Dan Teo - Where is our Lead...err? A model for successful Agile Adoption
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
1 like•699 views
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
Similar to Dan Teo - Where is our Lead...err? A model for successful Agile Adoption
Similar to Dan Teo - Where is our Lead...err? A model for successful Agile Adoption (20)
More from AgileNZ Conference
More from AgileNZ Conference (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Dan Teo - Where is our Lead...err? A model for successful Agile Adoption
- 1. Where is our Lead..err? A model for successful Agile Adoption Dan Teo Fiserv
- 2. We’re going to talk about… 1. Intentional Gaps 2. Looking through a lense 3.Leadership Engagement © 2014 Fiserv, Inc. or its affiliates.
- 3. 1. Intentional Gaps © 2014 Fiserv, Inc. or its affiliates.
- 4. Are there gaps? What are the greatest concerns when adopting Agile? © 2014 Fiserv, Inc. or its affiliates.
- 5. What do these gaps look like? What are the barriers to further agile adoption? © 2014 Fiserv, Inc. or its affiliates.
- 6. Intentional Gap #1 – Living the Values ▪ Filling the SM role? ▪ Role interpreted differently ▪ Impact of this? © 2014 Fiserv, Inc. or its affiliates.
- 7. Intentional Gap #2 – Measuring Teams 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 24-Jan 5-Feb 21-Feb 7-Mar 21-Mar 4-Apr 17-Apr Points Committed vs Completed Performance measured on % committed Difference Committed You get what you measure Teams game’d the system! © 2014 Fiserv, Inc. or its affiliates.
- 8. Intentional Gap #3 - Estimation Different levels of estimation Held to account for estimation? Cone of uncertainty! © 2014 Fiserv, Inc. or its affiliates.
- 9. Intentional Gaps © 2014 Fiserv, Inc. or its affiliates.
- 10. Intentional Gaps © 2014 Fiserv, Inc. or its affiliates.
- 11. Intentional Gaps © 2014 Fiserv, Inc. or its affiliates.
- 12. Intentional Gaps © 2014 Fiserv, Inc. or its affiliates.
- 13. 2. Looking through a lense © 2014 Fiserv, Inc. or its affiliates.
- 14. ▪ Low Competency 1 2 3 4 © 2014 Fiserv, Inc. or its affiliates. ▪ High Commitment ▪ Low Competency ▪ Low Commitment ▪ High Competency ▪ Varied Commitment ▪ High Competency ▪ High Commitment
- 15. ▪ Decision to go Agile ▪ 2 Day Scrum Training ▪ Scrum Boards forming ▪ Low Competency ▪ High Commitment ▪ “Agile……” ▪ Isn’t it exciting?! ▪ Let’s wait and see.. ▪ This is fun!! 1 Hear See © 2014 Fiserv, Inc. or its affiliates.
- 16. STAGE 1 Are you building a strong foundation? ▪ Strong Scrum Master ▪ External Consultant © 2014 Fiserv, Inc. or its affiliates.
- 17. 2 ▪ People “doing” scrum ▪ DoR, DoD, Team Charter ▪ Reliance on SM ▪ Team forming.. ▪ Low Competency ▪ Low Commitment ▪ “Too many mtgs” ▪ “That isn’t Scrum” ▪ Why do we Point? ▪ Decision to go Agile ▪ 2 Day Scrum Training ▪ Scrum Boards forming ▪ Low Competency ▪ High Commitment ▪ “Agile……” ▪ Isn’t it exciting?! ▪ Let’s wait and see.. ▪ This is fun!! 1 Hear See © 2014 Fiserv, Inc. or its affiliates.
- 18. STAGE 2 Are values being role-modelled? ▪ There will be problems ▪ Supporting the teams to resolve, not resolving for them This is where old habits are broken
- 19. 3 ▪ Self-Directing Teams ▪ Stand-up without SM ▪ Planning/Refinement ▪ Sticking to Commitments ▪ High Competency ▪ Varied Commitment ▪ “Our environments ▪ Are always broken!” ▪ Ahhh too many ▪ dependencies 2 ▪ People “doing” scrum ▪ DoR, DoD, Team Charter ▪ Reliance on SM ▪ Team forming.. ▪ Low Competency ▪ Low Commitment ▪ “Too many mtgs” ▪ “That isn’t Scrum” ▪ Why do we Point? ▪ Decision to go Agile ▪ 2 Day Scrum Training ▪ Scrum Boards forming ▪ Low Competency ▪ High Commitment ▪ “Agile……” ▪ Isn’t it exciting?! ▪ Let’s wait and see.. ▪ This is fun!! 1 Hear See © 2014 Fiserv, Inc. or its affiliates.
- 20. STAGE 3 Moment of realization… ▪ External Impediments outside of team ▪ Varied Commitment… ▪ Leadership Scrum? Organizational impediments… have you been keeping them at bay? © 2014 Fiserv, Inc. or its affiliates.
- 21. 3 Hear See ▪ Self-Directing Teams ▪ Stand-up without SM ▪ Planning/Refinement ▪ Sticking to Commitments ▪ High Competency ▪ Varied Commitment ▪ “Our environments ▪ Are always broken!” ▪ Ahhh too many ▪ dependencies 2 ▪ People “doing” scrum ▪ DoR, DoD, Team Charter ▪ Reliance on SM ▪ Team forming.. ▪ Low Competency ▪ Low Commitment ▪ “Too many mtgs” ▪ “That isn’t Scrum” ▪ Why do we Point? ▪ Decision to go Agile ▪ 2 Day Scrum Training ▪ Scrum Boards forming ▪ Low Competency ▪ High Commitment ▪ “Agile……” ▪ Isn’t it exciting?! ▪ Let’s wait and see.. ▪ This is fun!! 1 4 ▪ High Competency ▪ High Commitment ▪ Celebrate Success ▪ Ideas + Solutions ▪ Well oiled engine © 2014 Fiserv, Inc. or its affiliates.
- 22. STAGE 4 Teams might get here…but will they stay here? ▪ Teams are fragile ▪ Test of the Foundation © 2014 Fiserv, Inc. or its affiliates.
- 23. 3. Leadership Engagement © 2014 Fiserv, Inc. or its affiliates.
- 24. A Typical Scenario © 2014 Fiserv, Inc. or its affiliates.
- 25. 1 2 3 4 ▪ Agile Master ▪ Agile Master ▪ Scrum Teams ▪ Leadership Team ▪ Low Competency ▪ High Commitment ▪ Low Competency ▪ Low Commitment ▪ High Competency ▪ Varied Commitment ▪ High Competency ▪ High Commitment ▪ Training ▪ Assess Team Health ▪ Room for Failure ▪ Resource Mgmt Models ▪ Measuring Performance ▪ Remove Org Impediments ▪ Holding roles to account ▪ Organizational Flow ▪ Portfolio -> Teams ▪ Scrum Teams © 2014 Fiserv, Inc. or its affiliates.
- 26. Problems that Emerge.. © 2014 Fiserv, Inc. or its affiliates.
- 27. Problems that Emerge.. Cause Effect Outcome Trained without organizational context Confusion around organizational unique roles (PM, TL, Release Manager..?) Teams confused about way of working Repeat Training… Changes to roles and Responsibilities not thought of… Does the Line-Manager job change? How do people managers support self-organizing teams? Conflict with SM and People Managers? Are leadership role-modelling Agile Values? Culture/Behaviour is top-down “Doing” Scrum …tend to emerge long after they have been created © 2014 Fiserv, Inc. or its affiliates.
- 28. Moving to Engaged Leadership © 2014 Fiserv, Inc. or its affiliates.
- 29. ▪ Organization Context Training ▪ Co-Location / Dedicated Roles ▪ Technical Practices ▪ Role Model Agile Values ▪ Hold roles to account ▪ Leader’s Scrum ▪ Measure teams on creating Value ▪ Supporting Organizational Impediments ▪ Celebrate Success ▪ Bring teams closer to dependencies ▪ Meetings about Rollout ▪ Has the consulted implemented Scrum yet? ▪ We’re trained ▪ We’re doing Scrum ▪ Why are there problems? ▪ Conflict between roles ▪ Line Mgmt vs Self-Organized ▪ No visibility to organizational impediments – anecdotal ▪ Constantly Communicate ▪ Supporting Organizational Impediments ▪ Celebrate Success ▪ Bring teams closer to dependencies 1 2 3 4 Typical Engaged Leadership ▪ We’re there © 2014 Fiserv, Inc. or its affiliates.
- 30. Key Takeaways ▪ There are Intentional Gaps in the Scrum Framework ▪ These gaps when interpreted incorrectly can lead to agile anti-patterns ▪ Leaders can identify where their organization is at in the 4 stage model ▪ Leadership engagement is on-going throughout the entire agile adoption – Don’t wait till it’s too late! © 2014 Fiserv, Inc. or its affiliates.
- 31. Questions? © 2014 Fiserv, Inc. or its affiliates.
- 32. Thanks for listening… Dan Teo Fiserv
Editor's Notes
- So how is it that some people get it so right, while others get it so wrong? I mean, we’re all reading the same guide right??!?! Many organizations look @ others who implement Scrum and get 3-5x more productivity and say, I want that here. However despite embarking, few do actually get to see the desired outcomes that excited them in the first place, why is this? Too often we’re focused on changing the process and tools, without considering how these intentional gaps are going to be filled. What determines how these intentional gaps are filled in btw? Yep – it’s the Mind-set and Culture. To put this into a practical example: Bball example – culture and mindset Let’s say soft dev is a game, take bball for instance. There are many players
- So how is it that some people get it so right, while others get it so wrong? I mean, we’re all reading the same guide right??!?! Many organizations look @ others who implement Scrum and get 3-5x more productivity and say, I want that here. However despite embarking, few do actually get to see the desired outcomes that excited them in the first place, why is this? Too often we’re focused on changing the process and tools, without considering how these intentional gaps are going to be filled. What determines how these intentional gaps are filled in btw? Yep – it’s the Mind-set and Culture. To put this into a practical example: Bball example – culture and mindset Let’s say soft dev is a game, take bball for instance. There are many players
- So how is it that some people get it so right, while others get it so wrong? I mean, we’re all reading the same guide right??!?! Many organizations look @ others who implement Scrum and get 3-5x more productivity and say, I want that here. However despite embarking, few do actually get to see the desired outcomes that excited them in the first place, why is this? Too often we’re focused on changing the process and tools, without considering how these intentional gaps are going to be filled. What determines how these intentional gaps are filled in btw? Yep – it’s the Mind-set and Culture. To put this into a practical example: Bball example – culture and mindset Let’s say soft dev is a game, take bball for instance. There are many players
- Share a model to help us with our frame of reference when looking at an organization going through agile transformation. See through anti-patterns, understand what Leadership Engagement is required for the different stages.
- Scrum team committed to own sprint, next sprint commits away, havent quite sorted out whether inter team dependencies or wider organization agile process Look + feel for language See something they can relate with in their world in the quadrants
- Scrum team committed to own sprint, next sprint commits away, havent quite sorted out whether inter team dependencies or wider organization agile process Look + feel for language See something they can relate with in their world in the quadrants
- If new agile adoption – training is important. E.g. scaled agile recommends everybody gets trained same time, even if people already know agile/scrum. To get same baseline, keep everyone on same page. Ballroom dancing, your hold -> If org already has Agile in progress – important to assess which stage the teams are at – if at ____, then best to either train, or model by example through coaching a strong high performing team first. Who are the key players In this place – need a strong AM What are the leaders actually doing in each quadrant,
- Scrum team committed to own sprint, next sprint commits away, havent quite sorted out whether inter team dependencies or wider organization agile process Look + feel for language See something they can relate with in their world in the quadrants
- Follow, break, transcend. - Empowerment - After training in Agile, workforce was energized,! Transparency - Problems that were hidden now became more apparent, -> - Reaction - leadership felt like agile was causing more problems - Outcome – scrum teams was ready and engaged, but leadership didn’t recognize the shift in supporting teams.
- Scrum team committed to own sprint, next sprint commits away, havent quite sorted out whether inter team dependencies or wider organization agile process Look + feel for language See something they can relate with in their world in the quadrants