To avoid a lack of clarity around roles and responsibilities. Often too much effort is put into the descriptions of roles and functions and still there are overlapping elements and vagueness. We feel that defining roles and responsibilities should be more of a living, continuous process. This stops frustration from festering and is a way of proactively streamlining and improving collaboration.
A meeting in which a team discusses each other’s roles and responsibilities and finds solutions for missing links, overlap, discrepancies etc. Also, people can propose to change their own roles. After time, these meetings could develop into role markets where people “buy and sell” new tasks.
Step 1: Someone (the case presenter) presents a proposal to change a role or task or states a problem concerning roles and/or collaboration.
Step 2: Anyone can ask clarifying questions. No discussions or reactions are permitted, only questions.
Step 3: People may give reactions but must not discuss these as yet.
Step 4: The case presenter may react by giving an amended proposal and/or further clarification.
Step 5: Objections: are there any objections in the sense that the new proposal will harm us or send us backwards?
Step 6: Integration: the facilitator leads an open discussion to solve the objections one by one.
When roles appear unclear and there is a lot of discussion about “dropping the ball” at different times.
Also, one could advocate that regular governance meetings should be carried out anyway to prevent roles from becoming unclear, frustration from festering or the ball from being dropped.