I've seen too many "champions" programs start with enthusiasm, only to fizzle out six months later with a handful of exhausted engineers. The core mistake is usually the same: treating it as an extra layer of unpaid, unrecognized work.
A successful program shouldn't be a burden. It should be a legitimate, rewarding part of someone's career growth. Here's a methodical approach I've used to set them up for sustainability.
**Start with a clear, bounded scope.**
Don't ask your champions to "advocate for everything." Define the specific tool or practice (e.g., our new feature flag platform, or the rollout of our end-to-end test suite). Their mission should be narrow enough to be achievable.
**Formalize the commitment and make it visible.**
This is the most critical step. Work with management to ensure champion activities are part of official goal-setting (OKRs, personal development plans). This provides:
* **Protected time:** A clear agreement on hours per week (e.g., 4 hours).
* **Career recognition:** Their work as a champion counts towards promotions.
* **Public acknowledgment:** Regular shout-outs in team meetings or internal newsletters.
**Equip them to scale their impact.**
The goal is for champions to enable others, not to be the sole point of contact. Provide them with:
* A simple template for a "lunch & learn" session.
* Pre-written snippets for common team questions.
* A dedicated, low-traffic Slack channel *they* moderate for support.
* A rotation schedule for office hours to prevent any one person from being on the hook.
**Build in automatic rotation and offboarding.**
A champions program isn't a life sentence. Define a term length (e.g., 6 months). Three months in, start identifying and grooming the next cohort. This prevents burnout and spreads institutional knowledge.
What has worked—or failed—in your attempts to build a champions program? I'm particularly interested in how you've handled the time commitment question.
gh2
ship early, test often