Describe organizational drivers to support understanding and communication about situations that are relevant for the organizational to respond to, and for recalling why particular activities are undertaken and why specific decisions are made.

Table of Contents

An organizational driver is any situation where the organization’s members have a motive to respond because they anticipate that doing so would be beneficial for the organization (by helping to generate value, eliminate waste or avoid undesirable risks or consequences).

Organizational drivers are identified by individuals (see Navigate Via Tension) who either respond to them directly (when a driver falls within their own domain of responsibility), or who pass on information about drivers they discover to others in the organization (whom they believe are responsible for dealing with them).

Why describe organizational drivers?

In the course of their daily work in organizations, individuals frequently encounter situations that need responding to. They make decisions alone or with others, based on what they believe is required and then act accordingly. However, sometimes decisions are taken without fully understanding the situation they were intended to deal with. Decisions can be based more on judgments and assumptions rather than on concrete observations. Additionally, failing to communicate relevant information to other stakeholders can lead to misunderstanding, conflict, and waste.

Clearly understanding organizational drivers and documenting essential information about them before deciding on a response, is crucial for ensuring that the rationale behind decisions is understood. It also provides an opportunity for those who are collaborating to verify their assumptions, combine diverse viewpoints, align understanding, and consequently agree on a description of a driver.

Both individuals and groups can describe organizational drivers. A summary can be added to a backlog, or used as a straightforward method to communicate pertinent details about a relevant situation to others within the organization who have responsibility for dealing such things. Subsequently, these drivers can be prioritized in relation to other drivers that are pending a response and then, when the time comes, they can be dealt with accordingly. Further details on how to respond to organizational drivers can be found in the pattern Respond to Organizational Drivers.

How to describe organizational drivers

A simple way to describe an organizational driver is by explaining:

  • the current situation that is being observed,
  • the (current or anticipated) effect this situation leads to.
  • and, if it’s not already obvious from the previous two points, why it’s relevant for the organization to respond to this situation.

Describing these three aspects will typically provide enough information to communicate an organizational driver clearly.

Describe Organizational Drivers

Problem-focused or opportunity-focused

In most cases, organizational drivers can be framed as either a problem to solve, or as an opportunity to pursue. Sometimes it helps to deliberately choose (or agree on) which perspective to take, to help people gain a more optimistic, or realistic, outlook on a situation.

Here is an example of a driver framed as a problem:

(current situation) Information is unstructured, kept in silos and sometimes unrecorded, (effect) leading to people working with missing or outdated information, (relevance) which results in ineffectiveness and our clients’ needs being unmet.

The same driver framed as an opportunity:

(current situation) Useful information that can help us build a better understanding of our clients’ needs is distributed throughout the organization, (anticipated effect) and figuring out how to record and share it could help us improve our services.

Tips for describing organizational drivers

Aim to create a comprehensive but brief summary in two or three sentences, so that the information is easy to remember and process. If necessary more details about the driver may be recorded below the summary and/or kept in a logbook.

For further guidance on how to describe organizational drivers and requirements in an effective way, check out the following example:

To resolve local issues, teams currently have autonomy to develop their work and decision-making processes in the way they see fit. This often leads to incoherence in how work and decision-making is handled between teams, which impedes effective collaboration on handling dependencies between and across domains.

1. Current Situation

“To resolve local issues, teams currently have autonomy to develop their work and decision-making processes in the way they see fit.”

  • Describe the situation you observe, rather than describing assumptions about what might be missing or lacking. For example, avoid phrases like “teams don’t focus enough on resolving common issues“or “we are lacking coherence between teams”. This way of framing a situation obscures what is actually happening.
  • Be concise and describe the essentials of what is happening, and, if necessary, the context in which it occurs.
  • Be specific and avoid vague and ambiguous statements (e.g. use “to resolve local issues” instead of “to resolve some issues”.
  • Be objective and describe verifiable facts and observations.
  • Avoid evaluative language (e.g. use “teams have autonomy” instead of “teams have too much autonomy”).

2. (Current or Anticipated) Effect

“This often leads to incoherence in how work and decision-making is handled between teams ….”

  • Explain the consequences that you observe or that you expect could result from the situation.
  • Be as objective and specific as possible.
  • Be explicit about whether the effect(s) are occurring already, or if they are anticipated.
  • If it’s not obvious, explain how you think the effect is a consequence of the situation.

3. Relevance for the organization

“… which impedes effective collaboration on handling dependencies between and across domains.”

  • Explain why responding to the situation is worthwhile for the organization, by describing the benefit of interacting with it, or the cost of not doing so: How would it help the organization to respond to this situation? How would it harm us if we don’t?
  • Sometimes the relevance of responding to the situation for the organization is already obvious and clear, in which case there is no need to add any further information.

Other examples:

Effect is already occurring:

  • (current situation) Information is unstructured, kept in silos and sometimes unrecorded, (current effect) leading to people’s inability to support each other, and understand and contribute to the bigger picture, (relevance) which impedes our ability to effectively do our work.
  • (current situation) We spend 25% of our work hours on admin work (effect) and this is leading to slow response time for customer requests and a growing number of complaints. (relevance) We’re starting to develop a bad reputation and run the risk of losing customers and compromising future sales.

Effect is anticipated:

  • (current situation) We’re preparing to recruit five new members into the development teams, (anticipated effect) and a lack of relevant training could lead to inefficiencies and errors, (relevance) and an overall decrease in team productivity and quality of work.

Effect is already occurring and relevance is implicit:

  • (current situation) The teams often work on items that have not been prioritized in accordance with the product roadmap. (effect) This slows down the delivery of features that have been assigned a high priority by the customer and is leading to complaints about the effectiveness of our work.
  • (current situation) Although the financial records of the organization are available to anyone who asks, most people in the organization lack adequate financial understanding to make sense of them in the current format. (effect) This leads to frustration, uncertainty and questions that are hard to answer about why certain decisions are being made.