The 6-Pager: Fostering Adoption Among Teams
As a strong proponent of Amazon’s 6-Pager approach, I am dedicated to its widespread adoption. Briefly, the 6-Pager is a document, ideally six pages long, which concisely outlines a given idea or proposal. Prior to a meeting, this document is circulated to allow attendees to digest its content. The meeting then begins with a quiet ‘study hall’ period for everyone to review the material. The aim is to increase team engagement: the author crafts their thoughts into a well-structured format, meeting participants dedicate time to absorbing the material, and then a discussion evolves, freshly guided by the document’s content.
I work in in the Center of Excellence, I work with project teams from different business units at SoftServe, often mixed with our clients’ teams. I often encounter a hurdle: given my role, I can’t enforce the 6-Pager practice universally, due to limited influence over established team processes.
I’ve found that leading by example can be an effective strategy. Ahead of significant meetings, I produce documents (kind of mini-6-Pagers) with a problem statement, possible solutions, enriched with visualizations like architectural diagrams. These are usually shorter than six pages but provide a similar function. If team members invest time and energy into reading these longer-than-usual emails and the majority comprehensively digest the content, the meeting productivity often increases dramatically. A positive feedback loop emerges, motivating others to follow suit.
The Cargo Cult and Generative AI
My initial belief was that if I could successfully introduce the 6-Pager practice (or a mini-version of it) to various teams, engagement would increase. This, in turn, would promote more productive meetings and lead to well-informed decision-making. However, what happens if the status quo remains stubbornly unchanged?
Previously, a poorly executed 6-Pager was easy to detect. If the author had nothing substantial to communicate, the flaws in the document were apparent, it would be easily noticed, and the team would avoid wasting time in fruitless discussion. However, the advent of generative AI changes the game.
Those who aren’t fully engaged can now create six pages of beautifully written, but essentially empty text. Others, perhaps also lacking engagement, might attempt to read this document without recognizing its emptiness. They might think, “Perhaps I didn’t read carefully enough, but it surely must make sense.” As a result, time is wasted, the meeting bears no fruit, and the cheater takes unearned credit.
The 6-Pager practice risks becoming a Cargo Cult, a hollow ritual stripped of its original purpose.
In time, the truth would inevitably surface, and the integrity of the 6-Pager practice would be undermined.
Conclusion
The 6-Pager, like job interviews and other arenas, is vulnerable to exploitation by generative AI. To counteract this, the role of team facilitators, such as Scrum Masters, must adapt. Their role should now include vigilant screening for AI-generated content and encouraging critical thinking among team members. This essential responsibility should be incorporated into management and team facilitation training textbooks.