Team Thermometers in 45 mins

Transcript

1. armakuni.com
   Agile Scotland:
   Team Thermometers
   Billie Thompson & Tim Long
   @ArmakuniHQ & @PurpleBooth
   

   View Slide

2. What’s the real state of play?
   2
   Sometimes messages can get mixed as they get
   reported through a chain of people, and just like a
   watermelon, it can be green on the outside
   (management meeting), and red on the inside
   (the daily standup).
   In a business it’s a bit more serious than at
   breakfast. Without clear feedback loops it’s not
   possible to make effective change.
   We can help you make the intangible tangible,
   and measure not only features delivered, but
   culture and capabilities as well.
   Have you heard of Watermelon Reporting?
   

   View Slide

3. Understanding and
   measuring team health
   

   View Slide

4. Who we are
   Billie Thompson
   Senior Consulting Engineer
   Billie Thompson specialises in Cloud Native
   software development, DevOps and
   Day2Operations. With a background spanning
   multiple programming languages Billie is a true
   polyglot developer, comfortable architecting
   microservice application, building and supporting
   infrastructure platforms and coaching teams to
   adopt new technologies and practices.
   @PurpleBooth
   4
   Timothy Long
   Consulting Software Engineer
   Tim is a technically proficient software engineer
   with experience working in agile environments. He
   has a keen interest in trying out new ways of
   working as a team to improve productivity whilst
   maintaining sustainable pace. He is passionate
   about learning and engaging with others to achieve
   end goals with best practice techniques and the
   most effective technology.
   

   View Slide

5. The Armakuni Way
   Stop relying on anecdotes and start collecting data
   Technology
   Assessment
   What technology
   problems are holding
   you back
   Cultural Assessment
   Using scientific research
   learn your teams
   mindset
   Organisational
   Technical Strategy
   Now we know what the
   problem is, we help
   steward your technical
   asset
   Capability Uplift
   Give your teams
   additional capabilities
   Organisational
   Sheep Dip
   Allow the wider
   organisation insight
   Embedding a
   culture of
   change
   Empower your
   teams with by
   enabling
   experiments
   Baseline
   Metrics
   Metrics
   Prove Outcome
   

   View Slide

6. What we will take you through
   Content
   ● AWKSS
   ● Westrum
   ● 4 Key metrics (Accelerate)
   ● Lencioni’s 5 dysfunctions of a team
   

   View Slide

7. What are you hoping to learn?
   What do you want out of the session?
   ● Write it on a post it and stick it on the wall
   

   View Slide

8. AWKSS
   

   View Slide

9. Awareness
   Is this thing on my radar? Have I heard of it?
   Willing
   Given what I know about it right now, is it
   something that I am willing to try or use? Or
   am I disregarding it completely already?
   Knowledge
   Am I a novice, or an expert that people could
   approach for help?
   Skills
   Do I have the skills required to do this?
   Support
   Do I feel I have a support network to assist me
   with this? Will my team/organisation be open
   to me using this? If I required further training,
   would it be made available?
   

   View Slide

10. Before
    Awareness
    Willing
    Knowledge
    Skills
    Support
    1 2 3 4 5
    

    View Slide

11. After
    Awareness
    Willing
    Knowledge
    Skills
    Support
    1 2 3 4 5
    

    View Slide

12. Westrum Typology
    

    View Slide

13. 13
    Westrum Typology
    ● Created by Ron Westrum in 2004
    ● Categorises organisations in terms of how their culture affects safety and performance
    ● 3 categories in the Westrum model: Pathological, Bureaucratic and Generative
    ● Predicts how an organisation will react in a crisis
    

    View Slide

14. 14
    Westrum Typology
    Work out how your organisation will cope in a crisis
    Pathological
    (power-oriented)
    Bureaucratic
    (rule-oriented)
    Generative
    (performance-oriented)
    Low co-operation Modest co-operation High co-operation
    Messengers shot Messengers neglected Messengers trained
    Responsibilities shirked Narrow responsibilities Risks are shared
    Bridging discouraged Bridging tolerated Bridging encouraged
    Failure leads to scapegoating Failure leads to justice Failure leads to enquiry
    Novelty crushed Novelty leads to problems Novelty implemented
    1) Westrum, Ron. (2005). A Typology of Organisational Cultures. Quality & safety in health care. 13 Suppl 2. ii22-7. 10.1136/qhc.13.suppl_2.ii22.
    

    View Slide

15. 15
    Encapsulation
    Suppression Public Relations
    Local Fix
    Global fix
    Inquiry
    Suppression - Harming or stopping the person bringing the anomaly to light; “shooting the messenger”
    Encapsulation - Isolating the messenger, so that the message is not heard
    Public relations - Putting the message “in context” to minimise its impact
    Local fix - Responding to the presenting case, but ignoring the possibility of others elsewhere
    Global fix - An attempt to respond to the problem wherever it exists. Common in aviation
    Inquiry - Attempting to get to the “root causes” of the problem
    1) Westrum, Ron. (2005). A Typology of Organisational Cultures. Quality & safety in health care. 13 Suppl 2. ii22-7. 10.1136/qhc.13.suppl_2.ii22.
    Westrum Typology
    A Prediction of crisis response
    

    View Slide

16. Facilitator Notes
    Ask them to rate on a scale of 1 to 7:
    ● Information is actively sought.
    ● Responsibilities are shared.
    ● Cross-functional collaboration is encouraged or rewarded.
    ● Failure causes enquiry.
    ● New ideas are welcomed.
    ● Failures are treated primarily as opportunities to improve
    the system.
    Information classification: Internal
    16
    Using this for a team
    

    View Slide

17. Facilitator Notes
    Where 1 to 7 means:
    1.
    Strongly Disagree
    2.
    Disagree
    3.
    Somewhat Disagree
    4.
    Neither Agree nor Disagree
    5.
    Somewhat Agree
    6.
    Agree
    7.
    Strongly Agree
    Information classification: Internal
    17
    Using this for a team
    

    View Slide

18. Facilitator Notes
    This is primarily useful as a discussion point, and to set
    expectations of what people can achieve change wise.
    In order to move the needle on this Ron Westrum says we have
    to fire the boss. Now that’s not practical (for most of us).
    Thankfully some research from Nicole Forsgren says we can
    also become more generative by implementing DevOps
    practices.
    Information classification: Internal
    18
    What can I do with this result
    

    View Slide

19. Facilitator Notes
    With this you can predict how the people around this team will
    interact with your intervention with the team.
    ● Pathological cultures will try to shut you down
    ● Bureaucratic cultures will try to manage you
    ● Generative cultures will embrace you
    You will see these behaviours in the interactions with people
    that you see in the team.
    Information classification: Internal
    19
    Predicting responses
    

    View Slide

20. In Real Life: What happens
    when a build fails?
    

    View Slide

21. A Pathological Response
    Who broke the build?! An investigation is
    done to identify who caused the build to fail.
    When they have been identified they are
    instructed to fix it ASAP.
    An investigation is held to find out if any
    external teams or customers were affected
    by the failure. The developer at fault is told
    to write up how they caused the build to fail.
    The developer is told to be more careful, and
    is now required to get his work reviewed by
    two more senior developers before it can be
    released.
    

    View Slide

22. A Bureaucratic Response
    Who broke the build?! An investigation is
    done to identify who caused the build to fail.
    When they have been identified they are
    instructed to fix it ASAP.
    A more senior member of the team
    investigates the build failure to find out its
    cause, and whether any requirements on the
    build checklist had failed to have been
    carried out.
    The developer who caused the failure is
    informed of their mistake, and a new
    rule/requirements is put into place that must
    be passed before a new build can be
    triggered.
    

    View Slide

23. A Generative Response
    Down tools! The priority is for the team to
    fix the broken build. All current development
    work stops until the build is green again.
    At the end of the current iteration, the team
    have a blameless post-mortem. They discuss
    what led to the build becoming broken and
    what the best plan of action might be to
    prevent it from breaking again.
    The team shared lessons learned with other
    teams and they are built in to other teams’
    pipelines and processes.
    

    View Slide

24. Westrum Worksheet
    

    View Slide

25. 4 Key metrics (Accelerate)
    

    View Slide

26. The Book
    ● Based on the State of Devops Report
    ● Based on studies spanning multiple years and
    thousands of respondents
    ● Key Metrics identified have a causal relation to the
    performance of teams and the financial
    performance of companies
    ● Collection and analysis of the data follows a
    rigorous statistical approach
    

    View Slide

27. 27
    DevOps Metrics
    Measuring a team’s performance
    Lead Time for change
    e.g. 1 day
    Deployment Frequency
    E.g. a couple of times a day
    Mean Time to Recovery
    e.g. 7 Hours
    Change Failure Percentage
    e.g. 20%
    It is important to be able to
    measure at all levels of an
    organisation.
    These allow us to view
    individual team
    performance
    With this baselined we can
    begin to experiment!
    

    View Slide

28. Lencioni
    

    View Slide

29. Lencioni
    RESULTS
    ACCOUNTABILITY
    COMMITMENT
    CONFLICT
    TRUST
    To take Accountability takes prior
    Commitment
    Focus on delivering measurable Results.
    Collective and individual accountability,
    and feedback
    Commitment follows
    healthy conflict
    Healthy Conflict
    implies Candid
    Debate
    Building Trust
    requires
    Vulnerability
    Five Behaviors of a Cohesive Team
    

    View Slide

30. 30
    Lencioni model
    The Five Dysfunctions of a Team
    Work out each team’s unique
    strengths and areas for
    improvement.
    RESULTS
    COMMITMENT
    CONFLICT
    TRUST
    ACCOUNTABILITY
    

    View Slide

31. Lencioni Worksheet
    

    View Slide

32. Exercise!
    

    View Slide

33. 33
    Make the metrics visible
    

    View Slide

34. Lencioni Online Team Assessment
    https://www.tablegroup.com/
    

    View Slide

35. Project Aristotle
    ● Started by Google in 2012
    ● Study covered hundreds of teams
    ● Lots of Patterns but none of them fit easily
    ● Not what they did but how they felt?
    ● ‘‘equality in distribution of conversational turn-taking.’’
    How can you build the perfect team?
    

    View Slide

36. 36
    https://rework.withgoogle.com/guides/understanding-team-effectiveness/steps/identify-dynamics-of-effective-teams/
    

    View Slide

37. AWKSS
    

    View Slide

38. After
    Awareness
    Willing
    Knowledge
    Skills
    Support
    1 2 3 4 5
    

    View Slide

39. Thanks!
    @ArmakuniHQ
    @PurpleBooth
    hello@armakuni.com
    

    View Slide