[sokoloff]

If your backlog is six-plus months long, do you simultaneously go out and “want to be the ones to do it”?

I have no problem with another team being too busy to take on work in my area, provided they don’t actively try to take on work in my area and then pocket veto it.

[Jare]

This is the real core of the issue. There's always a chance that some software project, small or large, will progress massively slow for 1000 reasons. But the dysfunction with turf wars and actively blocking solutions is really serious, and common in large or growing companies.

[Tempest1981]

Possibly fear that "asking team" builds the dashboard themselves, in a custom way, then asks the "dashboard team" to maintain it.

Although that might still be a time-saver for the backlogged "dashboard team".

[cutemonster]

I think they (the dashboard team) were worried that if other teams started building their own dashboard, that'd indicate that the dashboard team wasn't that useful. Which could mean they would get fewer promotions or raises, or might even get fired if bad days came. -- So they wanted ownership of all dashboards, whilst actually building them, was less important. (Is my interpretation.)

The new dashboard team manager, who appeared in the end, seemed to be a bit more "get something done" minded though

[alistairSH]

No of course not, but this person was complaining they didn’t start work the same day the request was made. That’s completely unreasonable.

[Zababa]

In that case, shouldn't you reply with "my backlog is currently X weeks/month long, we'll probably get started around Y, I'll keep you updated" instead of saying nothing? Since the team wanted to do it and didn't mention that they had to do something before in the meeting, you can assume that they will get started on it right away. If not, at least tell it to the other team so they can explore their options.