Category : Management

Le but de votre entreprise… Enchanter vos clients… En fait non!

Mon collègue Martin a déjà publié un billet au sujet de la présentation que nous avons préférée jusqu’à maintenant à Agile 2011. Il s’agit de Making the Entire Organization Agile par Stephen Denning.

Je vous conseille fortement de lire le billet de Martin avant de lire ce billet car il fait un survol complet de la présentation. Ne ratez pas la courte vidéo de 1 minute.

Le bouquin Radical Management de Stephen Denning est dans ma liste de bouquins à lire depuis quelques temps. Depuis la présentation de hier, j’ai pris un peu de temps pour commencer à absorber le contenu, valider des hypothèses, intégrer les implications sur d’autres modèles d’organisation, etc. En d’autres mots, mon cerveau est en cinquième vitesse. Le bouquin de Denning se retrouve maintenant en première position dans ma liste de lectures !

Denning propose cinq changements fondamentaux qui s’imbriquent et se renforcent. Le premier étant que le but de l’entreprise (bottom line) passe de générer de l’argent pour ses actionnaires à enchanter (delight) ses clients. C’est en fait le changement fondamental que propose Denning et celui sur lequel il a passé le plus de temps durant la présentation.

Ce changement a des implications profondes car il demande entre autre de passer d’une logique de production (output) qui génère des profits à une logique de produire un résultat (outcome). Je crois que c’est absolument génial que des entreprises réalisent ce changement fondamental qui amène à prendre une perspective plus globale.

Il est important de rappeler que Denning nous dit que de simplement adopter ce but d’enchanter nos clients ne fonctionnera pas et qu’il est nécessaire d’adopter les quatre autres changements suivants :

  • Nouveau rôle pour les gestionnaires : de controleur à facilitateur ;
  • Coordination du travail : d’une hiérarchie bureaucratique à des équipes liées dynamiquement ;
  • De valeur à valeurs : transparence radicale, amélioration continue ;
  • Communication interactive : de commander et contrôler à une conversation d’adulte à adulte.

J’ai bien hâte de lire le bouquin de Denning pour comprendre plus spécifiquement ce qu’il propose et mettre tout ça en parallèle avec les modèles d’organisation apprenante (The Fifth Discipline) développé par Peter Senge et Management 3.0 développé par Jurgen Appelo.

Lorsque je prends un point de vue systémique, comme mentionné plus haut, je suis ravi d’intégrer une mesure d’enchantement des clients en priorité sur les résultats financiers et mobiliser l’organisation vers cet objectif. J’ai d’ailleurs suggérer à Martin qu’il serait une bonne idée pour Pyxis de mettre en place une mesure similaire au Net Promoter Score (voir The Ultimate Question) dans notre cadre de suivi des résultats. Je lui également dit à la blague qu’il devrait passer de Chief Executive Officer à Chief Delighter Officer !

Je souhaite vigoureusement ajouter que je crois qu’il est important voire essentiel pour une entreprise d’avoir un futur envisagé (une vision) établi collectivement qui met l’entreprise en mouvement dans une direction cohérente.

De façon plus fondamentale, j’aimerais ajouter que la perspective systémique m’amène à dire que le but d’une entreprise ne doit pas être d’enchanter ses clients ; elle doit selon moi avoir cet objectif et cette préoccupation bien présente dans sa culture. Je crois qu’une organisation doit avoir une clarté de la part de l’ensemble de ses participants sur ce qui constitue sa raison d’être (sa mission). Rémi Tremblay dans son bouquin J’ai perdu ma montre au fond du lac nous invite à réfléchir et clarifier ce qu’il nomme le bien commun de l’organisation.

Dans le cas de Pyxis, la raison d’être est notre guide depuis plusieurs années :

Pyxis aide les organisations de développement logiciel à devenir des endroits où les résultats, la qualité de vie et le plaisir coexistent de façon durable en étant en premier lieu un exemple de ce qu’elle propose à ses clients et en accompagnant ceux-ci.

Nous devons trouver comment nous assurer que nous accomplissons notre raison d’être ; que nous respectons entièrement notre définition du bien commun. Des suggestions ?

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;

  • 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)

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:

  • 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?

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!

Making the entire organization Agile

At the 2011 Agile Conference, I had the opportunity to attend Stephen Denning‘s session yesterday on Making The Entire Organization Agile and I was wow’d.

Before getting into the details of the presentation, I want to highlight that Steve is not an Agilist – and that’s a good thing. He is the author of many award-winning books (including The Leader’s Guide to Radical Management: Reinventing the Workplace for the 21st Century). Although the main topic covered during the presentation really didn’t have anything to do with Agile per se, it was a very powerful backdrop for coaches attempting the make any organization Agile. Steve has also published a short video that explains his concept.

Now, back to the presentation. [Note that Steve was kind enough to make his slides available to everyone.]

Steve’s presentation began with a simple question “Why do managers act the way they do?“, after all “These are highly intelligent, educated people!“, he said. He then followed by asking a powerful question: “Why did management systematically kill all the creative things in organizations?” To support his point, he provided relevant examples such as: knowledge management, lean manufacturing, innovation, marketing, leadership storytelling, and even Agile and Scrum!

See the connection with Agile transitions now?

The core of his presentation (and of his most recent book) is that “Traditional management rests on five interlocking principles”:

  1. The purpose of a firm is to produce outputs that make money - What is produced is much less of a concern than making money. Key point here is that traditional organizations strictly focus on generating money with little (or no) concern for anything that doesn’t generate money for the shareholders.
  2. Managers act as controllers of individuals – Traditional organizations need conformity and to get conformity, they need compliance. Having managers control their employees is the preferred method used within those organizations.
  3. Work is coordinated by hierarchy and bureaucracy – Historically, it was important to get standardization and compliance. As such, traditional organizations have promoted people who were good at ensuring the work of others was being done in accordance to the plans. The hierarchical structure supported by bureaucracy were great ways to ensure standardization, and hence to generate more money. In such organizations, planning, monitoring and reporting were critical activities.
  4. “The main thing is efficiency” – Since the most important thing the organization were focusing on was to make money, creating efficiencies became a critical activity in the system. Efficiency forces the organizations to look inside as opposed to focusing on the outside (the customers).
  5. Communicate by directives – The traditional model assumes that people aren’t able to determine the best way to do their work and that they need to be told what to do and how to do it. It also creates a dominating relationship where the one giving the order has more power and authority than the one receiving the order.
Image by Steve Denning

Based on an in-depth research from Deloitte (Deloitte’s Center for the Edge: The Shift Index), Steve presented some alarming statistics:

  • The rate of return on assets has fallen by 75% since 1965
  • The life expectancy of Fortune 500 firms down to 15 years, and is heading towards 5 years
  • Only 1 in 5 workers fully engaged

Based on such statistics, he claims that “Management is broken” (and I would agree) and as a consequence “We have to manage differently!” He proposes 5 fundamental shifts that organizations will be required to make.

  1. New goal for the organization -> delight the customers (from outputs to outcomes)
  2. New role for managers -> from controller to enabler
  3. New coordination mechanisms -> dynamic linking
  4. Shift from value to values -> radical transparency and continuous improvement
  5. New way to communicate -> conversation (adult-to-adult conversations)

Image by Steve Denning

Once Steve presented the five big shifts required for organizational survival, he quickly highlighted which of the 5 shifts the Agile approach are actually impacting, and which areas our community still needs to alter in order to make the entire organization Agile.

Steve rightfully pointed out that the Agile community hasn’t done such a great job at “delighting customers” (not just making them satisfied but really delighting them) and in “altering the conversations”. On this point, that fact that many of the sessions at the 2011 Agile Conference were about coaching, mentoring, and collaboration is a good step in this direction.

Image by Steve Denning

The other interesting observation that Steve had with regards to Agile and the big shifts, is the serious conflict Agile initiatives face (since they only address 3 of the 5 shifts). He explained that Agile transformation are executed while 2 of the required shifts (from “making money for the shareholders” to “delighting customers” and from “top-down commands” to “from commands to conversations”) weren’t being addressed. This situation creates an environment where “organizations are at war with themselves“.

Any Agile coach who has attempted a large scale organizational transition can certainly agree with the statement. The 3 shifts (from controller to enabler, from bureaucracy to dynamic linking, and radical transparency) are the realm in which the Agile teams are successful. Unfortunately, they are rapidly confronted to the remaining 2 traditional perspectives.

This is the area I referred to as the Level 5 – Management Level Maturity and where many paradigms need to be altered (such as the role of the Agile manager in a self-organizing team, among other things).

Image by Steve Denning

In the end, it is very interesting to realize that the shifts that are currently taking place within the software development field are not unique and specific. Many (most?) of the various industries are currently going through such fundamental shifts and we can learn from their experience along with continually improving our approaches.

For those with a systemic perspective, Steve provided a simple comparison between traditional management and the suggested radical management.

Image by Steve Denning

The presentation was, by far, the best one I attended during this week… so far!

Happy 2nd Anniversary Analytical-Mind

Picture by srsphotoToday marks the 2nd anniversary of my blogging hobby! It has been a fun and interesting endeavour that has allowed me to discuss various concepts with people all over the world, and within my organization. Blogging forces me to crystallize my thoughts and perspective on some important aspects of my leadership style, my coaching abilities and my personal development.

Thanks to all of you who are reading my posts and comment (in person or in writing) on the posted topics. The number of readers have tripled in the last year and the number of Twitter followers has gone from 0 to 200 - if you’re not already one of them, send me some positive vibes and start following me :)

If you like what you have been reading, don’t hesitate to link to my posts and even maybe include me in your blog roll. Thanks to those who have been tweeting and re-tweeting my posts.

If you haven’t been following my blog since the beginning, you may want to read my top 10 blog posts:

Now let’s get back to writing…

Share

You might be interested in these related posts:

  1. Happy 1st anniversary Analytical-Mind
  2. Gartner’s “The Current State of Agile Method Adoption”
  3. Analytical Mind has moved

You need a ScrumMaster to change the old style

There seem to be a confusion between the role of the ScrumMaster and one of a team facilitator. Jason Little recently wrote that you might need a coach, not a ScrumMaster:

So what is a coach going to give you compared to a Scrum Master? Scrum talks about a Scrum Master as the team facilitator, someone who is there to protect the team, remove obstacles and help the team function better. Essentially the scope of a Scrum Master is local optimization for the team.

A coach, on the other hand, will be focused on optimization of the organization. Often they are working and thinking on multiple levels and deeper when team output is exposing other organizational dysfunctions.

I disagree. This is a misinterpretation of the role of the ScrumMaster. Scrum is a tool that an organization can use to address hard problems. It is a tool to foment change. An organization that decides to use Scrum to address its issues is choosing very hard work. Only few organizations will fully take advantage of Scrum. The remaining organizations will try to use Scrum and run into ScrumButs. ScrumButs are the reasons why they cannot take full advantage of Scrum to solve their problems and realize the benefits. Each ScrumMaster is responsible for fighting ScrumButs by maintaining the integrity of the Scrum process, even if it is in conflict with the organization. This is much more than a facilitator role, right?

Of course, when a ScrumMaster starts working with a team, he or she might act as a parent, teaching the team how to self-organize. As the team gets more mature though, the ScrumMaster will spend more time working with management on the ScrumBut backlog to remove the dysfunctions of the organization. The ScrumMaster is not a team facilitator, it is a secret change agent!

Does YOUR organization have personality?

Personality can be defined as a dynamic and organized set of characteristics possessed by a person that uniquely influences his or her cognitions, motivations, and behaviors in various situations - Wikipedia

 

Yesterday, Pyxis Technologies celebrated its 10th anniversary, launched a new web site, released 2 video clips (How do you explain Agile approaches in 1 minutes? and Software development according to Pyxis) and threw a great party.

Over 200 guests attended the celebration. Many of the people I had a chance to speak with during the evening told me they really noticed the personality of our organization – some of which even asked if we would hire them. François has done an amazing job at attracting passionate individuals who share a common goal and that truly reflects a Pyxis personality.

Does YOUR organization have a personality?

A dead coach is a useless coach

Picture by WouterKvGDuring our monthly consulting services meeting, an interesting conversation took place. The conversation revolved around how to show traditional organizations the benefits of going Agile.

Granted, everyone around the table was already sold to Agile so everybody was working toward the same objective. The question was how to bring traditional organizations to switch their ways of doing things in order to adopt a more Agile approach? The debate was “Should we use a big-bang approach where all the energy is put toward getting the organization to take a quantum leap?” or “Is it preferable to use small steps in an effort to bring the organization toward the desired state?”.

Some people around the table argued that to quickly gain acceptance and shock the system, it is better to take somewhat of an extreme position and avoid deviating from the goal and as such, implement the Agile practices without consideration to the context.

Others (including myself) believed that the hard position and extreme approach doesn’t help much. It typically polarizes positions and creates an environment where conflicts are frequent. Personally, I believe that small steps taken in the right direction are much better than attempting to quantum leap forward when it comes to large scale transitions.

As consultants we are called in to help organizations transition from a current state to a future and hopefully better future. We bring our expertise and our convictions to the table in the hopes that we can influence these organizations. What happens when the consultants’ perspective collides with the organizational culture, values, processes and people? Of course, it depends.

Needless to say implementing change is a difficult task and if it was easy, nobody would need help (i.e. consultants). But when consultants adopt the following approach:

  • I need to change the organization;
  • The best way to accomplish this objective is to stick to my position – no matter what – until the organization realizes that I am right (i.e. they are wrong);
  • I will be successful for as long as I can hold my position.

What comes next is usually a dead coach…

Granted, the other extreme is no more useful when the organization thinks something like this:

  • What we have been doing is exactly what needs to be done;
  • We have all the answers and we will stick to our position – no matter what – until everybody accept the current situation;
  • We will be successful for as long as we can hold our position.

What comes next is an organization that will be less (and less) adapted to its environment and a Darwinian (survival of the fittest) consequence will happen.

So what is the right thing to do?

If you are a consultant, it is always a difficult balance between sticking to your position and completely letting go. The answer obviously varies by organization but sticking to a hard position is rarely (i.e. never) a good approach to actually change an organization.

Share

You might be interested in these related posts:

  1. Stuck in a dead-end job…
  2. What consultants don’t tell you before you begin an agile transition – Part 4: Why a coach is useful
  3. What the heck does an Agile Organizational Coach do?

I’m afraid that things won’t go well

Image by Capture Queen ™

The soft-minded man always fears change. He feels security in the status quo, and he has an almost morbid fear of the new. For him, the greatest pain is the pain of a new idea. – Martin Luther King Jr.

Do you ever face resistance when attempting to implement a new idea or a new concept? I often notice interesting behaviors when helping teams and individuals transition to Agile. In fact, I notice strange reactions whenever there is a change management initiative underway.

In such circumstances, the first question that comes to mind is “Why is this individual afraid?“.

In my opinion, people are typically afraid for 2 reasons: they have had a bad experience in a similar situation in the past or they anticipate that the change will cause unwanted results. Either way, my approach is the same.

Being afraid is normal and is not limited to humans (for sake of this post, let’s limit ourselves to humans). As babies we learn through experience and the recommendations of our parents – the stronger the initial experience is, the longer it remains encrusted in our brain.

Let’s admit that many change initiatives have led to very negative impact for people. Remember enterprise re-engineering? What about outsourcing? Do you think people who lost their job as a result might be afraid of other organization-wide initiatives??

As change agents, it is our role to dig into the reasons behind the fears. I’m not talking about psychology, I’m simply talking about root cause analysis of the situation in an attempt to properly address the concerns. To do so, coaches must ask powerful questions and keep silence to make room for valuable information to be shared.

Once we understand the motivation or the source of the fears, we then need to be truthful and honestly tell if the situation will (or won’t) lead to the feared consequences. In the cases where it may actually lead to the expected consequences, we should engage the individuals into finding potential solutions or way to mitigate the unwanted conclusions.

Share

You might be interested in these related posts:

  1. Agile transitions are hard. I wonder why people feel the need to control?
  2. Using silence as a communication tool
  3. How can someone Join a Community? Can people leave a Community?

911 – “I need help! I’m a people manager and my team is going Agile…”

Image by Michael RansburgIn line with a few posts I recently published (this one and this one) and following conversations with people (and managers) around me, I decided to take another stab at helping people managers transform into agile leaders. Contrary to popular beliefs, people managers in an agile context are not doomed to buy pizza for their team and getting out of their way…

One of the underlying principles of Agile is to help organizations become more adaptive and flexible in order to (more) quickly react to changes in their environment. In this context, the agile manager has an important role, despite the fact that his traditional responsibilities can greatly change.

In his new role the agile manager needs to acquire or develop these abilities:

  • Adapt your leadership style: Every team reaches a certain level of maturity and the agile manager’s leadership style needs to be adapted to the context of his group.
  • Make yourself available: Your team members will need help and they will need to turn to someone they trust. Make yourself available and keep an open mind when problems arise so you can actually do something useful for them.
  • Help your team remain focused: Well jelled teams tend to become enthusiastic about what they can accomplish and sometime lose focus and get distracted by shinny objects – this is especially true with software development teams. In his role, the agile manager can greatly help his team members keep their focus in order to achieve their objectives.
  • Secure resources: In every traditional organization, departments are typically assigned a budget to provide a certain level of service and as such, the self-organized team rarely has the maturity and visibility to obtain the budget it needs to protect and grow the unit. The manager remains the best spoke person for his team since he has developed the political abilities to influence people around him.
  • Become a consultant to the team: Develop your credibility as an expert in certain areas and make sure to bring that value to your team members. As a rule of thumb, you shouldn’t show up at their meetings unless you are invited.
  • Guard the team from disruption: Once the self-organized team demonstrates a high level of performance, others around will notice and are likely to request activities, tasks or special projects from the highly performing team. The manager must then block disruptions and maintain the team’s focus in order to remain productive.
  • Be a spoke-person and do marketing: The team will want to achieve a high level of performance and once it does, recognition from others is a likely contributor to their motivation. The manager is an position to promote the success of his team – and indirectly his own as the manager of a highly performing team. If you believe “marketing” to be inappropriate, think again. After all, the manager delegated some of his authority to the team and as such deserves to get recognition.
  • Increase communication and visibility: A lot happens outside the team. The manager has to bring the information about the organizational threats and opportunities back to his team. Sometime even gossips can be useful information for the team.
  • Prepare the team for the future: As the team undertakes some of the traditional management responsibilities, the manager can spend some time actually preparing the team members for the career development, especially if some of the members are interested in developing their management expertise.
  • Offer to help with retrospection: The team is typically very focused on their activities in order to achieve the objectives that were defined for them. As a consequence their retrospection are likely to focus on short term, immediate challenges they are facing and much less about the long term. The manager may offer to facilitate meetings geared toward the future.
  • Grow the team members: Observe the team in action. In collaboration with the individual team members, determine which area they wish to develop in order to achieve their career goals and support them by coaching them.

Overall, in such a context the agile manager needs to start focusing on a strategic perspective as opposed to a very tactical one which is often what managers do despite their many promotions over the years.

The change is likely to be positive not only for the team but also for the manager himself – only if he develops enough self-confidence and courage to start operating this way.

Share

You might be interested in these related posts:

  1. I don’t feel so good – I’m a people manager in an Agile organization
  2. The 7 Dimensions of an Agile Project Team
  3. Are you an Agile Leader? – Nine questions for people managers

Are we coaches or do we offer coaching?

 

 

As I was heading back home, I wondered – is coaching something we do or the way we are? So once I got home, I looked up the definition for both words (coach & coaching) and came across Visual Thesaurus (image below).

The reason I was wondering is that when I meet people who “do coaching”, they always say “I’m a coach”. I’m not actually disputing that they are (or aren’t) coaches, it’s just that I wonder if they have assimilated the coaching role so much as to BECOME coaches. Maybe it’s simply like someone who defines himself as being an accountant, an engineer or a clown when in reality it is because their day-job is accounting, engineering or clowning.

This leads me to wonder, if accountants stop doing accounting after 5 pm, does it mean coaches stop coaching after work hours? It seems to me, based on the many coaches I personally know that very few actually stop coaching – that’s almost a way of being – coaching the kids, sometime the spouse, some of the friends and so on.

Should we call ourselves coaches only when we are on duty or is there a better name to describe bipeds who provide coaching to people around them?

Personally, I have decided a while back that I do not define myself as a coach. Coaching is simply a tool for me – a very effective one, I would add – that I use to help people accomplish their objectives.

Share

You might be interested in these related posts:

  1. The world would be a better place without accountants
  2. On my way to coaching certification
  3. What Is Coaching? And Other Relevant Questions