Changing ways agile meetup 2015 11-12
•
0 likes•79 views
Agile NOVA: Changing ways - organizational change in an agile world by Shaun Presson
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Similar to Changing ways agile meetup 2015 11-12
Similar to Changing ways agile meetup 2015 11-12 (20)
More from sparkagility
More from sparkagility (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (12)
Changing ways agile meetup 2015 11-12
- 1. CHANGING WAYS ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE IN AN AGILE WORLD NOVEMBER 12, 2015
- 2. Shawn Presson is an Agile Coach at eGlobalTech who’s greatest enthusiam is setting people up to succeed. He has worked with numerous methods, standards, and models, and has evolved a pragmatic view of tools and methods. He does not believe in silver bullets, but does believe that some approaches have been through “trial by fire” and are worth using – until they hit a situation where they don’t work. Shawn has worked with many organizations internationally undertaking organizational change, and finds that the supposed superiority of any given approach usually is lost on those who can only see the disruption it presents. He therefore seeks analogies and ways forward that make change (relatively) untraumatic.
- 3. Some Inputs Into This Discussion 3
- 5. 5 Gordon E. Moore, co-founder of Intel
- 6. Change as a Competitive Advantage 6
- 7. Deaths per million vehicles for 1975 and 1976 for the best-selling compact cars of that era. Vehicle 1975 1976 ---------------------- ------ ------ Datsun1200/210 392 418 VW Beetle 378 370 Corolla 333 293 Datsun 510 294 340 Pinto 298 322 Vega 288 310 Gremlin 274 315 Gary T. Schwartz,“The Myth of the Ford Pinto Case” 7
- 8. 8
- 11. • Homeostasis - 1926, from homeo + Greek stasis • Stasis - "stoppage of circulation," 1745, from medical Latin, from Greek stasis "a standing still, a standing; the posture of standing; a position, a point of the compass; position, state, or condition of anything.“ • Statue –from Latin statua source: http://www.etymonline.com/index.php • This principle partially explains the “corporate immune response” to change. 11
- 12. 12 “…all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.”
- 14. 14 Being static has problems…
- 15. Fear of This… 15
- 16. …Leads to This 16 But, we’re different.
- 17. Analyzing Reasons for Reactions 17
- 18. Five Whys (Fishbone Diagram) 18 Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why? Why?
- 20. 20
- 21. 21 Hopson B & Adams J (1976) Transition – Understanding and Managing Personal Change Well Being First shock Provisional adjustment Inner contradictions Inner criteria Re-construction & recovery Uncertainty Losing confidence Feel Good OK Distress /despair Excitement Honeymoon Confusion Depression Crisis Life Event 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8+ months
- 22. 22 Hopson B & Adams J (1976) Transition – Understanding and Managing Personal Change Well Being First shock Provisional adjustment Inner contradictions Inner criteria Re-construction & recovery Disbelief Minimising or denial Numbness (b) Depression Crisis (b) trauma or loss Extended crisis Feel Good OK Distress /despair Life Event 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8+ months Bargaining
- 23. Inner criteria 23 Hopson B & Adams J (1976) Transition – Understanding and Managing Personal Change Disbelief Minimising or denial Testing Feel Good OK Distress /despair Numbness Depression Crisis Exploring Accepting New confidence, transformation Re-construction & recovery Well Being First shock Provisional adjustment Inner contradictions Life Event 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8+ months
- 25. 25
- 26. Clan + adhoc Hierarchy +market Adho + mark et Clan + hierar chy Clan culture adhocracy Competing Values Model of Culture 26 Flexibility and Individuality Stability and Control External Focus Internal Focus Hooijberg and Petrock, “On Cultural Change” hierarchy market clan culture hierarchy culture adhocracy culture market culture LEAN AGILE CLAN ADHOCRACY MARKETHIERARCHY • Traditional bureaucracy • Emphasis on controls and formal rules and procedures • Emphasizes stability, predictability, and efficiency • control by looking outward, • all transactions are exchanges of value. • driven by results, very competitive.. • Open culture, flexibility • Dynamic, entrepreneurial; creative problem-solving, risk- taking • Adjusts to rapidly changed conditions; cutting edge • Friendly, family-like • Group cohesion, teamwork, and morale highly valued; • Group decision making and labor-mgmt. cooperation • Values from quality movement clan culture hierarchy culture adhocracy culture market culture
- 28. “You can’t engineer your way out of a problem you mismanaged your way into.” ~ Bob Read, Boeing IDS
- 29. 30 PERFORMANCE LATE STATUS QUO FOREIGN ELEMENT NEW STATUS QUO PRACTICE AND INTEGRATION TRANSFORMING IDEACHAOS TIME
- 32. Points on Experiment Execution 33 ©Marcin Białek, Creative Commons
- 33. Step 1 • Figure out where you are
- 34. WheretoStart?
- 36. Assess
- 37. Culture Know your organizational system overlaps Technology Human/ Social Financial Acquisition Managerial
- 38. Step 2 • Figure out where you are • Figure out where you need to be strategically
- 39. 40 Tactical: “Adopt Kanban” Objective: “Provide good services to our internal and external customers via Agile methods.” Mission: “Survive by improving and evolving how we provide valuable services to our internal and external customers.” Adapted from Toyota Kata by Mike Rother Organizational Objectives
- 40. Step 3 • Figure out where you are • Figure out where you need to be strategically • Decide how to go about getting there
- 42. VISION SKILLS INCENTIVES RESOURCES ACTION PLAN CHANGE CONFUSIONSKILLS INCENTIVES RESOURCES ACTION PLAN VISION INCENTIVES RESOURCES ACTION PLAN ANXIETY GRADUAL CHANGE VISION SKILLS RESOURCES ACTION PLAN FRUS- TRATION VISION SKILLS INCENTIVES ACTION PLAN FALSE STARTS VISION SKILLS INCENTIVES RESOURCES “Managing Technological Change” Carnegie Mellon University, Software Engineering Institute 43
- 43. Incentives 44 Relevance “I want my work to matter”; “I want to build something lasting.” Autonomy “I want fewer dependencies on others to make my work valuable, or to declare it finished.” Connectedness “I want to be part of a community of like-minded professionals.” Status “I want to be respected for superior work and knowledge.” Earning a living “I want to be paid according to my skills and accomplishments.”
- 45. Plans and Tracking VISION LATENT PAIN ENABLERS WE HAVE ENABLERS WE NEED FELT N EEDS STEPS AND OUTCOMES Experiment Wall Groups Group A Group B Group C Group D Group E Definition of Awesome Experiment Backlog Strategic Goals Experiments in Flight Experiments Done & Lessons Learned Target Condition: Actual Condition: PDCA Cycle: Obstacles: Challenge: Vision: Process focus:
- 47. On-The-Ground Approaches 51 Improvement Kata 1 Understand the Direction 2 Grasp the Current Condition 3 Establish the Next Target Condition 4 Iterate towards the Target Condition What is the perfect outcome? “Situational Fluency” - Understand situation from customer and internal viewpoints so clearly that the innovation becomes obvious Observation, facts, and data OVER interviews and opinions How does activity X NEED to work? Favor experimental, incremental improvement OVER delayed, theoretical perfection
- 48. Sponsors Change Agents Champions Change Efforts People impacted by change Inventors Entrepreneurs Experts Integrators Managers/ mentors
- 49. Mentor-mentee
- 50. <man with briefcase and cape, leaping with arm outstretched> Image removed for copyright reasons
- 51. Confederated model The Development Teams
- 52. Strategic change needs backlog 56 Enterprise-Level Strategic Change Navigation Group Organizational Sponsors and Change Agents Organizational Unit Change Agents Change Backlog Organizational Unit Change Agents Change Backlog Enterprise Team model
- 53. 57 Enterprise-Level Strategic Change Steering Group COMMUNICATE!COMMUNICATE!COMMUNICATE!
- 54. 60
- 55. Upcoming Events • DC Women in Agile • Tuesday, November 17, 6:00 PM • The Advisory Board Company2445 M St NW, Washington, DC • Unleash Innovation in Your Organization • Thursday, December 10, 2015 6:30 PM to 8:00 PM • Lean Change Management by Jason Little • Thursday, January 21, 2016, 7:00 PM to 8:00 PM; virtual 61
- 56. Resources – Links 62 • Toyota Kata web page - http://www-personal.umich.edu/~mrother/Homepage.html • Change Without Burning Platforms - http://www.forbes.com/sites/ciocentral/2014/04/29/changing- cultures-without-burning-platforms/ • The Discipline of Teams - http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~jfc/cs160/fall01/lectures/Discipline_of_Teams.html • Competing Values Model of Organizational Culture - http://www.researchgate.net/publication/229703244_On_cultural_change_Using_the_competing_value s_framework_to_help_leaders_execute_a_transformational_strategy • The Marshall Model of Organisational Evolution – http://fallingblossoms.com/opinion/content?id=1006 https://flowchainsensei.wordpress.com/rightshifting/the-marshall-model/ • Satir Change Model - http://www.satirworkshops.com/workshops/balancing-act/satir-change-model/
- 57. Resources - Books 63 • Changing Ways, Murray M. Dalziel and Stephen C. Schoonover, • The Culture Code, Clotaire Rapaille • F.I.R.E, Dan Ward • Flawless Consulting, Peter Block • Leading Lean Software Development, Mary and Tom Poppendeick • Lean Change Management, Jason Little • Managing the Design Factory, Donald Reinertson • Mastery, George Leonard • Out of the Crisis, W. Edwards Deming • Quality Software Management: Anticipating Change (Vol 4), Gerald M. Weinberg • Toyota Kata, Mike Rother • The Wisdom of Teams, Jon R. Katzenbach and Douglas K. Smith
- 59. Jason Little, Lean Change Management
- 60. Experiment Wall Groups Group A Group B Group C Group D Group E Definition of Awesome Experiment Backlog Strategic Goals Experiments in Flight Experiments Done & Lessons Learned
- 61. Quick Wins Trite RISK/COMPLEXITY VALUE A B C D E F G H I Strategic Initiatives Tactical Initiatives Zone of Current Infeasibility
- 62. Target Condition: Actual Condition: PDCA Cycle: Obstacles: Challenge: Vision: Process focus:
Editor's Notes
- Book References Shown Changing Ways, Murray M. Dalziel and Stephen C. Schoonover, Amacom Books (May 1988), ISBN-13: 978-0814459249 The Culture Code, Clotaire Rapaille, Crown Business; Reprint edition (July 17, 2007), ISBN-13: 978-0767920575 F.I.R.E, Dan Ward, HarperBusiness, April 29, 2014, ISBN-10: 006230190X How Do Public Managers Manage, Carolyn Ban, Jossey-Bass; 1st edition, May 22, 1995, ISBN 978-0787900984 Managing the Design Factory, Donald Reinertson, ISBN 0-684-83991-1, The Free Press, 1997 Mastery, George Leonard, Plume, 1992, ISBN-13: 978-0452267565 Out of the Crisis, W. Edwards Deming, The MIT Press; Reprint edition (August 11, ISBN-13: 978-0262541152 Toyota Kata, Mike Rother, ISBN 978-0-07-163523-3, McGraw Hill, 2010 Leading Lean Software Development, Mary and Tom Poppendeick, Addison-Wesley, October 2009, ISBN-13: 978-0321620705 The Wisdom of Teams, Jon R. Katzenbach and Douglas K. Smith, Collins Business Essentials, July 2006, ISBN 978-0060522001
- The screen initially contains the words “Change Is”. Depending on audience response, the word “Good” or “Bad” is displayed next. This leads to a discussion of whether change is always good or always bad. The reality is that changes can be constructive or damaging, and that change simply “is”, how we manage it influences the degree to which it is good or bad. Nothing is permanent but change, adapting to this makes way for an adaptive organization. (A bust of the Greek philosopher Heraclitus is displayed, who is credited with the statement that “no one steps into the same river twice.”)
- Obsolescence alone is a compelling motivator for change. What other compelling or inescapable changes do we face? --------------------------------------- Moore's law is the observation that the number of transistors in a dense integrated circuit doubles approximately every two years. The observation is named after Gordon E. Moore, the co-founder of Intel and Fairchild Semiconductor, whose 1965 paper described a doubling every year in the number of components per integrated circuit, and projected this rate of growth would continue for at least another decade. In 1975, looking forward to the next decade, he revised the forecast to doubling every two years. -------------------------------------------- en.wikipedia.org Gordon E. Moore photograph source IEEE
- These discussions almost invariably include a section on Japanese Management. For years, these examples focused on manufacturing. We will start in that vein, focusing on the auto industry. Joseph Juran, one of the great researchers and authorities on quality, observed how using change as a competitive advantage transformed the automobile manufacturing industry. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Photograph of 1959 Ford Edsel is in the public domain Photograph of 1974 Datsun F10 Sedan is in the public domain
- In the mid-20th century, the United States had a powerful automobile manufacturing capability. There was high demand and ready money in post-WWII America The U.S. manufacturers therefore did not focus on innovation and change as much as meeting demand for exciting new body designs. Earlier Japanese cars were generally inferior to those made in the U.S. (Some would say they were outright junk.) The Japanese, however, focused on the process of making change and adaptation normal and constant. As a result, their quality eventually surpasses that of the U.S.-made automobiles. The U.S. industry did eventually learn the lessons Deming had tried to teach them, and began to embed innovation and change into their practices. At that point, however, it was a “game of catch-up”, since the Japanese did not slack their pace of innovation. (Source: Joseph Juran) Take safety as a topic to underscore where Japanese carmakers started. Below are statistics on deaths per million vehicles for 1975 and 1976 for the best-selling compact cars of that era (compiled by Gary T. Schwartz in his landmark law-review article “The Myth of the Ford Pinto Case”): Vehicle 1975 1976 -------------------------- ------ ------ Datsun1200/210 392 418 VW Beetle 378 370 Corolla 333 293 Datsun 510 294 340 Pinto 298 322 Vega 288 310 Gremlin 274 315 (Source: New Yorker) http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/05/04/the-engineers-lament This is not to deify all Japanese companies. One major electronics company tried to stifle many innovations by some of its most brilliant minds, labeling those visionaries “selfish,” which in that work culture is the equivalent of tagging someone a “baby-killer” here. That particular company has been operating in the red for nearly a decade.
- Many IT people complain that the best examples of applying Lean, Agile, CI/CD come from manufacturing In the post-industrial age, however, there are many U.S. Companies that have demonstrated these principles and shown the ability to rapidly innovate as a competitive stance, including the area most relevant to us: Information Technology. A short list of these companies includes: Facebook Google Southwest Airlines Motley Fool ETSY Amazon a market-changing customer value proposition and a radical profit formula expanded beyond books to include all sorts of easily shippable consumer goods commission-based brokerage service to buyers and sellers of used books third-party sellers Web services platform Kindle e-book reader (OEM). Netflix AirBNB
- The screen initially contains the words “Resistance Is”. Depending on audience response, the word “Good” or “Bad” is displayed next. This leads to a discussion of whether resistance is always good or always bad. It is not automatically good in the “down with everything” sense It is not automatically bad It is simply a normal reaction of a healthy organism. Each instance of resistance should be handled based on whether it is serves a good purpose or merely supports inertia. The final phrase displayed is, “Resistance is healthy”. Resistance to change therefore normal. Resistance is greater if change poses the risk of loss. Common statements below reflect a range of resistance-based comments. “Would they please make up their minds….”, “I just don’t have the motivation to cope with so much change.” “I’ve been successful up to this point this way, who’s to say I should change now?” “I’m afraid I don’t have the skills to succeed in the organization being proposed.” “I don’t believe the proposed changes will improve performance.” “The proposed changes threaten my turf.” “They’re touting things we knew 20 years ago but made us abandon. I’m done.” “This stuff all winds up failing in the end.” Becoming callous to change efforts is a prominent risk. One remedy is not to advertise every change as an “Improvement.” Adults will feel insulted when handed a “best practice” and are told it is an improvement when it hasn’t been piloted or proven in their environment. Unproven changes should simply be called that – “changes.” After experimenting, data will show whether it was an improvement. Another prominent issue is holding on to an improvement after it may have outlived its “window of impact.” ---------------------------------------------- Presenter Note: this is a complex build slide using regions to trigger display of objects.
- Key Points: People don’t automatically act based on what we feel is clear information. (This is a typical conflict in the engineering community: engineers explain why something should happen with iron-clad proofs, and get frustrated when it doesn’t happen.) People will resist any change that conflicts with their deeply held beliefs. (In his book Solution Selling, Michael T. Bosworth tells of his refusing to try more hair growth solutions after he had been scalded, cheated, and broke over remedies that did not work, resulting in an undying belief that his was an unsolvable problem. That belief that there is no remedy is the earliest thing that must be addressed.) People will do the easiest/most efficient thing even when they are told it isn’t the right thing to do. (Usually. Sometimes people over-complicate things. Still, an old work adage is to give a task to the laziest person because that person will find the most efficient way to do it.) People respond more favorably when there is empathy for their position. People will resist change until the pain of NOT changing is greater than the pain of changing. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Corporate Immune Response to Change - James March and Herbert Simon, "Organizations", Wiley, 1958
- The Declaration of Independences states, “…all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.” The phenomenon of change happening when the pain of remaining static greater than the pain of changing is well known. It has been written about in countless books on consulting, organizational change, family counseling, salesmanship, stories of prodigal children, and so forth. It is even documented in our nation’s Declaration of Independence! Change champions and change agents should be aware of this. They should also be aware of the “burning platform” tactic, which promotes change by making all present conditions evil and insufferable (see Dan Ward, http://www.forbes.com/sites/ciocentral/2014/04/29/changing-cultures-without-burning-platforms/) Even when change is necessary, the “burning platform” approach is fear-based, manipulative, and insulting. The message should be, “let’s use what we know how to do, bring in new ideas, re-examine and maybe toss some old ones, and really kick it up a notch.” The Burning Platform message is, “You have no good reason for what you are doing, you know nothing, we’re starting from scratch.” Sometimes a little shock-and-awe is needed. Often, it’s possible to show how change is the (sometimes radical) next step in people’s development.
- “If any change is imposed on a system in equilibrium, the system will change in such a way as to counteract the imposed change.” ~ Le Chatelier-Braun Principle This includes good change, not just bad. People often engage in groups because that external motivation can help keep moving forward. Like a personal trainer, change agents, champions, and coaches will encounter resistance. Don’t take it personally. Don’t get bogged in justification and other tangents
- Discuss issues with staying static. Missing opportunities Becoming non-valued and obsolete Settling for low levels of value-add Becoming unable to break your own inertia and settling for status quo, even if it means being miserable. Pyrrhic victories, in which one demonstrates autonomy but has no political capital left (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyrrhic_victory)
- The image depicts dispirited workers marching in and out of the workplace. Their entire day is drudgery. Fear-based cultures can take work that should be stimulating and purposeful and make it feel like drudgery. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Image from a poster for the film Metropolis, Fritz Lang, Director, March 1927; printed work has been placed in the public domain. Film copyright Paramount Pictures, restored copyright 1966, Universum Film AG.
- During the early TQM years, IT people were provided examples from manufacturing, with little help deriving applicable lessons; this reinforced the apparent differences in the IT world. “Managing the Design Factory” by Don Reinertson was a pivotal work in bridging the perceived differences. Misunderstanding of methods instead of change agility often leads to solving problems by doing the wrong thing righter. Failure to see common ground, such as the fact that all organizations are staffed by people, leads to focus on difference rather than common ground. In spite of many differences, many organizations have far more in common with other organizations than their personnel may see or admit. Those who derive abstract ideas from specific situations, and re-apply them to other specific situations, will have more success with change and will in fact stand out from the crowd. The primary valid difference observed over the past several decades has been the extent to which an organization’s excellence does not provide competitive advantage. This ties into the reality of organizations not actually changing with shifts in contracts or with mergers/acquisitions, but actually becoming new organizations. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- *Penguin image by Brian Gratwicke, March 2012, Creative Commons.
- The Five Whys are somewhat related to Ishikawa Diagramming, also known as “fishbone diagramming.” Ishikawa diagramming considers domains of root causes (tools, environment, personnel, regulations, etc.). Using standard categories may limit innovative viewpoints if used strictly. They should be considered periodically, however, so that key viewpoints are skimmed over. The “Five Whys” may be used from a number of viewpoints: As part of a team exercise to produce actionable items As a management technique to mentor someone in the art of problem analysis. When performed as a group exercise, avoid the temptation to compile a large, unscientific list of “to dos” that divert resources away from key, valuable improvements. We often think of diagramming Five Whys in a formal root cause analysis session, but this behavior could become part of normal interactions in a complex environment. CHANGE AGENTS should select such methods over didactic, argumentative approaches to encourage change. They should, however, avoid: Letting the perfect be the enemy of the good. “Five whys” should not degrade into getting stuck in analysis. Sticking with a rote set of “why” categories to the extent that valuable information is lost (this applies to systems design decisions, too.) “flipping” so that the five “whys” are simply justification for a solution we already jumped to.
- A “fishbone diagram” that does not branch is a symptom that something went wrong. “Confirmation” of a preconceived solution Haste Lack of situational fluency, the understanding of the people, systems, agreements, technologies, etc. related to a situation. Bullying or H.I.P.P.O. (Highest Paid Person’s Opinion)
- Activity: Why Resistance? Time: 15 Minutes Materials: Drafting dots, large Post-It notes, markers, butcher paper Part 1 of 5: Teams identify root causes of resistance using “Five Whys” Allow linear decomposition for this exercise. Part 2 of 5: Teams take their “five why” outcomes and combine them in a central spot in the room. Part 3 of 5: Teams attempt to derive one-word summary motivations, such as “Loss”, “Gain”, “Survival”, then dot-vote on them. Have each group report on its top single-word motivators and subordinate root causes. Part 4 of 5: Summarize Part 5 of 5: Retrospective What are the strengths of this exercise we just performed? What are potential flaws? Accept all answers. If no one mentions that it is performed in a class environment, rather than using a “go and see” approach, add that to the list of answers and state that we will return to that point later today.
- This slide depicting the emotional reactions to change is complex and is not totally Section 508 compliant. Additional resources: On Death and Dying, Elisabeth Kubler-Ross, Scrubner, Reprint 2014, ISBN-13: 978-1476775548
- This slide depicting the emotional reactions to change is complex and is not totally Section 508 compliant. Additional resources: On Death and Dying, Elisabeth Kubler-Ross, Scrubner, Reprint 2014, ISBN-13: 978-1476775548
- This slide depicting the emotional reactions to change is complex and is not totally Section 508 compliant. Additional resources: On Death and Dying, Elisabeth Kubler-Ross, Scrubner, Reprint 2014, ISBN-13: 978-1476775548
- Culture is often seen as arts, literature, sciences, behavior norms, etc. But it is more than that. Culture is a collection of skills, attitudes and beliefs that societies build to help them survive Culture therefore is seen as a survival tool and is cherished, even when it is wrong – even when people in the culture know it is wrong! Culture can have a clannish aspect – “WE can criticize us, but YOU can’t criticize us.” Sometimes we don’t realize when we are slamming up against culture. For example, Lean writers talk about setting perfection as an objective. Clotaire Rapaille’s research discovered that many Americans subconsciously equate “perfection” with Death and having no horizons left to explore. Until this is surfaced and addressed, the perfection issue is seen as unsolvable. Culture can even override our objective knowledge “Emotional commitment dwarfs purely rational compliance every time.” ~ Jon R. Katzenbach and Zia Khan Mentally healthy people are able to balance conflicting beliefs and impulses; those that overcome cultural pressure and stay within the culture have developed successful coping mechanisms. This defies people who believe they can persuade merely by proving they have the correct facts. Attempts at culture change occasionally include apparently sweeping, radical moves don’t panic; even if the culture doesn’t change, learn how to plug improvements into the culture Culture often changes slowly; be patient We often need to instill practice changes within the existing culture rather than hoping to overhaul the culture itself
- In the July Agile Leadership Forum, we discussed Culture. Culture is a set of attitudes and beliefs, and each organization may have multiple cultures. There is a saying that culture trumps policy, every time Policy that is well-planned, supported, and enduring can shape culture over time. Finding ways for change to be enacted by those impacted by it, helping it be seen as a step towards success and self-actualization Successful approximations of desired behavior are recognized. Variances are expected in the progression towards the end attitudes, skills, behaviors, activities, and outcomes. Imparting critical thinking and an experiment-based, scientific approach to problem solving is more important than mandating rote actions. Consistency over time can help move culture (this is related to the “shu – ha – ri” model) “Cognitive dissonance” is one theory that attempts to explain this. Imagine a person has adopted the attitude that they will no longer eat high fat food, but eats a high-fat doughnut; the four methods of reducing self conflict are: Change behavior or cognition ("I will not eat any more of this doughnut") Justify behavior or cognition by changing the conflicting cognition ("I'm allowed to cheat every once in a while") Justify behavior or cognition by adding new cognitions ("I'll spend 30 extra minutes at the gym to work this off") Ignore or deny any information that conflicts with existing beliefs ("This doughnut is not high in fat“, or “the latest Runners World article doubts the effect of dietary fat.”) Writing excessive policy and instruction (a form of “Big Design Up Front” - BDUF) can bog down change efforts and shut down adaptability -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [Image posted on Cruxalyst April 2012 by Sharon Ede, original authorship unknown] [The graphic depicts a seagull, which could symbolize “seagull POs/SMEs/clients/managers” who swoop in, make a lot of noise, make a mess, and then leave.]
- [Interactive discussion on where the your business cultures (note the plural) may fall along the competing values axes. Time permitting, use drafting dots on butcher paper/dots on whiteboard.] The Hierarchy Traditional bureaucracy Emphasis on controls and formal rules and procedures Emphasizes stability, predictability, and efficiency The Clan Culture Friendly, supportive, family-like organization Group cohesion, teamwork, and morale highly valued; favors group decision making and labor-management cooperation Values from quality movement and human relations school of organizational theory The Adhocracy Open culture, focusing on external relations and flexibility Dynamic, entrepreneurial; rewards creative problem-solving and risk-taking Able to adjust to rapidly changed external conditions, committed to being on the cutting edge Market Culture The Market organization also seeks control but does so by looking outward, and in particular taking note of transaction cost. Note that the Market organization is not one which is focused just on marketing, but one where all transactions, internal and external are viewed in market terms. Transactions are exchanges of value. In an efficient market organization, value flows between people and stakeholders with minimal cost and delay. Market cultures are outward looking, are particularly driven by results and are often very competitive. Leaders in market cultures are often hard-driving competitors who seek always to deliver the goods. Competing Values model of Organizational Culture; Source Hooijberg and Petrock, “On Cultural Change: Using the Competing Values Model to Help Leaders Execute a Transformational Strategy”, 1993. This model was cited by Carolyn Ban in her work “How Public Managers Manage.” ----------------------------------------------------------------- Presenter Notes: This slide involves a complex build. The “agile” and “lean” bubbles will show up with the first two key strokes, and disappear on the third. After that, be careful to click on zones indicated by the cursor change, or the slide will advance prematurely.
- Five minute Group discussion on influencers of your mission and change activities. Discussion of what are the perceived/real constraints and enablers to change. If discussions get stuck, prompts could include: Budget constraints Competing values Complexity of managerial role under budget/staffing constraints; culture What the FAR says versus what we think it does; impact on acquiring and managing vendors Civil Service System, local coping mechanisms Personnel Management constraints and regulations Hiring constraints and regulation
- The Virginia Satir curve shows the general impact of change on performance. Organizational readiness, how drastic the change is, and perseverance through the change will impact the duration and magnitude of the move from chaos to a new “status quo”, hopefully approaching a target set for the change. One scenario underlying this curve comes from family counseling, in which a parent exhibits periodic disruptive and abusive behavior, and then corrects that behavior. Turmoil is the norm in such families until the change. In many cases, after the parent corrects the behavior a child will begin abusing drugs or alcohol, thereby reintroducing the feeling of “normalcy.” Unfortunately, in project management we sometimes see the same behavior of mistaking confusion, “efforting”, pushing off done-ness, and other anti-patterns for normalcy. Well-run, quiet projects are almost unsettling. One incident illustrates this point: when hearing that a project is coming on time and under budget, management rewards the project manager by cutting the budget and schedule! ( “Peopleware”, Tom DeMarco and Tim Lister) The critical point in this model is moving beyond the formal status quo. The “transforming idea” and the “practice and integration” represents points at which persons may start to buy into the change and experiment with new behaviors. Beliefs and willingness to go outside of comfort zones are absolutely critical. Remember that “Emotional commitment dwarfs purely rational compliance every time” (Jon R. Katzenbach and Zia Khan .)
- Periodic “big change” can be highly disruptive. If executed unwisely, it can permanently dampen improvements in quality, productivity, mission-fulfillment, and other facets. Even smaller disruptions can be dampening if we declare too quickly, “well, THAT didn’t work.” Mikek Rother points out that the point at which most American managers give up on an experiment is the point at which Toyota managers get started, “roll up their sleeves and get to work.” Here’s the payoff: organizations accustomed to experimentation and change are able to routinely take on changes that would bring other organizations to a standstill. That is the competitive advantage.
- To counter the succession of “hits” via change, make them smaller, measurable, constrained. This minimizes loss of time if a change turns out to be a non-improvement. It also minimizes disruption and the learning curve of personnel to adapt to each change, while teaching them the skills and mindset to take on experimentation and change as a path to success. One example of this is the improvement cycle based on “Toyota Kata”. Mike Rother writes, “At the start, coaching cycles often take too much time and thus become burdensome. Once a target condition has been established, a coaching cycle can often be completed in 15 minutes. Less is more.” Keeping the cycles tight and continuing the hard work until improvements are identified and put in place is the key to reaping the incremental rewards. A change breakdown could be as follows: Experiment (try out an idea) Pilot larger change (for-real, but still with contained blast radius) Keep the change as an improvement, or reject the change and use the resulting information.
- Key Points: Avoid calling each change/experiment an “improvement” until it is shown to improve something; its only an experiment up to that point Some changes may be premature. Don’t oversell a change (which is what happened to the Ford Edsel!), or it will be difficult to try it again later. See how experiments and change surround us, at different scales from 10,000-foot-view to the 500 foot view At the macro level, newly implementing Scrum, XP, Kanban, CI/CD, test first, etc. are large-scale changes. They may be a bit noisy to be used as experiments. At the project level, iteration plans and reviews are medium-scale experiments and analysis of results; actions on retrospective outcomes may be experiments At the detailed level, each code or data change is an experiment. Like scientific experiments, organizational change experiments include hypotheses (ranging from objectives to user stories), assumptions, and observation criteria (ranging from Key Indicators to tests). Just as good experiments contain control groups to avoid false results, IT experiments include controls such as starting with negative tests to avoid false positives. Just as with good scientific experiments, organizational change experiments define their bounds, the limits under which the experiment is executed. Experiments are most likely to generate new information at higher risk areas, such as technical or human interfaces and handoffs. Constrain your scope and duration for most experiments. An entire systems development projects could be considered an experiment in some ways, but generally is too long-term and too “noisy” for it to provide measurable outputs at a frequency that supports meaningful change. Having experiments span a couple of iterations or less yields learning faster, and with less noise in the outcomes. Occam’s Razor – choose the hypothesis with the fewest assumptions Lean – don’t burden failing explanations with ad hoc hypotheses (in this situation, experimenting becomes a form of resistance) Wikipedia – simpler theories are better testable and falsifiable Einstein (attributed) – Keep things as simple as possible, but no simpler
- Successful organizational change involves a good self-assessment. What do you hold as valuable? What may you be holding onto that has outlived its value? What is shaping your actions that does not improve the mission of your group and company? Recommended Study: Steven Covey “7 Habits of Highly Effective People” Independence 1 – Be Proactive 2 - Begin with the End in Mind 3 - Put First Things First Interdependence 4 - Think Win-Win 5 - Seek First to Understand, Then to be Understood 6 - Synergize Continuous Improvements 7 - Sharpen the Saw
- The concept of a high organizational Performance Ethic (and a shared performance challenge) as a “glue” holding high-performance teams together was observed by Katzenbach and Smith, and documented in their book “The Wisdom of Teams” “Teamwork” is often cited, and is valuable. Truly effective teams are only possible, however, with a high performance ethic. High performance teams can’t be mandated or be fabricated. The job of management is to remove blockers that could inhibit their formation. When this ethic is established, experiments that challenge practices (yes, even agile ones), are not just resistance in disguise; they are moving beyond seeing methodologies and frameworks as silver bullets, and towards using them as stepping stones and tools. A good change program recognizes that “all models are flawed, some are useful,” and moves on.
- Group image licensed by Shawn Presson for presentation display, not approved for digital display on web sites, etc.
- The first objective is static. The second objective focuses on using change to stay relevant or competitive. There is a profound difference. The third objective emphasizes providing value, using change to maintain that ability. This is the best option. This slide is not to propose a new mission statement, but to illustrate how mission and performance challenges move away from specific methods and models, and towards a long-term performance goal implementing change agility.
- Formats: Lecture – good for awareness, background knowledge and persuasion, least effective for learning specific tasks Lecture plus demonstration –marginally more effective for learning tasks Workshop/Simulation – more effective for task execution skills, especially if practiced soon after the teaching Guided execution – real-world based, teaches new reflexes, most highly effective for learning task execution skills Timing: Experiments have been performed on learning retention based on two scenarios. In scenario (A), students applied materials directly after instruction, and did not use those skills for 6 months. In scenario (B), students did not apply the skills until 6 months after the instruction. Students in scenario (A) retained significantly more ability to apply the learning than students in scenario (B).
- We’re all familiar with the Plan Do Check Act cycle. Very often, organizations plan around this approach in very long change loops, taking months or years to assess results. This creates waste, frustration, confusion. Think of PDCA in tighter loops with incremental, proven improvements – experiments. Graphic property of ISPI, used by permission; source graphic in the public domain
- The improvement kata is one way of performing person-to-person change. The non-intuitive aspect of the kata is that mentoring someone in problem solving is more important than coming up with the right solution immediately. It follows the old saying about teaching someone to fish rather than just handing him a fish. When performed in a mentoring context, avoid guessing games (in the style of “I’m thinking of a number between 1 and 20…”) Also avoid using this as a disguise for telling the mentee what to do anyway. Use the Five Whys to teach mentees to consider possibilities, go and see the actual situation, and avoid leaping to the first promising conclusion. (See the Toyota Kata at http://www-personal.umich.edu/~mrother/Homepage.html)
- Sponsors give legitimacy to changes in the organization. This is not merely a figurehead role, however; sponsors take an active part in shaping their guidance based on feedback and outcomes. They provide funding and clear obstacles for change efforts on the ground. Champions are people who have a vision for the possible benefits of a change, and encourage their peers to explore its possibilities. They also advise sponsors in the organization regarding priorities and needs for change. Champions may be hands-on workers, managers, product owners, internal customers, or from many other roles. Change agents provide knowledge, guidance, and feedback to the organization in executing the change. They may be external or internal, permanent or contracted. Change agents may work as coaches, observers, oversight, trainers, advisers, etc.
- All too often, transitional practices, tools, and systems become permanent and difficult to move beyond. Letting go of something familiar is even harder than trying something new. The psychology of loss is real and powerful. Change in general needs champions, knowledgeable people who support and promote change. The champions also must understand how to adapt ideas from other organizations to fit the current needs without falling into the “we’re different” trap. One of the primary issues raised in the October ALF was complacency as a change inhibitor. The concept of “exit champions” is one of nurturing critical thinking and not shutting down recommendations that a practice or system has outlived its usefulness.
- A confederated model involves all teams working on improvements and sharing their experiences will all other teams Blogs, “all hands” meetings, word of mouth, Scrum of Scrum, and many other forums can be used to share learning
- An enterprise-level strategic change team can act as business owners or collective sponsors of changes. Change agents and sponsors work together to share knowledge about change initiatives, receive feedback from personnel “on the ground” executing the changes, plan actions to support sponsored changes, and determine what change activities have joint interest and priority. Good Patterns Change deliberately rather than accidentally Be consistent Find your champions Enlist your sponsors Light and nourish many small fires Enlist allies Balance radical change with experimental increments Change collaboratively Seek analogies with current knowledge Cautions Prefer Pull over Push; let projects drive changes wherever possible and use the navigation group more for communications than setting policy. Beware of long-range, complex, Big Plan Up Front change efforts that mimic common failed projects Make change organic whenever possible, no “big book of process” Avoid the “middle management black hole” Understand resistance, learn to discern between its symptoms and straight feedback Avoid “burning platform syndrome,” but stop war stories that are “slow-rolling.” Strike the balance between being overly directive and too vague Don’t pursue silver bullets
- Communication feedback loops vitally enable sponsorship of change. They inform change sponsors rapidly and frequently on the impacts of change initiatives They allow continuous improvement to become concrete, and not just a well-discussed idea Quick feedback helps avoid the trap of overplanning, overspecification, duplication of effort, pushing problems downhill, and rigidity. Tight communication loops help sponsors, change agents, and the “real work” teams impacted by changes develop a mutual sense of mission and to understand one another’s contexts. Frequent communications provide insight to smooth out common miscommunications between strategic and tactical levels, including: Context mismatch Distortion Information overload Dropped communication Contradictory messages Aging of communications, out-of-synch messages and actions
- This exercise will cite challenges identified in the work of Ban, Liff, and other researcher on Public Sector management. Inhibitors and challengers may include: Recognition systems and cultures that emphasis technical skill but not management skill Personnel holding titles without authority to act Personnel being assigned authority outside their job description and training Organizational culture resistance to change Belief that industry examples do not apply to this organization Belief that the organization is performing well enough as is Belief that others must do the changing Failure to find the tipping point Inflexible change Confusing methods with vision --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- CSI Exercise sample cards.
- Links The Marshall Model of Organisational Evolution – http://fallingblossoms.com/opinion/content?id=1006 https://flowchainsensei.wordpress.com/rightshifting/the-marshall-model/ Toyota Kata web page - http://www-personal.umich.edu/~mrother/Homepage.html Change Without Burning Platforms - http://www.forbes.com/sites/ciocentral/2014/04/29/changing-cultures-without-burning-platforms/ The Discipline of Teams - http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~jfc/cs160/fall01/lectures/Discipline_of_Teams.html How Do Public Managers Manage - http://www.carolynban.net/ Iterative and Incremental Development: A Brief History - https://www.cs.umd.edu/~basili/publications/journals/J90.pdf Competing Values Model of Organizational Culture - http://www.researchgate.net/publication/229703244_On_cultural_change_Using_the_competing_values_framework_to_help_leaders_execute_a_transformational_strategy Satir Change Model - http://www.satirworkshops.com/workshops/balancing-act/satir-change-model/ Others Mentoring - http://www.ambition-in-motion.com/extra-extra-read-all-about-it-mentoring-news-from-around-the-country/
- Publications Changing Ways, Murray M. Dalziel and Stephen C. Schoonover, The Culture Code, Clotaire Rapaille, F.I.R.E, Dan Ward, ISBN-10: 006230190X, HarperBusiness, April 29, 2014 Flawless Consulting, Peter Block, How Do Public Managers Manage, Carolyn Ban Juran’s Quality Handbook, Sixth Edition, Joseph Juran and Joseph DeFoo, ISBN-13: 9780071629737, McGraw-Hill Professional Publishing, 2010 Lean Change Management, Jason Little, Happy Melly Express; October 3, 2014, ISBN-13: 978-0990466505 Leading Lean Software Development, Mary and Tom Poppendeick, Addison-Wesley, October 2009 Managing Government Employees, Steward Liff, AMACAN February 2007, ISBN 978-0814408872 Managing the Design Factory, Donald Reinertson, ISBN 0-684-83991-1, The Free Press, 1997 Mastery, George Leonard,, Plume, 1992, ISBN-13: 978-0452267565 On Death and Dying, Elisabeth Kubler-Ross, Scrubner, Reprint 2014, ISBN-13: 978-1476775548 Quality Software Management: Anticipating Change (Volume 4), Gerald M. Weinberg, ISBN 0932633323, Dorset House, 1997 Solution Selling, Michael T. Bosworth, McGraw-Hill Education; 1 edition (September 22, 1994), ISBN-13: 978-0786303151 The Satir Model: Family Therapy and Beyond, Virginia Satir, et. al., ISBN 0831400781, Science and Behavior Books, 1991. The Wisdom of Teams, Jon R. Katzenbach and Douglas K. Smith, Collins Business Essentials, July 2006, ISBN 978-0060522001 Toyota Kata, Mike Rother, ISBN 978-0-07-163523-3, McGraw Hill, 2010