One of the holy grails of Agile in software development and other business scenarios is how to organize so that stable teams are efficient, effective and safe. The great preponderance of organizations use some variant of an organizational model that groups people by specialty and then allocate them to project teams. This creates a matrix in which any practitioner will be part of two or more teams, which, in turn, means they have two or more managers and serve two or more masters. People, like desks, chairs, and laptops, flow to the area of need, disband, and then return to a waiting pool until needed again. One of the basic assumptions is that within some limits people are fungible and can be exchanged with relative impunity. This approach has problems. Ariana Racz, Senior Quality Assurance Analyst, provided a great summary of what is wrong with the idea that people are fungible in her response to Get Rid of Dynamic Teams: The Teams. Ariana stated, “A resource on paper is not a resource in application.” In most circumstances, dynamic/matrixed teams reduce the productivity of knowledge workers. (more…)
April 20, 2017
Leave a Comment
April 18, 2017
The use of teams to deliver business value are at the core of most business models. In matrix organizations teams are generally viewed as mutable, being formed and reformed from specialty labor pools to meet specific contexts. Teams can be customized to address emerging needs or critical problems and then fade away gracefully. Examples of these kinds of teams include red teams or tiger teams. This approach is viewed as maximizing organizational flexibility in a crisis. The crisis generates the energy needed to focus the team on a specific problem. However, as a general approach, dynamic teams have several problems because of how the organizations are structured and how people interact and become teams. (more…)
April 9, 2017
Leave a Comment
The Software Process and Measurement Cast 437 features a discussion of our recent re-read of The Five Dysfunctions of a Team by Patrick Lencioni (Jossey-Bass, Copyright 2002, 33rd printing) with Steven Adams. Steve has participated on nearly all of the re-reads, providing his unique wisdom. It was a great talk that helped me understand why the book has (and continues to have) such a large impact on how I view Agile and software development. Steve also has some advice on how to get the most out of the re-read feature.
Steve lives in the San Francisco Bay Area (a.k.a, Silicon Valley) where he has a successful career in software development. Steve has worked for Hewlett Packard, Access Systems Inc,, Trilliant Inc., and Sony Mobile Communications; plus has consulted at Cisco Systems. Steve has a computer science degree from California State University at Chico, learned software project management at Hewlett-Packard and, in 2009, started his Agile journey with Sony Ericsson. Steve enjoys listening to technical podcasts, and SPaMCAST was one of the first and is a favorite! Steve is also an avid bicyclist (road) and is on track to log over 3,500 miles in 2016.
Re-Read Saturday News
This week we begin our read of Holacracy with a few logistics and a review of the introduction. We have a short entry this week that will give you time to buy a copy today and read along! If you have not listened to my interview with Jeff Dalton on Software Process and Measurement Cast 433, I would suggest a quick listen. Jeff has practical experience with using the concepts of holacracy in his company and as a tool in his consultancy.
Holacracy: The New Management System for a Rapidly Changing World by Brian J. Robertson was published by Henry Holt and Company in 2015. The book is comprised of a forward, 10 chapters in three parts, notes, acknowledgments, and an index. My plan is to read and review one chapter per week. We will move on to a new book in approximately 12 weeks.
December 10, 2016
In this week’s re-read of The Five Dysfunctions of a Team by Patrick Lencioni (Jossey-Bass, Copyright 2002, 33rd printing), we conclude Part Three with the sections titled the Last Stand, Flack, Heavy Lifting, and Rally. I suspect we have 3 or 4 weeks left before moving to the next book, BUT we still have a number of ideas to extract from this book.
If you are new to the re-read series buy a copy and go back to week one and read along!
I have not heard any nay sayers on the idea of re-reading Carol Dweck’s Mindset next, however just be to fair I am going to include a poll at the end to decide between Mindset, Thinking Fast and Slow (Daniel Kahneman) and Flow (Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi). I would like your opinion! (more…)
December 3, 2016
In this week’s re-read of The Five Dysfunctions of a Team by Patrick Lencioni (Jossey-Bass, Copyright 2002, 33rd printing), we tackle the sections titled Accountability, Individual Contributor, and The Talk. We are getting close to the end of the novel portion of the book, but over the next few weeks we have a number of ideas to extract from the book before we review the model.
(Remember to buy a copy and read along.) We are well over halfway through this book and I am considering re-reading Carol Dweck’s Mindset next. What are your thoughts?
The second off-site continued with a discussion immediately turned began with a review of progress toward the teams 18 deal (sales) goal. Lencioni uses the 18 deal goal to illustrate developing a measurable goal and how the team holds itself accountable. As a reminder, the four key drivers the team had agreed upon in the first off-site were: product demonstrations, competitive analysis, sales training, and product brochures. Martin reported that product demonstrations were ahead of schedule partially becasue Carlos had pitched in to help Martin. Carlos’s chipping in had the unintended consequence of contributing to the competitor analysis that Carlos was leading being behind schedule. The competitor analysis was also behind because Carlos had not gotten support from Nick’s people. This detail is important to illustrate two issues. The first is that Carlos had not gone to Nick to talk about the getting the needed support. Carlos had not engaged to hold Nick accountable. Secondly, no one had actually even challenged Carlos about the progress he was making on the competitor analysis. Carlos and the team had fallen down on accountability.
Lencioni (using Kathryn’s voice) states that there are three reasons it is difficult to hold people accountable.
- Some people are just generally helpful,
- Some get defensive, or
- Some are intimidating.
There are probably other reasons it is difficult to hold or be held accountable. Accountability is intertwined with the concept of trust. Without accountability, it is difficult to trust. Holding someone accountable does not represent a lack of trust, but rather a signal of a trust that team members push to make the team better.
As this section concludes, Mikey holds herself out as better than the team and only sarcastically goes along with the decision for everyone to attend sales training (note: once upon a time I might have been this person).
As a team, holding each other accountable for the actions and activities that we’ve agreed to do is critical for the health of the team. Teams that don’t have enough trust to be willing to hold each other accountable means that it’s very difficult to make progress as a team.
The fourth driver of DecsionTech’s 18 deal goals, new product brochures, was the next topic. Mikey proudly produced mockups of the brochures from her bag and announced they were going to print next week. A train wreck ensued. Nick was uncomfortable because his people have been doing research and no one had talked to them. Mikey, as the marketing lead, had struck out on her own without consulting and interacting with a team. Her opinion was more important than that of the team. BOOM. Kathryn called for a long break and dismissed everyone except Mikey.
Individuals need participate and integrate into the team. Attributes such as humility and working well in a team, the ability to accept criticism and then work in a manner that allows others to have input are required to work in a team. While individual contributors are important they are generally not the right people for an effective team.
Mikey did not seem to see the end coming. Mikey was not aware of her impact on the team. Mikey’s reaction to Kathryn’s comment “I don’t think you are fit for this team” indicated she did not understand her impact on the team.
Throughout the story, Lencioni paints a picture of Mikey as the person that cuts herself off, eye rolls when statements are made that she doesn’t believe without getting involved in the discussion and in generally acts as a motivation heatsink. Mikey only really respected herself. As the talk progressed, Mikey turned to veiled threats to deflect Kathryn’s decision (a form of frustration on the Kubler-Ross change curve). In the end though Kathryn felt that Mikey was coming to terms with the situation, but she was wrong. Another Lencioni cliffhanger.
“Talks” like these are a form of negotiation. In these circumstances, unless both parties see the event coming, one party will tend to have less information or power than the other. When a similar situation occurred between Kathryn and Nick, Nick was successfully able to delay the decision so that he could reduce the stress of the situation and help even the power balance. Saying yes immediately in this type of negotiations probably isn’t a good idea. Let things sink in and then even if you can say yes immediately don’t.
Three quick takeaways:
- Team members hold other team members accountable.
- Be aware of how you affect the people around you or suffer the consequences!
- Try to step back and reduce the stress when confronted by tough negotiations.
Previous Installments in the re-read of The Five Dysfunctions of a Team by Patrick Lencioni:
November 26, 2016
In this week’s re-read of The Five Dysfunctions of a Team by Patrick Lencioni (Jossey-Bass, Copyright 2002, 33rd printing), we continue with the third section of the book. This section begins the second off-site by wrestling with defining who their first team is. The concept of the first team can be summarized as who a team member owes their ultimate work loyalty. Any scenario that includes a hierarchy of teams faces this issue. (more…)
November 19, 2016
I am back from the Øredev in Malmo, Sweden. It was a wonderful conference. Check out my short review.
In this week’s re-read of The Five Dysfunctions of a Team by Patrick Lencioni (Jossey-Bass, Copyright 2002, 33rd printing), the team returns to the office and quickly begins the transformation process.
(Remember to buy a copy from the link above and read along.)
Part Three – Heavy Lifting (more…)