Function Leader
This is an Assignment's Handbook...
In Product we break our jobs into smaller units of responsibility we call Assignments. We do this to provide clarity for the person doing the job (what am I being relied upon for), clarity for the person's teammates (what can I rely on this person for), as well as to encourage high quality (specific and relevant) feedback.
Function Leader:
= AR3
Tagline:
We serve a specific function and the people executing against its Assignments. Our goal is continuous improvement of the tools and processes (balancing autonomy and focusing on feedback loops) to ensure everyone knows what success means, has the tools to achieve success, and are engaged throughout the journey in pursuit of success.
Outcome:
The people taking on the Assignments within the function* I serve, agree or strongly agree to the following statements:
- Thinking of my Assignments; I understand, see value in, believe are feasible, & they are not-checklists but all have clear expectations
- I know how I’m being evaluated on these Assignments.
- I receive actionable (meaning timely, frequent, specific, and observation-based) constructive feedback on my performance within the function Assignments.
- I receive actionable (meaning timely, frequent, specific, and observation-based) recognition (public or private) on my performance within the function Assignments.
- I have the tools to meet or exceed the outcomes listed within the function Assignments.
- I have the processes and environment to meet or exceed the outcomes listed within the function Assignments.
- We are continuously improving in how we go about executing these function Assignments.
Required Activities:
- All Assignments must have a card in this FigJam, where... (as of 2024•Q3)
- ... The title links to a Guru card formatted exactly like this one (the OurGruuv section is optional)
- ... The tagline and outcome are summarized directly on the card in the FigJam
- Any adjustments to an Assignment's handbook is logged in Guru (as of 2024•Q3)
- Any material adjustments to an Assignment is discussed in your 1-1's with all taking on the Assignment in question (as seen here):
Handbook:
How to get an Assignment from "Discussing to Tracking"? - Get 2-3 other people to agree: "I understand, see value in, believe is feasible, & this is not-checklist but has clear expectations"
Creating a new Assignment... add it to the FigJam, and set the state to Drafting.
Ready for that Assignment to be discussed? Set the status to Discussing.
How do we get it to "Tracking"?
The answer is... together. Here are the criteria of who has to agree to the following statement: "I understand, see value in, believe is feasible, & this is not-checklist but has clear expectations":
- The function leader who authored the assignment.
- At least one person who will take on the assignment.
- Management: So either...
- Function leader's manager (so Canaan, for the EMs), AR3 or Jenny
- --or-- two additional managers who are involved in evaluating the Assignment
Note 1: Both AR3 and Jenny have veto power and can convert an Assignment from Tracking to Discussing
Note 2: The theory is…
- Has to be understandable, or it is better to not have it at all
- Folks have to see value in it, meaning they think it is worth either tracking or at least considering for us to be successful as our motto, company viability goals, and ultimately the company mission.
- If it isn’t possible, then we have a problem, which is why we speak to feasibility. Feasibility does NOT mean you have full control… there isn’t a single OUTCOME that ANYONE has full control over. Everything is multifactorial / multifaceted / impacted by multiple inputs. But, given what we know about the system… is it reasonable to think that this Assignment is possible aka feasible.
- Finally… we DO NOT manage to activities. We DO NOT manage to outputs. We manage to OUTCOMES. So, if the Assignment is a collection of activities… it will likely be vetoed. If the Assignment is a promise of an output, it will need to have very good reason for existing, and we should push to see what outcome is the end result of the output. So Assignments have to reach a tricky balance of clarity, but not be overly prescriptive aka a checklist. Checklists would “lower the ceiling” more than we are willing to have the ceiling lowered.