Agile with a Little Bit of Lean


556976357_2062640bd7_oI’m probably one of the biggest fans of Agile.  Not because it’s one of the hottest things going on right now in the development community.  I’m big on Agile because I’ve seen what it can do for teams and organizations first hand.  Transformational would be an understatement.  Unfortunately there are plenty of shops out there not realizing the benefits that agile can bring.  They are practicing a faux pas version of it.  Let’s just call it ‘iterative’.  If you think you might be doing this type of Agile than this post is not for you.  This post is about the next level of Agile.

Those of us that have seen true Agile in practice will tell you that at the end of the day you’ll be left wanting more.  Clearly this practice can be applied to a larger audience.  Clearly every company should use Agile for everything!  Agile is more than the considerable uptick in productivity, quality and customer satisfaction!  To borrow from the extreme sports community:  Go big or go home!  I think I echo most of my colleagues when I say this.

I have news for us Agile advocates.  The business side of the house has been looking at Agile based methodologies much longer than we have.  I’ve known this for sometime, but I recently came across an article in Forbes where the author, Dan Woods, speaks about the marriage of Lean Manufacturing and Agile Development.  Agile is not Lean and Lean is not Agile.  Their approach to iterative improvement, removal of barriers and fail early- fail often approach is a best of breed. 

Woods makes an interesting statement at the end of his article:

In practice, Agile seems to be changing for the better by adopting Lean thinking in a large way. Rally says that its customers get to market 50% faster and are 25% more productive when they employ a hybrid of Lean and Agile development methods. Given the way that Agile fits in to the Lean framework, it wouldn't surprise me if before too long Agile is considered a branch of Lean practice tailored for the software industry.

I’ve written many times about the importance of business and technology coming together to create the best value.  This is by far the most common ground I’ve seen.  I agree with Wood, I look forward to the child of these two methodologies.

Teach Teams to Win AND Fail


picard-facepalmI’m going to tell you a story about how I almost failed as a manager.  I say almost because it was only because of Bob Smith that I recovered and really understood the error of my ways.    Bob is a factious character because the innocent should be protected.  However, the situation is real and the lesson is a good one that I would like to pass on. 

One of my first experiences managing development teams was an incredible opportunity. I was young, enthusiastic and motivated.  I inherited a team of folks with great capabilities but a relaxed attitude towards owning issues.  I’m positive we were not the first shop to experience this!  During the first few weeks of taking over this team I hired Bob as a replacement for a team member who left just before I took over.  Bob was my first hire.  Bob is an incredible technician.  He knows code, architecture and the urgency of our craft.    

I think I’m preaching to the choir when I say that inevitably there will be an issue in IT.  I, as a young manager, experienced this within two weeks of Bob coming on board.  I remember it clearly.  The guy Bob replaced left a code base and an architecture platform that, well, let’s just say was suboptimal.  I called everyone into a room and said this is the ‘hottest’ issue.  Let’s dedicate all our resources to getting this solved.  I got a lot of blank stares.  Bob however, was the guy on the beat.  Within five minutes he knew what to do, how to solve it and what needed to happen.  I was in love.

We were a young shop and there were about two more ‘major’ issues that came up within the next six weeks.  Each time I leaned on Bob.  He was my go-to guy to fix the issues that the team couldn’t address, with his help we  satisfied the customers and pleased the execs.  Then came the dreaded lunch!  Bob and I went out to lunch and he let me know that he was thinking about leaving the company.  Imagine my face at this point.  Bob was my get it done guy.  However, it was exactly why Bob wanted to go.

Bob had other ambitions.  None of them having to do with fire fighting others misfortunes.  Bob was a team player, but in his words (Bob doesn’t speak the best English so this is the best translation)  he said “I’m always willing help out, but you need to help others know how to win”.  Prolific need I say more!

What I learned from Bob is that teams need to learn how to fail as much as they need to learn how to succeed.  Winning feels good, I think that anyone that’s been a part of a winning team can sense what a winning team ‘feels’ like.  You just know.  Failure is the same.  You just know when something doesn’t feel right.  Winning and losing is intrinsic in our psyche. 

Failure is painful but inevitable in our business, just as much as success is.  The problem is that most people, as a team, don’t know what it’s like to manage through ‘failures’. It’s not natural.   We naturally separate into individuals when we sense failure.  The whole ‘It’s someone else's problem’ is a common reaction.  Arguably it’s a healthy reaction designed to help us cope.  However, in our business, the business of providing technology, it’s a toxic attitude because we can only solve problems as a team. 

Bob taught me that when a crisis occurs hold the team accountable.  The easy way out is always rely on Bob to fix the situation. Bob is not the long-term fix.  The team needs to know what pulling yourself from failure ‘feels’ like just as much as they understand what success ‘feels’ like.  Just like people know what ‘winning’ and ‘failure’ feels like, your team needs to understand what pulling success from the jaws of defeat feels like so they can repeat the behavior each time something goes wrong.  It's like muscle memory!

Can You Go From Zero to Hero by using SaaS?


saasI was reading through some updates on a few social networking sites.  When I came across a link posted by one of my friends, Josh Minton,  who posted an article by Aaron Levie, the CEO and co-founder of Box.net.  The article titled How the IT department co go from zeros to heroes.  The article jumps around a bit but the essence of the article is this.  The cloud represents an opportunity for users to use whatever technology they want because, when given the choice, they will utilize technology that will ultimately make them more productive.  IT just needs to get out of the way. 

I think it’s expected that Aaron Levie would make a claim that the cloud is 100% good and if you’re not moving that way you and your customers are missing out.  Don’t get me wrong.  I think the cloud is great and a real opportunity for companies to leverage great software that would either be too expensive, difficult to manage or don’ have the expertise to create themselves.

However, there are three key problems that I have with the way Levie justifies opening up the purchasing and management of software purchases to business unit owners.  The first is that resources, I’m referring to money here, is a finite resource.  Purchasing and managing software is a process and a skill that takes time to learn and master.  Your IT department should have enough experience in this area to make sure that you are getting the best value for your dollar.  Believe me, in the world of Enterprise software everything is negotiable and you need to have knowledge of all the levers you can pull to negotiate the best deal. 

Secondly, Levie cites some Forrester research that finds this type of purchasing is already prevalent:

"Especially in firms where IT is seen as plodding and cumbersome to work with, the new price points and preprovisioning of SaaS and cloud will foster renegade buying by the business."

If you find yourself in this position I would simply start by addressing why your IT organization is viewed by your business partners in this way.  Something is clearly broken and needs to be addressed.

The last issue that I have with this thinking is that IT is in a unique position to see how the enterprise operates end to end.  Many business units work in isolation.  Sales doesn’t always fully understand or appreciate what information the accounting department needs to do their job effectively.  My experience has been that everyone always looks for a software solution to fix any gaps that a good old communications plan can fix for free.  Allowing each department to independently choose a solution without consideration of the larger enterprise needs will do nothing but perpetuate the inevitable ‘brokenness’ and siloed cultures that you see in some organizations. 

SCRUM in Under 10 Minutes

 

This is one of the best SCRUM overviews I've seen in some time.  Just thought I would share.

Video originally posted by: Axosoft.com