Geek's Guide to Leading Teams

1,007 views
847 views

Published on

Patrick Kua, ThoughtWorks, From GOTO Conference Aarhus, Denmark

Published in: Technology, Business
0 Comments
2 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,007
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
16
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
28
Comments
0
Likes
2
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Geek's Guide to Leading Teams

  1. 1. The Geek’s Guide to Leading Teams @patkua ThoughtWorks
  2. 2. The Geek’s Guide to Leading Teams @patkua ThoughtWorks
  3. 3. Who am I?
  4. 4. Who am I?
  5. 5. Me! Who am I? Tech Lead Programmer Agile Coach
  6. 6. Author http://tiny.cc/retrobook Me! Who am I? Tech Lead Programmer Agile Coach
  7. 7. Why do we need a Tech Lead?
  8. 8. ?
  9. 9. Think this doesn’t happen in the real world?
  10. 10. @julianboot
  11. 11. @julianboot @thejayfields: I had ten guys on my last project, all of them had opinions and all of them were expressed in the code base #speakerconf Source: http://twitter.com/julianboot/status/232830267822309376
  12. 12. A simple test for an effective Tech Lead...
  13. 13. Does the codebase look like it was written by a single person? Yes No
  14. 14. What does a good Tech Lead focus on?
  15. 15. P P P
  16. 16. Programming P P
  17. 17. Programming People P
  18. 18. Programming People Process
  19. 19. Programming
  20. 20. Do effective Technical Leaders need to code? Programming
  21. 21. Do effective Technical Leaders need to code? fi e D y! el it n Programming
  22. 22. Do effective Technical Leaders need to code? fi e D y! el it n Programming
  23. 23. Do effective Technical Leaders need to code? y! el it n fi e D At least 30% of the time with the team Programming
  24. 24. Programming http://bit.ly/15Rm4z
  25. 25. “...respect is the currency of the realm” Programming http://bit.ly/15Rm4z
  26. 26. ““The amount of respect an IT pro pays someone is a measure of how tolerable that person is when it comes to getting things done...”” Programming http://bit.ly/15Rm4z
  27. 27. Consistency over Cleverness Programming
  28. 28. Programming
  29. 29. Tabs OR Spaces Brackets OR not 2 Spaces OR 4 Spaces CamelCase OR Underscore Programming Curly brace end of line OR next line
  30. 30. Tabs OR Spaces Brackets OR not 2 Spaces OR 4 Spaces CamelCase OR Underscore Programming Curly brace end of line OR next line
  31. 31. Tabs OR Spaces Brackets OR not There are more important topics to spend timeCurly brace end of line on... 2 Spaces OR 4 Spaces CamelCase OR Underscore Programming OR next line
  32. 32. Team Culture Programming
  33. 33. Team Culture Programming
  34. 34. How long does the build stay broken? Programming Team Culture
  35. 35. How long does the build Team Culture stay broken? Do people avoid conflict? Programming
  36. 36. How long does the build Team Culture stay broken? Do people avoid conflict? Do people offer new ideas? Programming
  37. 37. How long does the build Team Culture stay broken? Do people avoid conflict? Do people offer new ideas? Do people flag when they need help? Programming
  38. 38. How long does the build Team Culture stay broken? Do people avoid conflict? Do people offer new ideas? Do people feel okay to admit being wrong? Programming Do people flag when they need help?
  39. 39. Vision Programming
  40. 40. People
  41. 41. Strength in Diversity People
  42. 42. People
  43. 43. Woo Intellection Strategic Analytical Achiever Activator People Input
  44. 44. Fortune 500 companies with 3 or more women on the Board gain a significant performance advantage over those with the fewest People Source: Catalyst (2007) http://bit.ly/nEEfGX
  45. 45. Fortune 500 companies with 3 or more women on the Board gain a significant performance advantage over those with the fewest 73% 112% Return on Sales People 83% Return on Equity Return on Invested Capital Source: Catalyst (2007) http://bit.ly/nEEfGX
  46. 46. “...over the past six years, companies with at least some female board representation outperformed those with no women on the board in terms of share price performance.” People Source: Credit Suisse Research Institute (August 2012) http://bit.ly/Oozuvl
  47. 47. “...over the past six years, companies with at least some female board representation outperformed those with no women on the board in terms of share price performance.” 12% Return on Equity People Source: Credit Suisse Research Institute (August 2012) http://bit.ly/Oozuvl
  48. 48. “...over the past six years, companies with at least some female board representation outperformed those with no women on the board in terms of share price performance.” 12% Return on Equity People 16% Return on Equity Source: Credit Suisse Research Institute (August 2012) http://bit.ly/Oozuvl
  49. 49. People
  50. 50. Collective Average Accuracy + = Accuracy Diversity* People
  51. 51. Collective Average Accuracy + = Accuracy Diversity* * Requires ability to integrate People
  52. 52. Trust isn’t built in one day People
  53. 53. Growing People People
  54. 54. HIGH Challenge LOW LOW People Skill/Ability HIGH Source: Csikszentmihalyi, Flow (1990)
  55. 55. HIGH LOW Challenge Anxiety LOW People Skill/Ability HIGH Source: Csikszentmihalyi, Flow (1990)
  56. 56. HIGH Challenge Anxiety LOW Boredom LOW People Skill/Ability HIGH Source: Csikszentmihalyi, Flow (1990)
  57. 57. HIGH ow Fl Challenge Anxiety LOW Boredom LOW People Skill/Ability HIGH Csikszentmihalyi, "Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience" (1990)
  58. 58. HIGH ow Fl Challenge Anxiety LOW Boredom LOW People Skill/Ability HIGH Csikszentmihalyi, "Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience" (1990)
  59. 59. HIGH ow Fl Challenge Anxiety LOW Boredom LOW People Skill/Ability HIGH Csikszentmihalyi, "Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience" (1990)
  60. 60. HIGH ow Fl Challenge Anxiety LOW Boredom LOW People Skill/Ability HIGH Csikszentmihalyi, "Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience" (1990)
  61. 61. HIGH ow Fl Challenge Anxiety LOW Boredom LOW People Skill/Ability HIGH Csikszentmihalyi, "Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience" (1990)
  62. 62. HIGH ow Fl Challenge Anxiety LOW Boredom LOW People Skill/Ability HIGH Csikszentmihalyi, "Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience" (1990)
  63. 63. HIGH ow Fl Challenge Anxiety LOW Boredom LOW People Skill/Ability HIGH Csikszentmihalyi, "Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience" (1990)
  64. 64. HIGH ow Fl Challenge Anxiety LOW Boredom LOW People Skill/Ability HIGH Csikszentmihalyi, "Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience" (1990)
  65. 65. Maximising Potential People
  66. 66. People
  67. 67. Skills People
  68. 68. Skills Strengths People
  69. 69. Skills Goals People Strengths
  70. 70. Interests Goals People Skills Strengths
  71. 71. Interests Skills Sweet Spot Goals People Strengths
  72. 72. Interests Goals People Skills Strengths
  73. 73. Interests Goals People Skills Strengths
  74. 74. Interests Goals People Skills Strengths
  75. 75. Interests Goals People Skills Strengths
  76. 76. Learning Activities People
  77. 77. Brown Bag sessions Team code reviews Pair Programming Learning Activities Video/Book Club Technical Retrospectives People Spike Showcases
  78. 78. People
  79. 79. Beware the bad apple People “Bad Is Stronger Than Good” (2001) Baumeister et al
  80. 80. Process
  81. 81. Process
  82. 82. Is it okay to tell people what to do? Process Situational Leadership Model
  83. 83. Is it okay to tell people what to do? but ( Process Y es ys onl et om es) im Situational Leadership Model
  84. 84. Supporting Behaviour High Low Process Directing Behaviour High Situational Leadership Model
  85. 85. Supporting Behaviour High Low Process Directing Behaviour High Situational Leadership Model
  86. 86. Supporting Behaviour High Low Process Di re c Directing Behaviour tin g High Situational Leadership Model
  87. 87. Process g Low chin Coa Supporting Behaviour High Di re c Directing Behaviour tin g High Situational Leadership Model
  88. 88. Supp orti n Supporting Behaviour Process g Low chin Coa g High Di re c Directing Behaviour tin g High Situational Leadership Model
  89. 89. Supp orti n Supporting Behaviour Process g Low e D ng ti ga le chin Coa g High Di re c Directing Behaviour tin g High Situational Leadership Model
  90. 90. Process Situational Leadership Model
  91. 91. Process Situational Leadership Model
  92. 92. Development level of an individual Process Situational Leadership Model
  93. 93. Developing Developed Development level of an individual Process Situational Leadership Model
  94. 94. High commitment Developing Developed Low competence Development level of an individual Process Situational Leadership Model
  95. 95. Low competence Low commitment High commitment Developing Developed Low-some competence Development level of an individual Process Situational Leadership Model
  96. 96. Low-some competence Low competence Variable commitment Low commitment High commitment Developing Developed Moderate-high competence Development level of an individual Process Situational Leadership Model
  97. 97. High commitment Moderate-high competence Low-some competence Low competence Variable commitment Low commitment High commitment Developing Developed High competence Development level of an individual Process Situational Leadership Model
  98. 98. Tuckman’s Model Process
  99. 99. Process Tuckman’s Stages of Group Development
  100. 100. Forming Process Tuckman’s Stages of Group Development
  101. 101. Forming Process Storming Tuckman’s Stages of Group Development
  102. 102. Forming Process Storming Norming Tuckman’s Stages of Group Development
  103. 103. Forming Process Storming Norming Performing Tuckman’s Stages of Group Development
  104. 104. Forming Process Storming Norming Performing Adjourning Tuckman’s Stages of Group Development
  105. 105. Forming Process Storming Norming Performing Adjourning Tuckman’s Stages of Group Development
  106. 106. “Essentially, all models are wrong, but some are useful.” - George E. P. Box Process
  107. 107. Make time for you Process
  108. 108. Process
  109. 109. Process
  110. 110. Monday Tuesday Email Time Wednesday Thursday Email Time 9am Friday Email Time Email Time 1:1s Planning Time 6pm Process Planning Time Next week planning
  111. 111. Concluding Thoughts Programming People Process
  112. 112. Questions? are hiring http://jobs.thoughtworks.com/ @patkua
  113. 113. Photo Credits http://www.flickr.com/photos/69696287@N04/7343027064/sizes/k/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/create-learning/3676366324/sizes/o/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/mbeo52/5062096969/sizes/l/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/klausonline/5510455925/sizes/o/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/sushicam/5584789234/sizes/o/

×