10 Signs your Management is Hurting your Teams

Sometimes, we're dealing with bad management. And sometimes, we're dealing with management that's actually good, but may look bad. How can you decide whether your management is helping or hurting your team? With that, let's take a look at "10 Signs your Management is Hurting your Teams."

Lack of Accountability

Great managers lead by example in owning up a situation and focus everyone on constructive ways forward. They "stop the buck" and change the discussion from fault to solution. But some managers see every problem as caused by their teams, and regardless of what happens - they will always find a way to frame things so that failure is never their problem. Those who never see how their own behaviour contributed to a situation will make their teams risk-averse and reduce the desire to be innovative. A boss taking credit for wins and exposing their subordinates for failures will eventually find themselves surrounded only by people who can't find better alternatives.

Intransparency

One of the core challenges of management is to filter information: Teams need to focus on doing their work, they don't have time to sit in meetings or read emails all day. Good managers do what they can to minimize the mental load of their teams while still letting them know what's going on. However, many managers do it wrong - they keep team members in the dark about important decisions and information that will affect their ability to succeed. Such a lack of transparency leads to uncertainty and speculation, and ultimately, failure. And teams who are content with not understanding how to make a difference - won't.

Poor communication

Good managers always provide clear expectations, updates, and feedback to their teams. Lack of clarity regarding any of these, "doing the best we can" may not equal "doing what we should be doing," which in turn leads to poor outcomes - and frustration on both ends. While it's arguable whether it's worse to provide vague, or potentially even mutually conflicting, information to the teams or no information at all, managers are always multiplicators of performance - and with bad communication, they can singlehandedly devastate an entire organization!

Unrealistic Expectations

It's great to let people know that you trust them to achieve great things. But a manager who sets the bar too high without providing the necessary support and resources pushes their own people over the cliff. Simply expecting the impossible sets up teams to fail. Repeatedly doing this can lead team members to burnout and drives them to the job portals.

Siding Against the Team

When complaints come in, whether from customers or other departments, a good manager would always first try to learn what has happened, and listen to both sides of the story. Even when the going gets tough, they would be their teams' heat shield, ensuring people can constructively focus on improving the situation. Bad managers choose to take sides against their team, even before understanding what has happened. When the very person who is supposed to lead the team to success is constantly sending the signal that the team is not good enough, people will first choose to collect CYA evidence, and eventually seek someone else to work for. Team cohesion and the organization's ability to deliver erode.

Favoritism

Good managers look at the value of outcomes. Great results should be attributed to everyone who contributed, and ideas should be evaluated based on their merit. Great managers count on the Pygmalion Effect - letting their people know they can do great things will drive them to exellence! Favoritism can tear a team apart. When a manager shows a visible preference for some individuals, this breeds resentment and jealousy. Those who aren’t the favorites feel sidelined and unappreciated, can quickly lead to a Golem effect - marginalizing people will make them underperformers!

Micromanagement

Great teams are in control of their work. With an understanding of what's expected, they will find out how to solve problems, and deliver outstanding results. Bad managers, however, often fail to articulate what they expect and are unable to connect operational challenges with their (unspoken) expectations. Instead, they check into the small details and turn molehills into mountains. They want to know who is doing what when instead of asking how things are going. This kills creativity and morale. Especially those employees who know full well what needs to be done will find themselves so appalled by the constant checks and controls that they'll prefer to put their remaining energy into finding their next career move.

Ignoring Feedback

Feedback is a gift for those who know how to appreciate it. It's sometimes just a small thing that enable a manager to help their teams do much better. Great managers are not only actively asking for feedback - they're picking up cues and hunches and turn them into action. Terrible managers ignore feedback even when it is actively provided - the worst kind even finding ways to dismiss the outcomes of explicitly institutionalized feedback processes. In doing so, they implicitly tell their teams that nothing will change and that getting a better working environment is easier achieved by job hopping than by talking. Those whom such a manager is left with will eventually have learned not to care when things go wrong.

Unsupportiveness

Great managers aren't great by their own ability - they're great because they have great teams behind them, composed of great people doing great things. But greatness isn't something static. It evolves over time, and is always measured relative to the challenges. Hence, great managers continuously invest into the professional growth of their teams. They actively provide opportunities for training and career advancement to give their teams the necessary edge. Poor managers use the talent they have, and squeeze their people dry like a lemon. When people are falling behind, they get discarded like useless chaff. Individuals who have seen this pattern before will have learned to jump ship while there's time.

Lack of Appreciation

Recognition serves as a catalyst for growth - so great managers will take the opportunity to give credit where it's due, and celebrate noteworthy successes. Without acknowledgement of a job well done, our psyche will eventually come to believe that "it doesn't matter." The worst of managers not only fail to appreciate the hard work and great outcomes of their teams - they will always look for the fly in the ointment and jump upon every inadequacy. Like that, they can drive even the most talented individuals into despair and burnout - or to a competitor.

Closing remarks

We all make mistakes. And managers are as human as anyone else. The occasional glitch is normal, and we shouldn't think too much or too hard about it.

But when any of the points above are a habitual pattern of an individual, or worse: a cultural pattern of the organization - we should have a serious conversation: Does the company want to get the best possible performance from their teams, or are they willing to pay the dividend of poor performance in order to keep counterproductive management behaviours?

Oftentimes, it's ignorance, and then we can work on it. Smart businesses will address the issue and increase their ability to persist on the market. But not all businesses are smart.

If that's the case - draw your own conclusions.

10 Signs You're Facing an Agile Fanatic

As "Agile" popularity rose in recent years, so did fanaticism — a rigid adherence to a fixed set of ideas that doesn't embrace the spirit behind them. In this post, we'll delve into ten signs that may indicate a person's journey into Agile has taken a detour into fanaticism. From dogmatism to denialism, we'll unravel the subtle but impactful shifts that can hinder the true essence of Agile and its intended goal: delivering value to customers.
So here we go -

Denialism

Denying the existence of bad Agile practices "because I've never seen that" hints at a lack of awareness and narrow-mindedness.

See also: "Argument from Ignorance."

Tunnel Vision

Rejecting ideas from anyone who isn't a recognized Agile Thought Leader indicates a narrow perspective and a filter that severely restricts opportunities to grow.

See also: "Ad Hominem Fallacy."

Guru Idolatry

A line of reasoning that depends on quotes from Agile gurus, using the name of the gurus as the primary evidence, may not have a point to begin with.

See also: "Argument from Authority."

Manifesto Memorization

Reciting the Agile Manifesto from memory without flexibility in its application reveals an unhelpful focus on form over function.

See also: "Formal Fallacy."

Dogma Defense

When the first reflex is to reject ideas conflicting with "Agile," without entertaining their possible validity, opportunities for improvement are lost.

See also: "Personal Incredulity."

Framework Fundamentalism

Insistence that a "proper" use of an Agile framework is necessary - shows a misunderstanding on the core Agile concept of adaptivity.

See also: "False Dilemma."

"Not Real Agile"

Labeling deviations from a personal interpretation as not "real" Agile betrays unconstructive dogmatism that doesn't encourage finding better ways of working.

See also: "No true Scotsman."

Purity Over Delivery

Prioritizing the "correct" application of "Agile" practices and methods above the delivery of valuable products to customers necessitates reevaluating one's focus.

See also: "Slippery Slope."

Blaming

Immediately responding to challenges or failure by blaming others for incorrectly following Agile practices destroys trust and the opportunity to address the deeper issues.

See also: "Attribution Error."

Elitist Tribalism

Those who separate the world into the categories "Agilists," "Those who can be converted," and "The irredeemable rest," not treating the latter as equals - are dangerous company.

See also: "Othering."

Conclusion

Always remember that Agile is ultimately about suceeding and helping others succeed. Flexibility, collaboration, and continuous improvement lay the foundation for this success. Embrace the principles, resist the notion of dogmatically following ideas or practices. This paves the way for a more resilient, innovative, and ultimately successful Agile journey.

If you spot signs of fanaticism in yourself, reconsider your position. If you spot some signs in those around you - address them. And if someone gets a full Bingo on the list above - do yourself a favor and steer clear.

10 signs your Scrum Master doesn't understand Scrum

As an enterprise Coach, I meet a lot of Scrum teams. Despite its widespread adoption Scrum is rarely done well. Many Scrum Masters, the pivotal role responsible for fostering a high-performing team, aren't even prepared to grasp the essence of their job. Being an advocate for continuous improvement and a firm believer in the power of sarcasm to make a point, I'm not here to cast blame or ridicule anyone, but to tigger a discussion. I genuinely believe that most Scrum Masters who find themselves in these situations came there unwittingly, and want to do better. But they may lack the right understanding or guidance to see what's wrong. So - here goes my Top 10 list of common pitfalls and misconceptions how a Scrum Master could get in their own way of fostering an environment of growth, learning, and continuous improvement:

10 Signs that Your Scrum Master Doesn't Understand Scrum

Customer Focus? Maybe Later - For Now, Let's Get Scrum Straight!

A Scrum Master who prioritizes "getting Scrum straight" over customer focus misunderstands the core value of delivering value to the customer. Scrum emphasizes customer collaboration and responding to their changing needs, ensuring that the team builds products that meet their expectations and bring maximum value.

Team Dynamics? We Had a Team Building Workshop at the Kick-off, So We're Good.

Believing that a one-time team building workshop is sufficient for effective team dynamics disregards the continuous effort needed for building and maintaining a high-performing team. In Scrum, fostering a collaborative and self-organizing team is an ongoing process, requiring consistent support and attention from the Scrum Master.

Transparency and Openness? Nah - Nothing Beats a Great Hidden Agenda!

A Scrum Master who drives a hidden agenda undermines the essence of Scrum's core foundation of trust. Transparency allows for honest visibility into the team's progress, challenges, and achievements, fostering trust among stakeholders. Hidden agendas defer problems caused by misalignment into the future, at which point they may have grown significantly.

Facilitation? Servant Leadership? No, They Need Someone Who Gives Them Clear Direction!

While there are reasons for being directive, that should be a last resort. Facilitating collaborative discussions and informed decisions improves understanding, and thereby reduces risk. By taking a directive stance as a default, the Scrum Master introduces themselves as a dependency into the team and hampers their growth and collaboration.

Focus on the Sprint Goal Now - We'll Talk About Impediments in the Retro!

Let's be clear - it's not an impediment unless it significantly impacts the team's ability to deliver value. What would you think about a car mechanic who told you, "Just ignore your flat tire, go to work and come back, you can always fix the tire later." Most likely, you won't be going anywhere with a flat tire - and even if you will, the price, cost and duration required to fix a broken hub will exceed the cost of the flat tire by orders of magnitude. While this could be necessary for survival, it should be an informed Product Owner choice, and definitely not a default strategy.

You Want Time for Learning? Just Look at All That Unfinished Work in the Product Backlog!

The Product Backlog is infinite, as it gets replenished in line with demand. A team deferring necessary learning in favor of Velocity loses their edge, and will eventually lose both. Learning isn't a luxury that competes with unfinished work, it keeps the effectiveness of the team up, and trades a bit of time in the short term for improvements to quality, scope and risk in the long term.

Releasable Product Increment? Once a Quarter - otherwise, it's Too Much Overhead.

Delaying the delivery of a releasable product increment contradicts Scrum's principle of delivering value with minimal delay. Even in settings where releases are scheduled at a low frequency, a failure to keep the Product in a releaseable condition introduces risk into the process: as long as our product isn't in a releasable state, we neither know how much work it is to bring it into this state - nor whether we will have the capacity to do so when we need to.

We Wouldn't Need Feedback if you Just Learn to Write Better User Stories!

Creating a false dichotomy between writing user stories and collecting feedback is a thorough misunderstanding of Scrum's empirical approach. User stories only inform us what we believe a priori about what users need, whereas feedback validates that we did indeed solve their problem. Just think of the last time you went to a restaurant and didn't like the meal: Would you have liked the waiter to blame you for not correctly specifying what you like?

That's the Standard Process. You Can't Change It Just Because It's Stupid.

Scrum is a vehicle for enabling the team to find the process that allows them to perform at their optimum. A broken or ineffective process leads this ad absurdum. Scrum encourages continuous inspection and adaptation to optimize processes and outcomes, fostering a culture of continuous improvement and innovation.

Definition of Done? Yeah, we have one ... somewhere ... Let me find it.

The DoD is one of Scrum's core commitments, as it defines how the team is committing to work. Lacking transparency, clarity or commitment to the Definition of Done is a common source of poor quality and conflict. A good, transparent Definition of Done builds shared understanding both within the team and with stakeholders.

Conclusion

Having a well-informed and capable Scrum Master is essential for a successful Scrum team. I have deliberately phrased the above signs with some sarcasm and hyperbole. In practice, they're often much more subtle. Recognizing them enables you to take proactive steps to improve the effectiveness of the collaboration between Scrum Master, team and stakeholders.

If you spot any of these signs in your team, maybe ... try raising it in the next Retrospective?

Let's Scrum better!

10 signs that your Transformation has failed before it started

"Agile transformation" is a popular buzzword these days, and the promises improved efficiency, better collaboration, and increased customer satisfaction are too hard for any enterprise to ignore. However, the transformation journey is not without its pitfalls. Let's take a tongue-in-cheeck snipe at some of the common causes of transformation failure.

You Know That Your Agile Transformation Has Failed Before It Started, If you...

Brought in consultants to prescribe the details of what everyone must do, when and how.

An Agile transformation doesn't come with a one-size-fits-all approach. When consultants define roles and processes without considering the unique challenges and context, we'll get a "square peg, round hole" solution. Successful transformations rely on collaboratively progressing on the Agile journey, letting teams experiment and adapt based on their own understanding and experience with a continuous interplay of opportunity, ideas, execution and feedback.

Spend more time documenting the Future Mode than experimenting or talking to people.

Agile transformation is about establising a habit of growth and learning based on iteration and continuous improvement. An overreliance on assumption-driven documentation without enough actual interactions and experiments achieves the opposite.

Already know the perfect solution, before having made a single change.

Agility is only required because we have to deal with uncertainty. An agile approach needs to acknowledge that perfect solutions rarely exist. Assuming that a "perfect" solution can be found without experimentation, learning or adaptivity will lead to missed opportunities for improvement and won't make the future organizational system any more flexible.

Can show the future on a slide deck, but not in a team.

Agile transformation is built on "individuals and interactions," not on a top-down declaration by some smart folks who know it all. A vision that exists only on a slide deck without any backing of teams who can tell "war stories from the trenches" doesn't instill much trust.

Have defined the correct process that everyone just needs to follow.

Rigidly following predefined processes is what got us into the mess that agility tries to address by fostering adaptability and flexibility. Imposing a "correct" process without degrees of freedom undermines autonomy and the opportunity to take advantage of domain specific benefits, leading to decreased motivation and ultimately, failure to realize any significant improvement potential.

Declare a mandatory universal "Agile Standard" for all teams.

Each team and organization has its own unique challenges, needs and potential. A one-size-fits-all Agile standard that disregards context stops teams from effectively practicing Continuous Improvement. Successful agile organizations treat the diversity of teams as an advantage.

Consider teams deciding their own ways of working to be a problem.

Empowering teams to self-organize and make decisions that impact their work is the means by which organizations reduce risk of failure and coordination overhead. Treating team autonomy as a liability annuls this advantage.

Apply so much rigor that Team Retrospectives don't let people change, experiment, or learn to do it better.

If the rigor and formality tells team members that their ideas aren't welcome, they'll quickly stop highlighting opportunities for improvement. When teams can't figure out how to improve in their context, "Agile" will merely become a new status quo without any sustainable benefits.

Believe that "people are doing it wrong," without giving them any leeway to do it better.

Agile transformations often involve a shift in thinking and culture, not just the mechanics of Agile practices. Blaming individuals without understanding the systemic barriers causes demotivation and resistance. A successful transformation acknowledges that there is no single "one right" approach, and focuses on enabling teams to find what works best - for them.

Your Coaches can recite the doctrine by heart, but don't understand the psychology of change.

Coaches play a crucial role in guiding teams on their transformation journey. Reciting Agile frameworks, values or principles without understanding the human aspect of change and the psychology of team dynamics alienates people and deprives them of the meaningful support and guidance they require. Successful coaches empathize with teams, create a safe space for learning, and tailor their approach to the needs of the individuals and teams they work with.

Closing remarks

Although this list might be slightly humorous, it highlights some serious pitfalls that can seriously derail transformations. Understanding these reasons for failure will help you become more successful on your Agile Journey. Being agile, fostering collaboration, and living agile values and principles is as essential for the teams doing the work as it is for the change towards Agility itself.