Scrum vs. Kanban vs. ADKAR vs. Kotter: Which Is Best for You?

Transcription

1 Scrum vs. Kanban vs. ADKAR vs. Kotter: Which Is Best for You? Which path is best for your organization? Using the Change Approach Characterization Model Presented by Mishkin Berteig Global Scrum Gathering Dublin 2017

2 Change is Hard Discussion with your neighbour: why is change hard?

3 Confirmation Bias Proponents of a change approach are subject to confirmation bias... Is Scrum universal?

4 Unified Theory of Change Truthfulness is the foundation of change Love is the strongest driver of change This talk focuses on one aspect of truthfulness: selfknowledge (culture).

5 Change Approach Characterization Model The : Many different change management approaches Some seem anti-agile We want to have integrity through our culture, methods, processes, including our change management approach It would also be nice if we could somehow pick an change approach that is most likely to work for our situation NOTE: I am assuming you know Scrum and Kanban.

6

7

8

9 Change Approach Characterization Model The Solution: Identify the aspects (factors, dimensions) that help us distinguish between change approaches Characterize each change approach based on these aspects Use the aspects heuristically to describe an organization s needs/desires for change Match the organization to a change approach

10

11 Building the Model Urgency Urgency Hazy Future Strategic Tactical Immanent Immediate Urgency of Change This aspect describes the stakeholders perception of the level of need for change, considering time to change. Urgency is always relative to the stakeholders normal planning time scale. Hazy Future: orders of magnitude beyond the normal planning time scale Strategic: at most one order of magnitude beyond the normal planning time scale Tactical: close to the normal planning time scale Immanent: as much as one order of magnitude shorter than the normal planning scale Immediate: more than one order of magnitude shorter than the normal planning scale

12

13 Building the Model Impact Urgency Impact Hazy Future Existential Strategic Systemic Tactical Ramified Immanent Localized Immediate Minute Impact of Change How broadly does the change affect the recipient of the change (the organization)? Existential: the change creates the organization from nothing OR failure to change utterly destroys the organization Systemic: the change deeply affects all aspects of the organization to its furthest boundaries Ramified: the change deeply affects one significant part of the organization, and has consequential ramifications throughout the rest of the organization Localized: the change only affects one significant part of the organization Minute: the change affects only a very small part of the organization

14

15 Building the Model Goal Level Urgency Impact Change Goal Level Hazy Future Existential Vision Strategic Systemic Tactical Ramified SMART Goal Immanent Localized Solution Immediate Minute Planned Change Goal Level The level at which the outcome or goal of the change is defined. Vision: a very-high-level description of the subject of our change effort. : a high-level description of a problem to be solved, with very few defined success parameters. SMART Goal: a clear description of a Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Results-oriented, Timebound outcome. Solution: a detailed description of our desired outcome is defined includes metrics, role definitions, technology choices, ideal working procedures, etc. Planned: a detailed set of tasks is defined that leads us reliably to our desired outcome.

16

17 Building the Model Control Urgency Impact Change Goal Level Control Hazy Future Existential Vision Invitation Strategic Systemic Facilitation Tactical Ramified SMART Goal Coaching Immanent Localized Solution Consulting Immediate Minute Planned Directing Control of Change Those who see the need for change approach others in the organization using different levels of control and/or authority. Invitation: stakeholders/participants in the change are only ever invited to engage, and are welcome to dis-engage at any time. Facilitation: a group is told to engage, but the group judges its own progress and results. Coaching: individuals are told to engage, but each individual judges his or her own progress. Consulting: advice is provided to individuals and groups including progress assessment, but that advice has no authority over the stakeholders/participants in the change. Directing: one or more individuals have authority over the stakeholders/participants in the change and control activities and outcomes.

18

19 Building the Model Scale Urgency Impact Change Goal Level Control Scale of Change Hazy Future Existential Vision Invitation Individual Strategic Systemic Facilitation Team Tactical Ramified SMART Goal Coaching Community Immanent Localized Solution Consulting Enterprise Immediate Minute Planned Directing Industry Scale of Change The recipient of change is an organism or organization with a size based on the number of levels of autonomous agents. Individual: one level, a single autonomous agent Team: two levels, maximum ten to twelve individuals Community: three levels, maximum twelve to twenty teams (also known as a department or line of business or service delivery value stream) Enterprise: four levels, many communities Industry: five or more levels, many enterprises

20

21 Building the Model Feedback Urgency Impact Change Goal Level Control Scale of Change Rate of Feedback Hazy Future Existential Vision Invitation Individual None Strategic Systemic Facilitation Team Stages Tactical Ramified SMART Goal Coaching Community Iterative Immanent Localized Solution Consulting Enterprise Evolutionary Immediate Minute Planned Directing Industry Continuous Rate of Feedback The frequency at which feedback is received before the change is considered done and finished. None: change is implemented directly with no feedback mechanism. Stages: a moderate and fixed number of defined milestones are used to track the change effort. Iterative: change is implemented with frequent feedback milestones of unknown number, spaced equally through time. Evolutionary: feedback occurs based on either internal desire for feedback or on-demand from the environment in which change is occurring. Continuous: feedback is a flow of information between the environment and core of the change with no distinct feedback control mechanisms.

22

23 Building the Model Type Urgency Impact Change Goal Level Control Scale of Change Rate of Feedback Type Hazy Future Existential Vision Invitation Individual None Simple Strategic Systemic Facilitation Team Stages Complicated Tactical Ramified SMART Goal Coaching Community Iterative Complex Immanent Localized Solution Consulting Enterprise Evolutionary Chaotic Immediate Minute Planned Directing Industry Continuous Unknown Type The underlying problem that the change is trying to solve can be characterized by the cynefin categories with an additional unknown category. Simple: the solution to a problem that requires change is obvious and definable. Complicated: the problem can be systematically reduced to many small problems. Complex: the change problem requires hindsight and cannot be reduced to small problems. Chaotic: the change problem may have unclear cause and effect relationships and any kind of analysis will be insufficient. Unknown: the change problem is clearly not-simple, but it is currently unknown if it is complicated, complex or chaotic.

24

25 Building the Model Catalyzing Agent Urgency Impact Change Goal Level Control Scale of Change Rate of Feedback Type Catalyzing Agent Hazy Future Existential Vision Invitation Individual None Simple System Structure Strategic Systemic Facilitation Team Stages Complicated System Behaviour Tactical Ramified SMART Goal Coaching Community Iterative Complex System Interface Immanent Localized Solution Consulting Enterprise Evolutionary Chaotic Human Behaviour Immediate Minute Planned Directing Industry Continuous Unknown Human Thought Catalyzing Agent Where does change start? This is the most philosophical of the aspects in that it represents the implicit belief system of the change approach about where to start change. System Structure: start change by changing the structure of the system in which people work. System Behaviour: change the processes, procedures and policies of the system. System Interface: change the way that people interact with the system. Human Behaviour: change the skills, techniques and activities of the people in the system. Human Thought: change the beliefs, thinking habits and motivations of the people in the system.

26 Building the Model The Whole Thing <Change Model> Urgency Impact Change Goal Level Control Scale of Change Rate of Feedback Type Catalyzing Agent Hazy Future Existential Vision Invitation Individual None Simple System Structure Strategic Systemic Facilitation Team Stages Complicated System Behaviour Tactical Ramified SMART Goal Coaching Community Iterative Complex System Interface Immanent Localized Solution Consulting Enterprise Evolutionary Chaotic Human Behaviour Immediate Minute Planned Directing Industry Continuous Unknown Human Thought Using the Model Each column represents an aspect (or factor or dimension) of change that can be thought of as independent of the other aspects and which can be measured on a continuum. The boxes under each column are qualitative descriptions of some of the distinguishable values of each aspect s continuum. A particular change model can be characterized by identifying the distinguishable values of each aspect that describe how the change model operates.

27 Some Examples I m interested in collaborating with anyone who is an expert in any change approach to help make these characterizations more accurate and more useful! Examples we will look at: ADKAR, Kotter, Positive Deviance, Appreciative Inquiry, Scrum, and Kanban

28 Hypothetically... My Change Approach Urgency Impact Change Goal Level Control Scale of Change Rate of Feedback Type Catalyzing Agent Hazy Future Existential Vision Invitation Individual None Simple System Structure Strategic Systemic Facilitation Team Stages Complicated System Behaviour Tactical Ramified SMART Goal Coaching Community Iterative Complex System Interface Immanent Localized Solution Consulting Enterprise Evolutionary Chaotic Human Behaviour Immediate Minute Planned Directing Industry Continuous Unknown Human Thought This represents a hypothetical (non-existent) change approach that only deals with hazy future existential impact visionary goals by invitation to change for individuals with no feedback on solving simple problems by changing the system s structure.

29 Using the Model ADKAR ADKAR Urgency Impact Change Goal Level Control Scale of Change Rate of Feedback Type Catalyzing Agent Hazy Future Existential Vision Invitation Individual None Simple System Structure Strategic Systemic Facilitation Team Stages Complicated System Behaviour Tactical Ramified SMART Goal Coaching Community Iterative Complex System Interface Immanent Localized Solution Consulting Enterprise Evolutionary Chaotic Human Behaviour Immediate Minute Planned Directing Industry Continuous Unknown Human Thought This characterization is based on the Prosci summary article about ADKAR: and feedback from Jerry Doucett a Prosci ADKAR certified consultant.

30 Using the Model Kotter Kotter s 8-Step Model Urgency Impact Change Goal Level Control Scale of Change Rate of Feedback Type Catalyzing Agent Hazy Future Existential Vision Invitation Individual None Simple System Structure Strategic Systemic Facilitation Team Stages Complicated System Behaviour Tactical Ramified SMART Goal Coaching Community Iterative Complex System Interface Immanent Localized Solution Consulting Enterprise Evolutionary Chaotic Human Behaviour Immediate Minute Planned Directing Industry Continuous Unknown Human Thought This characterization is based on the information provided at: and in the book Leading Change by John Kotter.

31 Using the Model SAFe Implementation SAFe Implementation Urgency Impact Change Goal Level Control Scale of Change Rate of Feedback Type Catalyzing Agent Hazy Future Existential Vision Invitation Individual None Simple System Structure Strategic Systemic Facilitation Team Stages Complicated System Behaviour Tactical Ramified SMART Goal Coaching Community Iterative Complex System Interface Immanent Localized Solution Consulting Enterprise Evolutionary Chaotic Human Behaviour Immediate Minute Planned Directing Industry Continuous Unknown Human Thought This characterization is based on the information provided at: and and expertise and experience from Mishkin Berteig (SPC).

32 Using the Model Positive Deviance Positive Deviance Urgency Impact Change Goal Level Control Scale of Change Rate of Feedback Type Catalyzing Agent Hazy Future Existential Vision Invitation Individual None Simple System Structure Strategic Systemic Facilitation Team Stages Complicated System Behaviour Tactical Ramified SMART Goal Coaching Community Iterative Complex System Interface Immanent Localized Solution Consulting Enterprise Evolutionary Chaotic Human Behaviour Immediate Minute Planned Directing Industry Continuous Unknown Human Thought This characterization is based on the book The Power of Positive Deviance by Jerry Sternin, Monique Sternin, and Ricardo Pascale.

33 Using the Model Appreciative Inquiry Appreciative Inquiry Urgency Impact Change Goal Level Control Scale of Change Rate of Feedback Type Catalyzing Agent Hazy Future Existential Vision Invitation Individual None Simple System Structure Strategic Systemic Facilitation Team Stages Complicated System Behaviour Tactical Ramified SMART Goal Coaching Community Iterative Complex System Interface Immanent Localized Solution Consulting Enterprise Evolutionary Chaotic Human Behaviour Immediate Minute Planned Directing Industry Continuous Unknown Human Thought This characterization is based on the wikipedia article about Appreciative Inquiry which is currently (Jan 2017) in a poor state of editing:

34 Using the Model Kanban Kanban Urgency Impact Change Goal Level Control Scale of Change Rate of Feedback Type Catalyzing Agent Hazy Future Existential Vision Invitation Individual None Simple System Structure Strategic Systemic Facilitation Team Stages Complicated System Behaviour Tactical Ramified SMART Goal Coaching Community Iterative Complex System Interface Immanent Localized Solution Consulting Enterprise Evolutionary Chaotic Human Behaviour Immediate Minute Planned Directing Industry Continuous Unknown Human Thought This characterization is based on the book Essential Kanban by David Anderson and Andy Carmichael and the expertise of Travis Birch, Accredited Kanban Trainer.

35 Scrum as a Change Approach Stories about Scrum from Ken Schwaber: Ken as a ScrumMaster Ken and the CIO Expose problems

36 Using the Model Scrum Scrum Urgency Impact Change Goal Level Control Scale of Change Rate of Feedback Type Catalyzing Agent Hazy Future Existential Vision Invitation Individual None Simple System Structure Strategic Systemic Facilitation Team Stages Complicated System Behaviour Tactical Ramified SMART Goal Coaching Community Iterative Complex System Interface Immanent Localized Solution Consulting Enterprise Evolutionary Chaotic Human Behaviour Immediate Minute Planned Directing Industry Continuous Unknown Human Thought This characterization is based on the book The Scrum Guide found at and the expertise of Mishkin Berteig, Certified Scrum Trainer.

37

38 Kanban vs. Scrum vs. ADKAR vs. Kotter What change approach works for a given organization? Understand the organization The same aspects for describing a change approach can be used to describe an organization Find the best fit (this may be too simplistic... but it s a starting hypothesis). Make the choice of change approach transparent!

39 Scrum vs. Kanban Scrum Urgency Impact Change Goal Level Control Scale of Change Rate of Feedback Type Catalyzing Agent Hazy Future Existential Vision Invitation Individual None Simple System Structure Strategic Systemic Facilitation Team Stages Complicated System Behaviour Tactical Ramified SMART Goal Coaching Community Iterative Complex System Interface Immanent Localized Solution Consulting Enterprise Evolutionary Chaotic Human Behaviour Immediate Minute Planned Directing Industry Continuous Unknown Human Thought Urgency Impact Change Goal Level Control Scale of Change Rate of Feedback Type Catalyzing Agent Hazy Future Existential Vision Invitation Individual None Simple System Structure Strategic Systemic Facilitation Team Stages Complicated System Behaviour Tactical Ramified SMART Goal Coaching Community Iterative Complex System Interface Immanent Localized Solution Consulting Enterprise Evolutionary Chaotic Human Behaviour Immediate Minute Planned Directing Industry Continuous Unknown Human Thought Kanban

40 Agile Change Approaches Agile Change Models Urgency Impact Change Goal Level Control Scale of Change Rate of Feedback Type Catalyzing Agent Hazy Future Existential Vision Invitation Individual None Simple System Structure Strategic Systemic Facilitation Team Stages Complicated System Behaviour Tactical Ramified SMART Goal Coaching Community Iterative Complex System Interface Immanent Localized Solution Consulting Enterprise Evolutionary Chaotic Human Behaviour Immediate Minute Planned Directing Industry Continuous Unknown Human Thought This characterization is based on the Agile Manifesto: But... Starting non-agile and getting to Agile may require something a bit different! What about the existing organizational environment and needs?

41

42 Discussion Scrum vs. Kanban With your neighbour or in small groups, use the characterizations of Scrum and Kanban to examine which would work best for achieving real agility in your organization. (I will flip back to the comparison slide in a moment.)

43

44 Invitation to a Conversation As a Change Agent I want a way to systematically choose my change approach So that life is better for everyone! Join me in this conversation: mishkin.berteig@berteig.com

45 Invitation to a Conversation The characterization model needs work! It s a bit hard to understand The aspects aren t necessarily fully independent Characterizing the change approaches needs work! Detailed validation by experts At least some research to verify in-practice Understanding organizations with this model needs work! Lots of other organizational models (e.g. Laloux) Testing this model needs work! (This is the hard one!) Designing experiments Finding opportunities to do the experiements Collecting results Join me in this conversation: mishkin.berteig@berteig.com