two-pizzas-teams

Two-Pizza Teams

Two-Pizza Teams, a concept popularized by Amazon’s founder and former CEO Jeff Bezos, has become synonymous with fostering innovation, agility, and collaboration within organizations. This innovative approach to team size and structure has gained recognition across industries, emphasizing the importance of small, cross-functional teams in driving productivity and creativity.

Understanding Two-Pizza Teams

The Essence of Two-Pizza Teams

At its core, Two-Pizza Teams is a concept that advocates for keeping teams small enough that they can be fed with only two pizzas. In practical terms, this means limiting the size of teams to a number where every team member can be actively involved in discussions, decision-making, and execution without the need for excessive coordination and bureaucracy.

Key characteristics of Two-Pizza Teams include:

  1. Small Team Size: Each team typically consists of no more than 5 to 7 members, although the exact size may vary depending on the organization’s context.
  2. Cross-Functional Composition: Teams comprise individuals with diverse skills and expertise, allowing for a holistic approach to problem-solving.
  3. Autonomy: Teams are empowered to make decisions independently and are held accountable for the outcomes of their work.
  4. Clear Goals: Teams have well-defined goals and objectives that align with the organization’s mission and strategy.

Origins of Two-Pizza Teams

The concept of Two-Pizza Teams traces its origins to Amazon, where it was popularized as part of the company’s innovative and customer-centric culture. Jeff Bezos introduced the idea as a means to break down traditional silos, improve decision-making speed, and foster a culture of ownership and accountability.

Key factors contributing to the development of Two-Pizza Teams include:

  • The need for Amazon to maintain its agility and customer focus as it rapidly expanded its operations and product offerings.
  • A desire to promote a decentralized and entrepreneurial spirit among employees.
  • A commitment to reducing bureaucracy and fostering innovation.

Key Concepts in Two-Pizza Teams

1. Small Team Size:

  • The primary defining characteristic of Two-Pizza Teams is their small size, which enables effective communication, decision-making, and collaboration.

2. Cross-Functional Composition:

  • Teams are composed of individuals with diverse skills and backgrounds, ensuring that all necessary expertise is available within the team.

3. Autonomy:

  • Two-Pizza Teams are granted a high degree of autonomy to make decisions and execute their work without unnecessary oversight.

4. Clear Goals:

  • Teams operate with clear and well-defined goals that align with the organization’s overarching objectives.

Advantages of Two-Pizza Teams

Organizations that embrace the concept of Two-Pizza Teams often experience a range of advantages:

1. Enhanced Collaboration:

  • Small team size fosters better communication and collaboration among team members, leading to increased creativity and innovation.

2. Faster Decision-Making:

  • Teams can make decisions quickly due to their reduced complexity and the absence of bureaucratic layers.

3. Greater Accountability:

  • Team members take ownership of their work, leading to higher accountability and a stronger sense of responsibility.

4. Improved Efficiency:

  • Smaller teams are often more efficient and can deliver results with fewer resources and less overhead.

5. Flexibility and Adaptability:

  • Two-Pizza Teams are more adaptable to change and can respond rapidly to evolving market conditions.

6. Empowered Employees:

  • Team members have the opportunity to contribute significantly to the team’s success and take pride in their work.

Implementation Strategies

Implementing Two-Pizza Teams requires careful planning and consideration:

1. Define Team Objectives:

  • Clearly define the goals and objectives of each Two-Pizza Team, ensuring alignment with the organization’s mission.

2. Assemble Cross-Functional Teams:

  • Form teams with members possessing a diverse range of skills and expertise to address complex challenges effectively.

3. Grant Autonomy:

  • Empower teams to make decisions independently and provide them with the autonomy needed to execute their work.

4. Foster a Culture of Ownership:

  • Encourage team members to take ownership of their projects and outcomes, promoting a sense of responsibility.

5. Monitor and Support:

  • Provide ongoing support and resources to Two-Pizza Teams while also monitoring their progress and outcomes.

Challenges of Two-Pizza Teams

While Two-Pizza Teams offer numerous advantages, they are not without challenges:

1. Communication:

  • Effective communication can become more challenging as teams scale, requiring careful coordination.

2. Resource Allocation:

  • Managing resources across multiple small teams can be complex, requiring efficient resource allocation.

3. Team Dynamics:

  • Smaller teams may experience team dynamics issues that need to be addressed to maintain a healthy work environment.

4. Scalability:

  • As organizations grow, maintaining the Two-Pizza Team model can become challenging, necessitating adaptations and scalability solutions.

Broader Impact

The Two-Pizza Team concept has had a far-reaching impact on modern organizational dynamics and management practices:

1. Agile Organizations:

  • The concept aligns with agile principles, promoting adaptability and responsiveness to change.

2. Collaboration:

  • Two-Pizza Teams have highlighted the importance of collaboration and effective communication within organizations.

3. Employee Empowerment:

  • Empowering employees to take ownership and make decisions has become a fundamental aspect of many organizational cultures.

4. Start-up Culture:

  • The model has been influential in promoting a start-up culture within larger organizations, fostering innovation and creativity.

Conclusion

Two-Pizza Teams have emerged as a powerful concept that challenges traditional notions of team size and organizational structure. By prioritizing small, cross-functional teams, organizations can unlock the potential for innovation, collaboration, and agility. As the business landscape continues to evolve, the principles embodied by Two-Pizza Teams serve as a beacon for organizations seeking to remain competitive, adaptive, and responsive to the ever-changing needs of customers and markets. Whether in technology companies or traditional enterprises, the Two-Pizza Team concept has proven its ability to drive success and foster a culture of ownership and accountability.

Key Highlights:

  • Definition: Two-Pizza Teams advocate for keeping teams small enough that they can be fed with only two pizzas. They typically consist of 5 to 7 members and are cross-functional in composition.
  • Origins: The concept was popularized by Amazon’s Jeff Bezos to promote agility, innovation, and collaboration within the organization.
  • Key Concepts:
    • Small Team Size
    • Cross-Functional Composition
    • Autonomy
    • Clear Goals
  • Advantages:
    • Enhanced Collaboration
    • Faster Decision-Making
    • Greater Accountability
    • Improved Efficiency
    • Flexibility and Adaptability
    • Empowered Employees
  • Implementation Strategies:
    • Define Team Objectives
    • Assemble Cross-Functional Teams
    • Grant Autonomy
    • Foster a Culture of Ownership
    • Monitor and Support
  • Challenges:
    • Communication
    • Resource Allocation
    • Team Dynamics
    • Scalability
  • Broader Impact:
    • Agile Organizations
    • Collaboration
    • Employee Empowerment
    • Start-up Culture
  • Conclusion: Two-Pizza Teams challenge traditional notions of team size and structure, promoting innovation, collaboration, and agility within organizations. As businesses evolve, the principles of Two-Pizza Teams remain relevant for driving success and fostering a culture of ownership and accountability.
Related FrameworkDescriptionWhen to Apply
Agile Methodology– An iterative and incremental approach to software development and project management that emphasizes flexibility, collaboration, and customer feedback. Agile Methodology enables cross-functional teams to deliver value in short cycles, adapt to changing requirements, and continuously improve processes. Two-Pizza Teams align with Agile principles by promoting small, self-organizing teams that are empowered to make decisions and deliver high-quality products iteratively.– Applicable in software development, product management, and project delivery where responsiveness to change, collaboration, and delivering value incrementally are essential for achieving project goals effectively and satisfying customer needs efficiently. Two-Pizza Teams complement Agile practices by fostering autonomy, communication, and alignment within small teams, enabling them to respond quickly to customer feedback and deliver value-driven solutions.
Scrum Framework– A lightweight Agile framework for managing complex projects, Scrum emphasizes teamwork, accountability, and iterative progress towards achieving a common goal. Scrum involves organizing work into time-boxed iterations called sprints, where cross-functional teams collaborate to deliver potentially shippable increments of product. Two-Pizza Teams align with Scrum principles by forming small, self-organizing teams that are responsible for delivering valuable product increments.– Relevant in product development, IT projects, and cross-functional collaboration where delivering high-quality products iteratively, adapting to changing requirements, and maximizing team autonomy and accountability are crucial for project success. Two-Pizza Teams complement Scrum by fostering collaboration, communication, and alignment within small teams, enabling them to work efficiently and effectively towards achieving sprint goals and delivering value to stakeholders.
Lean Startup Methodology– A methodology for developing businesses and products based on iterative cycles of hypothesis testing and validated learning. The Lean Startup Methodology emphasizes rapid experimentation, customer feedback, and iteration to minimize risk and optimize resource allocation in the early stages of building a business. Two-Pizza Teams align with Lean Startup principles by forming small, cross-functional teams that can quickly validate hypotheses and iterate on product ideas.– Applicable in startup ventures, product innovation, and entrepreneurship where validating ideas, learning from customer feedback, and iterating on product concepts quickly are essential for achieving product-market fit and maximizing the chances of business success. Two-Pizza Teams complement Lean Startup practices by fostering agility, collaboration, and innovation within small teams, enabling them to iterate rapidly and pivot based on validated learning.
DevOps Culture– A cultural and professional movement that emphasizes collaboration, communication, and integration between software development and IT operations teams. DevOps aims to streamline the software delivery process, automate workflows, and foster a culture of continuous improvement and innovation. Two-Pizza Teams align with DevOps principles by forming small, cross-functional teams that take ownership of end-to-end software delivery and collaborate closely with operations.– Relevant in software development, IT operations, and continuous delivery where reducing lead time, enhancing collaboration, and improving deployment frequency and reliability are essential for delivering software products efficiently and meeting customer expectations effectively. Two-Pizza Teams complement DevOps practices by promoting autonomy, accountability, and alignment within small teams, enabling them to deliver value continuously and sustainably.
Kanban Method– A visual management approach for optimizing workflow efficiency, Kanban emphasizes transparency, flow, and incremental improvements. Kanban involves visualizing work on a Kanban board, limiting work in progress (WIP), and continuously improving the flow of work. Two-Pizza Teams align with Kanban principles by forming small, self-organizing teams that use Kanban boards to visualize work and manage workflow efficiently.– Applicable in project management, workflow optimization, and continuous improvement where visualizing work, limiting WIP, and optimizing flow are critical for maximizing productivity and delivering value consistently. Two-Pizza Teams complement Kanban practices by fostering transparency, collaboration, and adaptability within small teams, enabling them to manage work effectively and continuously improve their processes and outcomes.
Cross-Functional Teams– Teams composed of individuals from different functional areas or disciplines who come together to achieve a common goal or deliver a specific outcome. Cross-functional teams leverage diverse skills, perspectives, and expertise to solve complex problems and deliver innovative solutions. Two-Pizza Teams align with the concept of cross-functional teams by forming small, diverse teams that collaborate closely to achieve shared objectives efficiently.– Relevant in project management, product development, and organizational effectiveness where addressing complex challenges, fostering innovation, and delivering value require collaboration across functional boundaries. Two-Pizza Teams complement cross-functional team structures by promoting diversity, collaboration, and alignment within small teams, enabling them to leverage collective expertise and achieve synergistic outcomes effectively and collaboratively.
Holacracy Model– A self-management organizational system that distributes authority and decision-making power among autonomous teams or “circles.” Holacracy promotes agility, transparency, and distributed leadership within organizations by defining clear roles, accountabilities, and governance processes. Two-Pizza Teams align with Holacracy principles by forming small, self-organizing teams that are empowered to make decisions and take ownership of their work.– Applicable in organizational design, management innovation, and leadership development where promoting autonomy, agility, and accountability is essential for adapting to change and fostering innovation. Two-Pizza Teams complement Holacracy practices by fostering self-organization, empowerment, and alignment within small teams, enabling them to collaborate effectively and drive organizational agility and performance in dynamic and complex environments.
Design Thinking– A human-centered approach to innovation and problem-solving that involves empathizing with users, defining problems, ideating solutions, prototyping concepts, and testing iteratively. Design Thinking fosters creativity, collaboration, and user-centricity in developing products, services, and experiences. Two-Pizza Teams align with Design Thinking principles by forming small, interdisciplinary teams that collaborate closely to solve complex problems and deliver user-centered solutions.– Relevant in product development, service design, and user experience (UX) design where understanding user needs, exploring ideas, and validating solutions through rapid prototyping and user feedback are essential for creating products or services that meet user expectations and address real-world problems effectively. Two-Pizza Teams complement Design Thinking by promoting collaboration, creativity, and user-centricity within small teams, enabling them to innovate and deliver user-centric solutions iteratively.
Six Sigma Methodology– A data-driven approach to process improvement and quality management, Six Sigma aims to reduce defects, variation, and waste in organizational processes. Six Sigma uses statistical methods and tools to identify root causes of problems, optimize processes, and improve performance. Two-Pizza Teams align with Six Sigma principles by forming small, cross-functional teams that focus on solving specific process problems and driving continuous improvement.– Applicable in quality management, process optimization, and continuous improvement where reducing defects, improving efficiency, and enhancing customer satisfaction are critical for achieving operational excellence. Two-Pizza Teams complement Six Sigma practices by promoting data-driven problem-solving, collaboration, and accountability within small teams, enabling them to identify and address process inefficiencies and deliver measurable improvements in quality and performance.

Read Next: Organizational Structure.

Types of Organizational Structures

organizational-structure-types
Organizational Structures

Siloed Organizational Structures

Functional

functional-organizational-structure
In a functional organizational structure, groups and teams are organized based on function. Therefore, this organization follows a top-down structure, where most decision flows from top management to bottom. Thus, the bottom of the organization mostly follows the strategy detailed by the top of the organization.

Divisional

divisional-organizational-structure

Open Organizational Structures

Matrix

matrix-organizational-structure

Flat

flat-organizational-structure
In a flat organizational structure, there is little to no middle management between employees and executives. Therefore it reduces the space between employees and executives to enable an effective communication flow within the organization, thus being faster and leaner.

Connected Business Frameworks

Portfolio Management

project-portfolio-matrix
Project portfolio management (PPM) is a systematic approach to selecting and managing a collection of projects aligned with organizational objectives. That is a business process of managing multiple projects which can be identified, prioritized, and managed within the organization. PPM helps organizations optimize their investments by allocating resources efficiently across all initiatives.

Kotter’s 8-Step Change Model

kotters-8-step-change-model
Harvard Business School professor Dr. John Kotter has been a thought-leader on organizational change, and he developed Kotter’s 8-step change model, which helps business managers deal with organizational change. Kotter created the 8-step model to drive organizational transformation.

Nadler-Tushman Congruence Model

nadler-tushman-congruence-model
The Nadler-Tushman Congruence Model was created by David Nadler and Michael Tushman at Columbia University. The Nadler-Tushman Congruence Model is a diagnostic tool that identifies problem areas within a company. In the context of business, congruence occurs when the goals of different people or interest groups coincide.

McKinsey’s Seven Degrees of Freedom

mckinseys-seven-degrees
McKinsey’s Seven Degrees of Freedom for Growth is a strategy tool. Developed by partners at McKinsey and Company, the tool helps businesses understand which opportunities will contribute to expansion, and therefore it helps to prioritize those initiatives.

Mintzberg’s 5Ps

5ps-of-strategy
Mintzberg’s 5Ps of Strategy is a strategy development model that examines five different perspectives (plan, ploy, pattern, position, perspective) to develop a successful business strategy. A sixth perspective has been developed over the years, called Practice, which was created to help businesses execute their strategies.

COSO Framework

coso-framework
The COSO framework is a means of designing, implementing, and evaluating control within an organization. The COSO framework’s five components are control environment, risk assessment, control activities, information and communication, and monitoring activities. As a fraud risk management tool, businesses can design, implement, and evaluate internal control procedures.

TOWS Matrix

tows-matrix
The TOWS Matrix is an acronym for Threats, Opportunities, Weaknesses, and Strengths. The matrix is a variation on the SWOT Analysis, and it seeks to address criticisms of the SWOT Analysis regarding its inability to show relationships between the various categories.

Lewin’s Change Management

lewins-change-management-model
Lewin’s change management model helps businesses manage the uncertainty and resistance associated with change. Kurt Lewin, one of the first academics to focus his research on group dynamics, developed a three-stage model. He proposed that the behavior of individuals happened as a function of group behavior.

Organizational Structure Case Studies

OpenAI Organizational Structure

openai-organizational-structure
OpenAI is an artificial intelligence research laboratory that transitioned into a for-profit organization in 2019. The corporate structure is organized around two entities: OpenAI, Inc., which is a single-member Delaware LLC controlled by OpenAI non-profit, And OpenAI LP, which is a capped, for-profit organization. The OpenAI LP is governed by the board of OpenAI, Inc (the foundation), which acts as a General Partner. At the same time, Limited Partners comprise employees of the LP, some of the board members, and other investors like Reid Hoffman’s charitable foundation, Khosla Ventures, and Microsoft, the leading investor in the LP.

Airbnb Organizational Structure

airbnb-organizational-structure
Airbnb follows a holacracy model, or a sort of flat organizational structure, where teams are organized for projects, to move quickly and iterate fast, thus keeping a lean and flexible approach. Airbnb also moved to a hybrid model where employees can work from anywhere and meet on a quarterly basis to plan ahead, and connect to each other.

Amazon Organizational Structure

amazon-organizational-structure
The Amazon organizational structure is predominantly hierarchical with elements of function-based structure and geographic divisions. While Amazon started as a lean, flat organization in its early years, it transitioned into a hierarchical organization with its jobs and functions clearly defined as it scaled.

Apple Organizational Structure

apple-organizational-structure
Apple has a traditional hierarchical structure with product-based grouping and some collaboration between divisions.

Coca-Cola Organizational Structure

coca-cola-organizational-structure
The Coca-Cola Company has a somewhat complex matrix organizational structure with geographic divisions, product divisions, business-type units, and functional groups.

Costco Organizational Structure

costco-organizational-structure
Costco has a matrix organizational structure, which can simply be defined as any structure that combines two or more different types. In this case, a predominant functional structure exists with a more secondary divisional structure. Costco’s geographic divisions reflect its strong presence in the United States combined with its expanding global presence. There are six divisions in the country alone to reflect its standing as the source of most company revenue. Compared to competitor Walmart, for example, Costco takes more a decentralized approach to management, decision-making, and autonomy. This allows the company’s stores and divisions to more flexibly respond to local market conditions.

Dell Organizational Structure

dell-organizational-structure
Dell has a functional organizational structure with some degree of decentralization. This means functional departments share information, contribute ideas to the success of the organization and have some degree of decision-making power.

eBay Organizational Structure

ebay-organizational-structure
eBay was until recently a multi-divisional (M-form) organization with semi-autonomous units grouped according to the services they provided. Today, eBay has a single division called Marketplace, which includes eBay and its international iterations.

Facebook Organizational Structure

facebook-organizational-structure
Facebook is characterized by a multi-faceted matrix organizational structure. The company utilizes a flat organizational structure in combination with corporate function-based teams and product-based or geographic divisions. The flat organization structure is organized around the leadership of Mark Zuckerberg, and the key executives around him. On the other hand, the function-based teams are based on the main corporate functions (like HR, product management, investor relations, and so on).

Goldman Sachs’ Organizational Structure

goldman-sacks-organizational-structures
Goldman Sachs has a hierarchical structure with a clear chain of command and defined career advancement process. The structure is also underpinned by business-type divisions and function-based groups.

Google Organizational Structure

google-organizational-structure
Google (Alphabet) has a cross-functional (team-based) organizational structure known as a matrix structure with some degree of flatness. Over the years, as the company scaled and it became a tech giant, its organizational structure is morphing more into a centralized organization.

IBM Organizational Structure

ibm-organizational-structure
IBM has an organizational structure characterized by product-based divisions, enabling its strategy to develop innovative and competitive products in multiple markets. IBM is also characterized by function-based segments that support product development and innovation for each product-based division, which include Global Markets, Integrated Supply Chain, Research, Development, and Intellectual Property.

McDonald’s Organizational Structure

mcdonald-organizational-structure
McDonald’s has a divisional organizational structure where each division – based on geographical location – is assigned operational responsibilities and strategic objectives. The main geographical divisions are the US, internationally operated markets, and international developmental licensed markets. And on the other hand, the hierarchical leadership structure is organized around regional and functional divisions.

McKinsey Organizational Structure

mckinsey-organizational-structure
McKinsey & Company has a decentralized organizational structure with mostly self-managing offices, committees, and employees. There are also functional groups and geographic divisions with proprietary names.

Microsoft Organizational Structure

microsoft-organizational-structure
Microsoft has a product-type divisional organizational structure based on functions and engineering groups. As the company scaled over time it also became more hierarchical, however still keeping its hybrid approach between functions, engineering groups, and management.

Nestlé Organizational Structure

nestle-organizational-structure
Nestlé has a geographical divisional structure with operations segmented into five key regions. For many years, Swiss multinational food and drink company Nestlé had a complex and decentralized matrix organizational structure where its numerous brands and subsidiaries were free to operate autonomously.

Nike Organizational Structure

nike-organizational-structure
Nike has a matrix organizational structure incorporating geographic divisions. Nike’s matrix structure is also present at the regional and sub-regional levels. Managerial responsibility is segmented according to business unit (apparel, footwear, and equipment) and function (human resources, finance, marketing, sales, and operations).

Patagonia Organizational Structure

patagonia-organizational-structure
Patagonia has a particular organizational structure, where its founder, Chouinard, disposed of the company’s ownership in the hands of two non-profits. The Patagonia Purpose Trust, holding 100% of the voting stocks, is in charge of defining the company’s strategic direction. And the Holdfast Collective, a non-profit, holds 100% of non-voting stocks, aiming to re-invest the brand’s dividends into environmental causes.

Samsung Organizational Structure

samsung-organizational-structure (1)
Samsung has a product-type divisional organizational structure where products determine how resources and business operations are categorized. The main resources around which Samsung’s corporate structure is organized are consumer electronics, IT, and device solutions. In addition, Samsung leadership functions are organized around a few career levels grades, based on experience (assistant, professional, senior professional, and principal professional).

Sony Organizational Structure

sony-organizational-structure
Sony has a matrix organizational structure primarily based on function-based groups and product/business divisions. The structure also incorporates geographical divisions. In 2021, Sony announced the overhauling of its organizational structure, changing its name from Sony Corporation to Sony Group Corporation to better identify itself as the headquarters of the Sony group of companies skewing the company toward product divisions.

Starbucks Organizational Structure

starbucks-organizational-structure
Starbucks follows a matrix organizational structure with a combination of vertical and horizontal structures. It is characterized by multiple, overlapping chains of command and divisions.

Tesla Organizational Structure

tesla-organizational-structure
Tesla is characterized by a functional organizational structure with aspects of a hierarchical structure. Tesla does employ functional centers that cover all business activities, including finance, sales, marketing, technology, engineering, design, and the offices of the CEO and chairperson. Tesla’s headquarters in Austin, Texas, decide the strategic direction of the company, with international operations given little autonomy.

Toyota Organizational Structure

toyota-organizational-structure
Toyota has a divisional organizational structure where business operations are centered around the market, product, and geographic groups. Therefore, Toyota organizes its corporate structure around global hierarchies (most strategic decisions come from Japan’s headquarter), product-based divisions (where the organization is broken down, based on each product line), and geographical divisions (according to the geographical areas under management).

Walmart Organizational Structure

walmart-organizational-structure
Walmart has a hybrid hierarchical-functional organizational structure, otherwise referred to as a matrix structure that combines multiple approaches. On the one hand, Walmart follows a hierarchical structure, where the current CEO Doug McMillon is the only employee without a direct superior, and directives are sent from top-level management. On the other hand, the function-based structure of Walmart is used to categorize employees according to their particular skills and experience.

Main Free Guides:

Scroll to Top

Discover more from FourWeekMBA

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading

FourWeekMBA