Does the Change Agent Networks work? In my case the Agile Champions…

Well… I just started to implement this model in the company that I’m currently working and my first feedback is positive. But only time will tell if it was a success or not 😉

Lets go back in time to understand why we are trying this model.

As you know we live in a world that is made of different people, mentalities and cultures. Due to this, we need to keep improving and find new approaches and models to help implement changes.

After working for a period of time with different environments and cultures, I’ve realised that some times it’s really hard to help people to change even when that change is beneficial to them, others and the business.

Some time has passed, conversations and discussions took place with different people, but, one person in particular asked why shouldn’t we try to motivate and empower people to be change agents?

Why not try this approach?

From that moment I started to plant this idea, like a seed, in everyone’s mind. So far so good!

Coincidently, this week I was reading a book that elaborated on this same idea and I’ve summarised their thoughts on the following quote:

“You will need executives, managers and staff to act as change agents. That’s because people are more likely to listen to, and work with, their peers rather than external consultants or dedicated change agents.

People tend to feel threatened or feel that change is being pushed on them if they don’t see their peers jumping in first. This approach helps the change go viral, and helps build the momentum.

Here are some tips for expanding our change agent team:

  • Get at least one person from each business area that is affected by the change.
  • Set strong expectations with the early adopters that being part of the change team is extra work.
  • Make becoming a member of the change agent network exclusive in order to attract the right people. I’ve always wanted to try some American Idol style audition, but that has been to crazy of an idea for the organisations I’ve worked in!
  • Agree on rotating the type of change you’re implementing.

Most of all, give early adopters support, training, and some autonomy. Notice I said some autonomy. At this point you want the people who are motivated to help execute the change, but be aware, thy may not have the necessary skills you, as a change agent, have.

Change goes viral when people start helping other people adjust.

These people, who weren’t part of the core change team, starting taking ownership of roadblocks all the teams were facing. They would provide updates to the whole departement during our monthly retrospectivs and the change team supported their efforts.” [1]

As a last thought I will be sharing with you (when possible) all the experiences, situations, issues, successes about this path that I’m taking so we all can learn together.

References:

[1] Jason Little | Lean Change Management

Is trusting relationship and symbiosis a myth in Self-Organising teams?

As you know one of the Scrum Principles is Self-Organising Teams. This means that, the teams should include all required roles to bring the product or feature to life.  Also, all team members from the Scum Team must form a close and trusting relationship, a symbiosis in order to allow them to work together as peers. Shouldn’t exist us and them but only us.

Ir order to create this relationship and symbiosis they need pass through the four-stage model as described by Bruce Tuckman’s: [1]

  • Forming – Stage 1

In this stage, most team members are positive and polite. Some are anxious, as they haven’t fully understood what work the team will do. Others are simply excited about the task ahead.

As leader, you play a dominant role at this stage, because team members’ roles and responsibilities aren’t clear.

This stage can last for some time, as people start to work together, and as they make an effort to get to know their new colleagues.

  • Storming – Stage 2

Next, the team moves into the storming phase, where people start to push against the boundaries established in the forming stage. This is the stage where many teams fail.

Storming often starts where there is a conflict between team members’ natural working styles. People may work in different ways for all sorts of reasons, but if differing working styles cause unforeseen problems, they may become frustrated.

Storming can also happen in other situations. For example, team members may challenge your authority, or jockey for position as their roles are clarified. Or, if you haven’t defined clearly how the team will work, people may feel overwhelmed by their workload, or they could be uncomfortable with the approach you’re using.

Some may question the worth of the team’s goal, and they may resist taking on tasks.

Team members who stick with the task at hand may experience stress, particularly as they don’t have the support of established processes, or strong relationships with their colleagues.

  • Norming – Stage 3

Gradually, the team moves into the norming stage. This is when people start to resolve their differences, appreciate colleagues’ strengths, and respect your authority as a leader.

Now that your team members know one-another better, they may socialize together, and they are able to ask each other for help and provide constructive feedback. People develop a stronger commitment to the team goal, and you start to see good progress towards it.

There is often a prolonged overlap between storming and norming, because, as new tasks come up, the team may lapse back into behaviour from the storming stage.

  • Performing – Stage 4

The team reaches the performing stage when hard work leads, without friction, to the achievement of the team’s goal. The structures and processes that you have set up support this well.

As leader, you can delegate much of your work, and you can concentrate on developing team members.

It feels easy to be part of the team at this stage, and people who join or leave won’t disrupt performance.

This is why we should minimize any teams change since Its takes time to become a true team – a tightly unit with members who trust and support each other and who work together effectively.

Changing teams compositions makes the team-building process (four-stage model) all over again and in the end self-organisation suffer.

References:

[1] Mind Tools Club | Forming, Storming, Norming, and Performing, Understanding the Stages of Team Formation

[2] Businessballs | Tuckman Forming, Storming, Norming, Performing model

AGILE ADRIA CONFERENCE 2015 :: TALKS “How” to go beyond Scrum and Agile Performance Metrics

Was with great pleasure that I found out this yesterday.

“It is a great pleasure for me to tell you that your talk proposal for Agile Adria 2015 was accepted. We’re looking forward to meet you in April.”

I’m really happy to be doing these two talks described bellow:

Also, share and learn with everyone!

Nevertheless, now is time to start working and find sponsors for the trip 😉

Should we establish Business Value per each Work item?

One of my previous posts was related with Agile Perfomance Indicators and their use in order to understand teams and business behaviour.

From that moment, I didn’t stop thinking how could we improve one of these performance indicators. In other words the “Delivered Work Items”.

As everyone knows, when we deliver a work item we are delivering or should be delivering value. Nevertheless, I do agree this is a complex and very subjective metric to try to come up with.

Screen Shot 2015-02-06 at 23.39.15

After having surfed a bit the web I found an interesting article on this topic. Why not establish Business Value Points per each work item?

Roman Pichler in the book Agile Product Management with Scrum says:

“Value is a common prioritisation prioritisation factor. We certanly want to deliver the most value items first.” [1]

Well.. I do believe that, with this approach the Product Owners have a better way to understand each work item and their priority to be implemented by the teams.

Nevertheless, after discussing this subject and article I received the following question:

“What happens when a team starts to get consistently work items that have low points? Do they get demotivated?”

My thoughts and my answer to this question was:

A team shouldn’t just receive US with low Business Value Points. What can we do to change that?

Also, should we implement a feature that has low business value, or should we pick up features with more business value?

What are your thoughts about this subject and approach?

References:

[1] Roman Pichler | Agile Product Management with Scrum: Creating Products That Customers Love