The effective "Daily"

If you feel that your "Dailies" are an ineffective energy-drainer, it may have to do with the way you run them. Here's what I do.

First things first, I don't like Scrum's "Three Questions" much, because in my opinion, they still invite over-emphasizing the work of the individual. So here's the focus I would like to set:

Focus on the goal

It's quite important, and this is where many teams already take a wrong turn, to have a proper, clear, SMART goal for the week (or Sprint). And that goal should be elaborated along the lines of "What is different for our organization at the end of the interval?", rather than "Do X amount of work".

The secret lies in measuring our progress against such a meaningful goal, because it allows us to focus on our relative position towards where we want to be. That becomes the measure of our "Inspect and Adapt".

Keep the goal in view

Even in a Remote setting, I have adopted a habit of writing down the goal and make it the center of attention in the Daily. When people join the Daily, I make sure that everyone takes a look at our goal. This primes the mindset. 

Let's orient ourselves!

Once we have a goal, all of our discussions should center around the goal: 

1. Is the goal still valid? 
2. Are we getting closer to our goal?
3. Is anything stopping us from reaching our goal?
4. What's our next step towards the goal?

Avoid: Antipatterns

I have attended too many Dailies which focused either on the work items or on the contribution of individuals. These meetings usually go like this:

Avoid: Individual reporting

Person A says, "Yesterday, I wrote 5 mails and attended 3 meetings. Today, I will meet with ..."

Person B picks up, does the same.

Rinse & repeat until meeting over. 

 

When the meeting is over, we know everyone is doing something.

Unfortunately, we have no idea whether we're moving in circles, standing still, or even going in the wrong direction.

People are distracted from the goal, because they have to think about what they will say so that everyone knows they're busy.

Avoid: Status tracking

Scrum Master picks a look at work item A, asks, "Who is working on this?"

Someone says, "Me, still working on it" or "It's done" or the Scrum Master asks, "Who can do it?" 

Scrum Master looks at work item B and does the same as with A.

Rinse & repeat until meeting over. 

 

When the meeting is over, we know everything "in progress" is being worked on. Maybe we also make sure everyone is working on something.

Unfortunately, again, we only know that we're working, not whether we're going to reach the goal.

Bring Value

Many times, it's not clear who gets what value out of a Daily event.
The most important thing to realize: This event isn't "for the Scrum Master", or "for the company". It is for the team, and as such, for the attendees.

Law of two feet

"If any participant feels they are neither receiving nor contributing value, they should leave the meeting." 

This could have the consequence that everyone is walking away from the Daily: that should trigger a conversation on whether you're bringing up the right and important stuff!

Personal ownership

The flip side of the coin on value is: As attendee, you must be the one who is responsible for maximizing the value of your own contribution so that people won't use the Law of Two Feet on you.

Stop talking about things that don't help the team inspect and adapt their progress towards the goal, and limit your contribution to the minimal required input and questions which are relevant to remain and get back on track.

Stop asking Why!

 The quest for reason and understanding, for change and improvement, always starts by figuring out the "Why". And now I'm suggesting to "stop asking Why?" - Why? [pun intended!]

The problems with "Why" questions

Let me start with an illustration. 

Jenny and Ahmad struggle with major issue in an untested segment of Legacy code. Ray, our coach, joins the conversation by asking, "Why are there no tests available?" - "Because", Jenny snaps, "the guy who coded this didn't write any." How was Ray helping? His question wasn't helping, it heated the mood further - and it didn't generate any new insight.

So was it even worth asking? No. It was the wrong question.

And like this, many times, when we ask "Why", we're not doing that which we intend to achieve: generate insight into reasons and root causes. 

A second problem with "Why" questions is that all parties engaged in the conversation must be interested in exploring. When people are under duress, they are interested in solutions, but not long winded discussions. Hence, they may disengage from the conversation and claim you're "wasting time".

Why that's a problem

There are numerous other problems with "Why" questions that you may have encountered yourself, so I'll list them here as types of "Problematic Why" questions:

Why?	Example	Problem
Nosy	Why did you just put that document there?	When you dig into matters that others feel is none of your business, you will get deflection, not closer to the root.
Suggestive	Why don't you put the document in the Archive folder?	You're implying the solution, and the answer will usually be "Okay" - you're not exploring!
Inquisitive	Why did you put the document into the Archive folder?	It puts people on trial, and the response is often justification rather than inspection.
Accusatory	Why didn't you put the document in the Archive folder?	This immediately poisons the conversation, provoking a "fight or flight" response. Any sentence starting with, "Why didn't you..." is easy to interpret as personal attack.
Condescending	Why can't you just put that document into the Archive folder?	When your question hints at perceived superiority, you're not going anywhere with exploration - it becomes personal!
Commanding	Why isn't the document in the Archive folder yet?	Just like a parent asking, "Why are you not in bed yet?", this isn't an invitation to a conversation - the only socially acceptable response is: "I'm on it".
Rhethorical	Why don't we go grab a coffee?	The expected answer is "Yes".
Distracting	Why do you want to store your document?	Although this question could be interesting, it's taking the conversation on a tangent. I can un-proudly claim to have torpedoed an entire workshop with such a misaimed "Why" question.

While there may indeed be legitimate reasons to use these types of "Why" questions, please remember: If you want to explore and generate insight, these aren't the questions you may want to ask.

Why that doesn't help

"Why" questions become stronger and stronger as means of making people uncomfortable and less open to actual exploration as they contain, in descending order:

1. "You"
2. modals ("do", "can", "should", "must" etc.) 
3. negations ("don't", "can't" ...)
4. Past tense ("did")
5. Judgmental terms ("even", "bad")
6. Temporal adverbs ("yet", "still", "already")

And here is a full double bingo: "Why haven't you even pondered yet that your questions could be the problem?" - How happy does that make you to start a conversation with me on the topic?

 

With the above list in mind, when you begin analyzing the conversations around you, you may indeed start to feel that "Why" questions are often more reason for people to avoid exploring further than to generate valuable insights.

Why Blanks are also bad

Someone just made a statement, and all you're asking is, "Why?" - one word. What could go wrong? How could that be a problem? It can be.

Imagine you're in the middle of a conversation. Jenny says, "We didn't write enough tests." The insight is there. Now you just intercede with a probing "Why?" - and although you never said it, you have just accused Jenny of not writing enough tests, against better knowledge: her mind will auto-complete your one word question into, "Why didn't you write enough tests?"

What to ask instead?

Try re-framing "Why" questions, as to keep out of the solution space and to make people interested in actually having an exploratory conversation. The easiest way to do this is very often to avoid the term "Why" altogether.

When we take the table above, all of the "Why" questions could be replaced with an open conversation during the Retrospective, such as: "I sometimes have a hard time finding ourt documentation. What could we do about it?"

Almost all "Why" questions can be replaced with a "What" or "How" question that serves the same purpose, without being loaded in any direction. 

For example, the question "Why do we have this project?" sounds like, "I think this project is pointless!" whereas, "What is the intended outcome of this project?" assumes "There is a good reason for this project, and I may not understand it."

Likewise, the question "Why didn't we find those defects during testing?" sounds like, "Our testing sucks!", whereas, "How do those defects get into production?" assumes that "I don't know where the root cause is, and we have to locate it."

Summary

Take a look at when you use "Why" questions. Ponder when you didn't get the clarification that you intended. A truly open "Why" question can be re-framed as a "What", "Where" or "How" question that achieves the same purpose.

Experiment with alternative ways of framing questions that avoid pressing hot buttons, such as implied blame or command. 

In doing so, stick only to the facts which have been established already and do not add any extra assumptions or suggestions.

Be slow on "Why": Avoid the "Why" question until you have pondered at least one alternative that doesn't rely on a "Why".