One of the keys to building a strong, effective team is to involve each member as a contributor and collaborator to the overall business, while still respecting their expertise in certain aspects of the building process. This is counter to the approach taken by some larger, siloed organizations that treat each role as an independent contractor—a task-doer who receives instructions and produces an output.
While the "contractor" model might seem efficient on a spreadsheet, it creates a dangerous lack of cohesion and shared purpose.
The Danger of a Siloed, "Contractor" Culture
When team members are treated as isolated cogs in a machine, the negative consequences begin to compound.
-
A Lack of Shared Goals: An engineer who only sees a ticket doesn't have the context to make the best decisions for the product. They are focused on completing a task, not solving a user's problem. This disconnect from the business goals leads to a lack of ownership and passion.
-
Over-Reliance and Bottlenecks: This model often creates an over-reliance on a select few individuals (like a product manager or a lead architect) to hold all the context and make all the decisions. This not only creates bottlenecks but also disempowers the rest of the team.
-
The "Lost in Translation" Problem: When responsibilities are simply handed off from one silo to the next, crucial information is lost. The intent of a user story can be warped as it's translated from product to design to engineering, leading to wasted work and features that miss the mark.
-
The Human Cost: This approach is a direct path to burnout. When people feel like they are just cogs in a machine with no say in the process, they become resentful. It stifles diversity of thought, limits opportunities for growth, and ultimately leads to high churn.
The Collaborative Alternative
The most successful teams are the ones where every member feels like a stakeholder. An engineer's job isn't just to write code; it's to use their unique expertise to solve the company's problems. This means inviting them into the process early, giving them access to the "why" behind the work, and trusting them to contribute to the solution, not just implement it.
The word "company" is literally defined by the people you surround yourself with, not the instructions that are given to them. When you close doors to the process and treat your team like a collection of hired hands, you are rejecting the collective intelligence and creativity you worked so hard to assemble.
Don't just give your team instructions. Give them problems to solve and the context to solve them well. You'll build a better product and a more resilient organization.