Scrum Master Series: Team Maturity

There is no doubt that a scrum master’s role is seen as a leader.  A leader should also be prepared to adjust their leadership style to provide what the group may be missing.  This would compliment the team.  Other times the team might be best served by capitalizing on their strengths and instead augment them.  Yes, there may also be times when the team is so empowered that for a short while they may be almost invisible; sharing the leadership with others. A scrum master might consider being lenient with some processes in the cases where the team is showing respect for the agile principals.

A Scrum master will grow a team.  Keep the team and the organization continuously improving.  The ability to identify where a team is in its maturity will help.  To be clear, a team’s maturity has little to do with the time spent together and is more about the characteristics of the team.  How do they interact?  How well do they tackle some fairly thought-intensive work?

Bruce Tuckman described 5 phases to team formation.  All these phases required common tasks or goals for the team to align with. While the product owner’s abilities lay in the analysis of unfolding information; the scrum master’s job is to facilitate the team’s transition through towards becoming more mature, shaping the interaction.

Forming:

Here the scrum master is a trainer.  This group of individuals may be seeking acceptance and may feel relatively uninformed.  Being more directive while members of the team seek acceptance and start orienting themselves.

Storming:

Still as a trainer, the team may be expressing some dissatisfaction as they test limits and boundaries.  Many different ideas are competing as they form acceptable leadership behaviors.  How the team deals with conflict will stop them or help them move onward.  Does the team focus on minutia or avoid real issues?  How is time spent?

Norming

Now as a coach, the scrum master is helping the team integrate with one another. The team has a goal and a mutually derived plan.  Some of the team members may have to acknowledge and help champion an idea that was someone else’s or perhaps even contrary to their own. All done towards achieving the group goal.

Performing

Now as a Mentor, the scrum master is seeing the team produce.  The team has a rhythm and perhaps even a swagger as they operate smoothly and are able to problem solve effectively without much conflict.  There is a high trust among the team members.

Adjournment

Things with beginnings also have an end.  Having closure, ending, celebration, recognition and reflection are all part of this cycle.  If the team delivered, celebrate and recognize the team for the win!  Not every ending is ideal however.  Say that a team has worked 6 months to deliver a product, has a sustainable pace AND met their deadline but the product is never put to market by the company.  There is no closure to the goals that have been the vision of the team for so long.  Motivation will certainly be affected.  It might take a while to get going again.  So too the loss of a team member… even one lost to promotion.  Keep visibility and an openness as teams deliver or maybe even wind down projects, deprecate portfolios, and assign applications to obsolescence.

Being an eternal peacemaker within the team might even inhibit a team advancing from norming to performing.  The largest caveat here is that the journey is not always a linear one.  The team can revert or be thrown into ANY of the stages for a time.  Maybe a new member has been added, or a particular stressor has the team acting differently.

Another way to look at a team’s maturity is to gauge the capability and characteristics.  Every team has it’s own unique identity, and watching an agile team work is  organizational behavior.

12 Criteria for measuring the maturity of a team

  • Feedback Mechanisms (poor -> excellent)  Does the team adapt? How long does it take to adjust?  Does it revert to a defensive posture when questioned or is it more reflective and thoughtfull? Does the team possess and agile mindset where they exhibit iterative, time-boxed and incremental improvement?
  • Decision Making Methods (dysfunctional -> functional)  This is bad when a head is locked up in a little view or single perspective.
  • Group Loyalty / Cohesion (low -> high)
  • Processes and Tools (inflexible ->very flexible)
  • Use of Member resources (poor -> excellent) Does the team exhibit swarming behavior? Is everyone efficient and effective?  Are we challenged and utilized?
  • Communications (unclear -> clear)  Does the team talk? Can I hear them? Does the team participate and help inform the organization? Are they visible with information radiators that are up to date and aligned?
  • Goals (unclear -> clear) The Product Owner will answer what is next, while the team will be able to explain their vision, how we will get there, and how we will know if we are there yet.
  • Problem-Solving Ability (simple -> complex)  Does the team stall out when presented with a challenge or do they forge ahead?  Are the solutions brittle or robust?
  • Participation in Leadership (low -> high) Is the team engaging, challenging and growing the organization around them.  Great teams have and influence others and benefit those around them.  What about outside the organization and in the community?
  • Acceptance of minority views (low -> high) are the quiet ones considered or even invited to speak?  Is is just one person’s opinion again and again? What about all the different perspectives that might use or even abuse this product?
  • Standards (low -> high) Is the quality of work high?  Are there defects or rework that make others avoid this team?  Is this team’s work readily accepted and meet a definition of done that sets a new level of expectation.

Just remember that where your team(s) might be,– is just the start of where they might go.

Advertisements

Scrum Master Series: The Team

Definitions and Back to Basics

Once in awhile I get to look back over some of the notes I put together on topics.    I think about organizations, teams and roles that we have.  Once in a while I have to lay the justification to an organization for one of the roles.  A scrum master included.  For a few people in the organization, as I take them through their valley of disbelief, I like to start very simply, and sometime include some history lessons along the way.  Dr. Winston Rice, the father of waterfall wasn’t all bad, but over time we learned to organize ourselves in even better ways.  New ideas in an organization that is pretty big and set in its ways is never easy, but I love watching the transformation.  I have the patience to see the changes and continue to grow and support the people who are experiencing it as well.

I had a developer say to me that they hated agile.  A very clear and aggressive message with an emotional anchor.  All pre-formed before I even got to know this individual or what his prior experiences were.  I love what I do, and it shows.

It’s not about you.

Organizations are dedicated to using teams.  This means what?   A team is a group of people… pretty basic.  But wait, there is more!

  • Holding themselves collectively accountable
  • For using complimentary skills
  • To achieve a common purpose

Scrum does not assume a minimal skill set.  There is also an assumption that the work is complex enough to warrant a team. Ralph Douglas Stacey who spent a career analyzing organizational relationships had a Matrix which might be adapted to agile as follows…Stacey Matrix

Scrum tends to play really well in breaking things up from chaos and pulling them down into the complex realm, and again pulling complex solutions down into the complicated.  Scrum for it’s simplicity cuts through the noise.  Kanban tends to work really well with simple or repetitive solutions we find ourselves performing again and again.solutions down into the complicated.

Why a team?

Well, it has the tendency to be good for people.

  • Improves our creativity
  • Can make better decisions
  • Can increase commitments to action
  • Help control their members
  • Helps offset large organization sizes
  • Types
    • Formal vs Informal
    • Temporary vs Long Term

In groups of a certain size we no longer feel lost amidst a very large organization.  Daniel Goleman who wrote Social Intelligence was curious about the maximum number of people to exhibit innovation in groups.  What he saw was natural pairing in groups of 2 then 4 and somewhere greater than 8 the groups tended to fracture and not be as cohesive.  Greater than 8 we don’t collaborate as well.  Seems right in line with what individual scrum teams are used to.

What can Teams Do?

It does seems obvious that we use them to develop software.  Our teams place an emphasis on making or doing things.  Team might also exist to recommend or just run things as well.   I get into teams more and more in the coming weeks as this is really where the scrum master matters most.  The team might be considered the scrum master’s product.

I will end with some immediate Dangers to a team.  Again this is always tricky with people who can have selective hearing. As a basis for evaluation in order to really make decisions with steps towards getting better, there are several terms which apply to groups becoming dysfunctional.

Dangers to a Team:

  • Social Loafing – complacency.  It is GREAT to have fun (There is an awful lots of stress and hard work)  but this points more to appropriateness within the context of accomplishment
  • Group think – the team actually loses its ability to think critically and is making decision from a defensive posture within the organizational hierarchy.
  • Social Facilitation – behaviors that start to become acceptable in front of others.  Teasing and hazing are such examples.
  • Personality Conflicts
    • Antagonizing relationships
    • jeopardize team accomplishments
  • Disruptive Behavior
    • Interrupts the group’s processes
    • Limits the teams effectiveness
    • Impacts the team’s cohesiveness

I have never called out an individual as being an impediment, as I tend to distinguish and separate behavior from a person.  There are certainly some behaviors I don’t care for and wont be helpful to a team.  One of the ways to focus on the good part of being within a team is to call out your working agreements.  Together as a team establish some guiding principles of your own.  There are quite a few examples and it has the tendency to put everyone on the same foot forward as they will come together against some tough thought problems.