yves ferland
Articles de yves :
- Proven management experience at navigating inside complex organizational cultures, systems and politics
- Exceptional listening skills
- Ability to think outside the box; Agility being one box
- Proven track record in having positively coached people on Agility
- A genuine dedication towards delighting customers (I do recommend the following Agile 2011 conference blog post by my colleague Martin Proulx)
- Agile’s framework doesn’t answer all your needs for doing so
- Instead of turning Agile into something it isn’t, ask for help and complement with other approaches based on your needs
- Using traditional management approaches and tools is not a sin. If it fits the purpose, why reinvent something new for that is the same things?
- Aéronautique
- Assurances
- Bancaire
- Finances
- Gestion des talents
- Juridique
- Manufacturier
- Santé
- Secteur public
- Télécommunications
- Nous voulons améliorer la qualité des solutions que nous livrons
- Nous voulons améliorer notre productivité dans son ensemble et par conséquent réduire nos frais d’exploitation
- Nous voulons que nos clients obtiennent plus de valeur d’affaires pour les investissements qu’ils effectuent auprès des technologies de l’information
- Nous voulons améliorer notre compétitivité en livrant plus rapidement sur le marché et de façon nettement plus flexible
- Nous voulons augmenter la mobilisation de nos équipes et ainsi accroitre l’acquisition et la rétention de talents
- Nous voulons simplement livrer à temps, selon les prévisions budgétaires et dans le respect des devis techniques
- La qualité globale des solutions livrées par sa division est bien en dessous des standards de Xyz
- Les coûts de résolution des régressions après livraison sont énormes
- Son groupe livre constamment l’intégralité des caractéristiques demandées, mais ni à temps et ni dans le respect des budgets
- Améliorer la qualité des solutions livrées
- Simplement livrer à temps, dans le respect des devis techniques et des budgets
- What consultants don’t tell you before you begin an Agile transition — (Analytical-Mind, March 2010)
- Enterprise-class Agile Development Defined — (Gartner / rapport payant, March 2011)
- From team self-organization to enterprise self-organization — (Analytical-Mind, March 2011)
- Are you an Agile leader? — (Analytical-Mind, May 2010)
- State of Agile Survey 2010 — (VersionOne, December 2010)
- Aeronautics
- Banking
- Finance
- Government agencies
- Healthcare
- Insurance
- Law
- Manufacturing
- Talent Management
- Telecommunication
- We want to improve the quality of the solutions being delivered
- We want to improve overall productivity, hence reducing cost of operations
- We want to deliver better value to the end-user for the resources invested
- We want to improve time-to-market, hence delivering faster with better flexibility
- We want to improve team mobilization, talent retention and acquisition
- We simply want to deliver on time, on specs and on budget
- Overall quality of solutions delivered by his group are way below Xyz’s standards
- Costs of solving post-delivery regressions are huge
- His unit constantly delivers everything on specs, but neither on time, nor on budget
- To improve the quality of the solutions being delivered
- To simply deliver on specs, on time and on budget
- From team self-organization to enterprise self-organization — (Analytical-Mind, March 2011)
- Are you an Agile leader? — (Analytical-Mind, May 2010)
- State of Agile Survey 2010 — (VersionOne, December 2010)
- ESTJ: extraversion (E), sensing (S), thinking (T), judgment (J)
- INFP: introversion (I), intuition (N), feeling (F), perception (P)
- Cold, hard facts, available options, guidance and unwavering support;
- Reality check from an operational standpoint (the people doing the job on the field);
- Personal and professional advice from an impartial/ethical perspective;
- Keeping my mind and heart focused and balanced during a tough decision-making process;
- Big picture and overall insight.
- Is it better to work for a small organization or a large one? — (Analytical-Mind, March 2011)
- ENTJ, The FieldMarshal — (Personality Desk, MBTI profiles, at work, relationships, type dynamics)
- Why Introverts Can Make The Best Leaders — (Jennifer B. Kahnweiler, November 2009)
- Canadians Say Yes to Social Media — (eMarketer Digital Intelligence)
- LinkedIn Now 60 Million Strong — (TechCrunch – February 11, 2010)
- Reinventing Careers — (Businessweek – July1, 2098)
- Week 1 (today): The first part of the story – Why quit a high-profile job?
- Week 2: Four lessons I learned during the process.
- Week 3: The self-analysis exercises I used to support my decisions.
- Seven Keys to Switching from a Big Company to a Small One — (Harvard Business Review – October 28, 2010)
- Turning Conflict into Cooperation — (Businessweek – October 15, 2010)
- 13 Unlucky Mistakes in Managing Traumatic Change — and How to Avoid Them (Harvard Business Review – March 22, 2010)
- Professing truths about management — (Henry Mintzberg / Finacial Post – September 14, 2010)
150 Minutes of Power
Breakthroughs in unexpected contexts !
I recently had a startling experience while leading a meeting with a demotivated Agile pilot team.
After 2 sprints, serious concerns were still not being outspoken; people morale was low.
So, I convinced all employees and managers to get together in a session I had specifically designed for them.
Two things struck me:
First: energized by the unusual agenda, participants felt empowered at unfolding deep concerns and at finding creative solutions.
Second: I was awarded a WOW ! statement by the customer because of the positive outcome of the meeting.
This strategic partner of ours is one of the largest public companies in Canada. Are they serious about Agile ? – Yes.
Lean against Agile – really?
There is a theme emerging from my 2011 coaching assignments; Lean and Agile initiatives are everywhere I go, and people are confused!
Sign of times: a pretty significant group of Lean and Agile experts just got together in Berlin earlier this month for the first European ‘ALE 2011 unconference‘; sharing their experience and knowledge on these two converging approaches.
What’s all the fuss about Lean and Agile?
In a nutshell, these two giants are fighting to get enterprise governance attention.
Agile isn’t easy
Anybody who says otherwise is probably trying to sell you something
I’m spending the whole week here in Salt Lake City; attending the Agile 2011 Conference.
Earlier this week, Agile veterans Ron Jeffries and Chet Hendrickson held a session on what they thought they got right and what they thought they got wrong over the last decade.
I’m taking the liberty today to cherry-pick and to comment on two of Chet and Ron’s assessments regarding the things that did not go so well since 2001.
Dogmatism
Yes, there is still a fair amount of Agile practitioners around who will religiously apply each and every principles of the Scrum Guide without having a deep understanding of what it really means, nor will they prove to have real-life experience from the field deploying Agile values and principles.
New people embracing Agility seem to frequently fall into that trap; coaching others at learning Agility like following a recipe cookbook.
Moreover, some experienced Agile practitioners clearly never came out of this paradigm. Hiding themselves behind dogmatism and religious behavior brings fear, ignorance, and inexperience to people willing to get the best out of Agility.
Besides material available on the web, from trainings, to books and the likes, I do believe a good Agile coach must be able to clearly demonstrate to his partners (usually called customers) the following top 5 core competencies;
Bottom line, being dogmatic and following step-by-step guidelines can be comfortable for many reasons. One of them can be the silver bullet syndrome that solves every possible issues faced by an organization in one monolithic state of mind and rigid framework.
I do personally think serious coaches needs to be fully inclined at mastering the above top 5 competencies if they really want their partners to be not only satisfied, but totally delighted!
Agile is not the answer to everything
Taking a step back and looking at why organizations are moving towards Agile, we can observe a heavy trend emerging from Agile practices on the field.
In an attempt to achieve all the benefits promised by Agility, some ‘agilists’ have started to accommodate or to modify quite substantially the Agile framework.
Out of the many reasons why one would be inclined to do so, there is one particular frightening motivation that caught my attention.
Let’s turn that toaster into a dishwasher… both are kitchen appliances aren’t they?
Applying Agile values and principles inside an organization is a challenge by itself. It requires a lot of skills, efforts and commitments from all parties involved. Most of the times, the Agile adoption cycle will expose many caveats and pitfalls for which the framework has not been designed to address at all.
In such circumstances, we do see Agile coaches, scrum masters, trainers and product owners distorting their practices so they can extend and reach out areas of the organization for which Agility is simply not the best answer (a toaster is a toaster).
If you’re really into turning your partners into Agile organizations focused on totally delighting their customers, you may consider the followings:
A good example on expanding your mindset by complementing your Agile practices with better-suited approaches is covered in my colleague’s most recent post from the Agile 2011 Conference.
In his blog entry, Martin comments on an inspiring presentation by Steve Denning on Making the Entire Organization Agile. I do recommend the read!
Accompagner des leaders lors de transitions Agiles (partie 1)
Parlons des vraies choses
J’ai pris la route avec quatre de mes collègues lors des deux dernières semaines de mars pour animer des microconférences stimulantes à Montréal et à Québec.
Comme promis aux participants de ces évènements, j’entreprends aujourd’hui une série de billets sur les commentaires reçus dans chacune des villes.
J’espère que ce premier article s’avèrera utile aux leaders recherchant des conseils sur l’introduction de l’agilité dans leur organisation et les défis que cela représente.
Une version anglaise de ce texte est disponible pour nos lecteurs et lectrices anglophones.
Nos « Déjeuners-Causeries » en bref : 50 dirigeants de l’industrie par ville, 5 tables rondes chacune assignée à un facilitateur et à un sujet spécifique lié à l’agilité. Le tout discuté pendant les 3 heures d’un déjeuner. Nous remercions tous les participants de s’être joints à nous et d’avoir ainsi constitué un auditoire varié représentant un large éventail de secteurs de l’industrie :
Pour chaque ville, j’ai eu le plaisir d’animer un sujet riche : guider les dirigeants lors de transitions agiles. Un autre animateur de l’évènement, mon collègue Martin Proulx a publié récemment son propre billet sur l’entreprise autoorganisée. Je vous en recommande la lecture.
Écouter les dirigeants sur l’agilité
Mon intérêt pour le sujet est marqué, ayant récemment dirigé en tant que dirigeant, une transition agile majeure au sein d’une grande organisation, le Mouvement Desjardins.
Dans chaque ville, nous avons échangé entre participants nos points de vue, nos attentes et nos préoccupations concernant l’agilité.
Les 5 sujets marquants exprimés par nos leaders à Montréal et à Québec
En passant à l’agilité, nous avons obtenu de bons résultats dans certains secteurs de notre organisation, mais avons subi des échecs cuisants dans d’autres, pourquoi ?
Nous nous sentons démunis quant à certains impacts associés à l’adoption de l’agilité
Comment mesurer nos succès avec l’agilité ?
Nos hauts dirigeants et nos professionnels nous exhortent de passer à l’agilité, mais nous pensons que nous faisons aussi bien sans nous remettre en question
Il semble que la gouvernance, la conformité, les processus et les contrôles sont délaissés par l’agilité— sommes-nous voués à l’échec ?
Quelques observations et leçons apprises
Le billet d’aujourd’hui se concentre sur le premier sujet ci-dessus. Je vous invite à surveiller mon blogue pour les prochaines publications qui traiteront plus en détail l’ensemble de ces 5 points exprimés par nos leaders des déjeuners-causeries.
Promouvoir l’agilité – un seul concept, mais des raisons diverses pour en justifier son adoption
Un scénario fréquent d‘expérimentation des pratiques agiles est le projet pilote. Travailler en circuit fermé avec peu d’acteurs impliqués permet d’obtenir rapidement des résultats. Cependant, les équipes agiles découvrent habituellement que l’idée doit être diffusée à travers l’organisation pour concrétiser et récolter des retombées vraiment significatives.
Au fur et à mesure que les promoteurs de l’agilité présentent le concept à une audience plus large dans leur entourage, certains groupes d’influence ou décisionnels commencent à poser des questions difficiles. Leurs préoccupations pouvant éventuellement ralentir, voire tout simplement stopper l’adoption de l’agilité au sein de la société.
Les départements ou comités responsables de l’architecture d’entreprise ou le bureau de gestion de projets centralisée (Project Management Office) par exemple, peuvent émettre de réelles inquiétudes s’il y a suffisamment d’interrogations demeurant sans réponses ou encore, s’il subsiste des risques non adressés provenant de la mise en place de l’agilité au niveau de la compagnie.
À ce point, les conversations deviennent difficiles et peuvent s’avérer improductives si les leaders faisant la promotion de l’agilité n’ont prévu aucune stratégie de communication.
Une bonne question de départ pour les promoteurs de l’agilité :
Pourquoi désirons-nous adopter l’agilité, et nos partenaires partagent-ils la même vision et des objectifs communs ?
Il existe plusieurs réponses potentielles à cette problématique, voici les plus populaires :
Les promoteurs de l’agilité sélectionnent habituellement quelques-uns des éléments de la liste ci-dessus comme objectifs. Un de ces points s’avère la plupart du temps plus important que les autres.
Quelques leçons apprises à ce sujet :
Une fois que vous savez pourquoi vous passez à l’agilité, ne tenez pas pour acquis que l’ensemble de votre organisation comprend entièrement les objectifs et motivations de votre initiative
Ne présumez pas que les autres divisions de l’entreprise partagent les mêmes raisons que vous, pour justifier d’effectuer une transition agile
Alors, assurez-vous de définir clairement, en tout temps et avec chaque personne interagissant avec votre équipe, les motivations de votre transition vers l’agilité
Lorsque vous saurez pourquoi vous faites cela, vous serez en mesure de cibler les zones de l’organisation qui demandent votre attention immédiate et des efforts concrets
Bien qu’en apparence évidents, ces éléments sont souvent mis de côté par les promoteurs de l’agilité en entreprise. Une situation qui laisse place à la mise en oeuvre de canaux de communication dysfonctionnels et qui guide les initiateurs de l’agilité à tenter de convaincre les mauvais intervenants
De plus, il est fréquent de constater un accroissement des craintes en regard des activités reliées à l’agilité. Des appréhensions fondées sur le sentiment d’effectuer une transition agile pour les mauvaises raisons ; transmettant ainsi des perspectives erronées sur les bénéfices et impacts d’un tel projet
En conclusion : la définition d’une stratégie de communication de tout premier ordre est votre meilleure alliée et l’application concrète et quotidienne de cette stratégie, un de vos critères de succès sine qua non
Illustrons ceci avec un cas concret
Pour des raisons de confidentialité, l’exemple suivant est un mélange de plusieurs observations que j’ai pu faire au fil des années.
Le contexte
L’entreprise Xyz publie des solutions web critiques utilisées par une clientèle internationale. Xyz est organisé selon une structure départementale typique basée sur les fonctions : lignes d’affaires, développement, finance, gestion de projet, production, etc.
Xyz livre ses solutions en production pour sa base clients 4 fois par an, à des dates déterminées et non négociables.
Le vice-président du développement de Xyz rencontre les problèmes suivants :
Son équipe de développement utilise les meilleures pratiques de l’agilité pour :
Des deux objectifs clés ci-dessus, sa principale préoccupation est sans l’ombre d’un doute la qualité des solutions livrées en production. L’excellence discutable des applications web de Xyz nuit considérablement à son image de marque.
Promouvoir sa transition agile au sein de l’organisation
Bien sûr, l’agilité peut apporter bien plus de bénéfices que ceux sélectionnés par le vice-président du développement. Je reviendrais ultérieurement sur ce sujet lors d’un prochain article, en lien avec le cycle de maturité de l’agilité. Surveillez la publication de la partie 3 de cette série : « Comment mesurer le succès avec l’agilité ? ».
Dans notre exemple, le bureau de gestion des projets (PMO) surveille étroitement les activités de la vice-présidence de développement et exige de cette dernière, de nombreux rapports et suivis d’avancement. Les chefs de projets affectés aux équipes de développement examinent la progression des tâches de façon excessivement granulaire.
Pour ceux d’entre vous qui sont familiers avec Scrum, cette situation peut s’avérer contreproductive et limitante dans la réalisation des bénéfices promis par l’agilité.
Lorsque la vice-présidence du développement a annoncé son intention de passer à l’agilité, le bureau de gestion de projets a interprété négativement cette nouvelle. Les dirigeants avaient « ouï-dire » que l’agilité et Scrum ne requièrent pas de gestion de projet.
Ils ont aussi entendu qu’avec Scrum, vous ne savez tout simplement pas de quoi sera composé la solution, vous n’en connaîtrez pas plus les coûts, ni quand celle-ci sera finalement livrée aux clients.
Un bon conseil de coach au vice-président du développement :
Assurez-vous que la direction du bureau de gestion projets devienne un partenaire clé et investissez du temps de qualité pour collaborer (non pas argumenter éternellement) avec ses équipes afin de définir une stratégie mutuelle d’adoption de l’agilité.
Une stratégie de collaborateurs qui tiennent autant compte des impacts, que des risques et des bénéfices reliés à ce type de meilleures pratiques
De toute évidence, cette collaboration amorcera de sérieuses discussions sur les implications des pratiques agiles sur les rôles et responsabilités des différentes fonctions en entreprise, ainsi que sur les processus de reddition de comptes gouvernant la gestion de programmes et projets : approbation par phase de projets (« go-no-go »), allocations budgétaires, tableaux de bords et indicateurs de performances, etc.
Le dernier billet de cette série parlera des stratégies pouvant être envisagées sous une optique d’établir des conversations productives entre les promoteurs de l’agilité et les divers groupes fonctionnels d’une organisation.
Je vous invite à surveiller la publication du billet : « Il semble que la gouvernance, la conformité, les processus et les contrôles sont délaissés par l’agilité – sommes-nous voués à l’échec ? ».
Revenons à la préoccupation principale du vice-président au développement – la qualité
Ses équipes de génie logiciel réalisent avec succès de meilleures solutions en ayant recours à des pratiques agiles telles que le développement piloté par les tests (Test Driven Development), l’intégration continue et l’automatisation des tests.
Ils ont aussi obtenu d’excellents résultats en modifiant leurs façons de fabriquer du logiciel en adoptant Scrum.
Cependant, ces gains s’opèrent à l’intérieur d’environnements de développement et de laboratoires, et non pas sur les plates-formes d’intégration systèmes et de production utilisés pour la mise en ligne des applications à la clientèle mondiale de Xyz.
Fait important à noter, les environnements d’intégration systèmes et de production sont gérés indépendamment par une autre vice-présidence : le groupe de production.
Les équipes de la vice-présidence au développement savent que Scrum et les meilleures pratiques de développement logiciel peuvent grandement améliorer le niveau de qualité lorsque ces derniers sont introduits et mis en oeuvre jusqu’aux environnements de production dédiés à la livraison en ligne aux clients.
Mais afin de réaliser ces bénéfices, des ajustements notables sont nécessaires sur les environnements d’intégration systèmes et de production. À cela s’ajoutent les impacts d’adhésion aux principes agiles tels que la modification du cycle de livraison des logiciels, ainsi que les transformations importantes affectant directement les rôles et les responsabilités des équipes liées aux fonctions assurées par les vice-présidences de développement et de production.
Toutefois, le département de production accomplit de façon constante un haut degré de qualité de services sur ses plates-formes d’intégration systèmes et de production. Ses ressources publient infailliblement en ligne quatre fois par année, à temps et selon les prévisions budgétaires, les solutions de Xyz.
La vice-présidence de production ne voit donc pas d’avantages à adopter des pratiques agiles. Il n’y a tout simplement pas de raisons évidentes d’envisager de tels changements à son infrastructure, à ses processus et à ses fonctions. Tout ce que son groupe désire est de recevoir des solutions fiables en provenance de la division de développement qui peuvent être mises en ligne efficacement selon les critères de production.
À la lumière d’un examen critique de la situation, les modifications demandées par le service de développement semblent mettre en péril la stabilité des systèmes de production, d’en accroitre leurs frais d’exploitation, tout en créant un climat d’incertitude au sein des équipes par la venue de concepts novateurs et mal compris tels que Scrum, le développement piloté par les tests, l’intégration continue et les tests automatisés.
Ce scénario est un classique dans l’industrie. De nombreuses variantes peuvent être observées dans votre entreprise autour de ce thème ; selon les différents acteurs impliqués, le degré de maturité de vos processus et le niveau de collaboration entre les parties prenantes.
Une leçon importante émerge de tout ceci :
Les vice-présidents du développement et de la production doivent élever leurs débats d’un cran en se concentrant sur les avantages d’affaires clés attendus par Xyz, au lieu d’isoler l’analyse de leurs enjeux respectifs sur des bases départementales déconnectées de la réalité de leurs clients internationauxLa qualité inappropriée des solutions livrées par le service de développement met en péril la réputation de Xyz et réduit directement la loyauté de sa clientèle envers ses solutions web de classe mondiale, et ce, même si la production mets en ligne ces applications de façon efficace
Sans l’aide d’un partenaire stratégique, en l’occurrence la vice-présidence production, le groupe de développement ne pourra matérialiser à un niveau adéquat les bénéfices promis par l’agilité
Le retour sur investissement sera décevant si seuls les avantages agiles émergeant du service de développement ne sont tenus en compte dans l’équation. L’intégration de la vice-présidence production au sein d’une stratégie commune de rehaussement majeur de la qualité des solutions web de Xyz occasionnera sans contredit un retour sur investissement nettement supérieur, pour ne pas dire impressionnant
Cela suggère que les coûts supplémentaires et les efforts requis pour adapter les environnements d’intégration systèmes et de production doivent être évalués sous l’angle d’un investissement d’entreprise visant l’atteinte des objectifs d’affaires de Xyz. Considérer ces injections de nouveau capital comme des dépenses additionnelles d’exploitation réduisant ainsi l’excellente productivité globale de la vice-présidence production, conduira inexorablement au refus de l’organisation d’aller de l’avant
Des métriques factuelles sont nécessaires pour capturer les frais de résolution des régressions impactant la qualité des solutions de Xyz
Des mesures qualitatives doivent aussi être collectées auprès des lignes d’affaires afin d’évaluer l’impact réel sur la réputation de Xyz de fournir des solutions de mauvaise qualité à ses clients
Guider les leaders durant leur transition vers les meilleures pratiques de l’agilité se résume à mettre en lumière qu’il n’existe pas de recette miracle et générique qu’il suffirait d’appliquer unilatéralement sans prendre en compte le contexte de l’organisation.
La définition des motivations clés de l’entreprise à vouloir effectuer une migration agile demeure sans aucun doute le facteur numéro un qu’un bon coach s’emploiera immédiatement à circonscrire avec les dirigeants de la société qu’il accompagne.
S’en suivra naturellement l’identification des départements, unités et fonctions de l’organisation devant être mis à contribution au succès de l’initiative, et ce, de manières très différentes.
Cela revient également à mettre en relation dans la même équation : les avantages, les impacts et les coûts d’un passage à l’agilité. En opposition aux avantages, aux impacts et aux coûts de ne pas résoudre les problèmes pour lesquels l’agilité est considérée comme une réponse aux enjeux de performances de l’entreprise.
Dans le prochain billet de cette série, je discuterai des stratégies que les dirigeants peuvent envisager pour gérer efficacement les conséquences d’une évolution vers l’agilité dans leur cadre de travail.
D’ici là, n’hésitez pas à me faire part de vos commentaires et réactions à ce premier article.
Quelques lectures d’intérêt en lien avec cette série :
Coaching Leaders on Agile Transitions (part 1)
Let’s talk about the real things
The last two weeks of March were stimulating as I hit the road with four of my colleagues, hosting micro-conferences in Montreal and Quebec City.
As promised to all attendees, I’m starting today a series of blogs on the feedback captured in both cities.
I hope this first entry will be valuable to leaders looking for guidance at introducing Agility in the workplace.
For our French readers, a translated version of each post will follow shortly after publication of its English counterpart.
Our “Déjeuner-Causerie” in a nutshell: 50 industry leaders per city, 5 roundtables each assigned with a facilitator and a specific subject related to Agility discussed over a 3 hour breakfast. Thanks to all participants for having joined us. We had a very diverse crowd representing a wide spectrum of industry segments:
For both cities I had the pleasure to facilitate a rich topic: Coaching Leaders on Agile Transitions. Another facilitator of the event, my colleague Martin Proulx just published his own blog entry on Enterprise Self-Organization. I do recommend the read.
Hearing leaders on Agile
My interests on the matter are obviously huge because of my recent involvement in leading, as an executive, a major Agile transition inside a large organization, the Desjardins Group.
In each city, we exchanged perspectives with participants on their expectations and concerns towards Agility.
Top 5 discussions with leaders in Montreal and Quebec City
We’ve been promoting Agility with great success in some areas of the organization, but got severely burned in others – why?
We feel helpless with some of the impacts adopting Agility
How do we measure success with Agile?
Top executives and professionals beg for Agility, but we think we are doing just great without it
It seems like governance, compliance, processes and controls are left behind by Agility – are we doomed?
Some observations and lessons learned
Today’s entry focuses on the first subject listed above. Join me in upcoming blog posts as I will go through all 5 and discuss furthermore on each concern.
Promoting Agility – one concept, but many reasons for doing so
One common scenario used to experiment the best Agile practices is the pilot project. Working in a closed-loop with a few people involved allows quick successes. However, Agile teams usually discover that the idea needs to be promoted across the organization in order to materialize significant benefits.
While pushing forward the Agile concept, some authoritative groups starts asking tough questions, eventually slowing down Agile adoption or even simply stopping it. Departments or committees like enterprise architecture and project management office (PMO) can show real concerns if there are sufficient unanswered questions or unaddressed risks exposed by the Agile initiative.
At this point, the conversation begins to be difficult and may prove to be unproductive if leaders promoting Agility have no communication strategy.
Agile promoters may consider asking themselves one simple question:
Why are we adopting Agility, and do our partners share the same understanding and objectives?
There are many potential answers to this question. Here are some of the most popular ones:
Promoters will combine several items from the list above as their business case for embracing Agility. Usually one point is significantly more important than the others.
Some great lessons I learned about this:
Once you know why you are going Agile, don’t take for granted that everybody in the organization fully understands the rationale supporting your endeavour
Don’t assume that other areas of the enterprise will share the same reasons for eventually embracing Agility
So, make sure to state clearly, at all times and with everyone interacting with your team, the reasons why you are transitioning to Agile
Once you know why you are doing this, you’ll be able to easily pinpoint areas of the organization that requires your immediate attention and efforts
Failing to do so creates dysfunctional communication channels, makes you invest time trying to convince the wrong people, generates fear of doing things for the wrong reasons and communicates misaligned perspectives on benefits and impacts related to Agile adoption
Bottom line: you’ll have to define a first-class communication strategy and execute on it on a daily basis
Let’s illustrate this with a real-life example
For the sake of confidentiality, the following example is a blend of several observations I made over the years.
The context
Organization Xyz produces mission-critical web-based solutions used by an international customer base. Xyz is organized in a typical departmental structure based on functions: lines of business, development, finance, project management, production, and so on.
Xyz gets its solutions into production for end-users available 4 times a year at defined dates; this schedule is not negotiable.
Xyz’s VP of development is facing the following issues:
His development group is using Agile as a mean:
From the two key drivers listed above, his main concern is without a doubt on the quality of the solutions being delivered in production. The negative impact on Xyz’s corporate brand is significant.
Promoting his Agile transition inside the organization
Of course, Agility can bring a lot more benefits than the above two selected key drivers by the VP of development. I will touch base on the maturity cycle of an Agile transition later on in the series: “How do we measure success with Agile”.
In this example the project management office (PMO) has the development group on its radar and asks for a lot of detailed reports and follow ups. Project managers are monitoring development in a very granular way. For those of you familiar with Scrum, this can be somewhat counterproductive.
When development announced it was moving to Agile, PMO concluded this was bad news. Project managers had heard through the grapevine that Agility and Scrum do not need project management. They had also heard that with Scrum, you just don’t know what the solution to be delivered will be made of, for how much, and when…
One good coaching advice to the VP of development here:
Make sure the head of PMO becomes a key partner and invest quality time to truly collaborate (not argue) with his staff on building a mutual strategy on Agile adoption, impacts, risks analysis and materialization of benefits
Obviously, this collaboration will initiate serious discussions on the implications of Agility regarding roles and responsibilities, as well as the reporting and stage-gating processes from a project management perspective and governance.
Potential strategies for handling the conversation will be covered in the concluding entry of this series: “It seems like governance, compliance, processes and controls are left behind by Agility – are we doomed?”.
Going back to the VP’s (of development) top concern – quality
His software engineering teams have been successfully delivering better solutions by experimenting Test Driven Development (TDD), continuous integration and automated testing. They also changed their way of producing software by adopting Scrum and got excellent results.
However, all of this was experimented in lab setups and development infrastructures, not with real-life systems integration and live production environments which are managed by another department: production.
The development group knows that Scrum and software engineering best practices will increase their quality ratio by a significant amount, if pushed to production.
But in order to really make the leap and reach outstanding quality rates, important adjustments will be necessary on systems integration and live production environments. Also, adopting Scrum modifies the software delivery cycle, plus roles and responsibilities, just to name a few.
On the other hand, the production department happens to rate high regarding quality of its services and performs great at delivering on time and on budget 4 times a year when bringing Xyz’s solutions online.
The head of production really sees no advantages of considering Agile; there are simply no obvious reasons to do so. All his team wants is to receive well-done software packages from development that will get put into production flawlessly.
Likewise, changes requested by the development group appear to hinder the stability of production infrastructures, to generate significant expenses for modifying environments, and last but not least, Scrum changes the processes in place as well as roles and responsibilities.
This scenario is a classic in the industry. There are many variations and changes between players involved, the maturity of their processes and the level of collaboration they’ve been achieving.
Important lessons learned emerge from this:
The VP of development and head of production need to elevate the debate up one notch by focusing on business key drivers rather than concerns specific to each of their units
The inappropriate quality of solutions delivered by the development group jeopardizes Xyz’s brand and customer base
Without the help of its strategic partner in production, benefits promised by Agility will be somewhat average and not sufficient
The Return on investment will be disappointing if Agile benefits emerge only from the development group. Having the production unit go the extra mile will invert this and generate an outstanding ROI
However, this means that extra money and efforts required to adapt production environments will need to be spent from a corporate investment perspective, rather than perceived as additional expenses reducing the overall productivity of the production group
Factual metrics will need to be captured regarding the costs of software regressions for Xyz
Qualitative metrics will also need to be gathered from lines of business on how Xyz’s brand gets impacted by delivering low-quality solutions to its customer base
Coaching leaders on Agile transitions is really about guiding an organization in understanding that there is no “one-size fits all” secret recipe one could blindly apply without factoring in the context of the enterprise.
A lot of care is required for defining the corporate motivations for going Agile and to expose rapidly areas of the organization that will need to contribute, in many different ways, to the success of the initiative.
It is also about factoring into the equation the benefits, impacts and costs of going Agile, against the benefits, impacts and costs of not addressing the issues for which Agile is being considered as a mean to improve the situation.
In the next entry of this series, I will discuss the strategies leaders can use to effectively manage impacts that usually arise when introducing Agile concepts into the workplace.
In the meantime, I’m looking forward to your comments on this first article.
Here’s some suggested reading:
Calling it quits on a high-profile job (part 3)
The self-analysis exercises I did
First of all, although 2011 is now well underway, I still want to take a moment to wish you all an outstanding year ahead!
I have been a little neglectful in keeping up my blog since I published part 2 of this story on December 1, 2010. Blogging is new to me, but the experience has been wonderful, and I admit I have grown addicted to your extraordinary feedback.
The number of visits to the site since its launch has been beyond my expectations. And the comments from readers across Canada, the United States and Europe have been tremendously inspiring. They have given me enough mental fuel to keep me going for months to come.
So thank you all for your readership. I really appreciate it.
In my last entry, I promised I would unveil to you folks the type of work I did while I was reflecting on the future of my career. Like with my last posts, some of you may find that what I’m saying is little more than good old common sense, applied in a business context. Well, good! That’s what I’m aiming for!
But, as I discovered while reading your comments, both the public and private ones, my self-analysis process seems to be a topic of interest for many of you out there. Hopefully, your expectations in this respect will be satisfied by the time you finish reading this post.
SWOT analysis: For use by businesses, business units, products, projects… and YOU!
A SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats) analysis can be an interesting exercise at the personal level. But, of course, it’s also a huge challenge and requires exceptional honesty and objectivity.
Fortunately enough, I discovered some effective ways of keeping myself from becoming complacent during the process. This section will cover how I achieved this.
Some background info on SWOT analysis
As described in an abundance of literature and Wikipedia, the SWOT technique involves specifying the objective of a business venture or project and identifying the internal and external factors that are favourable and unfavourable to achieve that objective. According to Wikipedia, “A SWOT analysis must first start with defining a desired end state or objective. It is particularly helpful in identifying areas for development.”
This statement made perfect sense to me as part of my decision-making journey, so I decided to proceed with a SWOT analysis on myself. My “desired end state” was already clear. Based on it, I defined my own personal mission statement, as follows:
“As a manager/leader, I want to grow my leadership by helping others develop their full potential and achieve outstanding results. Their success will help determine my own.”
Internal factors
As described in the SWOT analysis, there are internal and external factors to consider. Strengths and weaknesses are internal, whereas opportunities and threats are external. I started with the internal. In order to get a clearer idea of what my real strengths and weaknesses were, I had to take a long, hard look at myself – and resist the urge to shy away from some of the more brutal truths about my personality.
I avoided jumping head-first into an instinctive approach. Instead, I began by taking stock of the various sources of information already available on my strengths and weaknesses and found tools to complement my self-analysis from a soft-skills perspective. I was surprised to discover how much background material there was, most of which I had forgotten about over time:
Psychometric evaluation
I was lucky to have undergone a very good and quite extensive psychometric evaluation when I was hired to work at Desjardins as a senior manager. But the test results were four years old. (Generally speaking, human resources consider these results to have a shelf life of three years.) After carefully reading the 20-page report, however, I gleaned some amazingly accurate insights into my personal strengths and weaknesses, as well as my development plans.
If you have been lucky enough to undergo extensive psychometric testing of this kind, I encourage you to have a close look at your report. But do it with an open mind and nerves of steel: you’re bound to come across some things that are harder to swallow than others.
Yearly performance reviews (I know, we love to hate these…)
You probably have a couple of these on your laptop, right? I used to find my performance reviews very useful… for getting the fire started at my ski lodge. Performance review quality can vary greatly, depending on the process used in your workplace, the skill of the person conducting the evaluation and your relationship with that person.
However, as historical data for this in-depth analysis, I found past performance reviews to be quite helpful. I grabbed five years’ worth of assessments and sorted through them one by one to separate the wheat from the chaff. Any meaningful findings were set aside to be incorporated into my SWOT internal factors.
Peer reviews – 360º feedback evaluations – Off-site strategic meetings
These are also great sources of feedback on your internal qualities. In my case, I had attended five strategic off-site events during my four years as a manager at Desjardins. The individual feedback I received as a result was well documented and relevant.
Unfortunately, none of the 360º evaluations were recent. However, a few of my colleagues agreed to provide me with an informal peer review over lunch. This revolved around a simple, straightforward question:
“What do you think are my top five strengths and weaknesses? Be honest, I can take it!”
Myers Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) report
The purpose of an MBTI test is by no means to define your strengths or weaknesses. But I found the MBTI test to be useful in my self-analysis as it provided complementary information on my psychological preferences, perceptions and decision-making style.
If you’ve recently undergone an MBTI review, you may find this information useful in guiding you, once all four quadrants of your SWOT analysis have been completed. This can provide you with insights on how to approach people based on their attitudes and skills in the communication, decision-making, change management and conflict management arenas.
For those of you who are not familiar with this concept, there are 16 MBTI personality types, which are determined based on the following four dichotomies:
The population breakdown in the U.S. by personality type is as follows:
For example, if you are an ENTJ, your profile might be described like this (from Wikipedia):
“ENTJs are among the rarest of types, accounting for about 2–5% of those who are formally tested.
They tend to be self-driven, motivating, energetic, assertive, confident, and competitive. They generally take a big-picture view and build a long-term strategy.
They typically know what they want and may mobilize others to help them attain their goals. ENTJs are often sought out as leaders due to an innate ability to direct groups of people.
Unusually influential and organized, they may sometimes judge others by their own tough standards, failing to take personal needs into account.”
Her reputation as a tough and uncompromising leader is consistent with the personality of an ENTJ: Margaret Thatcher
Please bear in mind that MBTI tests must be administered by a trained practitioner. Professional feedback is critical to accurate interpretation. Also note that the reliability of MBTI techniques is not universally accepted.
However, from my perspective, I have undergone several psychometric tests throughout my career and have found the results to be a useful in dealing with interpersonal conflicts.
Putting it all together
I eventually compiled all the above-mentioned information and began my SWOT analysis in earnest. I started by drafting my top 10 strengths and weaknesses, based on the various sources I consulted. I set this list aside for a week or so and then narrowed it down to five. I was surprised to discover that these same five points came up again and again in every single source.
I won’t list my top 5 S&Ws here. I consider that to be private. But in a SWOT diagram, this is precisely the kind of information that goes into the two upper squares.
Your two upper quadrants could look something like this, for example:
Remember: the points listed in your strengths and weaknesses shouldn’t be ambiguous and shouldn’t overlap.
Once you have these two quadrants completed, you should be able to use this information to expand upon your mission statement:
“As a manager/leader, I want to grow my leadership by helping others develop their full potential and achieve outstanding results. Their success will help determine my own.”
The following will help me achieve this goal: I have strong people skills; I’m results-oriented; I’m customer-driven; I’m effective at mobilizing teams; and I excel at strategic thinking.
My most obvious impediments are: My business sense is weak; I’m not very good at keeping my skills honed; I lack ambition; I have a hard time establishing key performance indicators; and my negotiation skills are somewhat rudimentary.
Mapping your strengths and weaknesses in the SWOT quadrants does not mean you now have what it takes to fulfill your mission statement. It is up to you to use your S&W profile to your advantage and ensure it complements your endeavours.
External factors
External factors are somewhat less tricky to identify. But zeroing in on them can still present a challenge. In my case, I used my sounding boards (see part 2 in the previous post) to help me get a better handle on them.
The people I sought advice from acted as a kind of “advisory committee.” You may recall that they were a very effective and powerful group.
My talks with my “committee members” gave me access to some excellent information:
My approach to compiling opportunities and threats was not same as when I analyzed my strengths and weaknesses. For the O&Ts, I came up with six pairs of statements concerning my situation at Desjardins, focusing on whether I would keep my job or move on to something else.
The O&Ts presented below are the actual ones I used to help me make up my mind.
Remember: the points listed in your opportunities and threats shouldn’t be ambiguous and shouldn’t overlap.
Let’s re-examine my mission statement in light of these O&T pairs.
“As a manager/leader, I want to grow my leadership by helping others develop their full potential and achieve outstanding results. Their success will help determine my own.”
Should I stay?
(pair 1) – High-profile job vs. Unfair politics
Staying at Desjardins provides me with a respected, high-profile job and industry and peer recognition. At the same time, I am and will continue to be under heavy fire at every turn. I have to put up with unfair politics and participate in unproductive activities.
(pair 2) – Stable career path vs. Demotivation
My current job offers me a very stable career path that grants me excellent financial conditions and loads of perks, including a company car, hefty bonuses, an amazing pension plan and social prestige.
On the other hand, I’m doing my job on auto-pilot. I’m not excited about it anymore and I’m starting to lose my motivation about what I do and how I do it.
(pair 3) – Re-org visibility vs. No fail tolerance
The ongoing restructuring means a lot of visibility for an entrepreneurial-minded exec like me. There are initiatives springing up that would be an excellent fit for me and allow me to shine as a game changer.
Unfortunately, the fast pace of the re-org leaves no room for even the slightest failure, which reduces the likelihood of success and gives me almost no operational leeway.
Or should I go?
(pair 4) – Career realignment vs. Hero syndrome
Leaving my high-profile job to go work for a smaller organization gives me the chance to realign my career in sync with my mission statement, my expectations, my dreams, my capabilities and my values. Wow, I wanna do this!
However, this profile of mine generates expectations in others that are simply not achievable. Smaller companies interviewing me tend to see me as someone who can swoop down and solve all of their problems . But, hey, I’m not Superman!
(pair 5) – Entrepreneurship vs. Risky start-up
Joining a smaller firm will allow me to thrive and realize my full potential as an entrepreneurial-minded executive (which is what I am). For the same amount of energy, I’ll get a much better return on investment than I would in a larger, less nimble organization.
At the same time, smaller companies face their own set of challenges. Financial stability, for example. The overall level of risk associated with joining a small start-up is quite high. Let’s face it: in a small company, you never really know what next month will bring.
(pair 6) – Focus on mission vs. Unclear vision
With the increased latitude and influence I have in a smaller organization, I can focus on my personal mission statement and deliver outstanding results.
The flip side of the coin is that small firms can change business focuses overnight, depending on the opportunities and limitations that arise. As long as these changes don’t venture outside the sandbox I want to play in, everything is fine. But if they do, I’ll have to deal with a dramatic change in vision that could make me question my current or future role within the organization.
Time to make up my mind
As you already know, I ultimately opted for the smaller organization, knowing this path was a better fit in terms of my mission statement, my strengths and my weaknesses.
The decision I made took into account the two scenarios, all six pairs of opportunities and threats and the feedback I gathered (see part 2 of this post).
All in all, after three months at my new job, I can safely say I don’t regret my move. It has been a bumpy ride at times, as I adjust to the small business mindset, but this is where I belong.
I know I still have more tweaking to do. It’s all part of the “inspect and adapt” process that is central to Agile best practices. And at Pyxis, my core focus is all about bringing these practices to organizations of all sizes.
I hope you come back to this site regularly as I continue to share my real-life lessons and discuss the latest trends in leadership and management practices. And I very much look forward to receiving your feedback on this or any of my posts.
In the meantime, here’s some suggested reading:
Calling it quits on a high-profile job (part 2)
The four lessons I’ve learnedLast week, in the first part of this post, I covered the context that prompted me to start thinking about the next step in my career. The past year has been an intense one for me, culminating in a major decision to resign from my position as a senior manager with my previous employer.
This week, I’m sharing with you the lessons I have learned along the way. Bear in mind these observations might be obvious to some, but less so to others. In this entry, I aim to reach out to the latter and perhaps refresh the memories of the more experienced among you.
Many of us, myself included, may tend to react quickly and instinctively to stressful circumstances. Some would argue there is nothing wrong with this, since all decisions need to be made from an individual point of view in a given context and period of time.
Over the years, however, I’ve noticed that this statement tends to be less relevant as your responsibilities increase, your network of partners and colleagues grows and the number of people and organizations who rely on you expands into the hundreds.
When you put only minimal thought into your actions, the messages you are conveying to the community about your value proposition and career path may be confusing. At the same time, with today’s technologies, any such messages are much more visible than ever. Don’t get me wrong: LinkedIn, Twitter, Facebook and the blogosphere at large are fantastic, but they can tear you apart if you don’t understand their impact and the power of the content they carry.
1st lesson learned: Do not run in the opposite direction out of sheer panic. Things might have been scary – very scary – for me this year, but I got much better at reflecting on my situation. So before I moved forward with my big career shift, I thought it over many times. After all, with some moves, there is no turning back…
2. Flattery will get you nowhere
Something odd always happens during an intense career decision-making period. All of a sudden, it seems like your phone calls and emails are all once-in-a-lifetime job opportunities from headhunters and others looking for an immediate reply.
Tempting, isn’t it, to jump on the first train going by? Whatever challenges or surprises they may possess, these opportunities inevitably seem like a dream job and a chance to escape the hassles of your current employment situation – which in my case included an impending second wave of a major restructuring operation.
A great friend of mine told me once:
“You can jump on and off these opportunities as they pop out into your face. But, frankly, opportunities are always there when you start to look for them. You’re better off doing your homework first and finding out what you want to do. Then YOU will be the one presenting opportunities to people you would like to work with.”
2nd lesson learned: It’s always flattering to get a call from someone who wants you badly. But are they really aware of what you are looking for? Is it the right time for you to discuss these possibilities? Have you already done your homework at your current job, so you know what you should be pursuing? Have you explored all your options at work? Or have you simply grumbled about it to yourself in your office, while your misgivings continue to fester in your mind?
3. Sounding boards are a precious asset
It is hard to explain the challenges you are facing to someone else. It is even harder to find the right people to explain them to! Discouragingly enough, politics are rampant at every level of every large organization. By this I mean unproductive politics, which derail people from their missions and companies from their goals, as some politics can obviously be positive and necessary for developing rewarding relationships over time and having a constructive influence within an organization.
When I tell someone that I am seeking out advice from others I trust at work, I always get an odd smile and awkward silence in return, followed by a comment like:
“Are you nuts ? Have you lost it?”“You can’t trust anyone, especially in the middle of a restructuring operation!”“If your boss hears about this, you’ll get fired!”“Last, week, I heard Bill say to Mary that Joan was about to…” And so on.
Well, risk and potential gain have to be balanced in any situation, right? The same applies to your sounding boards. Carefully select the people you consult, the level of detail you bring to the table, the type of subject you want to cover, and the expectations you attach to them. In the final analysis, avoiding this type of brainstorming for the sake of your own protection will probably do you more harm than good.
In last week’s blog, I mentioned that I had approached a couple of sounding boards within my circle of contacts. Together, they comprised a sort of “advisory committee,” although most of them were unaware of the presence of the others.
There were ten people on the “committee”: eight from Desjardins, and two from outside the organization. They were each given specific information based on our relationship and their own profile. And each served a different purpose when it came to the following types of information:
Cold, hard facts, available options, guidance and unwavering support
Three executives, including my boss
Reality check from an operational standpoint (the people doing the job on the field)
Four trusted colleagues (first-line managers and professionals)
Personal and professional advice from an impartial/ethical perspective
One senior HR advisor
Keeping my mind and heart focused and balanced during a tough decision-making process
One family member (my wife)
Big picture and overall insight
One impartial mentor from outside the organization
At this point, you may be rolling your eyes a little. “He couldn’t have talked to all those people,” you may think. Well, I did. A decision of this magnitude takes time. You can’t be in a hurry. But the next time I have such a stressful choice to make, you’d better believe I’ll take exactly the same approach.
You may wonder whether my “committee” ended up agreeing on a final, clear-cut choice. The answer is no: the final decision was mine and there was no consensus among the people I trusted. And, believe me, the path I opted for did not meet with widespread approval.
One reason my various sounding boards did not agree is that most did not know who else was advising me. Plus, they all had very different perspectives or interests with regard to the issues my team and I were facing.
3rd lesson learned: Asking for advice is a tricky balancing act between risk and reward. But you’re better off asking for guidance and support and making some mistakes along the way than avoiding it altogether out of fear and uncertainty. I’m no specialist in the art of consulting sounding boards, but I can tell you it made a heck of a difference in the decisions I’ve made this year.
4. Whether you stay or go, hold your head high
The end of this particular story is that I resigned from my job. But there have been many occasions in my career where the exact opposite happened and I went on for many years being highly motivated in a job I had once considered abandoning.
Most people are very conscientious about starting a new job. They make sure their message and their intentions are understood loud and clear. I agree that this is important: first impressions are crucial. But, on a side note, just make sure that these impressions are the ones you intend to deliver on a steady basis afterward. Once the honeymoon is over, your co-workers will expect you to honour your commitments.
Not as many people are as conscientious about leaving. This is unfortunate, because nothing can be more damaging to a career than setting the boat on fire before taking off with the last available life vest. Memories of this kind of behaviour will last far longer than any mishaps at the first impressions stage. In fact, the way I see things, these memories are likely to follow you and hinder your professional track record throughout your career.
Finally, even fewer people are careful with the way they deal with difficult situations at work while they are pondering their next career move. They tend to lose their temper easily and have no sense of subjectivity. They stray from their sounding boards, talk to the wrong people and end up losing the respect of their colleagues. And that’s only the beginning.
Take a moment to factor in two or three variables like the ones I’ve been describing about my own story this year. Now try to find one good reason that would’ve kept you sane under the same circumstances and prevented you from directing your frustration toward the people around you… or even taking out on your dogs! You can imagine that the first opportunity that comes your way, whatever it is, may seem like your ticket out of the nightmare. It’s tempting. I’ve had enough here… I’m running scared!
4th lesson learned: Times like these are a chance to invest in yourself. Hold your head high and consider the impacts of your actions. People will remember how you dealt with these situations and whether or not you did so with integrity. If you panic, they’ll remember the behaviour itself – not the reasons behind it.
True, life is short and you don’t want to spend half a year thinking about what you will do next, especially if you are already under heavy fire. But the market you work in is smaller than you think. People talk about you a lot more than you imagine. And now there’s social media to worry about, which can accentuate your visibility, for good or for bad!
In two weeks from now, I will share with you the work I did in order to support my decision-making process. That will be the third and last installment of my story of quitting a high-profile job… and why I’m happy with the way I handled 2010!
In the meantime, the following links may be of interest to you:
Calling it quits on a high-profile job (part 1)
Why in the world would you do that?
Well, I guess I just did…
As I start my next exciting job at Pyxis today, I thought it would be a good idea to launch this new blog with a very personal and true story about some amazing events that have happened to me this year – events that have had a tremendous impact on me, my career, my colleagues, my family, my friends and even my two dogs!
Running over the next three weeks, this post will relate my journey through these events and how I decided to deal with these challenges.
I hope this story of mine will be an interesting source of insight for anyone considering a major change in their career and help them decide whether they are ready to take the leap.
A bit of background
I’m a driven professional with loads of entrepreneurial spirit and a genuine love for this thing we call management. By that, I mean the true art of achieving outstanding results by bringing together talented people and providing them with the very best environment so they can blossom to their full potential.
For the last two decades, I’ve been very fortunate to have had the privilege to do exactly that, carrying out leadership functions within a variety of organizations, from publicly traded technology start-ups to established global enterprises. And I’ve enjoyed every minute of it.
“We have good news and bad news for you…”
On January 5, following a minor skiing accident, I wound up in a hospital emergency room, only to be greeted by the kind of the cliché you’d expect to see in a Hollywood tearjerker:
“We have good news and bad news for you, sir. The good news is that you didn’t sustain any injuries during your accident. However, when we X-rayed your head… um… well, we found a brain tumor the size of a ping-pong ball. No, this isn’t someone else’s X-ray… this is your brain…”
Whoa… talk about a nice way to cap off the 2009 Christmas and New Year’s frenzy. I’m 46. I have two beautiful sons, an amazing wife and a job many would be envious of.
A mere two months beforehand, I had received a promotion I had worked very hard for, in the midst of my employer’s most ambitious restructuring initiative in its 110-year history.
I was working for the Desjardins Group, the largest financial cooperative group in Canada, with about 50,000 employees, 6 million clients and members and assets of $173 billion. My title was Senior Director, Innovation & Strategic Planning, and I was responsible for four key groups that oversaw strategic organization-wide IT initiatives. Our job was to implement three-year strategic plans and road maps, so our work influenced a lot of people and departments within the organization.
Two months into the job, I had just finished putting together a winning team for my new department. And there I was, about to have emergency brain surgery with a 50/50 chance of making it through. Even once I did, I still had four long months of recovery at home in front of me – totally disconnected from work.
“Welcome back, Yves – the next wave is coming at you!”
Yes, the surgery was a total success. I’m a survivor and very grateful to be one!
My neurosurgeon was thrilled with the results. The first thing he said to my wife and kids was, “Daddy will be skiing with you guys again next year!” I was simply amazed by my good fortune. I went back to work with energy to burn. I wasn’t afraid of anything anymore. Not a single thing.
Upon my return, I was told that a significant second wave of change had had a direct impact on most departments of our IT unit, mine in particular. The purpose of the transition – which was a justified and future-oriented move – was to shake things up a bit and help realign our departments missions over a matter of months.
Details about this are not public, of course, so I won’t get into them here. The point I want to make, though, has to do with the need to be aware of the reality of major restructuring operations. Most start out enterprise-wide, then trickle down to targeted units. Along the way, the process refines itself and adapts to specific realities.
Those of you who have gone through similar changes know what it’s like: You always hope the first set of adaptations is enough so that everybody can move on, get back to work and focus on business goals. Secretly, you fear a second wave is on the horizon but hope you’ll be spared – at least until you and your team have had the chance to show you’ve triumphed over the first wave.
I felt like I had been gone from work for over a year. Things I had been building in a hurry before I left were evolving in directions I didn’t expect, didn’t fully understand or didn’t agree with. You get the picture: I was totally disoriented. The changes being made, although they were necessary and designed to ensure long-term prosperity, were brutal from my perspective. I had to ask myself a hard question: Was I the right guy to surf the next wave?
Let me be clear here: Desjardins is one of the greatest places I have ever had the privilege to work at. Desjardins is a true Canadian icon known for its social engagement, commitment to excellence and unique corporate culture. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that the century-old institution will come out of this restructuring operation stronger than ever and with the utmost of respect for its most important asset – its people.
A large-scale restructuring is no picnic. It brings with it many challenges as well as many amazing opportunities. When you encounter major obstacles like this in the workplace, it’s important to remember it’s all about context. This is something I will cover in next week’s blog when I discuss the invaluable lessons I have drawn from my experiences during the past year.
“Hey, the tail shouldn’t be wagging the dog!”
My survivor attitude took a severe blow at that point. Most of my co-workers were doing their very best to keep their chin up, but some of my team members were growing discouraged and disheartened. It was hard to cheer them up on a daily basis, but it was part of my job to do just that. And, anyway, it came naturally to me, as the kind of person who automatically stands up and fights for the people I work with.
Despite my newfound feelings of fearlessness, I began questioning myself. I started to think a lot: every day, every hour, every minute. My four months at home after my brain surgery had given me plenty of time to reflect. My perspective on just about everything had already changed forever. Some interesting self-analysis exercises I did at that time were a big help in this regard (come back in two weeks for more on this, in part three).
I was tempted to make a bold move immediately and run away from the challenges I was facing. After all, the expression “life is short” had taken on a whole new meaning for me since January 5. But I did not make that leap. Instead, I decided it was time to put a positive spin on events and work even harder at the issues my team and I were up against.
Needless to say major restructuring operations are tough on people. But when managed correctly they pave the way toward a better future. In many cases, big changes put more pressure on employees and get them to work faster. In others, however, the pace actually slows down, which is what happened with our group – presenting us with a real window of opportunity.
I could have waited for official plans to be handed down to our unit, but I instead decided it was time to be bold and express my concerns. So I approached various executives from our CIO’s office, HR advisers and other key contacts within the broader organization.
Now, imagine for a moment the type of management activities going on in a large-scale financial institution in the midst of a comprehensive restructuring offensive. Surprisingly enough, my contacts, even the higher-ranking ones, were quite open and receptive to me. Even though we were all working heaps of overtime and subject to the unrelenting stress of a constantly changing environment, they did their best to provide guidance and support.
My goal was to engage in a dialogue with the executives I would most likely end up reporting to. I broached issues involving the future of my department and its people, as well as my own career path within the organization. Most of the subjects discussed were tricky. Some of the answers I got were not exactly what I was expecting; others were quite reassuring.
I kept the channels of communication open and touched on many sensitive matters over a period of three months or so. My fellow execs did not have all the answers, but they were in a position of influence and, in some cases, had a direct say as to the next steps to be taken. This part of the process ended up being very constructive, as I was laying the groundwork for a brighter future for a lot of the people on my teams, making sure their interests and their talent would be used in the most sensible and effective way, whether or not I would be there to see the outcome.
All in all, the people I consulted offered me something of great value: in-depth discussions about hard facts and new longer-term perspectives that alleviated shorter-term panic. This is something I would not have been able to achieve on my own, hidden away in my office, shaking my fist at the restructuring gods.
Plus, armed with the results of the self-analysis exercises I did during my four-month-long convalescence, I was able for the first time to compare my objectives and ambitions with what I now consider to be a very solid “due diligence report” on the situation at work and the options available to me and my employees. Incidentally, this approach also generated a lot of attention for my team from higher levels of management and empowered them to carve out their own paths as the restructuring progressed.
So what was next? It was decision time for my own future. I had tangible and real options in front of me that would translate into a constructive, comfortable career at Desjardins. Or I could leave the organization to pursue other, riskier, professional challenges.
My choice was very clear: the self-analysis sheet I had produced described exactly what my goals were for the next five years or so. And although the due diligence report I had created with my team appeared very promising for my department, many of its parameters were not in synch with the objectives I had identified.
It was then I recalled the words of my mentor, Laurent Proulx: “When the tail starts wagging the dog, it is time to ask yourself if you are doing the right things at work.”
Well, the findings on my sheet of paper confirmed the situation was indeed the wrong way around. I was trying to craft a large unit within Desjardins to fulfill my own personal vision – a vision that was not aligned with the key aspects of the mission for the group to ensure it persevered through the next wave of change and, ultimately, achieved success.
So I resigned… after three months of extensive discussions and contemplation, I was convinced I had done my homework, talked to the right people and was moving ahead for the right reasons and according to a timeframe that gave me the leeway I needed to make sound decisions.
On the day of my resignation, I submitted a detailed transition plan for my successors and dedicated five full weeks to coordinating these efforts before I left.
One important thing here: I quit because I knew I would have done so anyway within a matter of months. Could I ignore my self-analysis exercises and due diligence report and still preserve my personal integrity – not to mention the integrity of the people reporting to me or the organization as a whole? It was time for me to allow others better suited for the position and the mission to give it a whirl and make the most of this tremendous opportunity. It was time to allow others to motivate and inspire my crew to master the next wave of change.
Next week, I will share with you the lessons I learned from this experience. I hope my observations will help others as they contemplate their own career path.
In the meantime, you might be interested in reading the following:
