Does agile at scale need to be cookie cutter?

Recently, my wife and I (and our two little dogs) made a road trip across Kansas, Colorado, parts of Wyoming, South Dakota, a portion of Iowa and back through Missouri. We had an immensely enjoyable time stopping at National Parks and State Parks as well as kitschy roadside attractions. And while I was driving all those miles, it struck me that the diverse topography of these states had a lesson to teach us about agility.

The United States shows remarkable environmental diversity, even within a relatively small radius. Take, as an example the 3 photos below: All of these photos were taken within a 30 min drive of each other, and all in South Dakota

Badlands National Park, South Dakota

Black Hills National Forest, South Dakota 

Custer State Park, South Dakota

All three of these photos were taken within a 30 min drive of each other, and all in South Dakota. The top is in Badlands National Park all stark and dry, and looks like a scene from an alien planet. The second is in the Black Hills National Forest -Lush and rocky, mountainous with tall trees and clear streams. The third photo is within Custer State Park - a high plains meadow that supports huge herds of native buffalo and other wild game.  All three of these regions play an integral part in the ecosystems of our country. I think you'll agree it would be boring if all of the United States looked exactly the same. 

Sadly - many organizations want cookie cutter "sameness" of agility across the entire company.  

If you look at many efforts to "scale agility" across an organization, it seems to be a bit more about making sure everyone is using the same terminology, normalizing story points ( ugh), and falling in line. Scaling tends to be more in the form of compliance than about agility.  

Scaling agility isn't about conformity. So let's just stop it - ok?

Creating an environment for agile to thrive throughout an organization starts with three key activities: encourage unity, celebrate differences, and establish guard rails

Encourage Unity 

Agile teams do need to be united both in how they work together and in how they align to organizational strategy. But that doesn't mean they have to be the same. Strategic goals should drive deliverables, yet allow flexibility for discovery along the way. Each agile team will likely discover something new to delight the customer in the process of delivering towards those strategic goals

Celebrate Differences

The way one team works will be different from another–and this can be a powerful tool for learning in your organization. Good agile leaders highlight and celebrate these differences so that the whole organization can grow. Creating a learning organization depends upon these differences becoming shared openly, without fear of reprisal.

Establish Guardrails

Encouraging agile teams to "uncover better ways of working" isn't without risk.  As an organization you should have clear guardrails of what is in bounds and out of bounds for a team.  Without guard rails, teams could feel "anything goes"which can lead to disastrous results.  Co-creating these guardrails can be a powerful exercise where teams learn the bounds within which they can play, and can free up their collective creativity to deliver amazing value. 

Scaling Doesn’t Require Conformance

Turning agile teams loose to meet customers’ needs is powerful. At the same time, though, to quote Uncle Ben in the Spiderman comic series, "With great power comes great responsibility." 

Leaders can feel confident in giving teams freedom to make decisions by creating clear organizational goals that ensure teams are rowing in the same direction, allowing different approaches room to grow and learn, and setting clear boundaries where teams can uncover better ways of working. 

None of this is easy.

None of this is without risk.

But ultimately, empowering differences within a unified ecosystem not only brings humanity to the workplace, it also produces better products.

4 Factors to help you select an agile consultancy

 I get this question all the time: 

"Hey Howard, you've been plugged into the business of agility for quite some time, and know almost every significant player in the space. Our organization needs help in our agile transformation, who do you recommend?" 

It won't surprise many of you that the answer is " It depends " because each organization is facing different constraints, different goals, and different needs. I usually spend some time with each request trying to determine the real needs and objectives. I ask a ton of questions, but in general they fall under a few topics.  

In short, selecting a consultant or consultancy, comes down to these three factors that apply to both the  organization and the consultant, and one requirement I have for every consultancy I recommend.

1. Capacity:   Depending upon how large your organization might be, the depth and breadth of the consultancy's staff matters.  Smaller organizations can fair well with independent or small consultancy's, while larger organizations will likely need a much larger team. If you are a large organization and are wanting to start small, it's ok to start with a smaller group and have them scale up with your needs. This shouldn't mean you always hire a large consultancy, because many times thats a poor experience as a small/mid sized organization. With some consultancy's having in excess of 600,000 employees, you simply wouldn't command their attention unless you are a key revenue producer for them. As an example, in order to be a diamond client with Accenture, you will need to generate in excess of $100 million in revenue for them annually. According to this source, they have in excess of 200 Diamond clients as of the end of 2020.  I recommend finding a consultancy that has " slightly more" breadth and depth than you think you need. This way, as your needs increase they can help you and grow with you. 

2. Location:  The world is getting to be a smaller and smaller place, and almost any consultancy will tell you they service clients globally. The truth is, that it likely isn't in your best financial interest if you need the consultants onsite at your physical location. If the predominant amount of your operations are in one city/region, choose a consultancy based in that region.  Long term, you will save lots of expenses on travel costs and will allow the maximum contact time between your staff and the coach/consultant.  Also, for that individual consultant, being local means they aren't away from their families all the time. Choosing local can also help reduce carbon footprint by reducing travel.  In some instances, a remote or hybrid approach is acceptable but for that consultant to really provide value, nothing beats being "in the room". IEven if you are looking at a remote or hybrid approach, you benefit from people being more regional to your employees. 

3. Expectations:  Whether you are at the first days of an agile transformation, or you are on year 5, will matter in who you hire. Some service providers may come with pre-packaged solutions, while others will take a far more "sense and respond" approach. Are you looking for a provider to help solve your issues or are you seeking someone to bounce your ideas off of? These are far different ends of the spectrum because one has the consultancy carrying the burden of selecting the right approach, while the other puts that responsibility on the organization. Speed and urgency are other expectations you will need to articulate, as your situation is unique. Clearly articulating what you are seeking from the engagement will set your organization and the consultancy both up for success. 

And this one is a big one for me in order to recommend someone, and applies only to coaches/consultants/consultancies:

4. Credibility:  The Agile Manifesto for Software Development was signed in 2001, and the rise in the numbers of providers of services in the business of agility have skyrocketed. There are some consultancy's that have added " agile" as a service to the plethora of other things they can do ( Project management, Staff augmentation, Windows 95, and more) Re-sellers also abound, which are really no more than marketing and sales organizations that many times don't even have a clue what they are selling. Let's face it, the business of agility is profitable, and this attracts companies seeking to capitalize.  While some of these might actually have some good people working for them, I'm not a fan of recommending this as an add-on service. I look for companies that are or are trying to be truly agile companies themselves - that this is what they do. They need to live and breathe agility from the products they offer, to their leadership, and to their internal HR policies. You can't determine this from reading an ad slick - it's best to actually know the company and ask a LOT of questions. 

Finding the right alignment of Capacity, Location, Expectation with a consultancy with high Credibility can set you and your organization up for success.  After all, you are going to invest quite a bit of money and time in this effort. The investment of alignment time, is worth it. 

This article addressed 4 factors to consider when selecting your agile consultant or consultancy : Capacity, Location, Expectations and Credibility. 

________

If you are seeking an agile coach or consultancy and would like a referral - reach out. I don't charge for this.  It's my way of helping agile transformations be more successful and sustainable by matching clients needs to the best providers. 

Will hyper-specialization and the gig economy effect agile as we know it?

Organizations and individuals are moving and shifting.   Maybe what we call " agile" should too. 

In this article, we’ll inspect some background around the gig economy and hyper-specialization.  As an agilist, I’ve identified two things that are in conflict with those concepts – long lived teams and team size – to remind us that in addition to inspecting what’s happening in the real world, we’ll need to adapt the way we engage and work with people / organizations moving forward.

Agilist need to inspect

For a bit of background, I thought I'd share a little on the gig economy and on hyper-specialization 

 According to the Pew Research Groups study in 2021,  16% of Americans have earned money from online gig platforms. The study seemed to focus in on gig work like Uber, Grub Hub, DoorDash, etc.  In the paper I didn't see anything about technology work - Design work, software programming, Marketing,-which surprised me.  Sites like Fiverr, Upwork, and Freelancer seem to be growing rapidly, and each have tens of thousands of people ready to work in this new gig economy.  The gig economy is growing and seems to be creeping its way into organizations of all size. It provides a way to pull in skilled workers only when you need them. And for the skilled worker, this provides a freedom that conventional employment just can't match.   In a podcast I listened to a few weeks ago ( I can't seem to find the reference at this time) an investment group mentioned that renting a home vs purchasing was on a rapid rise, as it provided a lifestyle that consumers wanted - freedom from repairs and strings -which is a further indication to me that things are shifting.  I think the gig economy is that as well, and it is on the rise.   

Harvard Business Review wrote about Hyper specialization in 2011  and Inc. magazine wrote Welcome the era of hyperspecialization in 2013.  The list of articles is growing, and the specializations are getting narrower and narrower.  As an example, in the field of marketing you have SEO expertise, content marketing, social networking, email campaign, and many more.  In software, it's no longer just divided any by Jr or Sr Developer, or by language, but into UI/UX,Database, Architecture, Front end/back end , and even down to specializations on specific front-end web development platforms.  As our skills increase and the needs grow, people are choosing a much more narrow field in which they want to specialize in for work.  This only makes sense as we've seen this hyper-specialization occur in many other fields. ( thank goodness we aren't still relying on barber surgeons for our healthcare)

While you may not work in a gig economy today, and you may now be on a long lived team,  the organization where you are working is likely looking for people with these skills to augment future growth. 

So here is where these two things will likely be in conflict with agile as we know it. 

Long Lived Teams: 

High performing team based work is predicated on long lived teams. The longer a team is together, the better they are at communicating with each other and the better the work product can become.  New teams, tend to start in the "forming & storming " phases of Tuckmans Model . As employers start leveraging short term expertise with the gig economy, teams may never get to a state of high performance or flow.  Also, the allure of the gig economy will likely push many of an organizations more talented people to leave their current employment- adding fuel to the great resignation.

 Team Size:

For teams to be really high performing, they also need to be small.  Matter of fact, the smaller the better as long as you have all the skills needed to accomplish the goal. Scrum helps us all know that a team should be no more that 7-9 people big, and those individuals having " T shaped skills" ( meaning they may have a deep knowledge in one thing but have a diverse ability to assist in lots of other types of areas) Hyper-specialization means there will be fewer and fewer individuals with T shaped skills, and to get the needed skills on a team to deliver a product in a increment you'd need far more than the recommended 7-9 people.  More people equals more lines of communication and more complexity in completing work. Consider this: at 5 people there are 10 lines of communication, at 9 people there are 36 lines of communication, at 14 there are 91 lines of communication. I think this illustration from Lighthouse makes an excellent visualization of why smaller teams can move more quickly than larger teams.

Combine these two items with a remote-first world of work post COVID, and I think you can see where this might be heading.   So, what should we do?

Agilist need to adapt

Gone should be the days of people saying: " We can't, because the Scrum Guide says _______".  Going forward we need to realize the world of work is forever changing, and adapting - and we agilists need to as well.  We need to meet people and organizations needs within their existing constraints and help them prepare to deliver value in what may come.  Can you imagine a future of really large agile teams made up of people with I-shaped skills that are all working within a gig economy? Or maybe a future structure without teams all together?  I can.   And I've no idea exactly how it might work, but I realize that our understanding of what is "best practices" today, likely won't work.   The very first line of the Agile Manifesto says " We are uncovering better ways of developing software by doing it and helping others do it."   and maybe it's time for us to really embrace it. 

The world of work is constantly evolving and shifting, and so should how we imagine being more agile in the way we work. 

In this article, we’ve inspected some background around the gig economy and hyper-specialization.  As an agilist, you’ve learned two things that are in conflict with those concepts – long lived teams and team size – to remind us that in addition to inspecting what’s happening in the real world. We need to both inspect and adapt the way we engage and work with people / organizations moving forward.

Why your agile transformation is likely going to fail

 

According to several recent articles, somewhere in the neighborhood of 75%-94% of all agile transformations will fail.  It's a startling statistic, and one I couldn't find a solid reference. It seems most people believe it to be true, but really hasn't been any studies to back up this claim. For the purposes of this article, I'm going to assume its fairly accurate - as it matches my experience and anecdotal evidence over the past 15 years. And yet, the business of agile transformation is booming. Demand for frameworks, training, and coaching/consulting services is rising.   As of this writing, on LinkedIn alone, there are over 24,000 job openings for agile coach in the United States.  Companies are clearly hiring for help in the pursuit to be more agile in the way they work.

So why do so many agile transformations fail?

Some of the main reasons would be:

1. You are trying to follow a framework

2. You have the wrong people.

3. You see a transformation as a light switch

 

You are trying to follow a framework

So many organizations seem to think that if they just follow a set of instructions, they will be an agile organization. This is especially true of large scaling frameworks - they look good ( and sell even better) but I'm not sure they actually deliver true results.  This doesn't mean that frameworks are bad, it just means they aren't the solution.   Frameworks are good places to start, but they shouldn't be considered a plug -and-play solution.  You can follow a framework perfectly and still be one of the least agile organizations.   Agility in organizations is about mindset, of the employees and the leadership - not about compliance with a framework.  Start with a framework if you must, then adapt it to fit your business goals and needs. 

You have the wrong people

Since agility in organizations is ultimately about mindset of people, it could be that you have the wrong people in your organization.   None of us likes to consider this factor, but I've seen it time and time again - where a person that believes everything must be planned in advance is put in a position to work in an agile area.  Leaders must consider mindset fit when making this type of transition, offer training and mentoring to help the individuals, but ultimately may need to make a decision to either move those people off that agile project or help them find a new role somewhere else. 

You see a transformation as a light switch

Many years ago, an agile training and consulting company I was working with went on a sales call with a major US retailer.   In the discovery call with the potential client, our team was laying out a transition strategy, an alignment of organizational goals for this transition, and a way to discover what might be the best fit for them as an organization.  Thats when the most Senior VP in the room said " I don't really want this rollout plan, I just want you to flip it ".    This leader saw a shift to agility for their extremely large organization as simple as turning on a light switch.  

Organizational change is hard, and takes time.    If consultants were brutally honest with you ( like we were with this potential client) moving  a traditionally structured organization through an agile transformation can take years, or even decades depending upon the size of the company. And since organizations are always losing staff and hiring staff, the process likely will never be " done".  Transformations are never finished.  Even after 4 years at my last company, we had made excellent progress, but will always have a ways to go. 

Wrapping up

Leaders should understand that starting a transformation will take serious time and investment, and still may not be successful.   Invest in the individuals in your organization constantly and consistently, and don't look for some framework to be the destination.   This is a worthy journey, that can produce an organization that is far more responsive to the ever changing world of business. 

Patience, focusing on the real goals of why you are making this shift, and ensuring you have the right mindset can hep you be far more successful. 

A better, kinder agile community

 

Each and every day I check my social feeds, wanting to keep up on what is new in the world. I especially

follow topics and people in the agile movement, as I am passionate about bringing humanity to the

workplace. Yet sadly, most of my agile feed doesn't reflect that humanity I so want to see.

From an external view, there are so many twitter wars arguing over who is right and who is wrong, agilists

proudly proclaiming blocking each other, and individuals trying to raise themselves up by putting

something else down.

The whole thing makes me sad.

This agile movement is better than this. We are better than this.

I fear the divisiveness has moved the conversation away from the core tenets and values, reducing the agile movements credibility in the eyes of those those outside our immediate space. When people view us, they view how we behave with each other, and test to see if this movement is really unified in direction and cause, or is it more like a noisy playground of unruly kindergartners. Sadly, I've seen playgrounds better behaved some days.

Estimates or no estimates, which agile scaling is wrong or never scale, coaching vs consulting, word for word disagreements from the scrum guide, pink stickies or yellow stickies - in truth, little of this matters. Companies want to be more adaptive, more iterative, and incremental. They want to delight their customers - and they are looking to us for help. If we spend all of our energy fighting with each other about whether it’s “ok” to use Jira or not, we’re not only going to fail to help, we’re going to erode the confidence executives have in our ability to help in the first place.

I'm convinced this isn't peoples intent, nor is it the entire movement toward agility. I believe that there is a silent majority that likely feels a bit like me, hoping for something more. Something better.

My friend, @RonJeffries said it well a bit earlier today:

• 
  

For me, I'm committing to only add to the collective voice when it's words of hope, stories of success, or items that might bring this movement closer together. I believe our agile movement needs more examples of unity, of brightness, and direction.

There is a chance I'm alone in this feeling, and few will echo this concern, but I'm willing to take the chance and put this out there.

If this resonates with you, I encourage you to make a commitment on what you will add. And maybe, this agile movement will be just a little bit better and kinder place.

Please Note: this article was originally published on my LinkedIn account March 3, 2022

Is agile a religion or a business?

 

Recently, I was consulting on a client call and we were discussing product offerings to the world, when

one of the executives asked me the question: " Is agile more of a religion? or is it a business?" This

turned into an interesting discussion, and thought I'd share a bit of what was discussed, especially when

you are looking to hire someone to help you with your agile transformation - or if you are joining an agile

company. The Great Resignation has 4.5 Million people in the US quit their jobs in November 2021

alone.

This is really a time of change.

I'm no scholar on religion, so I did a little digging trying to find a definition, and with all I found it appears the scholars themselves don't agree. (see reference) There are some elements of the myriad of definitions of religion that sound a lot like how many approach agility. Phrases like " system of beliefs and practices", " comprehensive worldview" seem to align nicely while others do not ( "worship of a superhuman controlling power" would be an example)

But I do consider myself a student of the agile movement, and for me it is just that - a movement.

Dictionary.com has this definition for Movement:

Now, it may be debatable if all agilist have a " common ideology" , but I think you can see how this would apply. And the passion many people in the movement have, give us the appearance of a religion to some. This is especially true of those that focus on "employee happiness" as the leading goal. While I do believe agile teams enjoy their work more, it is a byproduct of having a vested interest in how the work gets done, and connection to the customer. Happiness is an outcome of the team based work, but shouldn't be the focus without the delivery aspect an agile way of working helps us achieve.

Now to Business. Wow, has this become a business. You see this everyday on websites and marketing collateral from organization, consultancies and more. People are selling "Agile*" and formulaic approaches - especially those that are financially beneficial to those selling. And the worlds organizations are buying. Many of those most active in selling " Agile*" can be the most accomplished business focused people, yet, can also be the least aligned with the agile movement. Large selling organizations have a powerful ability to connect companies needs with what they have to offer. They create selling solutions for the opportunities, and this shift from traditional ways of working has created a vast amount of opportunity. When they have a hammer, they help you see you are the nail.

So what is the answer?

I am finding is that many of the businesses best at selling "Agile*" maybe the least agile companies. And, many of the most agile people are likely some of the least equipped to powerfully sell what they know.

Yes, the agile movement has attributes of religious movements, but it isn't a religion. And yes, it is a business because people are buying offerings to help individuals and organizations to become more agile, but those that are focused on this as a business, likely are not very agile themselves. I'm sure there are outliers here, and these are just broad strokes, but it's a pattern I see again and again.

So what to do?

Before selecting who to hire or who to work for, do your homework.

• Check for champagne. A company should live the values it is proposing to teach you, they should drink their own champagne. This includes their C-suite, HR policies, Marketing and more. Ask questions and ask to actually see Mission/Vision/Values and governing documents. Talk to existing employees, and see how work is delivered iteratively and incrementally. Also ask employees how they are valued as an active contributor towards solutions for their customers.
• Read what they write. Read what you can that they have contributed to the agile movement beyond simply advertising for their particular solution. Are they adding to the collective good of the movement, or are they being divisive. This includes the principals within the company and how they present at agile events, write on social media and blog sites. Some spend most of their energy sharing how other people are wrong, in some effort to make themselves look better - I'd avoid them.
• Discover together. Be cautious of people's willingness and ability to help when they already have a solution to offer. The movement to agility isn't a one size fits all, and each company is in a different current state. Have frank and open conversations about where you are as a company, and what goals you hope to achieve. A company offering agile consulting should definitely take an iterative and incremental approach, and insisting on co-creating that journey with each client. If you are going to work for a company offering agile consulting, don't fall into the trap of signing up for a 3-step solution to every client's issues or a perfect framework - it likely will never work,

Organizational change is difficult, costly, and not guaranteed of success. You should do your due diligence.

The business of agility is booming. People and organizations realize the need to be able to be more responsive to customer's needs, and pivot when things change. You don't have to choose religion or business. Just ensure those you go into business with, aren't just selling "Agile*" but are living agile principles and values.

* - I am using the term "Agile" on purpose here - Capital "A" Agile. The word agile is not a noun. You can't buy an "Agile". Yet so many companies and consultants are selling it that way. Agile is an adjective or an adverb, and it can be used to describe something else. An agile process, or an agile mindset.

Please note: this article was originally published on my LinkedIn account March 22, 2022.

Unplugged

For the first time that I can remember, I totally unplugged from the digital world last week.  7 whole days of digital silence.

As a confession, I believe I am addicted to technology and digital connections.  

In a normal day I find myself checking my phone dozens of times a day.  Checking in with distant friends, work email, social networks, slack, online weather, news feeds, googling the thing I can't remember, etc.   Rinse and repeat.   It's like a permanent part of me, dangling there and taunting me to just look " one more time" because I might have missed something.

In the early days of technology, I remember a family trip to the beach where we rented a lovely beach front condo.  In order to stay connected, I carried a (likely) 25 lb fax machine and connected it in the condo so that I could get updates, mark up documents, and communicate back with the office.  Yep, I had it bad.  I don't believe I am alone in this.  In a recent Time article,  Americans check their cell phones 8 billion times a day. Individually, people look from 34-75 times.   Personally, I believe I exceed those numbers. ( even during trying to write this short post, I've multi-tasked and looked at my email 3x so far.)

This last week wasn't easy.   The first 3-4 days I honestly think I was going through withdrawals.  I spent much of my day looking for what I was missing. Checking my phone that was on airplane mode and receiving nothing new, and mentally thinking I should grab my laptop that was left at home.  This feeling slowly faded, and I believe I became far more aware of the present and proximate, and OK with not knowing about anything else.

What I noticed was that I slept more, and more often.  My family was shocked to see me so relaxed that I would doze at the drop of a hat.   Pool side lounger - snooze.  Comfy chair in the shade - snooze.   In 26 years of marriage my wife has never seen me nap ( unless I had the flu), so me being able to turn my brain off and just relax was a huge deal.  My heart rate reduced and I am sure my blood pressure was lower.

I'm not sure when the next time I will be able to totally un-plug again. Hopefully, the withdrawals will be less, and the rest will be more.