This sounds like a very promising partnership to me, if it is handled well.
One useful framework for discussing impediments during a retro is to place them in three concentric circles:
- innermost = "things we (the team) can control"
- middle = "things we
- outermost = "things we cannot control or influence"
Items in the outer circle, and perhaps in the middle one, would be candidates for passing on to Change Management, with and only with the full and explicit consent of the team.
After placing items in this framework for the first time, I might introduce this idea to my team in this way:
You know, we have an office of Change Management here, which might be
able to take action on some of these items we can't control.
- How would you all feel about that? (discussion)
- What concerns do you have about taking this action? (discussion)
I suggest we pick one or more items to forward on, and agree on the
wording to describe them. Then I'll forward it in an email that says
"Our team has identified the following item(s) that are affecting our
ability to delivery quality work. If these issues could be addressed,
it would be helpful." (modified to address the concerns & incorporate
elements raised during discussion)
Is everybody on board with this? Let's do a fist or five.
I expect that many teams would be open to, or even excited about, being able to raise "items we can't control or influence" to some external group that might be able to do something about them. I might start conservatively, by picking only one item to submit at first, and seeing how that played out before submitting anything else.