Zeros to Heroes in 3 Months - When Capability is Your Product

A story of a real non-IT team overcoming despair by applying the Scrum Framework to their operations.

Transcript

1. Zeros to Heroes in Just Three Months: When Capability is Your Product Anthony W. Montgomery AGILIA 2016
2. Exercise #1 1.  Take 30-seconds. 2.  Discuss with your neighbor. 3.  If you could have only one (1) superhero power what would it be and why? 4.  Go!
3. Meet the Team A story of a real team evolving… …from hatred to admiration... …from despair to joy!
4. AGILIA 2016 Introduction Speaker, Learning Objectives, and Outcomes
5. AGILIA 2016 Anthony W. Montgomery, CEO Ed.D. (ABD) in Leadership, M.B.A., B.S. – Finance CSP, CSM, CSPO, PMP, PMI-ACP credentials @SocialAgilist anthony.w.montgomery@gmail.com www.linkedin.com/in/anthonywmontgomery As I have been at the edge of mainstream Scrum by taking it into business teams, I’d like to dedicate this presentation to diversity of all kinds. I appreciate the opportunity to share my ideas and perspectives.
6. Learning Objectives q  Raise awareness of Scrum from a people interaction perspective. q  Raise awareness of the value of social interactions within teams. q  Knowledge of actual results when a team’s output is a service.
7. Learning Outcomes q  Ability to better recognize social interactions within teams. q  Ability to conceptually apply Scrum concepts to real service-based teams. q  Ability to summarize the benefits of normalizing social interactions in teams.
8. §  Introduction §  Background for Key Idea §  Key Idea §  Actual Business Team Results §  Closing Agenda
9. AGILIA 2016 Background Very Basic Scrum, Uncertainty, and Traditional Thinking
10. Very Basic Scrum ROLES CEREMONIES ARTIFACTS = + PEOPLE + INTERACTIONS = OUTPUT PRODUCT or SERVICE
11. Low High Low High Uncertainty Complexity Operations Improv Traditional Project Management Agile Methodologies Certainty vs. Uncertainty
12. Low High Low High Uncertainty Complexity Certainty vs. Uncertainty
13. Low High Low High Uncertainty Complexity Where are interactions?
14. Thinking Scrum Tool for Uncertainty = Traditional Thinking Scrum Tool for Uncertainty & Interactions = NEW Thinking
15. AGILIA 2016 Key Idea Key Idea, Message, and Benefits
16. Photo by Glamhag - Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike License https://www.flickr.com/photos/79031953@N00 Created with Haiku Deck Key Idea Scrum is a social tool that reshapes interactions It’s not just for uncertainty
17. Photo by Shrieking Tree - Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike License https://www.flickr.com/photos/46473296@N02 Created with Haiku Deck Key Message §  Scrum improves interactions §  ALL teams have interactions §  Scrum improves ALL teams
18. Photo by Eric Caballero - Creative Commons Attribution License https://www.flickr.com/photos/62677469@N00 Created with Haiku Deck The social nature of Scrum provides: §  Business Results (e.g. productivity, efficiency, customer responsiveness) §  Team Results (e.g. enhanced processes) §  Individual Results (e.g. commitment) Economic Benefits
19. Social Intervention Impact 19 +1.25 -1.25 +.75 -.75 +.25 -.25 Standardized Performance Average Abilities Only (-) Social Intervention & Average Abilities (+) Expertise Only (-) Social Intervention & Expertise (+) Adapted from Wolley, Gerbasi, Chabris, Kosslyn, & Hackman (2008) via Hackman (2011)
20. AGILIA 2016 Business Team Background, Situation, and Goals
21. •  Combined from merger with 7 members (6 + 1 manager) •  Different computer systems and work styles •  Unique, specialized skills •  Although merged, silos remained •  Not a cohesive team •  Lack of cross-training •  Very entrenched with an average tenure of 13.5 years Team Background
22. •  One-year of struggles after merger •  Unmet SLAs (2X worse than required) •  Sizeable backlog of incomplete activities •  Strained relationships with the Sales Department •  Overtime of 20-hours per member per month •  Desperate manager Current Situation
23. •  Elevate productivity •  Raise accountability •  Enhance communication •  Create transparency •  Encourage cohesion •  Provide the best capability possible to the sales team Manager Goals MANAGEMENT SPEAK
24. •  Working agreement •  Personnel pairings (one from Team A & one from Team B) •  Weekly sprints with 30-min max sprint planning sessions •  Physical Scrum board •  Daily 15-min stand-up (9:15 AM) •  Daily 15-min review (3:00 PM) •  Weekly 30-min max retrospectives Scrum Adoption Strong Ceremony Focus:
25. Exercise #2 1.  Take 30-seconds. 2.  Discuss with your neighbor. 3.  If you could have only one (1) Scrum ceremony in a team, what would it be and why? 4.  Go!
26. AGILIA 2016 Results Quantitative, Qualitative, and Summary
27. Exercise #3 1.  Take 30-seconds. 2.  Discuss with your neighbor. 3.  What do you think happened with the team and why? 4.  Go!
28. •  89% increase in productivity •  71% decrease in processing time •  45% reduction in average overtime hours worked •  Exceeded SLAs •  Eliminated backlogs •  Maintaining workload levels Quantitative
29. •  Developed more efficient procedures •  Gained efficiencies through cross-training •  Enhanced communication •  Improved transparency of daily operations •  Improved team morale •  Lowered team stress Qualitative
30. Goal: More Efficiency Productivity (Impact) OT Hours (Cost) Case Study Efficiency Shift Before Figure 5. Adapted from: Fig. 1, E and σ of Various Portfolios. Kroll, Y., Levy, H., & Markowitz, H. M. (2012) •  Greater productivity (Processing) for less cost (OT Hours) 30 89% 44% After
31. Increased Productivity •  Activities per month for the team 31 - 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 July 2012 August 2012 September 2012 October 2012 November 2012 December 2012 January 2013 February 2013* March 2013 April 2013 May 2013 June 2013 Figure 6. Changed Only How The Team Interacted With Each Other Average after Scrum = 2,784 activities Average before Scrum = 1,474 activities
32. Improved Service Levels •  Average days required to administer contracts •  Exceeding service level 32 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 July 2012 August 2012 September 2012 October 2012 November 2012 December 2012 January 2013 February 2013* March 2013 April 2013 May 2013 June 2013 Figure 7. Changed Only How The Team Interacted With Each Other Average before Scrum = 4.14 days Average after Scrum = 1.20 days
33. Reduced OT Hours •  Average monthly OT hours per work team member •  Less cost incurred with fewer hours 33 0 5 10 15 20 25 Jul 2012 Aug 2012 Sep 2012 Oct 2012 Nov 2012 Dec 2012 Jan 2013 Feb 2013 Mar 2013 Apr 2013 May 2013 Jun 2013 Figure 8. Changed Only How The Team Interacted With Each Other Average before Scrum = 11.25 hours per employee per month. Average after Scrum = 6.25 hours per employee per month.
34. •  More work accomplished •  SLAs exceeded •  Less overall cost •  Improved team factors of: Results Summary Accountability Cross-Training Cohesion Morale Collaboration Transparency Communication
35. AGILIA 2016 Closing
36. Hear the Team Team Comments: •  ‘Scrum transformed our way of thinking in a positive manner.’ •  ‘Agile helps us meet our objectives and be more productive.’ •  ‘This process helps us work better together.’ •  ‘It works!’
37. §  Scrum improves interactions §  ALL teams have interactions §  Scrum improves ALL teams §  Scrum is a social tool for ALL types of teams. §  Business Results (e.g. productivity, efficiency, customer responsiveness) §  Team Results (e.g. enhanced processes) §  Individual Results (e.g. commitment)
38. AGILIA 2016 Questions? Comments? Thank you for attending!
39. •  Bulkin, D., Montgomery A., (2015) Building Righter Stuff with Agile & HDD; August 13, 2015; Unpublished conference presentation for the Nashville Tech Council, Nashville, TN. •  Kroll, Y., Levy, H., & Markowitz, H. M. (2012). Mean‐Variance versus Direct Utility Maximization. The Journal of Finance, 39(1), 47-61. •  Montgomery, A. (2013). Understanding How Non-IT Scrum Helps Raise Productivity, Boost Profits: An IAD Perspective. Unpublished conference presentation at the 2013 Global Scrum Gathering, Paris, France. •  Montgomery, A., Bulkin, D. (2014). Team Based Business Process Re-engineering with Scrum. Unpublished presentation at the 2014 Global Scrum Gathering, Berlin, Germany. •  Hackman, J. R. (2011). Collaborative intelligence: Using teams to solve hard problems. Berrett-Koehler Publishers. References