Hey Nicolas — thanks for taking time to share your thoughts, and I totally agree with your observation: building teams in this way does (at face value) eliminate end-to-end accountabiility. Your suggestion to replace team members is an interesting one… would have to try this out in practice: I can imagine that with strong filters on the type of personality that is hired, and good onboarding processes it could be a go. Might also be interesting to try a hybrid — i.e. rather tha a hard handoff between teams, you introduce a team member (potetnially always the same one) early on, and that team member takes the project forward to elongate accountability. A new team member is introduced before next handoff, etc. Let me know if you test this out, would be keen to hear how it works out:)
In a more general sense, long term accountability is hard even in traditional teams where individuals, rather than teams, are set KPI’s nd given rewards. Even without handing off between teams, managing for employee churn poses the same challenges. Specisliased teams, or at the very least, setting team level KPI’s, has worked well for me. Have you tried similar?