A team member asked if our strategy and approach was lifted from the Phoenix Project. They wondered if that’s why I split our engineers into two squads: one focused on features, owning our frontend repos, and the other on platform, owning the backend and cleaning up the “messy middle”. We have a learning budget at TCG and I had encouraged them to read it. While there are some elements that overlap, our strategy is shaped by a lot of different experiences.
As we grow, I want the squad setup to evolve. The Features squad will become full stack, while Platform evolves into a Technical Design Authority (TDA). To support this, I built a career framework that clarifies where engineers are, where they can go, and what’s expected at each stage. It’s not just about delivering features but fostering a culture of growth and continuous improvement. I’ve reinforced this through our Strategy, Vision, and Roadmaps. From board presentations to all-hands meetings, I’ve aligned the company using the ‘Singer Analogy’: Like Singer takes a solid 911 (964) and refines it at every step, we’re iteratively adding value to make it the best version possible.
But did I lift this from The Phoenix Project? Possibly, in part. It’s a great book with a lot of valuable lessons, but our strategy came from a blend of my experiences. I’ve seen the pitfalls of people dependent playbooks, especially at scale, where reliance on individuals can take a team down when things go south. Yet, in smaller, established teams, the people are your greatest strength. The key is tailoring your approach, listening to feedback, and leading with empathy to get the most from your team.
So while The Phoenix Project may have inspired parts of this journey, our approach is our own, shaped by everything we’ve learned along the way.
Olly Brand 