Here you can find out about …
agile leadership
- Communication
internally, with you and your thoughts;
externally, with colleagues in the team, stakeholders, … - Integration of agile sense and agile attitude
- Utilization of maximum potential, even in a non-agile environment
also
- What is agility all about?
- Why does the first attempt at agile working fail so often?
- What are the core aspects of agile compared to waterfall, for example?
Aspects of communication in agile leadership
Aspects of communication in agile leadership
Communication is the key to (almost) everything! You will certainly notice that problems in the company are caused by various types of misunderstandings
- too little information available to you -> you as the recipient of the information
- Too little clarity in your own thoughts -> You in communication with yourself
- too little clarity in your point of view-> you as a provider of information about your background and priorities
- Too different ideas of the parties involved -> You in communication with others
(For each of the points, the following drop-down text provides details)
Why did agility come into play, what did the founders recognize as a problem and how did they want to solve it?
In my view, agile methods are often introduced with the familiar mindset. This familiar mindset includes
In large projects with external companies, very large work packages were defined and documented with large specifications and requirements specifications. However, the underlying information was never complete. There were often change requests and legal disputes even before implementation. Mistrust arises here even before people meet and work together (which would then create trust). And this game was played throughout the entire project. One problem: time, costs and scope should be fully defined at the beginning. We have learned that this is an illusion (see a separate point on this below).
So what if we get to know each other first, create an initial product iteration in a first project phase or complete a PoC? Perhaps this will create trust that the skills are right and that we all want to achieve something good together.
Dailies ensure transparency, transparency ensures trust, retrospectives provide feedback.
Nailing down all the corners in this project triangle of time, scope and cost does not work. In a project, we do a lot of things for the first time. Even as experienced external implementers, every customer is different, every tool stack is different.
In addition, scope is a very flexible target. When projects run for months and years, the requirements change, as do the priorities with which the requirements are to be implemented. Sometimes the budget fluctuates over time because the economic success of the company is also not a constant.
Ergo: We determine the amount of money to be invested per time, roughly define the scope and plan in detail for the next three or so sprints. If the willingness to invest or the investment capacity per time changes, we deliver more slowly and plan and prioritize the features and functions accordingly.
a strongly controlling-centered result expectation (exact cost and fulfillment transparency in tables at all times
We know that “chains of command” are too long in our fast-moving times. We have also maneuvered ourselves into a problem. It is often said that “Meier has the authority to decide”. What we mean by this, however, is authority. And often people who are authorized to make decisions are no longer competent.
The consultation model is a promising alternative. Here, people with expertise are also authorized to make the relevant decisions. If the scope of this decision exceeds certain limits (budget, time, other use of resources), the person is obliged to consult people with expertise and involve them in the process of making their own decision.
We have become accustomed to stress. The word “pressure” keeps cropping up in our work. Illness and burnout are becoming more and more prevalent.
Yet we read “The Goal” by Eliyahu Goldratt and Jeff Cox and “The Appointment” by Tom de Marco a very long time ago. Ken Schwaber and others have shown us ways in which we can unleash people and make them work optimally. Instead, we continue to push and micromanage.
With the pull principle, each unit, each individual decides on the next task and organizes itself according to the current circumstances. This is healthier for the entire organization, because it is healthier for each individual and an organization is also an organism. It improves motivation and, above all, teamwork and genuine collaboration.