I still remember the days in Poland during the 1980s when everyone was considered equal and fully occupied with building our beloved country—piece by piece, stone by stone. There was no unemployment; if you wanted a job, you got one. Everyone earned similar wages and could buy similar things for roughly the same price. The solution to every problem was either hiring more people or postponing the delivery date—neither of which seemed to be an issue.

It sounds like a wonderland… but not exactly. For some reason, the goods produced were of poor quality, people were dissatisfied with the outcomes, and reality was far from expectations. Organizations and companies, owned collectively by society, were not generating profit but accumulating losses. The only reason the system kept functioning was that the government masked reality.

Years later, working in the field of quality management, I began analyzing how companies conduct their business—how they manufacture products, how teams are built, and how social relationships influence daily work and product development. Among my many observations, a few stood out as particularly revealing.

Much like Poland during the socialist era—and even today in certain companies and teams—tremendous effort is invested in delivering results. Many people work on numerous tasks, often stretching themselves thin. Some are so overwhelmed that they “have no time to load”*. However, what is often missing is the big picture. Within our teams, we focus solely on our own parts of the whole. We work hard—sometimes even exceptionally hard—but in the end, neither the team nor the customer is satisfied. We search for reasons, wondering what went wrong, yet fail to find a clear answer. We fall short of expectations, reassuring ourselves that next time we won’t repeat the same mistakes.

Equipped with fresh enthusiasm, we embark on a new project—only to find ourselves in the same place yet again. Why did this happen again? we ask ourselves. We did things differently this time… didn’t we?

The answer is: Yes, we did things differently, but only within a small fragment of the system. We adjusted our way of working on our level, while the rest of the organization remained unchanged. The complexity of an organization and the interdependencies within it make such isolated changes insufficient. Modifying one piece of the puzzle does not alter the entire picture. To achieve real transformation, changes must be implemented across the entire organization.

What, then, is the right change? How should it look?

There is no single answer. Many elements contribute to the success of a company or project, and in most cases, these factors are unique—meaning a one-size-fits-all approach simply doesn’t work. However, there are certain fundamentals that must always be clearly defined:

•A well-defined offering – Clear information about the products and services provided.

•Explicit responsibility and accountability – Clearly assigned ownership at every level.

•Smartly designed processes – Well-structured workflows that align with business needs.

In socialist Poland, everything belonged to everyone. A noble idea in theory, but in reality, it led to a lack of care and poor quality. If something belongs to everyone, then in truth, it belongs to no one. In theory, everyone cares about it, but in practice, no one feels personally responsible for the product.

This phenomenon is still visible in modern corporations, particularly in large organizations employing thousands of people. When unclear responsibilities, a lack of accountability, and misinterpreted agility come into play, they create the perfect recipe for poor-quality products or outright failure.

One might say: Let’s define responsibilities and accountabilities as soon as possible, and we will succeed! Hard to disagree—but reality is never that simple. To make people accountable and responsible, we first need to define what they should be accountable and responsible for.

To do that, we must first correctly identify all the products being delivered within the organization.

And here lies the challenge: Products are not just physical goods sold to external customers. Products also include all types of services, delivered both externally and internally.

At this point, many of you might think: I already know this! or This isn’t new! And I agree. The real problem arises when we start asking people within the organization what products they are actually working on.

•What is the product of the HR team?

•What is the product of the Quality Office?

•What does Business Operations produce?

•What does the Product Office create?

The answers might surprise you. Often, people do not know what they are delivering or who their actual stakeholders or customers are.

Clearly defined products and named customers must be the first step in structuring an effective organization. No one in the company should be unclear about their product and its value to the organization. Every department—R&D, HR, Quality, Sales, Marketing—must have a defined product portfolio targeted toward a specific customer. This is especially critical for support teams, whose primary output is internal services rather than physical products.

Once we have clarity on who produces what, we can then evaluate whether these products add value to the business. Do some need to be retired? Should new ones be introduced? And finally, with this knowledge, we can establish relationships within the organization and clearly assign accountabilities. In other words, we can implement smart processes and operating procedures.

It all sounds so simple… but as always, the devil is in the details.

Creating smart processes is never easy. It presents challenges and often meets with natural resistance to change. Smart processes cannot be imposed from the outside—they must be a collective effort of those who will use them. They need to consider multiple factors:

•Cultural differences

•Business domain

•Company history

•Problems these processes are meant to solve

Each process must have a clear purpose with well-defined inputs and outputs.

Only then can we establish meaningful dependencies between them.

A combination of product knowledge (including services), well-defined processes, and clearly assigned responsibilities and accountabilities forms the foundation of an Effective Management System.

But is such a system enough to deliver great products?

Of course not—many other factors come into play. However, this is an excellent starting point. With this foundation in place:

•Product teams will be fully equipped to deliver their products and services on time and on schedule.

•Managers and leaders will have the necessary insight to make informed decisions and steer the organization in the right direction.

•Customers will receive products that solve their problems and provide real value.

—

There is an old Polish joke:

A construction site is buzzing with activity. One worker frantically runs back and forth, pushing an empty wheelbarrow. He appears completely exhausted.

A curious passerby stops and asks:

“Why are you running around with an empty wheelbarrow?”

The worker sighs, wiping his brow.

“Oh, don’t even ask… I’m so busy, there’s no time to load it!”