Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [scrumdevelopment] Command and control to start

Expand Messages
  • Alan Dayley
    ... Hash: SHA1 ... I ran into an unexpected and strong resistance to a 1 hour meeting introducing the framework last week. I still have strong resistance to
    Message 1 of 31 , Aug 2, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
      Hash: SHA1

      Cory Foy wrote:
      | Joakim Karlsson wrote:
      |> On Sat, Aug 2, 2008 at 10:00 PM, Alan Dayley <alandd@...>
      wrote:
      |>> The more I write and think about this, the more I think retrospectives
      |>> are the next thing to introduce.
      |> I agree. I might even go as far as to say that retrospectives is the
      |> practice to start with if you don't take the big bang approach.
      |
      | That's what I did. Second day on the job. It was vital for baselining
      | what the heck was going on:
      |
      | http://www.cornetdesign.com/2008/07/agile-retrospectives.html
      |
      | It paid off tremendously, because the team immediately realized that
      | things weren't as they thought. /Everyone/ learned something in that
      | meeting. And I was able to pull it off in about 3 hours.

      I ran into an unexpected and strong resistance to a 1 hour meeting
      introducing the framework last week. I still have strong resistance to
      even the < 15 minute daily team meeting and statements that "I already
      know how to do the work. I don't need training." A 1 hour meeting of
      any kind is difficult to schedule, even if the end result would be a
      tremendous payoff.

      It is an impediment of surprisingly large proportions, discovered when
      attempting the above mentioned intro meeting. This is the main reason I
      have not yet pushed a retrospective.

      Management wants Scrum. The team wants results and if Scrum gets them
      there, that's fine with them. But, none of them "get it" yet and change
      is hard. The only other two people that "get it" in the company are the
      executive sponsor and one other new CSM who is currently doing a project
      of one person, himself.

      I must say, this has been a very interesting process of "people
      watching" so far. It's amazing to see the team, and myself, go through
      this process. Proof that Scrum is about people, not technology!

      Alan


      -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
      Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
      Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

      iD8DBQFIlSbwDQw/VSQuFZYRAupvAJ0U1sRQMzToieIHcM2G/KZ+UJYrHACeLNcR
      jSZhaUIT4Y7s5ze9Il/lQD8=
      =S5Ys
      -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
    • david.hicks_radtac
      Not sure if this will help but I have often found that people are less than enthusiastic about changing the way they work using an approach suggested by
      Message 31 of 31 , Aug 4, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        Not sure if this will help but I have often found that people are
        less than enthusiastic about changing the way they work using an
        approach suggested by someone else - whether it be Scrum or any other
        new practice.

        In all circumstances I have tried to identify that person's goals -
        what they are truly trying to acheive in thier work, and what
        motivates them - and then help them to see how the new working
        practices can help them acheive those goals. If I can do this (and it
        is often difficult), then it always helps.

        --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, Alan Dayley <alandd@...>
        wrote:
        >
        > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
        > Hash: SHA1
        >
        > Writing about this topic in my Scrum adoption journal, I seem to
        have
        > arrived at a conclusion that should work for me. However, the
        great and
        > MUCH more experienced minds here can help solidify my confidence.
        If I
        > may indulge, let me describe my thought train.
        >
        > Our Scrum adoption is going slowly but positively. I have
        attempted to
        > teach the team about Scrum and agile principles to allow them to
        select
        > which pieces they want to adopt as we go. This has worked well with
        our
        > starting adoption of minimizing team effort interruptions and
        meeting
        > interruptions.
        >
        > But we have stopped adopting and the team has not asked for
        anything more.
        >
        > They only have a single, one-hour presentation on the Scrum
        framework
        > and some written materials in their knowledge bank. I am confident
        that
        > they either don't know what to ask for or don't see the practical
        value
        > of specific practices.
        >
        > We still very much have a Team Lead providing command and control
        in the
        > most positive way possible. (Another place where a self-directed
        team
        > is not yet realized.) The Lead has stated two things the pushed me
        to
        > my conclusion, paraphrasing: "We don't need training. We already
        know
        > how to get the job done," and "Just tell us a practice to do and
        we'll
        > do it."
        >
        > Overcoming the lack of desire to receive instruction is a slightly
        > different topic that I'll choose to ignore at present. Focusing on
        the
        > second point, I did not want "command and control" the team in their
        > adoption of Scrum.
        >
        > Then I remembered an question and answer exchange during ScrumMaster
        > training. The question was "What is the usual way to introduce
        Scrum in
        > an organization?" Trainer Michael described a two-day kick off
        going
        > through introduction, exercises, creating a real backlog, sprint
        > planning and go.
        >
        > And it hit me. The described introduction process is "command and
        > control," of a sort. And that makes sense to me now. When
        learning a
        > new technique, the student must be told what to do and the real
        learning
        > is in the doing. Especially when learning Scrum, the learning, and
        > proving value, is definitely in the doing.
        >
        > I know, based on team desires and management reluctance to surrender
        > time for training, a multi-hour "immersion" or an attempt to change
        > everything all at once will not work in my situation. But, I think,
        > based on the Team Lead's desire to be told and an initial
        > "teacher/student" relationship, it safe for me as ScrumMaster to
        pick
        > practices that the team can learn by doing. Command in the most
        > self-directed team manner possible.
        >
        > Any thoughts or insights for me about my thinking here?
        >
        > Alan
        > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
        > Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
        > Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
        >
        > iD8DBQFIk/PzDQw/VSQuFZYRAn67AJ9i8Cy9ZUH/0+KVNnhGLCWP2kAicgCfVC13
        > HY+uqIR/0xs8QcKz6Gs3RQI=
        > =33gh
        > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.