Problem with Either-Or Thinking

At The Company, the approach to addressing new needs was overly linear and siloed. When a request came from sales, product management, or customer relations, the architects took full ownership of the solution. They would create highly detailed SRS documents, often including pseudocode and step-by-step implementation instructions. These documents were then handed off to developers during refinement meetings.

However, these meetings were far from collaborative. The architects, primarily based in Sweden, expected feedback and engagement from the developers, who were based in India. But cultural barriers, combined with the overly prescriptive nature of the SRS, meant the developers rarely spoke up. Instead, they quietly accepted the handovers, often unsure of how to proceed.

Once the architects had delivered the SRS, they considered their role complete and moved on to the next project. The developers were left to implement the solution with little support or further communication. Inevitably, the outcomes fell short of expectations. When the architects returned for reviews, they criticized the developers’ work harshly, exacerbating tensions and deepening mistrust.

The organization’s response to these failures was to double down on its flawed approach: more detailed SRS, stricter processes, and additional handovers. This either-or mindset—believing that control through documentation was the only path to success—only amplified the problems, creating a culture of frustration, inefficiency, mistrust, and conflict.

The Shift to Both-And-More Thinking

The turning point for The Company came with the realization we provided as part of our investigation, that the solution wasn’t to continue in the selected path nor was it a complete disruptive change in abandoning the architects’ expertise or eliminating documentation entirely or removing the Indian developers. Instead, the organization needed to move beyond its either-or thinking and embrace Both-And-More Thinking, which integrates opposing elements to unlock greater outcomes.

This shift required addressing the root causes of the organization’s dysfunctions while preserving its strengths. The transformation focused on balancing structure and flexibility, technical rigor and collaboration, and short-term wins with long-term cultural shifts.

Stream-Aligned Teams: Balancing Structure and Flexibility

The first step was transitioning from project-based teams to stream-aligned teams. Under the old model, team composition changed frequently, depending on the project. This lack of continuity made it difficult to build trust or accountability. By aligning teams to specific value streams, we created a system where groups could take ownership of their work from start to finish.

Rather than eliminating the architects’ role, we embedded them within these teams. This allowed architects to provide technical guidance throughout the process, rather than delivering one-off specifications. Developers now had direct access to architects for clarification and feedback, fostering a more collaborative dynamic.

This change exemplified the Both-And-More principle of Structure and Flexibility: maintaining the expertise and oversight provided by the architects while introducing the adaptability of stream-aligned teams. The result was a more cohesive workflow, reduced misunderstandings, and a shared sense of ownership.

The Product Owner Role: Bridging Communication Gaps

A critical part of the transformation was the introduction of the Product Owner (PO) role. This role was designed to address the communication breakdowns and cultural barriers that had plagued the organization.

The Product Owners acted as bridges between architects, developers, and stakeholders. They translated business needs into actionable goals, ensuring that the focus shifted from exhaustive specifications to value-driven priorities. By facilitating discussions and encouraging feedback from all parties, POs created an environment where developers felt empowered to contribute their insights.

This approach aligned with the Both-And-More principle of Data-Driven and Human-Centered Leadership: balancing the clarity of technical goals with the empathy required to foster collaboration. By ensuring that everyone’s perspectives were heard and valued, the Product Owners helped transform the organizational culture.

The Scrum Master Role: Team Development skills

Empowering the already existing Scrum Master (SM) role was a key ingredient in building strong and effective teams at Jeeves. While the Scrum Masters were already part of the organizational framework, their role had been narrowly defined, often limited to facilitating ceremonies and ensuring adherence to Agile practices. This constrained interpretation failed to address the deeper team development skills required to navigate the complexities of The Company’s transformation.

As part of the shift to Both-And-More Thinking, we redefined the Scrum Master role to emphasize their potential as team developers, conflict facilitators, and change agents. By expanding their responsibilities and providing the necessary support, Scrum Masters became pivotal in fostering collaboration and alignment across teams.

In the new model, we shifted their focus to team development skills. This meant equipping Scrum Masters to:

• Facilitate open and productive conversations within teams.

• Address and resolve conflicts, especially those arising from cultural or functional differences.

• Help teams align on their purpose, priorities, and values.

• Create environments where team members felt safe to speak up, share ideas, and provide feedback.

This shift aligned with the Both-And-More principle of Individual Brilliance and Team Synergy, ensuring that the strengths of individual team members were leveraged within a collaborative framework.

Adapting Meetings: Evolving Existing Structures

Many of The Company’ existing meetings, like refinement sessions and reviews, were initially sources of tension. Rather than discarding these ceremonies, we adapted them to better support the new way of working.

Refinement meetings shifted from one-way presentations of SRS to collaborative problem-solving sessions. Architects and developers co-created solutions, using the Product Owners and Scrum Masters as facilitators. Reviews, which had previously been blame-filled critiques, became opportunities for shared learning and iterative improvement.

This evolution reflected the Both-And-More principle of Consistency and Evolution: retaining familiar structures while adapting their purpose to align with the organization’s new values. These changes reduced tension, fostered collaboration, and improved outcomes.

Cultural Shifts: Confidence and Humility in Leadership

Leadership at The Company also underwent a transformation. Previously, leaders often relied on top-down directives, reinforcing the culture of control and blame. Through coaching, we helped them balance confidence in decision-making with humility to listen and adapt.

Leaders were encouraged to take decisive action in implementing the value stream approach while remaining open to feedback from teams. This created a culture of psychological safety, where team members felt supported and valued.

This approach aligned with the Both-And-More principle of Confidence and Humility, fostering trust and credibility across the organization.

The Results: A Collaborative and Adaptive Culture

The transformation at The Company delivered profound results:

1. Improved Collaboration: Stream-aligned teams and Product Owners created real-time communication and reduced silos.

2. Reduced Tension: Developers and architects worked together as partners, shifting from conflict to cooperation.

3. Faster Delivery: Focusing on value streams and reducing over-reliance on documentation allowed teams to deliver solutions more efficiently.

4. Cultural Evolution: The organization moved from a culture of blame and rigidity to one of trust, collaboration, and adaptability.

5. Stakeholder Satisfaction: Stakeholders experienced faster, more responsive outcomes, improving their confidence in The Company’ ability to deliver.

Conclusion: The Power of Both-And-More Thinking

At The Company, the shift from either-or thinking to Both-And-More Thinking was transformative. By balancing structure with flexibility, technical rigor with collaboration, and short-term wins with long-term cultural shifts, the organization unlocked new levels of innovation, trust, and efficiency.

This case demonstrates that the most sustainable solutions don’t come from choosing one side over the other. They come from embracing complexity, navigating healthy tensions, and integrating diverse perspectives to create something greater—something more.

< Back to Table of Content