Leading Fearless Change Workshop – Apr 12th!

Posted on April 4, 2013 by Joe Little

We recommend that all agile advocates and all ScrumMasters and Product Owners learn more about making change happen.

Change both in the large (changing the organization and adopting Scrum more or better) and in the small (changing to fix each impediment).

Mary Lynn Manns will be leading a 1-day workshop on change. In Charlotte. April 12th. I can hardly imagine a better way to learn about change, and how to do it better. Nor can I imagine a more essential skill set.

For more info: http://leanagiletraining.com/ChangeWorkshop-Charlotte-1.html

Hope you can join us!

Making Change Happen

Posted on April 4, 2013 by Joe Little

We must make people change, and we hope we know the direction. And we hope we know the specific changes.

In Scrum, we believe in big changes, in kaikaku. This happens when we first implement Scrum.

And we do smaller changes, also. Kaizen. We do them as impediment removal, for example.

Changes is easy in a way. They must change, it is clear to you. And your ideas are good.

But change is usually hard also. You feel like you have no power. They want to stay the same. They want to change a different way than you propose.

So, the first pattern is that you become an Evangelist. You want to get people to change. You start with ‘Ask for Help’. Get others involved.

You want to get some traction. Use ‘Just Do It’. And get started in a small way with your change. You want to explain the change to more people. Use ‘Personal Touch’ to make it the change specific to those you are working with.

See more patterns and ideas in Fearless Change. Or read here.

We cannot emphasize too much the importance of adding change upon change. Incremental change. Compounded change. This is the way to 5x-10x improvement.

Selling the benefits of Scrum

Posted on March 28, 2013 by Joe Little

Two other CSTs (scrum trainers) made some comments in a Google Group, which got me thinking. They reminded me of the following exercise I normally do in my Scrum classes.

Every class is different, but imagine a class that is mixed. Some people are new to Scrum, some have a few months experience, some have 9-24 months’ of experience.

And a recent experience makes me think I should modify the exercise. A bit. I have to say explicitly: “If change is going to happen, you must ‘sell’ Scrum. In some sense of the word sell.”

I show a slide listing all the benefits of scrum. ‘More Fun’ being one of the big benefits. In all, 6 or 7 benefits…

I then ask the class:
‘I need an estimate from you. Each of you. A single rough percentage. On average across all these factors.
If on Monday you start with one team, maybe your real team, and you get to work with them for 1 year, after all that you learn in this course and your hard work in applying it over 1 year, in removing impediments over a year — how much better will the Team be, after one year?
Using whatever weighting you want to use on these (pointing to the slide) 6 or 7 success factors.
So, George (first person) what is your number?’

And then I go around the room.

I get a wide range, sometimes. Usually a bunch of low numbers. 0% (rarely), 10%, 15%, 20%, 25%, 30%…sometimes 80%, 100%, 150%, 200% (rarely). As you might guess, almost always many more low numbers than high numbers.

Usually I end that segment with the Henry Ford quote: “Whether you think you can or you can’t, you’re right.”

***
In the past, I have been asked to ‘sell’ in several different contexts. And it has usually made me uncomfortable. So, why am I asking us all to sell now?

It is simple. Change makes people uncomfortable. Unless they see a real reason to change, they will not change. For example, the company culture will not change.

So, to get change to happen you must ‘sell’. In some sense of the word. And sell in a compelling way.

Now, I know from experience that the benefits of doing Scrum properly are tremendous. So, obviously, we want everyone to experience those benefits. But it starts, as John Kotter says, with a sense of urgency. And that means we, who understand Scrum, must be continually ‘selling’.

Now, selling to me does not mean: fakery, lying, exaggerating, forcing people to listen, etc, etc. By ‘selling’ I mean giving people a chance to have, or to have again, that sense of urgency for the change.

Change: “You miss 100% of the shots you never take.”

Posted on March 22, 2013 by Joe Little

This is a quote by Wayne Gretzky.
I am flying to Canada now. And I like hockey.

Today the quote reminds me of how hard change is.

To make any change happen in an organization is hard. Takes a lot of energy. Takes a willingness to miss a shot, to make a mistake, as Gretzky says. That takes guts. Most people don’t have guts for things they don’t really really care about.

Why is it so hard?

First, I think organizations are mainly there to remain ‘static’. A company is there to preserve the situation. Yes, yes, of course any corporation is building things or providing services for its customers. So, a kind of change is happening all the time.

But the main idea of the corporation is to assure that the basics are there every day. Regular, unchanging. The building is there, its warm (or cool), the lights are on, the processes are known, you know who to go to, etc, etc. The same. Every day. Despite all the other things in the world that are changing.

And people want that. They need that stability.

Second. While people actually like some change, some degree of variety, still…

Still they don’t want to be changed. They don’t want to be the helpless pawn of some brilliant change that I (the great and wonderful Oz) am bringing them. No one wants to be a helpless pawn.

Also, there is too much change these days. People are tired of it. Why was everything stupid yesterday, and today, again for the 1000th time, we must change everything? Too much (damn) change! Stop it!

And you can feel this yourself, and see that it ties back also to that helplessness.

Still, people like change, they believe in improving their situation. So, if you can tie your idea to that inner feeling of progress, then they will want the change. Want it, at least to some degree.

Third, politics.

By this I mean the messiness of dealing with people in groups. The hierarchy, the power, the games. So, with any change, we must ‘play politics’ to some degree. Very bothersome for most of us.

So, where am I going with this?

To this idea: That one must be very motivated if one is going to start to make a significant change in a company (or any organization). Very motivated. Otherwise, one is easily stopped by all the barriers to change.

Kotter calls this motivation a sense of urgency.

***
I recently had an in-house class. And I was teaching them Scrum.

And most in this class found some aspects of it ‘impossible’. Meaning, that most of them did not think they could get the culture in their company to change that much.

My initial reaction was an inner anger (not shown outwardly). Anger that they in effect wanted me to change Scrum. Anger that these very talented people would let so much potentially good change go by, ‘merely’ because they thought that such as change was ‘impossible’. I say this in part because I know that people — less talented than these people are — have made this kind of change happen. And against odds equally as great.

But, looking back, anger is not good. And also not appropriate. They don’t owe it to me to change. And my getting angry that they can’t see the benefits and push through to get them, for themselves, my being angry about that, well, it is sweet and all, that I want them to have a better life, but also kind of silly.

Now, later I am reading Fearless Change by Mary Lynn Manns and Linda Rising. One of the change patterns in the book is Personal Touch. I start reading that pattern.

Aha!

I got two big flashes of insight.

First, most of the people in that group do not value the change in the way I do. And they have no reason to. They had no experience of its real success. To them, it was just ‘Joe talking’ — maybe sounds good, but no inner conviction yet.

Secondly, every one is different. One has to explain the change to each person, slowly, and help them come to see that it will benefit them (or even, that it has benefited them).

So, once you have helped someone care enough, gotten through to them in some unique way, then you will see someone who will make change happen.

Someone who will take many shots, and happily miss many. Knowing that eventually they will win the game.

We band of brothers

Posted on March 7, 2013 by Joe Little

“We few, we happy few, we band of brothers.” A great speech did Shakespeare write.

Here it is explained. The leadership in the real field of battle, against great odds. You may find this interesting as well.

Here it is enacted. Kenneth Branagh. You may wish to go to about 2 mins 20 secs in.

A bit later King Henry speaks:

We are but warriors for the working-day;
Our gayness and our gilt are all besmirch’d
With rainy marching in the painful field;
…

And time hath worn us into slovenry:
But, by the mass, our hearts are in the trim;

You may perhaps recognize yourself in this situation: that time hath worn you down, yet still your heart is in the trim.

Enjoy!

And may your Team have its heart half so much in the trim.

Leading Fearless Change

Posted on February 16, 2013 by Joe Little

What is the hardest thing about Scrum? (Maybe in life.)

Probably, it is that we must lead change.

Getting people to change is difficult. And in Scrum, for example, we are always trying to change people. Always continuous change. Always removing impediments.

But first, we have to change them to agree to a fully dedicated real Team. Then to fewer disruptions and only one product (product release). Then to doing all of Scrum. Then to really understanding self-organization. And on and on.

And then we start with the real hard impediments. Technical impediments. People issues. Managerial issues. Organizational issues.

Here are some resources to start with:

Leading Fearless Change by Mary Lynn Manns and Linda Rising. A good article by them. 3 pages.

This leading change course. With Mary Lynn Manns. In Charlotte in April.

By the way, this course will be about change. Any change. Not just change using Scrum or Agile. Any change.

Making Change Happen

Posted on January 28, 2013 by Joe Little

I was delighted the other day to have a brief conversation with Mary Lynn Manns, who is the co-author of Fearless Change, an excellent book on making change happen.

And I told her I had this idea: We can let change happen to us. (This is mostly to be passive in the face of bad change.) Or we can make change happen (the good change).

This dilemma was expressed by Shakespeare:

Whether ’tis Nobler in the mind to suffer
The Slings and Arrows of outrageous Fortune,
Or to take Arms against a Sea of troubles,
And by opposing end them…

We mean something slightly different. Not just to oppose the negative changes. But to advocate for positive change.

It takes guts.

I think, for many, it does not feel like guts. It feels like this: “I have to make this change happen, and I don’t care if I get nicked or scratched along the way.” The nicks and scratches are a ‘small price to pay’…is the way they feel.

Anyway, we are better people for making the good changes happen. It makes us better people.

To make it happen, we must be by turns aggressive and patient. By turns, emotional and thoughtful. By turns, with laughter and with all seriousness.

How do we make this happen?

Well, this change and we ourselves are the stuff that dreams are made on. There is no science here. But there are still many good ideas, and some of these ideas have been tried many times. And in the hands of the professional, they are usually or often successful.

Mary Lynn Manns and others call them patterns.

The first pattern is Evangelist. That would be you.

The Evangelist comes up with the good idea (somehow). (Hint: I think the first idea to implement is Scrum.) And then starts to…well, to evangelize. To get others to try the idea. To help the idea.

A couple of more patterns:

Ask For Help: The Evangelist asks others for help with the new idea. Maybe help defining it. Maybe help implementing it. Maybe help evangelizing. Also, have you noticed how wonderfully seductive it is to be asked for help. Who could possibly have more taste, brilliance, and acumen than the person who would ask me for help?

Innovator: Usually you have in your group some Innovators. Ask them especially for help. Get them on your side. In part, they are the ones most likely to have a positive attitude toward trying new things.

Just Say Thanks: Again, it is remarkable how a few bits of good manners can get people to go along with a new idea. Saying ‘thanks’ for the help can…well, help a lot.

Step by Step: Some of us want to make one big grand change. And be done with it. But the experience is that it is almost always best done, in some sense, step by step. One smaller change at a time. And they become added together into something quite big.

Small Successes: This is a similar idea, but somewhat different. As you have successes, even if small, be sure to celebrate them. The small celebrations will delight the change’s supporters, and confound its enemies. (Mark Twain said: When in doubt tell the truth. It will confound your enemies and astound your friends.)

***
In the book Fearless Change, Mary Lynn Manns and Linda Rising have gathered much more detail on these patterns. Indeed, on a total of 48 patterns.

You will find patterns you have done (but probably not done recently). You will find patterns you have heard of other people trying (but you have never used). And you will hear of completely new patterns.

The main problem is: use one pattern each day.

I think, if you do that, you will win.

We want a Stable Team

Posted on January 27, 2013 by Joe Little

I think our (your) business is about knowledge creation. (Well, knowledge creation is key for almost all the people who come to my courses and workshops.) It is about innovation, creativity, inventiveness. About cool solutions to hard business-technology problems. It is about some sort of intersection between people and technology. So, coming up with a great product requires something special.

And I believe the ‘special thing’ these days is far more likely to come out of a good Team.

So, from a business management viewpoint (and it is the managers we most need to convince about this) — we need a stable Team.

And it needs to include virtually all the functions (or far more so than we ever did before). And that also means it needs to include business people and technology people. Just for amusement, I like to call them suits and geeks. To me it suggests that it just might be ‘interesting’ to put them together.

We must mention two things.

It should be FUN to work in a real Team. And in fact, in Scrum with all but dysfunctional teams, it is fun. (But maybe could be more fun, if you had a good ScrumMaster helping the fun along.)

It should be more satisfying working in a Team. It is my belief that the human animal has been selected to enjoy life in a small Team. Like a family, but a bit different. A small ‘pack’. Maybe within a larger pack.

So, how long should a Team be stable?

To answer this question, we need to identify basically three situations.

1. Mediocre Team. This team improves 20-50% with Scrum. Give them 6 months. If they don’t become better by then, then try putting the individuals in different Teams.

2. Good Team. This team improves in the 100-200% range. Wow. Leave them alone. They are doing pretty darn well.

3. Great Team. This team improves in the 5x-10x range. Wow! Don’t mess with them. This is the goose that laid the golden egg. You would be crazy to bother them unless and until they want to be bothered (want to change). And, if you continue to give them good satisfying work to do, they may never need to change. But, of course, something will eventually happen…one of the usual human things (birth, marriage, death, move, etc, etc).

(There is also the situation of the occasional dysfunctional team. Usually that can be identified in a few Sprints. As soon as you are sure it is not just ‘storming’, then you must change the team composition or totally bust up the team.)

***

This idea of stable teams leads to a major shift in orientation. (The change can happen over time.) We no longer start with projects, and find people to do them. We now start with a Team, and find good work for it to do. Who knew that people were important?

Is release planning worth it?

Posted on November 28, 2012 by Joe Little

In a word: Yes, if done professionally.

How is release planning, and release plan refactoring…how are they useful?

A few ideas:

It enables the Team to share ideas
It allows the Team to see the same elephant
It enables knowledge creation
It enables cost, benefit, time trade-offs to become apparent
It enables everyone to start to distinguish minor decisions from major decisions

Any professional also knows that planning is not and never will be perfect. So, we must put a reasonable time box on doing the planning.

It is also useful to plan with good ‘agile’ people. Meaning people who will use the information developed from planning in a useful way (eg, will not do the ‘stupid waterfall manager trick’ of expecting the Team to always hit the date they planned on Day Zero).

Let’s talk about this last one (minor versus major)…

To put things simplistically, there are two types of decisions, which I will call minor and major. Minor decisions has a minor cost if we make them incorrectly. If we are clever, we soon learn that we are wrong, and we correct the decision.

But some decisions are major. To change the decision later, it can be very costly in terms of money or time or reputation or some other factor. Once we identify a major decision, we want to do our best to decide it correctly. This means first being sure we have framed the decision question correctly. Then, assuming this is a difficult decision, we want to make the decision at the ‘last responsible moment’.

***

Can planning be useless or worse?

Well, of course. If you have people who will not learn. If you have people who will take longer than the current knowledge can justify. If you too many people who want to use the information for ‘stupid waterfall tricks’.

But if done with good people, using useful concepts, the Scrum Team (and others) can learn a lot doing Release Planning, followed by Release Plan Refactoring every sprint.

It is also true that we can learn by doing ‘real work’. This is not to say ‘do only real work’…but one balances and shortens release planning (release plan refactoring) in the knowledge that we can and will learn some things faster by doing real work.

The importance of a real team

Posted on May 17, 2012 by Joe Little

Scrum requires a real team.

The word ‘team’ is often used, often in different ways. So, let us define it.

According to “The Discipline of Teams” by Katzenbach and Smith, this is what you should look for:

1. A meaningful common purpose that the Team has helped shape.

2. Specific performance goals that flow from the common purpose.

3. A mix of complementary skills. Including technical/functional, decision-making, and interpersonal.

4. A strong commitment to how the work is done.

5. Mutual accountability.

For more discussion, see The Discipline of Teams.

The team needs to be small (~7), stable, cross-functional, and self-organizing. The team is in it together. And should help each other.

In general it is best if the team is fully dedicated to one missson, one purpose, or at least the one team’s goals.

All of these team characteristics together are key to starting Scrum. Got to start with a real Team.

Note: Not everyone wants to be on a Team. And for sure, not everyone walks into the office knowing how to act in a real Team.