Workshop The OneABB Team Goes Agile

1. Workshop The OneABB Team Goes Agile The Tricks Used for Creating Awareness and Desire for Change and Actually Doing the Change Matthew Caine

2. AGILESome people call it amethod or an approachabove allIt is about PEOPLEand RESULTS

3. Assumptions • You are looking for real challenges of “Agile” • Expect some quick-win “take-aways” • You are not here to fine-tune your Standups

4. Who am I? • English • Come from near Liverpool / Manchester • I.T. background • Lived in Zurich since 1994 • Worked in London, NY, Berlin, Geneva and ZH • Discovered “Agile” in 2009 August 2011 Setup M.C. Partners & Associates September 2012Launched the Agile Academy

5. Community

6. OneABB’s Purpose:“An Awesome Website”www.abb.com

7. www.abb.com 2000 content editors 10 million views / month 80 country sites over 1 million urls

8. ABB’s website is a key customer connection Facebook and LinkedIn are the top sources of traffic after direct visits, search, and visits from the intranet

9. The Real Story • No transparency on status, people or activities • 50 people in four countries • 40 people in Krakow organized by skill • Culture of maintenance • “Hero culture” with Prima Donnas • Agile, but not really • Constant “firefighting” • Stuff was late, not as expected, poor quality

10. This Workshop is aboutthe changes above and beyond Agile skills.It is about some of the things wehad to docontinue to doand still need to doto give Agile a chance!

11. How the Workshop will Work • 9 topics… The first 5-6: • Examine the Scenario / Theory • You get 5 minutes at your table to discuss • I then chose 2 groups for feedback • We then look at what was actually done • At the end we’ll scan the remaining topics.

12. Better Transparency on Work Managing Prima Donnas Creating Awareness & Desire / Remote Teamwork Gold Plating = Quality Remote Team Perception Performance Reviews Looking for & Building Trust The GanttLieChart vs “Agile Planning”

13. Creating Awareness & Desire

14. Creating Awareness & Desire The Scenario It is May 2012. You are in a room with the key people from Krakow and Zurich. They know things have to improve. But don’t know where to start. Your Task Discuss how you would get them to: Share & agree on their pains Want to address the pains Agree on the most important changes?

15. Creating Awareness & Desire Step 1: Brainstorm to Visualise “Tensions”

16. Creating Awareness & Desire Step 2: Run a Normal Retrospectives Session

17. Creating Awareness & Desire Step 3: Which Tensions could be Resolved and Examine Left-overs 3b) Re-examine any left-overs 3a) Place “tensions” on top

18. Creating Awareness & Desire Step 4: Group & Name B C A D F E

19. Creating Awareness & Desire Step 5: Prioritise B C A D F E Each Team-member has 3 votes. Take 5 minutes to vote. Facilitator checks and summarizes the voting. Debate results.

20. Creating Awareness & Desire Step 6: Assign Owner B C A D F Don’t do low prio stuff! E As a peer-group they have identified their tensions, prioritized and assigned owners. By default they are aware and have the focus and desire to change.

21. Creating Awareness & Desire Project Methodology Improve PM ISDC GWH Improve Set up common rules for running a project Improve Interative: Get feedback more often, earlier Stop Classic BA process Start Have a board with projects and priorities visible to everyone. Well Doing the scope planning together Well Projects where we have a clear deliverables schedule Improve Prioritization and deadline setting Improve Be persistant with things we have started. Do not abandon things. Start Regular structured standups Stop Having every task a top priority Well Projects with weekly meetings to followup on overall status Improve Working on deadlines together Stop Making promises without consulting executing party Improve Planning and Prioritization Start Get the UX – BA – DEV process working Everything is a priority to everyone in GWM Maintenance burden of “old” vs developing new Well Structuring the Work (Basecamp)

22. Managing Prima Donnas

23. Managing Prima Donnas The Scenario Krakow has a number of Individuals that are “prima-donnas”… Your Task • Discuss and list your thoughts on : • The risks of prima-donnas to the teams, department & company. • How you could get the knowledge of the individual prima-donnas shared.

24. Managing Prima Donnas • Bottleneck for the teams • Difficult to plan • Create dependencies in a sprint • Burn out • Cause resentment • “Under a bus” syndrome • Like to keep know-how • Poor team members

25. Managing Prima Donnas Typical Solution Alternatively • Two or more teams share: • But still: • Bottleneck • Difficult to plan • Create dependencies in a sprint • Burn out • Cause resentment • “Under a bus” syndrome • Insecure– like to keep know-how • Poor team members • Make them free-agents • No longer responsible for deliverables • Now responsible for coaching & supporting team members who deliver 50% • Thus • Know-how transfer happens • Can support many people • Ego is not damaged ;-)

26. Better Transparency on Work

27. Better Transparency on Work The Scenario • Zurich has no idea who is working on what or why people are working on things. • Krakow does not understand the priorities, as they constantly change. • Krakow do not know what to work on or why it is suddenly “important”. Your Task List your thoughts on how to gain transparency on: Why work is important (Purpose)? What is coming (Future stuff)? Who is working now on what? It is important that both Krakow and Zurich see the same information.

28. Better Transparency on Work Step 1: Define Phases that Projects are “in” Based on DSDM: Pre-Project, Feasibility, Foundations, Exploration & Engineering A long 10m Wall will help!

29. Better Transparency on Work Step 2: Map Projects to the Phases and the Projects to Teams Teams can start to PULL work…

30. Better Transparency on Work Step 3: Assign People to Teams & Iterate (Action Gaps!)

31. Better Transparency on Work Step 4: Make it All Accessible to All (Zurich & Krakow) All the Time e.g. Google Drive Docs

32. Gold Plating = Quality /

33. Gold Plating = Quality / The Scenario • Krakow development speed is slowed due to: • Developers gold-plating • Poor quality • Yet developers want to work on the next latest sexiest work. Your Task • What do developers need to understand to: • reduce gold-plating • deliver quality • get developer working on the next sexy project?

34. Gold Plating = Quality / • Build the absolute minimum. • Don’t be tempted to do what is interesting. • Build it well. • Make it from simple stuff. • Frees developers from future maintenance. • Gives time to start the next sexiest job.

35. Remote Team Perception

36. The Scenario Remote Team Perception • There is miscommunication in the team split across Zurich & Krakow. • People are by-passed and feel unappreciated • Others have to much to do. Business Sponsor Business Visionary ProjectManager Technical Coordinator “Expert user” Your Task Team Leader Business Advisors Two groups will: Read their team descriptions Put names to the Roles(based on DSDM) – Flipchart Provided Reveal the results“Spot the Difference”. “End user” SolutionDevelopers Business Ambassadors Business Analysts SolutionTesters

37. Remote Team PerceptionSPOT THE DIFFERENCE

38. Zurich’s Perception Krakow’s Perception Remote Team Perception Mike Mike Business Sponsor Business Sponsor Nolan Piotr Casper Nolan ???? ???? Business Visionary ProjectManager Technical Coordinator Business Visionary ProjectManager Technical Coordinator ???? ???? Team Leader Team Leader Business Advisors Business Advisors Casper Casper ???? Lukas Casper Pawel Lukas Piotr Pawel SolutionDevelopers Business Ambassadors SolutionDevelopers Business Ambassadors Claire Anna Business Analysts SolutionTesters Business Analysts SolutionTesters Eloise Eloise SPOT THE DIFFERENCE

39. The GanttLieChart vs “Agile Planning”

40. The GanttLieChart vs “Agile Planning” The Scenario • Scrum & sprints are perfect for systems that are already live. • Zurich however, occasionally want to launch new products. • Sometimes for things that we don’t even know if they are possible. • DSDM is great for starting a new product… • Take an idea • Test options and feasibility • Set up a high-level plan and context (JEDUF) • Finally to launch into regular sprints / Timeboxes. Your Task What could the context be? What makes sense to agree before development starts, especially in large corporate IT environments?

41. “Agile Planning” • Business case, vision, assumptions • Options considered • Recommended option • Highlevel plan (ext deadlines) • Indictor of potential cost • Plan + cost to deliver “High level planning” • Key resources AT THIS POINT STILLNO DETAILED SPEC or DESIGN (JEDUF) Increment Increment Increment Idea! Options High Level Planning D J, A C I E H B F G Assess Benefits Deploy Deploy Deploy • Maintenance strategy • Testing strategy • Non-functional needs • Audit requirements • Regulatory needs • Hardware, software, middleware • PrioritisedHighlevel Requirements • Timebox Plans with MoSCoW’d requirements • Financial cost for entire plan. • Reporting • Resources • Delivery plan (training etc) • ROI, Business Case • Risks, assumptions • 1-Pager • Business driver • V. Highlevel Objectives • Request to invest $x in“Options” Decision Point(Go on, Stop) Prioritised Requirements A m B s C s D c E mF c G m H m I s J m Timebox Into production(Not necessarily switch-on) Deploy

42. Looking for & Building Trust

43. Looking for & Building Trust The Theory: The Five Dysfunctions of a Team (P. Lencioni, 2002) Status & Ego: Individuals put own or department’sneeds before that of the collective team’s goal. • Inattention toResults Low Standards: Don’t challenge peers whentheir actions appear counterproductive. • Avoidance ofAccountability • Lack ofCommitment Ambiguity: Rarely, if ever, buy-in andcommit but “pretend” to agree. Artificial Harmony: Incapable of unfiltered and passionate debate. • Fear ofConflict Invulnerable: Don’t admitmistakes and weaknesses. • Absence ofTrust

44. Looking for & Building Trust The Scenario • People in Zurich have started to distrust those in Krakow. • People in Krakow have started to distrust those in Zurich. • “Finger pointing” & blame has started. • There is an absence of trust! Your Task • Agile teams have perfect moments to admit mistakes and weaknesses. • When are they? • If team-members do trust each other, what do you hear when they talk?

45. Looking for & Building Trust • Sprint Planning • Standups • Review • Retrospective • Backlog Grooming • “I need help” • “I made a mistake” • “I found an issue, can we look together” • “Your work was great” • “This is taking longer than I thought” • “Sorry, my assumption was wrong” • “I am not familiar with this code, whocan help me?” • “You said you’d work on this…why have you not done so?”

46. Remote Teamwork

47. Remote Teamwork The Theory Top-Down Controls Increase Control from ZH Freedom in a Framework “Agile” is the framework Develop & Empower Them and Us! Bottom Up Krakow Autonomy

48. Remote Teamwork The Scenario Like 85% of teamwork, this team is remote (Zurich and Krakow). People think that only co-located teams can be Agile. Your Task • Discuss the reality that 85% of teams are not co-located. Then think about: • How far away do you have to be, to be “remote”? • Why is being Agile actually better for a remote team?

49. Remote Teamwork • In the next room • When you cannot hear a conversation

50. Remote Teamwork Community Decay Face-to-face event Face-to-face event Trust Motivation Them & Us Feeling starts Time