Principle: Adjust levels of involvement based on the maturity of the team

It’s sometimes hard to know just how much involvement to have. Too much and I can come across as micro-managing; too little and I’m an absent parent who only shows up when something goes wrong. I can think of numerous examples where I’ve left it too long or I’ve expected too much of a team and things have gone sideways, or other times I’ve allowed my discomfort at having less control get the better of me and I’ve jumped in too soon.

I’m not sure I have good heuristics for how much is required at any given time. Sure, there are some possibly obvious things like: Long-running, high-performing teams already know how to operate and improve and may only require intermitent involvement; Less experienced people might need more direct involvement day-to-day. But even then, as teams evolve—new people come and go, or goals and objectives change—so too must my level of engagement.

These days, I try to stay connected by attending rituals (stand-ups, etc.), offering support if/when needed, and asking individuals and teams who, what, when, and how questions to get a sense of performance and progress. In cases where they don’t need alot, I can work on building trust and understanding, and reward them for their efforts. When I sense that a team needs more, I can lean on that trust to help them navigate the uncertainty and ambiguity, redirect their efforts where needed, provide organisational support to unblock them, and coach them through the challenges.

By staying connected to the teams on a regular basis, even in a light-touch way, I get a better sense of how they are travelling and what level of involvement they need from me. For the most part, I no longer scare people when I turn up and ask questions.