Leading Cross-Functional Teams

"The Future of User Experience (UX) Might Not Be “UX” Anymore." That was one of the most thought-provoking insights from my recent conversation with Don Norman at the Book Passion Talk hosted by UX Unite and Helena Zilmer Levison in Denmark. He pointed out that the term UX has been trivialized, often reduced to just apps and websites. In fact, he’s even considered, through the IxDF - Interaction Design Foundation, rebranding it as "Design Experience." That struck me. But beyond that, here are my biggest takeaways from the session: 👩💻 Design teams need engineering representation. Having engineers involved from the start saves time and leads to stronger, more feasible solutions. 👬Designers must build relationships beyond design. Connecting with finance, marketing, and sales teams gives a holistic perspective of the business—expanding our impact beyond screens. 💡 Designers should be involved in product development from ideation, not just execution. We shouldn’t just be handed problems to solve—we should help define them. 🔹 Sustainable design matters. Aligning our work with the United Nations SDGs ensures we’re designing for the planet, not just for users. 🔬 Data-backed decisions always win. The best design arguments are evidence-based—let data tell the story. ✨ Personal reflection: This conversation reinforced the importance of cross-functional collaboration. As designers, our impact extends far beyond design tools—it’s about strategy, relationships, and systems thinking. I’d love to hear from you—which of these insights resonates most with you? And what are your thoughts on replacing UX with Design Experience? #UXDesign #DesignThinking #DonNorman #SustainableDesign #CrossFunctionalCollaboration

HR doesn’t need more dashboards. It needs better listening. Most people teams measure what’s easy…like engagement scores or turnover. But the best teams? They build feedback loops that help them predict problems, not just react to them. This post gives you 11 of the most useful, often-overlooked loops you can implement across the employee lifecycle: 🟢 Week 2 new hire check-ins (capture early impressions) 🟠 Post-interview surveys (from both sides) 🔵 Onboarding reviews (day 90 is your goldmine) 🟡 Skip-level 1:1s (cross-level truth-telling) 🟣 Quarterly team health check-ins (lightweight, manager-led) …and 7 more. 📌 Save this if: • You’re building a modern HR function • You want fewer “We should’ve seen this coming” moments • You believe listening is strategy Which feedback loop is missing in your company?

When KPIs are measured in silos. Every department hits its targets—while the mine misses its goals. Our last discussion on silos in mining education sparked an overwhelming response. Many of you pointed out these silos don’t stop at education—they shape how mining companies operate. Here’s what you shared: ✅ Geologists model resources but often miss downstream mining and processing needs. ✅ Mine engineers focus on moving tonnes but don’t always consider processing constraints. ✅ Metallurgists optimize recovery but lack insight into ore variability, setting them up to fail. But siloed KPIs hurt operations. Mining succeeds by maximizing metal recovery and throughput at the lowest cost. Yet, companies break this into departmental KPIs that reward local efficiency at the expense of overall performance. Here’s how that plays out: 📍Mining teams hit targets by extracting more tonnes—whether the plant can process them or not. ⚡Processing teams cut energy costs, even if it reduces throughput and recovery. 🔧 Maintenance minimizes downtime but defers repairs, leading to bigger failures later. 💸 Procurement buys the cheapest equipment, causing breakdowns and lost productivity. Each team hits its targets—while the mine falls short. Why does this happen? Company culture. Organizations set siloed KPIs because they manage operations in silos—separating budgets, encouraging competition instead of collaboration, and rewarding local wins over profitability. And they ignore one critical principle: 👉 Culture eats strategy for breakfast. Success depends on aligning incentives so every team works toward the same goal. This is where value-chain thinking matters. Mining must align every step of the process, from geology to the final product. ✅ Geologists must provide data that mining and processing teams can act on. ✅ Mine engineers must optimize feed prep for plant performance. ✅ Metallurgists must balance smelter requirements with environmental goals. This isn’t new—it’s Follow the Money 101. Yet teams optimize for their own success, not the mine’s profitability. The result? ❌ Poor communication disguised as “alignment meetings” that fail to drive real change.  ❌ Departmental KPIs that create trade-offs rather than shared wins.  ❌ Budgets that encourage departments to hoard resources instead of collaborating. How do we break free from siloed thinking? 1️⃣ Align KPIs with overall performance. ✅ Measure teams by their contribution to mine-wide success. ✅ Reward mining teams for delivering the right ore, not just more ore. 2️⃣ Break down budget silos. ✅ If cost savings in one area increase costs elsewhere, it’s a hidden expense. ✅ Empower managers to spend where it actually delivers results. 3️⃣ Build cross-functional teams. ✅ Use shared KPIs that require collaboration. ✅ Get geologists, engineers, and metallurgists aligned before problems arise. Until leaders fix this, the mine will keep falling short. What do you think? Let’s discuss.

Ambiguity fuels drama. Leaders often assume drama comes from difficult personalities or interpersonal conflict. But what I see consistently in my work is that drama usually grows out of ambiguity, not tension. It tends to show up when teams have: - unclear roles - unspoken expectations - vague priorities - inconsistent accountability And when people don’t know what “good” looks like, they start filling in the blanks with: - assumptions - rumors - alliances - emotional narratives In the absence of clarity, people create stories, because they’re trying to make sense of what’s happening around them. That’s why I often use this Clarity × Accountability 2×2 in my work with teams. It makes the invisible obvious. When both are low, teams fall into the Drama Zone. When one is high and the other isn’t, people end up in Fear or Resentment. But when clarity and accountability rise together, conversations get cleaner, decisions stick, and the emotional noise quiets down. Most people aren’t trying to be difficult. They’re just trying to find their footing in the fog. When clarity is present, the drama usually takes care of itself. #drama #clarity #leadership #learning #conflict #accountability #teams

Autonomy is often wrongly confused with independence. This mistake negatively affects accountability. People sometimes mistakenly think that giving people autonomy means leaving them completely to their own devices (this is independence). In the organizational sense, autonomy is not the opposite of structure—it’s the freedom to operate WITHIN a structure that supports continuous improvement and accountability. A Lean mindset and approach helps leaders to understand how to foster BOTH accountability and autonomy. Lean leaders do this by intentionally moving away from making people feel like they are "being held accountable" (which feels imposed) and inspiring them to "take accountability" (a sense of ownership that naturally fosters autonomy). Here’s how you can adopt this approach in YOUR team: 🟢 Be clear about goals, roles, and responsibilities: Use tools like RACI charts or visual management boards to clarify who does what. 🔴 Define success together: Involve the team in setting performance standards or KPIs so they have a say in what they’re working toward. 🟣 Encourage regular 1:1 check-ins and team huddles: create spaces for discussing challenges without fear. 🟡 Engage people in problem-solving: Use structured techniques and Kaizen to involve the team in addressing inefficiencies. 🔵 Ask for their ideas first: Instead of directing what needs to change, coach them with powerful questions like, “What do you think is the best next step?” 🟤 Use visual management: Team dashboards or Kanban boards make progress visible, reduce micromanagement and highlight areas needing attention. 🟠 Review metrics as a team: Make this part of regular meetings, so progress and accountability are a collective effort. ⚫ Own your commitments: If you make a mistake or miss a deadline, acknowledge it openly. ⚪ Model humility: Admit when you don’t have all the answers and seek input from the team. (This makes people feel valued!!) 🤔Reflection time for leaders... Are you balancing structure and flexibility in your team? Which of the above could you act on to shape a culture of autonomy?

𝗛𝗼𝘄 𝘁𝗼 𝗕𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗸 𝗗𝗼𝘄𝗻 𝗦𝗶𝗹𝗼𝘀 𝗶𝗻 𝗠𝗲𝗱𝗧𝗲𝗰𝗵 𝗗𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗹𝗼𝗽𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁: (𝗖𝗿𝗲𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗰𝗿𝗼𝘀𝘀-𝗳𝘂𝗻𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗵𝗮𝗿𝗺𝗼𝗻𝘆 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵𝗼𝘂𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗵𝗲𝗮𝗱𝗮𝗰𝗵𝗲𝘀) Ever notice how Quality, R&D, Regulatory and Marketing teams seem to speak completely different languages? This disconnect isn't just frustrating, it's costing your medical device company time, money, and potentially regulatory approval In my personal experience, I've seen how departmental friction can derail even the most promising innovations 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗥𝗲𝗮𝗹 𝗖𝗼𝘀𝘁 𝗼𝗳 𝗦𝗶𝗹𝗼𝘀 👉 Delayed submissions and market entry 👉 Regulatory surprises late in development 👉 Documentation rework and compliance gaps 👉 Increased development costs 👉 Team frustration and burnout Here's how to create seamless collaboration across your MedTech organization: 𝗦𝘁𝗲𝗽 𝟭: 𝗘𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗯𝗹𝗶𝘀𝗵 𝗖𝗿𝗼𝘀𝘀-𝗙𝘂𝗻𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗚𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗻𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲 Create a development council with representatives from Quality, Regulatory, R&D, Manufacturing, Marketing and Clinical. Meet bi-weekly with a structured agenda (top tip keep the minutes to use towards management reviews). 𝗘𝘅𝗮𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗲: A Class II device manufacturer implemented this model and reduced their development timeline by 30%, if not more, by identifying regulatory concerns during concept phase rather than pre-submission. 𝗦𝘁𝗲𝗽 𝟮: 𝗜𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗦𝘁𝗮𝗴𝗲-𝗚𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗥𝗲𝘃𝗶𝗲𝘄𝘀 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗔𝗹𝗹 𝗦𝘁𝗮𝗸𝗲𝗵𝗼𝗹𝗱𝗲𝗿𝘀 Don't move to the next development phase without formal sign-off from every department. This prevents costly backtracking 𝗘𝘅𝗮𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗲: During a stage-gate review (Design Review), a clinical specialist identified that the intended claims presented by the regulatory team would require further clinical data. By catching this early, the company adjusted their development plan rather than facing a surprise 6-month+ delay come submission time 𝗦𝘁𝗲𝗽 𝟯: 𝗖𝗿𝗲𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗮 𝗦𝗵𝗮𝗿𝗲𝗱 𝗗𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗹𝗼𝗽𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗟𝗮𝗻𝗴𝘂𝗮𝗴𝗲 Develop a glossary of terms that bridges departmental jargon. This prevents miscommunication that leads to rework. 𝗘𝘅𝗮𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗲: One client I worked with created a “MedTech Translation Guide” with input from each department. Not only did it reduce confusion, but it also built mutual respect engineers finally understood what the regulatory team meant by “intended use” and marketers stopped using terms that could trigger a knock on the door by Competent Authorities 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗕𝗼𝘁𝘁𝗼𝗺 𝗟𝗶𝗻𝗲? When this is done right, it accelerates development, strengthens compliance, and builds a more engaged team ✅ Faster to market ✅ Fewer compliance surprises ✅ Less internal friction If you're building your next-gen device and struggling with internal disconnects, it’s time to rethink how your teams work 𝘵𝘰𝘨𝘦𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳 💬 I'd love to hear: How does your team keep cross-functional collaboration on track? #MedTech  #MedicalDevice #ProductDevelopment

2 — Solving Goal & Priority Misalignment with Is/Is Not + Perspective Circle.  SOLVING THINGS with SYSTEMS THINKING (STwST) — a series of mini, real-world applications of DSRP. When a team says, “We’re working hard but not pulling in the same direction,” it’s usually not a motivation problem. And it’s rarely a communication problem. It’s a distinction + perspective problem. Different people are carrying different mental pictures of what the goal is and is not, and different perspectives on what actually counts as a priority. So even when everyone uses the same words, they’re not aiming at the same thing. They might be reading the same page but interpreting it differently. Two simple thinking moves fix this. The first is an Is / Is Not list. Take the goal and the priorities and make them explicit: what this goal is, what it is not; what matters now, and what does not. This forces clarity where assumptions usually hide. The second is a Perspective Circle. You don’t need everyone to think the same way—but you do need everyone looking at the same picture. Different roles, levels, and functions can keep their own viewpoints, as long as they’re all anchored to the same shared view. Then keep that shared model on the table. Revisit it at the start of meetings. Use it when tradeoffs show up. Let people argue with it, stress-test it, and refine it. Don’t laminate it. Put it to work. Alignment doesn’t come from hearing the right words once. It comes from people rebuilding their own internal picture until it matches the shared one. When that happens, language cleans up, decisions get faster, resources line up, and the friction fades—because action always follows the mental model. If you listen carefully, misalignment announces itself in sentences that shouldn’t exist if the goal were truly shared. Those sentences are the signal. #STwST #SystemsThinking #CabreraLabPodcast #SystemsThinkingStandardsInstitute

Shared understanding is fundamental to any change endeavour. But how do we orchestrate a journey towards a shared understanding? This framework - from the fantastic Challenge-led system mapping handbook by Climate-KIC - highlights a structured progression inspired by the DIKW pyramid. I really like the way iterative dialogue is embedded in a way that ensures resources become living documents that evolve with stakeholder insights, reflecting the dynamic nature of the system. "The evolving conversation contributes to the collective understanding of the challenges, the questions, and the mapped system itself." This journey begins with participatory processes and data generation, which lay the foundation for understanding the makeup of the system. These steps involve diverse stakeholders coming together to identify core components and relationships within the system. As the process evolves, we move into harvesting and documentation, where data transitions into manageable sources and is organised into coherent information. This phase involves physical structuring and cognitive processes, framing data into actionable insights and beginning to illuminate system patterns. The next phase—conceptualisation and analysis—builds on this structured base to foster a deeper understanding. Here, information transforms into knowledge through analytical structuring. This stage involves recognising connections, patterns, and dynamics, enabling stakeholders to identify key indicators of progress or change. Finally, the journey culminates in wisdom, where insights are communicated through visualisation and interpretation. This stage bridges the gap between abstract analysis and practical application, enabling informed decision-making and co-produced practices. Wisdom reflects a high level of both structure and understanding, empowering stakeholders to act collaboratively toward systemic change. This iterative and participatory process emphasises the importance of feedback loops and incremental understanding, ensuring that stakeholders grasp the complexities of the system and also feel invested in its transformation. "Knowledge management integrates links between interpretation, analysis, and action, allowing practitioners to move from traditional 'learning to manage' practices to 'management as learning'."

Over the weekend, my family was having a lively debate about language- how it shapes identity and how it connects people. It struck me that the same is true at work. In a global organization, we may all speak “business English,” but each team has its own dialect, jargon and unspoken cues. Leaders and L&D professionals should not underestimate how much language shapes belonging, trust, and learning. We often focus on what people learn: skills, tools, frameworks, but how we speak about learning shapes its impact. ✔️Language shapes culture—the words around performance and growth can empower or discourage. ✔️Shared language builds alignment—common phrases create common meaning across teams. ✔️Language enables inclusion—clear, mindful communication ensures no one is left behind. As L&D leaders, we don’t just design programs, we shape the very language through which people see themselves, their teams, and their future.

**Why clarity matters I went to a meeting this week and I was not sure what I needed to do to be prepared... how long it would last... and what my role was.... I didn't know if I could move around/ask for a break too if needed... Clarity provides psychological safety. When people know the structure, purpose, and boundaries of an interaction, they can focus on contributing rather than surviving. Research consistently shows that predictable structures reduce cognitive load, support executive functioning, and improve communication outcomes — especially for neurodivergent individuals who may rely on preparation and routine to manage information flow and social nuance. What happens when we don’t know Lack of clarity can lead to: • Heightened anxiety — “Am I in the right place?” "Did I need to prepare something?" • Reduced participation — “I’ll just stay quiet until I work it out.” • Misinterpretation — “I thought we’d agreed something different.” • Inefficiency — “We spent half the meeting figuring out the agenda.” For neurodivergent colleagues, this uncertainty can be especially draining. Meetings without clear purpose or role definitions can feel like walking into a play without a script — everyone else seems to know their lines, but you’re improvising under pressure. Clarity as a communication strategy Providing clear information about what, when, where, who, and why isn’t about micromanagement — it’s about inclusion. It helps everyone — not just those who identify as neurodivergent — to engage on equal terms. Small adjustments can make a big difference: • Share agendas and expected outcomes in advance. • Explain who will be attending and what their roles are. • Define what the meeting will (and won’t) cover. • Allow time for preparation and follow-up reflection. These are simple acts of respect that promote belonging and trust. **The bottom line Clarity aids communication because it removes guesswork. It turns anxiety into anticipation, confusion into contribution, and uncertainty into understanding. Inclusion isn’t only about access or awareness — it’s about designing interactions that let people show up as their best selves. And sometimes, that begins with something as simple as saying: “Here’s what will happen, when, and with whom.”