RE: Re: Do C-Level managers, and business drivers really need to know about XP?

Hi Ron,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ron Jeffries [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Monday, February 10, 2003 8:29 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [xpAdoption] Re: Do C-Level managers, and 
> business drivers
> really need to know about XP?
> 
> 
> > I started by putting up a list of opportunities and asking 
> people to sign
> > up for work. I did it in "unattended mode" and came back to 
> find a lot of
> > blank stares and nothing signed up for...so I then went 
> back to the more
> > old fashioned way of finding someone who is available, then 
> discussing
> > the project with them. I made it very clear that it was 
> their decision to
> > accept or decline the work, but nobody ever declined.
> 
> If all the necessary work for the next short period is on the 
> board, what
> would happen if you called a meeting and said: "There's all 
> the work we
> have to do. Any questions about any of it?" and then answered 
> questions.
> 
> Then, with questions answered, what would happen if you asked them to
> estimate how much time each thing would require? Observe 
> quietly who seems
> to know about the various areas.
> 
> Then, with estimates made, what if you said said "OK, please 
> everyone sign
> up for these things, picking whatever you want to work on, 
> until everything
> is signed up for", and then just waited?
> 
> If no one moves, what would happen if you asked "OK, who is capable of
> working on this one", with that hand raising gesture that 
> means you want to
> see hands? When a couple of hands go up, what would happen if you said
> "John? Dave? Would it make sense for one of you to take this one?"

In the long version of the story, that is what I tried, eventually.  The "unattended approach" was my first attempt, based on an experience at a previous company.  During the iteration planning and task selection process, I had found that the team members were really reluctant to sign up for anything, and that discussions started going round and round and round.  So I said "I'm going to step out of the room.  Go ahead and sign up for the tasks, and once you have all of this week's velocity accounted for, we're all done."  This worked really well there, and I foolishly assumed it would work for everyone.  In the case above, it was after walking everyone through the estimation and sign up that I was asked to please just assign the work.


> 
> > My approaches to recieving and inviting questions: I have used the
> > Management By Walking Around(MBWA), until it seemed to some 
> folks that I
> > was hovering, so I backed off. In other companies that was the most
> > successful form. I would never ask "how is project x" or 
> even "how are
> > you doing?". I always started with some sort of 
> conversation not about
> > work. It was received very well, and when someone had 
> something about
> > work they wanted to discuss, they new I was there to offer them the
> > opportunity to bring it up.
> 
> I think it's OK to ask how things are going. It may be better to have
> tangible ways of knowing, such as Big Visible How Are Things 
> Going Charts.
> 
I am absolutely in favor of the BVC.  My boss, however, thinks it clutters up the office.  He is also very opposed to too much noise...

> > We are in cubeville, so we don't have to
> > worry about closed doors or anything. I would prefer open space, but
> > there isn't much acceptance to that idea here. I offer help 
> either on a
> > "stop by any time" or by visiting. Some folks are more 
> comfortable with
> > email.
> 
> Yes. I am, in fact. I think I do better the less I rely on it.
> 
> Sometimes folks do need privacy to talk about things.
> 
> > My definition of success was that they enjoyed what they 
> were doing, did
> > it the best they could, and grew in the process. Before I 
> got here, it
> > was drilled into their heads that success was defined by 
> the number of
> > billable hours they worked. The bonus structure was based 
> on how much
> > overtime they worked.
> 
> I might add delivering some software, tested, predictably to 
> my definition
> of success ...
> 
> > In essence, I came into the organization planning on 
> migrating it to XP.
> > The resistance I received was from the programmers, not the 
> c-levels. I
> > tried allowing the team to self organize, until they asked 
> me to please
> > just tell them what to do. Obviously, while I thought I was being
> > empowering, I was being percieved as abdicating. One guy 
> went as far as
> > saying "stop trying to sell us on XP. Just tell us that's 
> how we have to
> > do things, and what the penalties are for not doing them that way."
> 
> Kill him as an example to the others. Then say: "When I say I 
> want you to
> be empowered, you WILL be empowered. Any questions?" ;->

It would probably be even more useful to put his head on a stake outside the cube farm as a tangible warning for others!
> 
> > Therein lies my dilemna. How do you strike the right balance? Is it
> > entirely determined by the team? They want high command and control,
> > because that is their current comfort zone. I am not particularly
> > comfortable running a development shop like a military 
> department. Should
> > I have rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty?
> 
> As Dale suggests, balance probably isn't the right word. I'd 
> suggest that
> it isn't dynamic enough. People do need to be clear on what 
> it takes for
> them to succeed.
> 
> I myself come across as more commanding than I really am, so 
> I can't get
> much closer than the above to your situation. I'll babble anyway, of
> course.
> 
It is always helpful babble.  If nothing else, it reminds me of the "XP Way".  Now how to gently lead the team back to the light side.

> Ron Jeffries
> www.XProgramming.com
> Don't confuse more exact with better.  -- Brian Marick
> 
> 
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
> ---------------------~-->
> Get 128 Bit SSL Encryption!
> http://us.click.yahoo.com/LIgTpC/vN2EAA/xGHJAA/nhFolB/TM
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> -------~->
> 
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> [email protected]
> 
>  
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to 
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
> 
> 
> 

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Get 128 Bit SSL Encryption!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/LIgTpC/vN2EAA/xGHJAA/nhFolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]

 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/