# Flight Levels: Coordinating Work Across Three Levels Author: Marin Niehues, Niehues Consulting · Published: 2024-02-26 · Organisation Design Source: https://www.niehuesconsulting.de/en/blog/flight-levels-coordinating-work/ Flight Levels is a model by Klaus Leopold that makes work visible on three levels: the operational work of teams, the coordination between teams and the steering of the portfolio. It shows at which level delivery stalls and stops companies from optimising the level where the problem does not sit. The model suits organisations with several teams that depend on one another. Many companies have organised their teams in an agile way and still see no faster delivery. The cause often lies above the teams: more initiatives run at once than the organisation can absorb, teams wait for one another, and nobody coordinates what has to be finished first. Flight Levels gives this observation a structure. This article explains the three levels, describes the introduction in five steps and offers a checklist with which executives can judge whether the model fits their organisation. **Teams that work efficiently inside their own boundaries do not make a company faster by themselves. Flight Levels directs attention to the level where waiting time arises: the coordination between teams and the steering of the portfolio.** ## What are Flight Levels? Flight Levels are three levels of observation on which a company makes its work visible and steers it. Klaus Leopold developed the model out of his consulting practice in Kanban and business agility, and wrote the book "Kanban Change Leadership" with Siegfried Kaltenecker. The name comes from aviation: the higher the altitude, the larger the area the pilot surveys and the fewer details are visible. On Flight Level 1 the teams work on their tasks, for instance in a Scrum team with a sprint backlog or in a Kanban system with columns for the flow of work. On Flight Level 2 the collaboration between teams becomes visible, so that a product or service needing several teams can come into being. On Flight Level 3 the company steers its portfolio: which initiatives are pending, which results should they bring, and how many of them can the organisation handle at once? A shared principle links the levels. On each level work is made visible, the number of simultaneous items is limited and the collaboration is discussed in fixed rhythms. The principle comes from Kanban and is applied here to the organisation as a whole. The article on [limiting work in progress](/en/blog/limit-work-in-progress-deliver-faster/) describes the basis. ## Why is it not enough to make teams agile? It is not enough because the lead time of an initiative consists largely of waiting time, and that arises between teams. A team may finish its tasks within days, yet the result then sits in the queue of the next team. In his book "Rethinking Agile", Leopold describes exactly this effect: improving a single team hardly shortens the lead time of the whole system as long as dependencies, hand-overs and an overload of simultaneous initiatives remain. A constructed example shows the mechanics. A company introduces Scrum in five teams that jointly build a customer feature. Each team delivers in two-week sprints and improves its own velocity. Even so, the feature reaches the customer only after five months, because team B waits for input from team A, team C may start only after team B's acceptance, and the business department has launched eight further initiatives at the same time. An improvement on Flight Level 1 would achieve little here. The levers lie on Level 2 with the alignment of the teams and on Level 3 with the number of simultaneous initiatives. The mechanics behind this are explained in the article on [flow metrics](/en/blog/flow-metrics-throughput-wip-wait-time/), and the consequences for planning are described in the article on [dependencies between teams](/en/blog/managing-dependencies-between-teams/). ## What do the three levels look like in detail? **The three Flight Levels at a glance** Criterion | Flight Level 1: Operations | Flight Level 2: Coordination | Flight Level 3: Strategy and portfolio | With Niehues Consulting Guiding question | How do we do our tasks well? | How do several teams deliver one result together? | Which initiatives serve the strategy, and how many can run at once? | Which level limits delivery, and which metric proves it? Made visible | Tasks of the team | Initiatives needing several teams, with their dependencies | Initiatives and strategic outcomes | One shared picture across all levels Typical improvement | Smaller tasks, limiting work within the team | Joint planning, sequencing of dependencies | Fewer simultaneous initiatives, selection by value | Decision paths and interfaces before the start Typical rhythm | Daily or weekly | Weekly to fortnightly | Monthly to quarterly | Fixed review date after 90 days Typical owners | Team | Coordinating role or body of the teams | Executive team, divisional heads | A named owner per level The table shows the logic of the model: each level asks a different question and needs different owners. The connection is decisive. An initiative from Level 3 must translate into initiatives on Level 2, and these into tasks on Level 1. If the chain breaks, delivery stalls at the break without any single team seeing the cause. ## What is the model good for, and what is it not? Flight Levels is good for diagnosis and for alignment between teams. It says nothing about whether a team should use Scrum, Kanban or another method, and it defines no roles. The model is a way of thinking that helps companies find the right level for improvement. It works with Scrum in the team as well as with Kanban, and it can be combined with other approaches, for example with the organisational building blocks of the [unFIX model](/en/blog/unfix-model-organisation-building-blocks/). The model is useful when at least three conditions coincide: several teams depend on one another, lead time is too long, and the cause is unclear. It is less useful for a single team with a manageable product, where a method at team level is sufficient. Its effect also stays small in organisations whose executive team has no interest in steering the portfolio, because Level 3 does not work without decision-makers. ## How do you introduce Flight Levels? Five steps The introduction starts with a stocktake and ends with rhythms that run permanently. Five steps structure the approach. 1. Delimit the value stream: choose an area in which several teams work on a shared result, and describe the customers and the expected business result. 2. Make the levels visible: record all running initiatives on one board per level with columns for waiting, in progress and done. Count how many initiatives actually run in parallel. 3. Find bottlenecks: measure lead time and waiting time per level and establish where initiatives lie longest. 4. Limit simultaneous work: set a cap on simultaneous initiatives at the level with the bottleneck, and start new ones only when old ones are finished. 5. Establish rhythms: agree a fixed meeting per level in which decision-makers select initiatives, clarify dependencies and remove obstacles. The limit in step 4 usually yields the largest effect, and it demands courage from the executive team. Whoever reduces ten initiatives to four has to defer six requests and justify this to the business units. Selecting by value, for example by the cost of waiting, makes the decision comprehensible. **Checking questions before the introduction** - How many initiatives are running at the same time right now, and who knows the number? - How long does an initiative sit on average between two teams before anybody works on it? - Who decides today which initiative must be finished first? - Is there a body that clarifies dependencies between teams regularly? ## How do you know that Flight Levels is working? The model works when the lead time of initiatives falls and the number of simultaneous initiatives stays stable. Further signs are fewer escalations because dependencies appear on the board earlier, and an executive team that selects initiatives by value rather than by volume. Measure the baseline before the start so that the effect can be demonstrated. A time series of lead time and the number of parallel initiatives over two quarters is enough for a first assessment. A counter-indicator is a board that is maintained while decisions stay the same. Flight Levels has then remained a visualisation project. Check in every meeting which decision follows from the board, and end rhythms that manage without decisions. ## Flight Levels with Niehues Consulting [Niehues Consulting](/en/) is a consultancy for AI management and organisation design from a delivery perspective, based in Düsseldorf. Founder Marin Niehues builds organisations that deliver, in projects ranging from VC-funded scale-ups to DAX 40 corporations and in more than 20 countries on six continents. As delivery manager, project manager or product owner he works at the interface between teams and executive management, exactly where Flight Levels 2 and 3 apply. The approach follows the Niehues Delivery Model with its three phases. For coordination across several levels, three of its checking questions count: Who decides, who delivers, who uses? Which roles, decision paths and interfaces does operations need? Which metric shows after 90 days that the solution has landed? The entry point is a free initial consultation of 30 minutes, which you can arrange via the [contact page](/en/#kontakt). **Conclusion** Flight Levels shows executives at which level delivery stalls: in the team, between teams or in the portfolio. The model combines visibility, limited parallel work and fixed rhythms on all three levels and leaves the choice of method to the teams. The greatest effect usually comes from limiting simultaneous initiatives on Level 3, and it needs an executive team willing to defer requests. **Sources** - Leopold, Klaus: Rethinking Agile: Why Agile Teams Have Nothing to Do with Business Agility, book - Leopold, Klaus; Kaltenecker, Siegfried: Kanban Change Leadership: Creating a Culture of Continuous Improvement, book ## Frequently asked questions ### What are Flight Levels? Flight Levels are a model by Klaus Leopold that looks at a company's work on three levels: the operational work of teams, the coordination between teams and the strategic steering of the portfolio. It helps to see at which level delivery stalls. ### Who developed the Flight Levels model? Klaus Leopold developed the model drawing on his experience with Kanban and business agility in companies. Siegfried Kaltenecker is co-author of his book "Kanban Change Leadership". Consultants and organisations that need to coordinate several teams have used it since. ### Is Flight Levels a framework like SAFe? Flight Levels is a model for diagnosing and designing coordination rather than a prescribed framework with roles and events. It prescribes no method and can be combined with Scrum, Kanban or other approaches. Organisations design the levels themselves. ### What is the difference between Flight Level 1, 2 and 3? Flight Level 1 covers the operational work of teams, Flight Level 2 the coordination between teams and Flight Level 3 the strategic steering of the portfolio. Each level asks a different question and needs different owners. ### Which companies benefit from Flight Levels? Flight Levels suits companies in which several teams depend on one another and lead time is too long. For a single team with a manageable product, a method at team level is sufficient. ### How long does it take to introduce Flight Levels? A first board for one value stream is in place within a few weeks, and you assess the effect on lead time after two quarters. Plan a review date after 90 days at which the executive team decides on rhythms and limits. ### Do we need Scrum or Kanban to use Flight Levels? No, Flight Levels requires no particular method at team level. Teams work with Scrum, Kanban or their own practices as long as their work is visible and dependencies are coordinated on Level 2. ### How much does it cost to introduce Flight Levels? Introduction ties up working time for the stocktake, the boards and the fixed rhythms. Scope and terms of an engagement are discussed in the free initial consultation.