Welcome to this month's edition of Plumtree Perspectives, and whether you're new here or returning, thank you for being part of the Plumtree community!
Each month we share new ideas, practical tools, and simple frameworks focused on how R&D teams can collaborate more effectively, thrive in complexity, and deliver faster for patients.
Most organizations try to create it by defining responsibilities, updating reporting lines, or clarifying who owns which deliverables.
That helps. But in complex work, it is rarely enough.
Because the real tension usually does not sit inside the clearly defined parts of a role. It shows up in the overlap. In the handoffs. In the decisions that do not fit neatly into one lane. In the moments where two people both need to lead, support, influence, or adapt together.
That is where role clarity is either built or broken.
What we're noticing
Many teams are not struggling because people are unclear on their titles. They are struggling because the work keeps moving into the grey space between roles.
We worked with a clinical operations organization to strengthen the way two leadership roles worked together, whose ownership was clear on paper but less clear in practice. The themes were familiar. Inconsistent expectation setting. Individualized approaches. Unclear directives. Variability in communication. Tension around overlap and being in each other's "lanes".
What became clear was this. The need was not to define responsibilities better. The real need was a shared understanding of what a strong partnership looked like, what outcomes they owned together, and how they would work when the answer was not obvious.
The insight
In complex work, role clarity does not come from separating people perfectly.
It comes from helping people understand where they are distinct, where they are interdependent, and what they are jointly accountable for.
When teams only define roles in isolation, people often hesitate. They worry about overstepping. Decisions slow down. Tensions build. Work gets pushed upward or stalls in the middle.
But when teams define shared outcomes first, role clarity becomes more useful. People can see who is best positioned to lead, where to leverage strengths beyond roles, and how they stay aligned as the work changes.
The Plumtree Perspective
At Plumtree, we see role clarity as an operating challenge, not just a role definition exercise.
The work usually starts in three places.
First, surface the friction honestly. What is working well. What is not working well. What needs to change.
Second, co-create what great looks like together. Not in abstract language, but in practical terms. What principles will guide us. What are the non-negotiables. What does strong partnership actually look like when pressure is high.
Third, define shared outcomes and use them to clarify ownership, overlap, and new ways of working.
That is what helped this clinical operations team move forward. They named the tensions, defined guiding principles and non-negotiables, and built a simple framework around shared outcomes to clarify how they would work together differently.
This is often what role clarity really requires. A shared view of the work. A shared standard for partnership. And a shared commitment to how decisions and coordination will happen when the work gets messy.
What you can try
If your team is struggling with role clarity, try this simple sequence in a 60 minute working session.
Step 1: Start with the friction - Ask: Where are we seeing confusion, duplication, hesitation, or dropped work? Where do we feel tension abut ownership or involvement? Where are people afraid of overstepping?
Step 2: Define what great looks like - Ask: When this partnership is working at its best, what does it look and feel like? What should be true in the way we communicate, decide, and support each other? What are the non-negotiables?
Step 3: Clarify shared outcomes before individual ownership - Ask: What outcomes are we jointly responsible for enabling? What does each role uniquely contribute to that outcome? Who is best positioned to lead, where should we leverage strengths, and how will we stay aligned?
The goal is not perfect role separation. The goal is enough shared clarity that people can move with confidence in the real work.
Marcus Buckingham's Design Love In makes a simple but important point. The moments people say "I love that" at work are not random. They point to something meaningful, energizing, and worth repeating.
His argument is that leaders can design for more of those moments through how work is experienced day to day. How people are heard in meetings, how people communicate under pressure, and how contributions are recognized.
The takeaway is practical. It is the reminder that performance and engagement are shaped in those small, everyday interactions.
In complex team environments, that experience directly affects how people contribute, how decisions get made, and how work flows across functions.
The open question for leaders is not whether every moment can feel great. It is whether the environment is designed so people can stay engaged and thrive, even when the work is hard.
Want to learn more? Click the image for the Amazon link.
Until next time!
If your R&D team is navigating complexity and you want support getting aligned and moving faster, we’re happy to start with a conversation.
Plumtree is here to help teams and organizations work together at the speed of science.
P.S. If you know someone who’d find this useful, please forward it and invite them to subscribe HERE.
-1.png?upscale=true&width=1160&upscale=true&name=Email%20Header%20Insights%20(2)-1.png)
.png?upscale=true&width=400&upscale=true&name=Jen%20Twitter%20Post%20(3).png)
