How to Avoid Agile Transformation Pitfalls
Pitfall 1 - The main actors in the transformation aren’t aligned
Over the years, I have been part of many organizational transformations. Almost without exception, the goal was a worthy one. Some did succeed, but many of these transformation efforts failed, either entirely or at least to a large degree.
The reasons for failure were often the same. I listed the ten most painful pitfalls in this article. Understanding the possible pitfalls is step one. Then, you can start fixing the situation.
Today, I will discuss what helped me successfully avoid the pitfall of misalignment of the main actors of the transformation. Please note that I am not aiming to paraphrase the 8 steps of leading change by Kotter or other approaches. I like Kotter’s model a lot. You may recognize elements in this article. However, I want to share my personal experiences without the limitations of referring to any approach. I will put the spotlight on the practices I experienced that were particularly helpful for me. I will not provide a complete guide.
Ensure you all agree on the goal
I can vividly remember how the head of our department announced we would start working with a scaled Agile approach (not SAFe). The C-level of the company was convinced it would make sense for every team to work in the same way and this approach would establish that.
He had already hired consultants to implement the approach. What he forgot to check, however, was what others than himself thought of the idea. In the corridors, I heard many people complain. It didn’t matter what their position was. Developers, product people and even people from the management team: all dreaded the day they would have to work with the scaled approach.
As a result of this lack of enthusiasm, the passive resistance was massive. On the surface, it seemed people did the work to implement the approach. But in reality, they continued to work as they did and ignored the scaling approach as much as possible. After a few months, the head of the department decided to end the initiative.
I am lucky to have experienced many times what difference it makes when people do agree on the goal. The most successful example involved the first Agile transformation. It was a time when we were in big trouble. We worked on 50 simultaneous projects, but none of them were successfully completed. Our value creation capabilities were at an all-time low.
We all knew things had to change. We were ready for something new. The management team involved everyone in identifying the pain points and possible solutions. The conclusion of what we needed to do was obvious to all. This kickstarted a journey that turned the company around and changed many lives to the positive, including mine.
Ensure you all understand the scope
It’s one thing to be aligned on the goal, but another one to be on the same page of the scope. You want to have alignment on questions like:
What elements of the way of working will be subject to change and what elements will not be in scope?
What parts of the organization will be the target of the transformation and how should they be involved?
What is the impact on people outside of the target group and do you expect them to be involved in a way? These are some questions that come to mind.
I have seen how a transformation team hadn’t thought about discussing whether our Project Managers should also be included in the transformation. The person responsible for the communication thought they weren’t “in scope”. This meant the Project Managers weren’t receiving information about what happened that directly impacted their daily life. When, well into the transformation, they received a mail informing them their role would cease to exist (they could choose out of three different new roles), they were unpleasantly surprised, to say the least.
Ensure you all have the same idea about the concepts
It’s mind-boggling to me how people THINK they are on the same page but are actually talking about totally different things. For example, when people talk about Agile, one person may have in mind that it is all about learning quickly what brings value and what doesn’t. But they may be unaware that the other thinks it is about faster delivery.
I have seen the same misunderstandings with Scrum, DevOps, Value Streams, Product Owners, OKRs and many more. One may be right and the other may be wrong. But that is not the point here. They are not aligned on the concept, but they think they are. As a result, they both have different ideas of introducing a concept.
Suppose that the head of the transformation sees Agile as a way to learn fast, but the others in the team think it’s about fast delivery. If this misalignment isn’t recognized or resolved, this will sooner, or (most probably) later lead to major issues.
The fallacy of thinking you need to produce to make progress
A pattern I have observed often is how people wish to switch into execution mode immediately. I am a fan of Agile. I subscribe to the principle that “Working software is the primary measure of progress” (Agile Manifesto). But this doesn’t mean you should avoid seeking alignment. Actually, Agile is very much about alignment.
Having a conversation to be on the same page takes time. But it will also save you from spending needless effort based upon misunderstandings. There are many ways to have effective conversations. I’m a fan of Liberating Structures. You don’t need to create huge documents. But you need to be sure you’re all on the same page.
Psychological safety
Sadly, not every environment is safe enough to allow people to bring everything to the table. As an example, the head of the department may not want to hear anything but confirmation of what they believe is true.
I remember how a CTO said he wanted to introduce an “Agile” admin tool because according to his golf buddy, it would revolutionize our way of working. No one was enthusiastic about the tool. Some even had bad first-hand experiences. However, the CTO did not accept anything but enthusiasm for it. After 6 months, the CTO left the company. A day later the new tool was shelved for good.
Lack of psychological safety can be a reason for alignment issues. This needs to be addressed to have any chance of success. Otherwise, both the transformation and working in an Agile way are doomed to fail.
Let me know!
This concludes my first follow-up article on 10 Agile transformation pitfalls. Did you like it? Did you miss some elements? Would you like to see me dive into more detail? Let me know in the comments!
Love it. Often people rush towards action by implementing something by the book.forgetting that real life is different and that context beats everything. I would add that Alignment didn't mean that everyone must have the same goal and that's OK. Often there is a lot of different goals at an entity level at a team level or at a personal level. But it's important to have everyone aligned with one main goal while STILL MAKING VISIBLE how it's serving the other goals.