Building an Organization for Borderless Success: A Discussion with Two Global Team Development Managers

Why I joined Money Forward

Teppan, why did you decide to leave Amazon after working there for 15 years and join Money Forward?

Teppan: I decided to leave Amazon simply because I felt I had accomplished what I needed to in 15 years.

In the beginning, I joined Amazon Japan as one of the founding members of their Marketplace business. At the time, the workplace was in a very lively phase, typical of a startup, as we were trying to keep up with and surpass Rakuten and Yahoo! I experienced a shift in my development colleagues, where previously the company mainly hired Japanese employees, but it started to recruit globally without requiring Japanese language proficiency. I worked primarily in product management and development management simultaneously, eventually overseeing 50 to 60 members across multiple teams. I then transitioned to AWS in Seattle, where I served as a TPM for two years.

I was searching for a new job located at a company headquarters in an organization that demonstrates a commitment to technology and offers its own services. Among various options, the factors that ultimately led me to choose Money Forward were the company's future potential and the compatibility with its members. I felt that I would fit in well, or rather, that there were many pleasant people.

Actually, I have only worked for foreign companies in the past, and Money Forward is the first Japanese company I have worked for. Before joining, I had some concerns about this transition. However, I was pleasantly surprised by how smoothly I integrated into the company.

Vishwas, you have only worked for Japanese companies since you were in India, right?

Vishwas: Yes. After joining the Indian branch of a Japanese company, I was transferred to the head office in Japan, and I have been living in Japan since then. In my previous role at my second company, which was also a Japanese company, my duties were much broader than development and included management and customer relations. So, I decided to change jobs because I wanted to focus more on my core skill, which is technology.

I was drawn to Money Forward not only because of its products but also because of its microservice development and flat team structure. I believed that in this environment, I would be able to learn a lot from others and enhance my skills while tackling different challenges.

After joining, I found the company was just as I had expected in this aspect. For example, creating a development plan is not a top-down process. Instead, the team brainstorms to address issues and decide on solutions. This allows major architectural changes to be initiated based on team members' opinions, which is great. My team is made up of members from diverse countries like Mexico, Brazil, India, Vietnam, and Indonesia. This gives us valuable opportunities to learn about each other's ideas and cultures.

Promoting the development team's globalization as Engineering Managers

The two of you manage development teams that are becoming increasingly globalized. Could you please tell me about the specific nature of your work?

Teppan: While I am a member of the CTO office, until recently, I was assigned to promote the globalization of the teams in the HR Solutions Department as a sort of internal secondment.

Several non-Japanese members were transferred to the HR Solutions Department, and I was transferred to help them get up and running successfully in their new teams and to facilitate smoother communication with our overseas offices. Our transition to using English, which was ahead of the rest of the company, is generally going well, thanks to the positive attitude of the team members.

We are now at the stage of working on an overall strategy that extends beyond a single department with the CTO Office Vice President of Engineering. One of the first things we are considering doing is sharing knowledge and best practices regarding inter-team communication. We want to gather examples of communication between teams that are mostly Japanese, non-Japanese, and mixed. We also want to document any challenges that may have come up and how they were resolved. This should help newly globalized teams make a seamless transition.

Vishwas, how does your mainly non-Japanese team communicate with other teams?

Vishwas: The development team at Money Forward X is divided into two groups: one for corporate services and another for consumer services. I am part of the corporate services group, which has a higher number of non-Japanese members. The consumer services group has recently begun hiring non-Japanese members and intends to increase their numbers going forward. However, we already have no problem with chat communication in English, so I think the transition to English conversation will also be smooth.

This can be attributed largely to the cooperation of our product managers and business members. The credit goes to everyone for willingly expressing interest in learning English and communicating with non-Japanese members. Initially, I often had to intervene and bridge the gap between Japanese and English. However, I noticed that, eventually, everyone began speaking on their own.

Does switching the language of the workplace to English lower productivity?

It is said that switching to English as the language in the workplace temporarily reduces team productivity, but how has this played out in reality for you?

Teppan: If the engineers switch to English, communication with product managers and designers cannot remain the same as before. We had been concerned for a while about how this change might affect our ability to meet the roadmap commitments we made earlier.

As a result of the language transition, the HR Solutions Department saw a temporary dip in productivity but recovered quickly, so it did not pose a major problem. It is hard to tell whether the decline was really due to the shift to English or some other factor. The timing coincided with a major change in our development structure, so it was likely the result of a combination of factors rather than just the adoption of English.

Either way, given the ease of hiring and the value of the skills that diverse members bring to the company, I believe that global hiring benefits the entire company, even if there is a temporary drop in productivity.

How was it with your team, Vishwas?

Vishwas: We actually didn't have much of a problem with the speed of development.

One of the things we did was allocate time in the first three months to allow Japanese and non-Japanese members to become acquainted with each other. During this time, I handled all communication between the development team, the product manager team, and the design team. I openly shared with both teams the details of my communication with the other team, including the nature of our interactions, so that everyone would know the communication patterns right from the start. I also interpreted for them in meetings and always made sure that nothing was unclear.

Introducing Scrum as a framework for development was also effective. Communication between team members is fundamental to the Scrum approach. In other words, if the team fails to communicate, development is bound to be unsuccessful. Creating a situation where members are forced to communicate worked pretty well.

However, whether the results of this approach are reproducible still needs to be verified. It would depend on the team's composition, the organization's size, and the development structure.

Areas that require updating for the organization's globalization

Some managers in the company must be new to managing non-Japanese members. Based on your experiences, are there any differences between Japanese and non-Japanese members from the management perspective, and are there things you are mindful of?

Teppan: In my view, there is a difference not so much in terms of members' traits but more in terms of organization and working style differences between foreign companies and Money Forward. Some members from foreign companies might feel confused because of this difference.

For example, goal setting, reporting lines, and meeting formats could be areas of uncertainty. Goal setting, and even goal tracking, tends to be a bit vague. Many of our members work multiple roles concurrently, which means they have more than one manager. This complicates reporting lines, and those used to simpler organizational structures might get confused. It appears that many meetings, whether at the company-wide or team-based levels, require everyone's participation and involve information sharing. In my opinion, it is necessary to clarify and review the purpose of some of these meetings.

This is just one of the many approaches, and it's not about this method being better or worse than another. Job-based employment is fundamental to foreign companies, and this difference is quite significant. The concern is that this difference could lead to challenges as more members join from foreign-affiliated companies. That's why I think it's necessary to update our approach.

In Japan it has always meant a lot to go through hardships together to build a team. It is certainly characteristic of Japanese companies or membership-based structures to have employees spend time together to strengthen unity and instill certain ideas. It is also typical for employees to be able to carry out their work even if the ownership of management is a little ambiguous.

Vishwas: I have worked for Japanese companies for a long time and agree that emphasis is placed on spending time together. However, I believe evaluating the purpose and frequency of meetings at certain times are crucial.

Teppan: Regarding the reporting line, I have actually heard some members ask, "Who is my manager?" At my previous companies, I only had one manager. I received directives and evaluations from one person, so it was simple. Especially in the context of goal setting and evaluation, I think it is essential to clarify goal setting, who is responsible for what goal, and systematize the evaluation process.

When the evaluation criteria and process are ambiguous, the amount of day to day communication and the perceptions that arise from it can unintentionally impact evaluations. Essentially, those who speak up the most end up with an advantage.

Everyday communication is often where we form perceptions like "that person has been putting in a lot of effort lately." It would be good for senior members involved in evaluations to interact with employees regardless of whether they are Japanese or non-Japanese, but biases will still inevitably emerge. If that happens, some will be at a disadvantage at the stage when senior members are forming perceptions about their members, which is not fair. As a first step toward systemizing the process, we are currently examining ways to achieve this, such as thoroughly documenting reflections and feedback.

Vishwas: At Money Forward X, we are also starting to measure the number of PRs (pull requests) and the number of tasks completed against sprints and capacity.

Teppan: That's great. I want to add more objective indicators like that.

Looking at it from a different angle, Japanese members tend to be relatively modest in their self-evaluations. However, those aiming to work on a global scale do not hesitate to highlight any strengths worth emphasizing, and some even strongly showcase their achievements. Neither approach is better or worse than the other, but as the attitudes and assertiveness levels of members become more diverse, it is essential to clarify the goals and member's expectations. If these are not clarified, senior members will be swayed by the various factors I mentioned, causing their judgment to waver.

Vishwas: That is true. During our monthly reviews, I've noticed that Japanese members tend to provide relatively less information in text about the results they have been able to deliver. Although I encourage them to write more, it seems like they only cover about one or two of the three topics that they have achieved. In contrast, non-Japanese members would report on all three result topics and even offer more detailed breakdowns for each task.

Teppan: Japanese people are shy. But if you cannot clearly report your achievements, you risk losing out in the global arena, regardless of how good you are at your job. I hope to enlighten our members about this.

We want people who can be role models and make a difference in the organization

What kind of people would you like to have at Money Forward in the future?

Vishwas: I would like to see more people working here who can be role models for junior members to look up to.

Taking engineering managers as an example, people who have all three of the following: technical skills, understanding of the products, and management skills. Furthermore, people who are capable of sharing their knowledge with junior members and addressing concerns directly. Right now, individuals with all three qualities are mostly division managers and general managers, so I want more people like this to work in positions closer to the junior members.

Teppan: We need more people like you, Vishwas. The company is still young, so the organization has yet to mature. As is typical with rapidly expanding organizations, recruitment and training may struggle to keep up with the pace of growth. Therefore, bringing in more of the kind of people we mentioned and fostering the development of the more junior members within the company is important.

I would also like to see individuals who are willing to challenge the status quo.

When I met our CEO, Tsuji-san, at my job interview, I told him, "I am only familiar with Amazon's way of doing things. If I join Money Forward, I might have many conflicts with the rules and people around me. People would assimilate, so I will approach the role as an outlier and strive to bring about positive changes." In response, Tsuji-san said, "Money Forward must continue to evolve. So, I prefer to have people with that type of mindset join us."

I can clearly see that the management team, like our CTO Nakade-san, is not satisfied with the status quo and is eager to see change. The inclusion of "Evolution" in the recent update to our Culture probably reflects this intention.

Vishwas: I think Money Forward will continue to undergo significant changes.

If we define the phases of globalization, the first phase is the transition to English; next comes the expansion of overseas offices, and finally, the globalization of products. This means we are currently only in the first phase.

Teppan: Globalization is essentially about striving to become borderless. And to be borderless, we must be streamlined. Take the development organization at Money Forward as an example— our engineers can work seamlessly, regardless of which global base they go to. We use a unified language, follow a similar development process, utilize the same tools, and have consistent KPIs and evaluation methods. That is the kind of organization we want to build.

I hope that individuals who support the idea of creating this kind of borderless environment and those who desire to work freely in the world will join us in transforming Money Forward.

Vishwas: Becoming borderless really is a primary goal.

Teppan: I believe it will become increasingly risky career-wise for everyone, not just engineers, only to have experience working in one's home country. For Japanese individuals, this would mean only having experience working in Japan. You may assume the work environment of a global organization in Japan is similar to working overseas, but in reality, it is an entirely different experience. Personally, I would like young people in particular to gain more experience working in other countries. I hope to facilitate such opportunities at Money Forward.

nterview by Asami Fukuda（Money Forward Technical Public Relations）
Interview and text and Photos by Mika Tsutoyama (Money Forward Recruiting and Public Relations)
English Translation by Reiko Tokuda （Money Forward Language Specialist Team）