Archives

Webinar – The role of a BA in large agile environments

This webinar was recorded in June 2014.  I was on a panel with Bernd Schiffer discussing the role of a BA in large agile environments hosted by Pete Cohen.  I forgot to post this at the time and although it was two years ago the discussion is still relevant today.

Thanks to Lynne Cazaly for capturing the following visual notes of the session.

BA in Large Agile Environments

LAST Conference 2016 – Agile Innovation and Thinking Like a Startup

My presentation at LAST Conference 2016 titled “Agile Innovation and Thinking Like a Startup” is available on Slideshare.

Many enterprises are struggling to innovate whilst smaller startups are disrupting the market. Existing organisational business models work well in a known and predictable environment. However, these approaches fail when applied to an uncertain and changing environment.

In this session I will discuss the different approaches and how an organisation can balance a portfolio that both can exploit existing opportunities while enable the exploration of new opportunities.

I will draw on my experience working with some innovation teams in an enterprise and how we are re-focusing agile back to its roots and thinking like a startup to evolve the way we work.

Participants will also gain an understanding how Design Thinking/Human Centred Design, Lean Startup, Agile and Business Model Innovation can blended together to transform the way you work to enable innovation within larger enterprises.

Here are some of the tweets from the session:

1st Conference 2015 – Evoking Excellence Through Agile Coaching

The presentation I delivered last year at  1st Conference 2015 titled “Evoking Excellence Through Agile Coaching” is available on Slideshare.

 

LAST Conference 2016 – Pirate Metrics AARRR !

My Lightning Talk at the opening session of LAST Conference 2016 titled “Pirate Metrics” is available on Slideshare.

The talk is a quick 5 minute introduction to the Pirate Metrics based on Dave McClure’s startup metrics.  Fans of Lucas Art’s game ‘Secret of Monkey Island’ would enjoy the inclusion in my talk. AARRR!!!

Here’s some of the tweets from the session:

Scrum Australia 2016 – Lean Discovery

My presentation at Scrum Australia 2016 titled “Lean Discovery” is available on Slideshare.

Chris-Chan-presentation

“The hardest part of building any software system is determining precisely what to build.” – Fredrick Brooks.

Discovering exactly what customers, stakeholders, and sponsors want to create is often the most difficult part of product development. Getting everyone aligned can be fraught with misunderstanding and misinterpretation. Scrum starts with a product backlog, but how do you know that the development of the product supports the growth of your company?

Getting off on the right foot when starting an agile initiative can set you up for success. This presentation will outline a basic flow of light touch Discovery workshops as a way to start your agile product development engine.

And here are some of the tweets from the session:

Leaders need to focus on providing Clarity and Competence, not control

Self-organising teams is the antithesis to hierarchical structures that exist in many organisations.  Traditional leadership required a strong leader to take control, attract followers and make it happen.  Modern leadership is about leaders giving control and creating leaders.

Self-organisation requires autonomy and control to be given to teams.   This includes trusting individuals to figure out how to solve problems, make decisions and how to best get work done.  With knowledge work the best decisions are those in teams who are closest to the information and customers.  However, structure, policies, processes and hierarchy often take the decision making away from these teams.

clarity and competenceIn his book, Turn The Ship Around!, nuclear submarine Commander David Marquet describes how control was given to the ship’s crew.  It required each member of the team to improve his or her technical competence and have a clear understanding and clarity of the organisation’s driving purpose:

Competence:   Provide teams with the tools and technical competence to get the job done; create the environment for thinking.

Clarity:  Define and communicate the organisational intent so everyone is clear on the vision, goals & objectives.  Everyone understands what is the right thing to do.
As a leader you trust the teams are competent and have clarity of vision.  Individuals have the freedom to adjust actions and make decisions in line with the vision and intent.

So what does this mean for a leader in today’s ever fast changing world?

If leaders do not believe individuals are competent and have clarity of vision, the leaders should fix THAT rather than remove power by putting in more controls or structure.
As a leader your job is to ensure people have clarity of vision and the competency needed to succeed.

If leaders don’t believe individuals can understand the vision or pick up the skills, why did the leader bring them in the first place?  And if there is a competency gap, why did the leaders not mentor or provide training?  We all have the extraordinary meta-skill to learn and acquire new skills.   If people do not have the competence, the role of leaders is to mentor, give people training and provide the environment for learning.

Rethinking Agile Procurement and Contracts

One of Edward Deming’s 14 Prinicples from his book Out of the Crisis (1982),  contains a very astute principle that procurement should grasp:

End the practice of awarding business on price tag alone. Instead, minimize total cost – move towards a single supplier for any item, on trust.

I was recently interviewed for an article on agile procurement and contracts by Cath Thompson for the Procurement Leaders Global Intelligence Network.

The current thinking and policies for procurement in organisations does not match the agile values and principles.  There are infinite tales of troubled projects as a result of fixed price (implicit fixed scope) using agile approaches.

Comparing vendors/partners on fixed price is fraught with danger when product development is inherently unpredictable and uncertainty is the natural order.  This is more complicated when vendors attempt to put a price on the work when the team that will work on the product development hasn’t even been assembled (self-organising teams plan and estimate their own work).

Organisations and teams are complex adaptive systems (human systems) that interact and connect with each other in unpredictable and unplanned ways.  Complex problems require experimentation and learning.  As a result each team will approach creative/knowledge work differently and will highly likely produce different results even when teams have the same starting conditions.  Pitting vendors in a competitive position against each other in order to get the best price under these inherently unpredictable and uncertain circumstances wastes time and energy.

Agile approaches

are counter-intuitive to [procurement] expertise built on containing risk and ensuring value for money through rigour, clarity and specificity
– Cath Thompson

However, there is a way forward for procurement – it will require a change in mindset to one that understands the need to develop a long term relationship with the vendor/partner beyond just the immediate contract transaction.  Procurement needs to realise agile ways of working are easier to govern as a result of increased transparency and visibility, ability to adapt, increased collaboration based on trust, and focus on working solution.

 

Here’s the link to the entire text of the article – Reinventing the office (Cath Thompson, Procurement Leaders, September/October 2015)

Leadership Debt

leadership debt

For the past 10 years I have been working with various organisations to humanise the workplace, help improve the leadership capability and dampen the toxic culture that may currently exit.  A recent article  (28 Oct 2015) in the news has provided no relief.

The article indicated that the thinking and culture of tomorrow’s leaders being taught at school’s today still resembles ‘traditional’ management of command and control borne out of the industrial era and Taylorism.  Traditional command and control is about managers telling subordinated what to do, when to do it, where to do it and how to do it.  There is very little thinking required of the subordinates and very little autonomy in this hierarchical culture.

The article has quoted a student stating to some other students:

Just remember your parents work for mine, so don’t go complaining to them.

Remember to say ‘hi’ to me when I’m your boss one day.

Girls who replied to the thread were told to shut up to “let the men handle business”:

Could all woman (sic) please refrain from expressing there (sic) opinions thank you

This type of thinking is a big contrast to modern management and leadership styles of ‘Servant Leadership’ where the leader is servant to those they work with.

The student’s comment resembles Level 1 of John Maxwell’s 5 Levels of Leadership.  Level 1 is more about “hierarchy” rather than “leadership”.

John Maxwell's 5 Levels of Leadership

John Maxwell’s 5 Levels of Leadership

There is a real leadership debt in some organisations.  We have too many leaders who work “in” the organisation rather than working “on” the organisation.  Organisations and machines don’t build great products and services, people do. It is the collaboration and the human spirit that are at the heart and mind of great work. We need to stop viewing people as ‘resources’; treating them as robots or commodities who are easily interchangeable. We need to enable performance rather than manage performance. 

Humanising the workplace is about making a work environment that puts a greater emphasis on knowledge, passion, inspiring people to collaborate towards common goals, and fostering teamwork where creativity can flourish.  Leaders have a large role to play in humanising the workplace.

Effective leaders are increasingly collaboraters rather than being command and control.  Effective leaders realise great outcomes from setting appropriate context, rather than trying to control people.  Modern leaders provide vision and purpose that allows individuals and teams to be self-organising and self-disciplined.  It’s not about “managing” people but more about “leading” people and being more facilitating.

Further to my last post, Malcolm Turnbull – The Agile Australian Government, Turnbull has said:

We need a different style of leadership.  A style of leadership that respects the people’s intelligence, that explains these complex issues and then sets out the course of action we believe we should take and makes a case for it.

We need to stop accumulating more leadership debt and start erasing this debt in schools so we can survive the challenges of today and tomorrow and build better world for the future.

LAST Conference 2015 – Agile Start Me Up – Using the Minimum Viable Discovery (MVD)

My presentation at last year’s LAST Conference 2015 titled “Agile Start Me Up – Using the Minimum Viable Discovery (MVD)” is available on Slideshare.

Malcolm Turnbull – The Agile Australian Government

Malcolm Turnbull

Malcolm Turnbull

The Australian Government took a pivot 2 days ago with a new Prime Minister after a leadership spill.  In his acceptance speech, Malcolm Turnbull talked about a more ‘agile Australia’ and urged Australians to ’embrace disruption’.  He said his government would be “focused on ensuring that in the years ahead as the world becomes more and more competitive and greater opportunities arise, we are able to take advantage of that.”

The Australia of the future has to be a nation that is agile, that is innovative, that is creative. We can’t be defensive, we can’t future-proof ourselves.  We have to recognise that the disruption that we see driven by technology, the volatility in change is our friend if we are agile and smart enough to take advantage of it. – Malcolm Turnbull

I have been following from afar the evolution of UK Government’s Digital Service Design Principles.  In summary the 10 principles are:

  1. Start with needs – Talk with customers, have empathy with users
  2. Do less – Government should only do what only government can do, for all else link to others
  3. Design with data – Let data drive decision-making, not hunches or guesswork, take a a Lean Startup approach.
  4. Do the hard work to make it simple – Don’t take “It’s always been that way” for an answer. The right thing to do is make things simple although that is hard to do
  5. Iterate. Then iterate again. – MVPs and agile, do I need to say more?
  6. This is for everyone – Build for needs, not audiences. Everything built should be as inclusive, legible and readable as possible
  7. Understand context – Don’t design for a screen, design for people.
  8. Build digital services, not websites – Uncover user needs, and build the service that meets those needs.
  9. Be consistent, not uniform – Use the same language and the same design patterns wherever possible. Make sure the approach is consistent (but this is not standardisation).
  10. Make things open: it makes things better – Use open source, but return the favor by sharing with others too.

In hindsight these principles were quite advanced for a Government given these came about 3 years ago.  More recently the UK Government has released the Digital by Default Service Standard.  In particular, one of the standards is very explicit:

Build the service using the agile, iterative and user-centred methods set out in the manual.

Both these principles and standards are wonderful and you will notice there a lot of modern delivery and management thinking behind them.

If you go from the UK across the North Atlantic Ocean you will find that the US digital services projects do not work well, are delivered late, or are over budget. To increase the success rate of these projects, the U.S. Government created a new approach with the U.S. Digital Services Playbook:

  1. Understand what people need
  2. Address the whole experience, from start to finish
  3. Make it simple and intuitive
  4. Build the service using agile and iterative practices
  5. Structure budgets and contracts to support delivery
  6. Assign one leader and hold that person accountable
  7. Bring in experienced teams
  8. Choose a modern technology stack
  9. Deploy in a flexible hosting environment
  10. Automate testing and deployments
  11. Manage security and privacy through reusable processes
  12. Use data to drive decisions
  13. Default to open

There are striking similarities between the UK Government Design Principles and Standards and the US Digital Services Playbook with both taking a citizen-centric view of customer needs as their first point.

When I last worked on some initiatives for the Australian Government there was no such principles and agile approaches were not widely adopted.  A search on Australian Government Information Management Office (AGIMO) website revealed only one reference related to agile – Behold the Power of Agile.

Early this year (2015) the Australian Government established the Digital Transformation Office (or DTO) to lead the government in transforming their services to improve customer experience.  The DTO has come up with their own Digital Service Standard.  A close look at these standards will reveal that it has been adapted from the UK Government’s Digital by Default Service Standard (almost exact word for word), and it includes the similar statement:

Build the service using agile, iterative, collaborative and user-centred methods

I would recommend you spend 30mins of your time to review the various governments Digital Standards and Principles.

Being a customer and citizen of the Australian Government I am eager to see the government put an agile value and principles approach on the agenda so that products and services are delivered faster and meets my needs.  The future will judge Turnbull’s comments of a more ‘agile Australia’ – is there going to be real change? or are these just buzzwords?

%d bloggers like this: