Tag Archives: Change Management - Page 2

The Calm Period

We are about six weeks after pimping my team – let’s see what has happened since then. A massive change is usually followed by a calm period. During such a period the team adapts to the effects of the change (new environment and methodology) and only small additional changes are applied, something like fine tuning. This is what’s happened in our case, and I think it’s worth sharing these small things.

The team moved to a different part of our landscape where we could try out a new seating layout. First not everybody was happy with it, but now everybody likes the place, and I heard someone advertising it to other teams. So far so good. Unfortunately, we weren’t that successful with the methodology and our way of working. We started to work on a poorly designed feature on a fairly complex code base, while we did not make ourselves masters of the Kanban + XP methodology. However, we tried to solve the problem with a slight change of the board and our way of working.

Previously we were using items, but after watching the Single Piece Flow in Kanban presentation, we started to use and talk about MMFs (Minimum Marketable Feature). We broke the feature down to MMFs and did a release plan.

Read more »

VN:F [1.9.17_1161]
Rating: 10.0/10 (1 vote cast)

Agile Seating Layout

A couple of weeks ago my team started to do things differently than before, and I promised I’d write about the effects of certain changes and new improvements. Effective and fluent communication is essential for an agile workspace, but unfortunately our former seating layout didn’t support either of that, so we changed it, inspired by an idea from Martin Fowler.

Have a look at the following seating layout (I modified the layout a bit due to privacy reasons):

At first sight, this is a regular seating layout, everybody can do their work in it, so far so good. Let’s have a look at it from the communication perspective. Communication is effective when there are no barriers, but unfortunately this specific layout is full of physical (the worst kind) barriers:

There are two borders (the red lines on the picture), which cut the team area into three separated isles (1, 2 and 3). A border can be a small wall or even a larger monitor. Sometimes the wall isn’t something physical; when someone has to stand up regularly in order to see something which somebody else is showing to her, then eventually she will stop standing up and communication between them will cease, because it is not convenient for her (for example in case of ‘H‘ and ‘C‘).

Read more »

VN:F [1.9.17_1161]
Rating: 10.0/10 (4 votes cast)

Pimp my Team

Abstract

From the middle of January 2011, our organization has been working in a new structure. There were different outcomes of this change, one of them was that my former firefighting team has been dismissed, and so has the team introduced in my Kanban Nightmares article. This post is not about ther organizational change and its effects, but about the start-up of a new team in the agile world. I’m going to launch my first series of posts in which I’m going share – because sharing is good – the life of my new team in an agile perspective.

The title of the article is influenced by MTV’s Pimp My Ride series, in which talented and creative engineers are customizing cars. The team members and I are the engineers, and our way of working is the car. While watching the show, I got the impression that not every customization is necessary for having a well-functioning vehicle, but if I take away the fancy, unnecessary extras, the engineers are doing a damn well job. This is what we are going to do: customize our car, maybe a little bit too much, and after driving it a little, we are going to add new or remove existing extras in order to have a very good car. The show has the following chapters:

  • Introduction of the car owner, and her situation
  • Meeting, where the engineers discuss the customization – similar to a planning meeting
  • Assembling the car - short session about how the engineers are building the car
  • The showdown – the engineers present the car to the owner - explain what they have built and for what purpose
  • Test drive

Before starting the actual post, I would like to thank Daniel H. Pink and Olaf Lewitz for their insights on demo cancellation and rewarding systems, which topics will be presented shortly.

Read more »

VN:F [1.9.17_1161]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)

XP with Kanban instead of Scrum

Abstract

I’m going to step into a minefield, because in this post, I’m going to share my subjective experiences with Scrum, and I’m going to share the reasons why I moved from Scrum to XP + Kanban. I’m using the minefield metaphor, because every single sentence I’m going to share can be exploded with good explanations, mostly from advanced scrum practitioners.

Again, this post is going to be very subjective, and is based on my experiences from the last two years. So please keep this in mind, and be gentle when you share a comment.

The Background

Every organization is different. Ours is a strange one: we inherited Scrum, while the organizations we were working with were still doing waterfall. Scrum has a very different terminology, and since nobody else is doing it, they do not understand us. We had a lot of problems from misinterpretations. Story points are a good example.

For example, we told the project management that we are going to deliver 400 story points. They asked in reply how much that was in man hours? We answered that in Scrum we don’t count man hours, we are working with story points. They insisted on the man hours, and since they pay our bills, we gave in and made an estimation in man hours. Almost the same happened with sprints, because the higher-level organizations had release cycles of six months, while we had sprints of two weeks. This means that we deliver a lot of features in one giant step, and lose all the benefits of continuous delivery, like faster feedback on our product. And the list goes on.

After a while, I had the feeling that we are doing several things unnecessarily, and our management does not understand our output, and they don’t care what we are doing internally. Some of us made conversions between our Scrum measures and the company-required measures, which turned out to be a disaster. No one can make a good conversion in this situation. We started to fail, but not at the beginning, but at the worst place ever: around global delivery dates. Additionally, we spent two years trying to change our environment, and the way how people think in this environment. We failed at it, of course. The environment is huge, one small organization cannot make a difference, unfortunately.

My first thought was that we may be doing Scrum wrong. And the next one was that maybe Scrum is not the agile method that we should choose. There are lots of methodologies out there, we should try them out, and after that we’ll see whether we did Scrum wrong, or it just wasn’t for us. Henrik Kniberg has a very entertaining and thoughtful presentation on this topic. I highly recommend reading it.

So I decided that we are going to try out the Kanban methodology. The principles of Kanban would help us handle frequent changes and the diversified work item backlog. However, Kanban isn’t a software development methodology like Scrum. You cannot do Kanban, you need a process on which you apply the principles of Kanban. I usually hear the expression that “We are working in Kanban“, which is partially true. Actually they are working according to their process following Kanban principles. There is a difference. A very well known and good example is Scrum-ban. It is a Kanban system which is applied on the Scrum methodology.

We needed a process under Kanban, and I chose eXtreme Programming. I needed something without an exact requirement on iterations. XP also talks about iterations, but it is not based on them that strictly. DSDM was a candidate for 5 minutes, but it is also iteration-based. Crystal was also a candidate, but since we already have experience with XP, we know its principles – although we still have to practice –, I chose XP.

Read more »

VN:F [1.9.17_1161]
Rating: 10.0/10 (4 votes cast)

Kanban Nightmares

I’ve mentioned in my previous post that I have less time for coding nowadays. I’ve started to lead a new team with the intention to introduce Kanban in their way of working. In this post, I’m going to share the result of this introduction.

In these last few years I’ve had opportunities to observe coaches and consultants how they help teams and organizations. I’ve been reading about how it should be done in the proper way. In most of the cases, the person who helps the teams asks questions, points out certain areas of improvement, keeps general coding sessions, but does not get involved in the teams’ life. No offence, but I don’t see how someone can help without taking responsibility. The intention he has is loud and clear: make the teams self-aware, self-organizing and independent. But there is a fair question, though: “How can a team be self-organizing if, before agile was introduced, they had been told what to do for years? How can they make decisions?” After these years, I can state that this approach is not really effective for novice teams. It is very good for advanced teams, who might miss some improvement opportunities occasionally, but are able to react if that missing piece comes to light by a coach or external advisor.

Another common mistake and myth is that the ScrumMaster should not be involved in the team’s decision making process and daily work. In novice teams, no matter what experts say, the team members want to follow the ScrumMaster, they want to hear what he thinks and they want to follow his lead. This may sound non-agile, but if someone wants to be successful with agile methodologies, he shouldn’t ignore this fact. The ScrumMaster should coach the team like the managers at Toyota in TPS, he should give background information, and show examples on how to make decisions and how to be agile, and not just do agile. This cannot be done without the involvement of the ScrumMaster in the beginning. Teaching by example is very important. If done properly then, based on my experience, teams won’t be lost when the ScrumMaster is no longer with the team. They will continue their work, they will start being agile, and won’t depend on the ScrumMaster. There is going to be a slight setback in their work, because the team will have less new ideas due to the absence of the ScrumMaster. Fortunately, they will have learnt from the ScrumMaster how to be agile by then – and not just do agile -, so someone will start driving the changes, others will follow, and a real agile team will start forming.

Read more »

VN:F [1.9.17_1161]
Rating: 7.0/10 (1 vote cast)