Spotify
Spotify’s teams are organized with squads and tribes, with squads focusing on specific missions and tribes being groups of related squads. They also have chapters, which are groups based on role or skill. Squads have product owners that are responsible for prioritizing work for the team, with tribe leadership setting direction and squads deciding how to implement. I would make ownership clear in this model by making the distinctions between a chapter and squad very strong.
Airbnb
At Airbnb, product decisions are led by the design team and the CEO. There is one product roadmap that is followed by the company, instead of smaller roadmaps for individual teams. The PM role is merged with product marketing, and PMs don’t control design or engineering. I admire the fact that design is core to Airbnb, however I think PMs provide helpful insight when it comes to making product decisions. I would want PMs and designers to be on more equal footing.
Zappos
Zappos has a unique structure of a holacratic model (flat and decentralized). It consists of many nested circles that are self managed. I’m personally intrigued, but it proved unpopular (18% of employees quit). I’d advise slowing this transition or testing it on smaller groups first. There doesn’t seem to be a PM role, and the decisions are made within each circle.
My choice
I’d prefer to work at Spotify. While the existence of both squads and chapters may blur the lines of ownership, this model fits the agile workflows I’m most comfortable with. However, I’d learn a lot from working in an atypical product structure like holacracy.
Sources
https://www.functionly.com/orginometry/real-org-charts/spotify-org-structure
https://medium.com/@elishaong/designing-design-teams-23eb85b66085
https://businessmodelanalyst.com/zappos-organizational-structure-analysis/?srsltid=AU7gw4W_dSgciQbGzN4WDZScvBf33wzsaRPdIzQ4SSUdwA2Km700RBWT
https://www.businessinsider.com/zappos-ceo-tony-hsieh-on-holacracy-transition-2016-1
