The agile organisation: applying visioning and learning models
In her session on the Agile Organisation, Jean Tabaka describes some of the models that have been used during her time with Rally. The honesty of this session was key. Jean described how models from a variety of sources had been tried, how they had been adapted, which had remained and which had been dropped.
I’ll try and capture some of the models Jean described and provide relevant references. I’ll also bring together some key “sound bites” in the hope that these provide insight into the mind set and values that underpin the application of these models.
Jean started out by focusing on some key principles:
Adults require reflection to learn
We will all learn more if we seek to “listen generously” and amplify positives
Behaviour is a function of people and the environment
Jean talked about two retrospective practices that had proved valuable; appreciations and break up letters. Making appreciation explicit is one aspect of retrospective practice that I have found difficult to introduce to teams in the UK. It seems that our dislike of emotion and our conservatism get in the way of speaking openly about how we affect one anothers work life. This national trait is even more noticeable, I find, in technology groups.
Jean’s recommendation was to use a protocol as follows while maintaining eye contact:
> [Name] I appreciate you for [something].
> Thankyou.
Time will tell if I am able to use this to any effect in the UK.
The idea of break up letters is fascinating. Jean described people writing elaborate letters to such things as e-mail, mobile devices and other systems. These provided a mechanism for exposing to other team members the trials and tribulations inherent in the authors day to day role.
A model I will certainly be applying going forward is ORID. I came across this some time ago but it slipped off my personal radar. Now I’ve had some deeper insight into how the model can provide a framework for reflection across an organisation I’ll be seeking to make it a part of my day to day practice.
The ORID model is deceptively simple:
Objective: what do we notice, what data do we have?
Reflective: what is out reaction to this data?
Interpretive: so what? Why do I react in that way?
Decisive: now what?
This is an instance of a broader pattern for dialogue. Often we begin with our interpretations and reflections, this can cause conflict due to a lack of agreement in what is being interpreted. [I've been reading about organisational defensive routines recently and in Chris Argyris's work this is discussed in terms of a ladder of inference, maybe I'll blog about this another day]
Jean described using ORID to provide a structure for a wide range of meetings, most notable (I felt) was it’s use in quarterly reviews. Each department would assess it’s quarter using ORID. Then the management team would hear ORIDs presented from each department to inform company direction and initiatives.
From Rockefeller Habits (see also Gazelles.com) Jean described “Rocks” as forming a key part of the way the organisation operates. Rocks are relatively short lived company initiatives that typically require cross functional involvement. The outcome of using ORID at the organisational level is likely to be an agreement to take on some Rocks for the next quarter.
Another influential source for Jean and Rally has been Jim Collins’s book Good to Great. I have been involved in using Jim’s hedgehog concept both organisationally and individually. This approach seeks to combine the subjects passion with what they can be the best at and what drives there economic engine. Other key considerations from Jim’s book are the BHAG concept, every organisation should have one of these, the BHAG is the Big Hairy Audacious Goal. and finally the principal of having the right people on the bus.
The idea of BHAG is similar in principle to the True North approach to organisational or departmental goals. True North may serve as a test for the value of taking on Rocks; “how does this relate to our true north”? Jean described using True North and Mother Strategies as a way to model long term strategic goals.
Finally Jean ran a Visioning exercise. This was of particular benefit to me since I’ve not been thinking big picture this year. The exercise was in 4 parts:
Guided by a set of questions establish a personal vision.
In pairs consider (without necessarily revealing) your vision and how attracted to it you really are.
Individually, again guided by questions, establish a personal vision for your company.
Review in pairs.
It appears to me that this approach can lead to a recognition of the influence we might have on our organisations direction and how we can align personal goals with organisational goals.
Jean described how pairing up to discuss a personal vision exposed similarity in values that influenced the developed company vision.
This whirlwind tour of models and lessons learnt was extremely valuable to me and I thank Jean for providing a bag load of inspiration for me to take home. I’m sure that the models discussed will be influencing the way I practice for some time.
Technorati Tags: agile2010, Models
