Devops for Growth

There are several benefits of establishing WIP limits. These include:

Agile teams have an objective, standardized way to decline new requests and explain why tasks are not being fast-tracked through the process. While this still won’t make internal or external customers happy, it is far more agreeable than just saying “no” and being unfairly criticized as inflexible or lazy.
Agile teams do not have to act like goldfish and dart frenetically from one item to another — which is not just inefficient, but it’s also exhaustive. Instead, they can focus on completing high quality work in the fastest possible manner, while minimizing distractions and interruptions.
Agile teams can build slack into processes, which allows for collaboration, collective problem solving, necessary meetings, and other activities that are essential to high-quality work, yet are not captured as formal work items.
Agile teams can more effectively identify actual and potential bottlenecks, and take targeted, practical action to alleviate or avoid them.
Agile teams can make better use of available resources, and deliver persuasive, data-driven business cases to managers and executives if additional resources are required.
Agile teams can cultivate a culture of support and teamwork — instead of “every woman and man for themselves” — which boosts engagement, performance, productivity, and accountability. This is particularly important and valuable given that agile teams must be inherently self-organizing and self-managed. With agile, either everyone reaches the finish line on time and intact, or nobody does.
Agile teams can use the visual language of WIP limits+Kanban boards to significantly reduce the need for status meetings (please keep your cheering and celebrating as quiet as possible, there are likely people in your work environment who are on the phone).

Let's talk about speed, more specifically, speed of software project delivery. It's amazing, nobody ever says, "I want to figure out how to go slower and be more methodical, and cautious." Everyone I talk to typically wants to figure out how to go faster. This was true when I was a consultant. It's been true in most of the jobs that I've held. Everyone wants to go faster, and yet, our intuition is a terrible source of ideas for how to go faster. The most common ways that I hear is, got to hold somebody's feet to the fire. Fairly violent. Got to set deadlines, because that's the way to create a sense of urgency. In my experience, these techniques, they tend to backfire. They don't go quite the way people expect.

When one is journeying into the unknown, plans have limited value simply because one doesn't know. The bigger the plan, and the more superficially complete the plan, the greater the challenges when innovating.

But why spend time on planning when you could get yourself a guide? Someone who has been over the same, or similar, territory before and can help you navigate the obstacles?

In truth many teams do secure the services of a guide. These people go by the name Agile Coach. However, even as the Agile Coach has become an accepted role in development teams a number of problems have built up with the role.
Conflicts in coaching

Question: should an Agile Coach present solutions?

When in the role as an Agile Coach I have spent days agonising when the organization and team expect me, their Agile Coach, to fix things. But I know, as a coach, I should help them find their own solution. Is it right for me to hold back my knowledge? Am I best serving my client by not doing what they expect me to do?

Question: When a team are content with their way of working, should an Agile Coach initiate change?

The biggest conflict in agile coaching is between the way organisations often view the coach role and the way coaches themselves see their role. Companies frequently see the coach as a change bringer, but coaches usually see their role as an enabler. In coaching terms this the difference between directive and non-directive coaching.

Many agile coaches take their lead from the earlier field of business coaching. Authors like John Whitmore and Myles Downey have long advocated a non-directive style of coaching where the coach helps the individuals resolve their own problems. Whitmore writes:

"Coaching is a management behaviour that lies at the opposite end of the spectrum to command and control. ... A skillful coach rarely provides or prescribes solutions." Coaching for Performance, Whitmore, 1992

In their work coaches often utilize the Socratic method to help coachees unlock problems and decide actions. Unfortunately, asking lots of questions, and not providing solutions, is usually not what companies expect from their coaches.

Reflections and findings triggered by the experience interview with Jimmy Janlén.

J’ai déjà des Scrum Masters, pourquoi ai-je besoin d’un coach d’équipes agiles?

Que vous ayez commencé l’adoption de certaines pratiques agiles au sein de votre entreprise ou non, le coach d’équipes vous aidera concrètement à :

Choisir la méthode la plus appropriée pour votre entreprise parmi les différentes méthodes disponibles (Scrum, Kanban, ScrumBan, etc.).
Accompagner les membres de vos équipes dans la mise en place des rôles, des activités, des rencontres et des outils nécessaires au bon fonctionnement. Lorsque tous les rôles ne sont pas comblés au sein de votre entreprise, le coach d’équipe agile peut aussi prendre en charge l’exécution de certaines activités.
Sélectionner les meilleures personnes pour jouer les différents rôles requis par la méthode sélectionnée.
Former et transférer les connaissances requises aux membres de votre équipe.
Développer vos Scrum Masters afin de les amener au prochain niveau.
Animer certaines rencontres.

When we introduce Scrum to an organization, many people are skeptical of the monetary benefits and ROI of the Scrum Master position. The question I am often asked is - "How do you justify the salary of the Scrum Master?"

Why are so many organizations stuck in the "middle" of DevOps evolution? What's preventing them from achieving higher levels of organizational performance des…

Comme vous le savez, Jeff Sutherland et Ken Schwaber nous ont proposé une nouvelle version du Scrum Guide en novembre 2020. Mais que propose...

À l’instar des autres pratiques de développement, la revue de code ou le mob programming ne peuvent pas se mettre en place indépendamment de considérations sur la culture de l’entreprise qui souhaite encourager ces pratiques. Certaines cultures d’entreprise favorisent activement la formation d’équipes en cohésion (principalement en ne plaçant pas d’obstacles à leur formation). Dans d’autres cultures, la notion même d’équipe est dénuée de signification réelle. De la même manière qu’aucune pratique de développement ne saurait être « copiée/collée » d’une entreprise à l’autre sans considération du contexte, il est apparent que toutes les entreprises ne sont pas égales devant le défi que constitue le développement d’un logiciel de qualité. La présence ou non des revues de code dans leur corpus de pratiques est à mon sens une preuve de cette inégalité.