Discussion:
Retros repeating action items
s***@tieto.com
2013-11-13 11:01:48 UTC
Permalink
Hi,

I have been facing this problem that in retros the improvement gets discussed but after a while when the focus is lost, it comes back in retro that we need to improve this.
Which means that improvements are not becoming business-as-usual.
How do we make sure that the retrospections take teams to the next level and not come back to same areas in a rhythmic way.

Any thoughts on this

Regds,
Sharmila
Greg Lucas-Smith
2013-11-13 12:45:53 UTC
Permalink
We found that there were two main types of retro actions that we uncover,
actions that are one-off's ("lets make a meeting free time zone!") and
actions that become team rules ("at the end of our standup's we'll ensure
that all work being done is on the board").

The one-offs I think ok to be recurring, they serve as a reminder that a
good practice has been forgotten. The team rules (or norms as I've heard
them called) we put on bright posters around the board and they get pointed
to vigourously when someone forgets.

Greg Lucas-Smith
Post by s***@tieto.com
Hi,
I have been facing this problem that in retros the improvement gets
discussed but after a while when the focus is lost, it comes back in retro
that we need to improve this.
Which means that improvements are not becoming business-as-usual.
How do we make sure that the retrospections take teams to the next level
and not come back to same areas in a rhythmic way.
Any thoughts on this
Regds,
Sharmila
Ryan Ripley
2013-11-13 14:01:14 UTC
Permalink
Have you asked the team why the solutions are not "sticking"? I would start
there.

--Ryan Ripley
Have you asked the team why the solutions are not "sticking"? I would
start there.
--Ryan Ripley
Post by s***@tieto.com
Hi,
I have been facing this problem that in retros the improvement gets
discussed but after a while when the focus is lost, it comes back in retro
that we need to improve this.
Which means that improvements are not becoming business-as-usual.
How do we make sure that the retrospections take teams to the next level
and not come back to same areas in a rhythmic way.
Any thoughts on this
Regds,
Sharmila
Cherie Silas
2013-11-13 12:48:42 UTC
Permalink
Sharmilla,
The pattern I have noticed consistently when coaching teams is that this problem is usually the result of treating symptoms rather than the root cause.

When we pick fruit from a tree, more fruit grows back in another spot to replace what was removed. Keeping the tree clean of fruit becomes daunting and the team lets up so the fruit begins to grow back. Sometimes this re growth makes the team believe the problems are impossible to solve so they settle and become willing to work around them.

If I identify this as the case, I generally work with the team to help them look beyond the painful symptoms and find the true root cause of problems.

Some techniques you might explore:
Circle of questions
5 why analysis
Asking powerful questions.


Cherie Silas
Sent from my iPhone
Post by s***@tieto.com
Hi,
I have been facing this problem that in retros the improvement gets discussed but after a while when the focus is lost, it comes back in retro that we need to improve this.
Which means that improvements are not becoming business-as-usual.
How do we make sure that the retrospections take teams to the next level and not come back to same areas in a rhythmic way.
Any thoughts on this
Regds,
Sharmila
Charles Bradley - Professional Scrum Trainer and Coach
2013-11-13 15:22:09 UTC
Permalink
+1 to Ryan and Cherie, also these might help:

http://www.scrumcrazy.com/Best+Practice+-+Make+Retro+Action+Items+Highly+Visible
http://www.scrumcrazy.com/Best+Practice+-+Review+the+Action+Items+from+the+Previous+Retro+in+the+Current+Retro

Please forgive the usage of the term "Best Practice" (on my backlog to fix that).  It should say "Popular" or "Proven Practice" or something like that instead.  I have come to learn that "Best Practices" are a unicorn.  (They don't really exist)


 
-------
Charles Bradley
Professional Scrum Trainer
Scrum Coach-in-Chief
ScrumCrazy.com
________________________________
Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2013 5:48 AM
Subject: Re: [scrumdevelopment] Retros repeating action items
Sharmilla,
The pattern I have noticed consistently when coaching teams is that this problem is usually the result of treating symptoms rather than the root cause. 
When we pick fruit from a tree, more fruit grows back in another spot to replace what was removed. Keeping the tree clean of fruit becomes daunting and the team lets up so the fruit begins to grow back. Sometimes this re growth makes the team believe the problems are impossible to solve so they settle and become willing to work around them. 
If I identify this as the case, I generally work with the team to help them look beyond the painful symptoms and find the true root cause of problems. 
Circle of questions
5 why analysis
Asking powerful questions. 
Cherie Silas
Sent from my iPhone
 
Post by s***@tieto.com
Hi,
 
I have been facing this problem that in retros the improvement gets discussed but after a while when the focus is lost, it comes back in retro that we need to improve this.
Which means that improvements are not becoming business-as-usual.
How do we make sure that the retrospections take teams to the next level and not come back to same areas in a rhythmic way.
 
Any thoughts on this
 
Regds,
Sharmila
 
Marcio Dias
2013-11-13 15:30:00 UTC
Permalink
Hi Charles,

This is a question I always wanted to make: "May I say that 'Avoid Best
Practice!' is one of your recommended best practices?".

Marcio


De: ***@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:***@yahoogroups.com] Em nome de Charles Bradley -
Professional Scrum Trainer and Coach
Enviada em: quarta-feira, 13 de novembro de 2013 13:22
Para: ***@yahoogroups.com
Assunto: Re: [scrumdevelopment] Retros repeating action items


+1 to Ryan and Cherie, also these might help:

http://www.scrumcrazy.com/Best+Practice+-+Make+Retro+Action+Items+Highly+Vis
ible
http://www.scrumcrazy.com/Best+Practice+-+Review+the+Action+Items+from+the+P
revious+Retro+in+the+Current+Retro

Please forgive the usage of the term "Best Practice" (on my backlog to fix
that). It should say "Popular" or "Proven Practice" or something like that
instead. I have come to learn that "Best Practices" are a unicorn. (They
don't really exist)


-------
Charles Bradley
Professional Scrum Trainer
Scrum Coach-in-Chief
ScrumCrazy.com <http://www.scrumcrazy.com/>



_____

From: Cherie Silas <***@att.net>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2013 5:48 AM
Subject: Re: [scrumdevelopment] Retros repeating action items


Sharmilla,
The pattern I have noticed consistently when coaching teams is that this
problem is usually the result of treating symptoms rather than the root
cause.

When we pick fruit from a tree, more fruit grows back in another spot to
replace what was removed. Keeping the tree clean of fruit becomes daunting
and the team lets up so the fruit begins to grow back. Sometimes this re
growth makes the team believe the problems are impossible to solve so they
settle and become willing to work around them.

If I identify this as the case, I generally work with the team to help them
look beyond the painful symptoms and find the true root cause of problems.

Some techniques you might explore:
Circle of questions
5 why analysis
Asking powerful questions.


Cherie Silas
Sent from my iPhone

On Nov 13, 2013, at 5:01 AM, <***@tieto.com> wrote:

Hi,

I have been facing this problem that in retros the improvement gets
discussed but after a while when the focus is lost, it comes back in retro
that we need to improve this.
Which means that improvements are not becoming business-as-usual.
How do we make sure that the retrospections take teams to the next level and
not come back to same areas in a rhythmic way.

Any thoughts on this

Regds,
Sharmila
Charles Bradley - Professional Scrum Trainer and Coach
2013-11-13 18:39:50 UTC
Permalink
Yup. Good one!<br/><br/>-- Sent from iPhone
Cass Dalton
2013-11-13 20:39:54 UTC
Permalink
We keep repeating the same action items every retro
SM: Why?
Because we are not making necessary changes to our process
SM: Why?
Because we don't believe the process works
SM: Why?
Because no one follows the process
SM: Why?
Because everyone is getting tired of the process
SM: Why?
Because whenever something goes wrong, people keep asking why


On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 1:39 PM, Charles Bradley - Professional Scrum
Yup. Good one!
-- Sent from iPhone
------------------------------
* Subject: * RES: [scrumdevelopment] Retros repeating action items
* Sent: * Wed, Nov 13, 2013 3:30:00 PM
Hi Charles,
This is a question I always wanted to make: "May I say that 'Avoid Best
Practice!' is one of your recommended best practices?".
Marcio
Professional Scrum Trainer and Coach
*Enviada em:* quarta-feira, 13 de novembro de 2013 13:22
*Assunto:* Re: [scrumdevelopment] Retros repeating action items
http://www.scrumcrazy.com/Best+Practice+-+Make+Retro+Action+Items+Highly+Visible
http://www.scrumcrazy.com/Best+Practice+-+Review+the+Action+Items+from+the+Previous+Retro+in+the+Current+Retro
Please forgive the usage of the term "Best Practice" (on my backlog to fix
that). It should say "Popular" or "Proven Practice" or something like that
instead. I have come to learn that "Best Practices" are a unicorn. (They
don't really exist)
-------
Charles Bradley
Professional Scrum Trainer
Scrum Coach-in-Chief
ScrumCrazy.com <http://www.scrumcrazy.com/>
------------------------------
*Sent:* Wednesday, November 13, 2013 5:48 AM
*Subject:* Re: [scrumdevelopment] Retros repeating action items
Sharmilla,
The pattern I have noticed consistently when coaching teams is that this
problem is usually the result of treating symptoms rather than the root
cause.
When we pick fruit from a tree, more fruit grows back in another spot to
replace what was removed. Keeping the tree clean of fruit becomes daunting
and the team lets up so the fruit begins to grow back. Sometimes this re
growth makes the team believe the problems are impossible to solve so they
settle and become willing to work around them.
If I identify this as the case, I generally work with the team to help
them look beyond the painful symptoms and find the true root cause of
problems.
Circle of questions
5 why analysis
Asking powerful questions.
Cherie Silas
Sent from my iPhone
Hi,
I have been facing this problem that in retros the improvement gets
discussed but after a while when the focus is lost, it comes back in retro
that we need to improve this.
Which means that improvements are not becoming business-as-usual.
How do we make sure that the retrospections take teams to the next level
and not come back to same areas in a rhythmic way.
Any thoughts on this
Regds,
Sharmila
David Koontz
2013-11-14 20:31:35 UTC
Permalink
Of course a ‘Best Practice’ exist. There is a best practice for breaking an egg if one is a short order cook. It is very different than my (not best) practice. But all really good short order cooks appear to use the similar best practice - so it must exist.

Perhaps the problem is that you are all mixing up the domain within which you are seeking answers and practices. Do you think that breaking eggs is the same domain “type” as building software? I do not. One domain type is very simple. One domain is very complex. Perhaps that is the distention between when we should look for *A* best practice and when we should avoid the concept that there is a best practice.

See: Cynefin Framework by David Snowden
Post by Cass Dalton
We keep repeating the same action items every retro
SM: Why?
Because we are not making necessary changes to our process
SM: Why?
Because we don't believe the process works
SM: Why?
Because no one follows the process
SM: Why?
Because everyone is getting tired of the process
SM: Why?
Because whenever something goes wrong, people keep asking why
Yup. Good one!
-- Sent from iPhone
Subject: RES: [scrumdevelopment] Retros repeating action items
Sent: Wed, Nov 13, 2013 3:30:00 PM
Hi Charles,
This is a question I always wanted to make: "May I say that 'Avoid Best Practice!' is one of your recommended best practices?".
Marcio
Enviada em: quarta-feira, 13 de novembro de 2013 13:22
Assunto: Re: [scrumdevelopment] Retros repeating action items
http://www.scrumcrazy.com/Best+Practice+-+Make+Retro+Action+Items+Highly+Visible
http://www.scrumcrazy.com/Best+Practice+-+Review+the+Action+Items+from+the+Previous+Retro+in+the+Current+Retro
Please forgive the usage of the term "Best Practice" (on my backlog to fix that). It should say "Popular" or "Proven Practice" or something like that instead. I have come to learn that "Best Practices" are a unicorn. (They don't really exist)
-------
Charles Bradley
Professional Scrum Trainer
Scrum Coach-in-Chief
ScrumCrazy.com
Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2013 5:48 AM
Subject: Re: [scrumdevelopment] Retros repeating action items
Sharmilla,
The pattern I have noticed consistently when coaching teams is that this problem is usually the result of treating symptoms rather than the root cause.
When we pick fruit from a tree, more fruit grows back in another spot to replace what was removed. Keeping the tree clean of fruit becomes daunting and the team lets up so the fruit begins to grow back. Sometimes this re growth makes the team believe the problems are impossible to solve so they settle and become willing to work around them.
If I identify this as the case, I generally work with the team to help them look beyond the painful symptoms and find the true root cause of problems.
Circle of questions
5 why analysis
Asking powerful questions.
Cherie Silas
Sent from my iPhone
Hi,
I have been facing this problem that in retros the improvement gets discussed but after a while when the focus is lost, it comes back in retro that we need to improve this.
Which means that improvements are not becoming business-as-usual.
How do we make sure that the retrospections take teams to the next level and not come back to same areas in a rhythmic way.
Any thoughts on this
Regds,
Sharmila
s***@tieto.com
2013-11-15 08:25:26 UTC
Permalink
But let's stick to retros not working
:)



From: ***@yahoogroups.com [mailto:***@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of David Koontz
Sent: Friday, November 15, 2013 2:02 AM
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: RES: [scrumdevelopment] Retros repeating action items



Of course a 'Best Practice' exist. There is a best practice for breaking an egg if one is a short order cook. It is very different than my (not best) practice. But all really good short order cooks appear to use the similar best practice - so it must exist.

Perhaps the problem is that you are all mixing up the domain within which you are seeking answers and practices. Do you think that breaking eggs is the same domain "type" as building software? I do not. One domain type is very simple. One domain is very complex. Perhaps that is the distention between when we should look for *A* best practice and when we should avoid the concept that there is a best practice.

See: Cynefin Framework by David Snowden


On Nov 13, 2013, at 2:39 PM, Cass Dalton <***@gmail.com<mailto:***@gmail.com>> wrote:



We keep repeating the same action items every retro
SM: Why?
Because we are not making necessary changes to our process
SM: Why?
Because we don't believe the process works
SM: Why?
Because no one follows the process
SM: Why?
Because everyone is getting tired of the process
SM: Why?
Because whenever something goes wrong, people keep asking why

On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 1:39 PM, Charles Bradley - Professional Scrum Trainer and Coach <chuck-***@emailchuck.com<mailto:chuck-***@emailchuck.com>> wrote:


Yup. Good one!

-- Sent from iPhone


________________________________
From: Marcio Dias <***@zoho.com<mailto:***@zoho.com>>;
To: <***@yahoogroups.com<mailto:***@yahoogroups.com>>;
Subject: RES: [scrumdevelopment] Retros repeating action items
Sent: Wed, Nov 13, 2013 3:30:00 PM


Hi Charles,

This is a question I always wanted to make: "May I say that 'Avoid Best Practice!' is one of your recommended best practices?".

Marcio


De: ***@yahoogroups.com<mailto:***@yahoogroups.com> [mailto:***@yahoogroups.com<mailto:***@yahoogroups.com>] Em nome deCharles Bradley - Professional Scrum Trainer and Coach
Enviada em: quarta-feira, 13 de novembro de 2013 13:22
Para: ***@yahoogroups.com<mailto:***@yahoogroups.com>
Assunto: Re: [scrumdevelopment] Retros repeating action items


+1 to Ryan and Cherie, also these might help:

http://www.scrumcrazy.com/Best+Practice+-+Make+Retro+Action+Items+Highly+Visible
http://www.scrumcrazy.com/Best+Practice+-+Review+the+Action+Items+from+the+Previous+Retro+in+the+Current+Retro

Please forgive the usage of the term "Best Practice" (on my backlog to fix that). It should say "Popular" or "Proven Practice" or something like that instead. I have come to learn that "Best Practices" are a unicorn. (They don't really exist)


-------
Charles Bradley
Professional Scrum Trainer
Scrum Coach-in-Chief
ScrumCrazy.com<http://www.scrumcrazy.com/>


________________________________
From: Cherie Silas <***@att.net<mailto:***@att.net>>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com<mailto:***@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2013 5:48 AM
Subject: Re: [scrumdevelopment] Retros repeating action items


Sharmilla,
The pattern I have noticed consistently when coaching teams is that this problem is usually the result of treating symptoms rather than the root cause.

When we pick fruit from a tree, more fruit grows back in another spot to replace what was removed. Keeping the tree clean of fruit becomes daunting and the team lets up so the fruit begins to grow back. Sometimes this re growth makes the team believe the problems are impossible to solve so they settle and become willing to work around them.

If I identify this as the case, I generally work with the team to help them look beyond the painful symptoms and find the true root cause of problems.

Some techniques you might explore:
Circle of questions
5 why analysis
Asking powerful questions.


Cherie Silas
Sent from my iPhone

On Nov 13, 2013, at 5:01 AM, <***@tieto.com<mailto:***@tieto.com>> wrote:

Hi,

I have been facing this problem that in retros the improvement gets discussed but after a while when the focus is lost, it comes back in retro that we need to improve this.
Which means that improvements are not becoming business-as-usual.
How do we make sure that the retrospections take teams to the next level and not come back to same areas in a rhythmic way.

Any thoughts on this

Regds,
Sharmila
David Koontz
2013-11-20 15:56:33 UTC
Permalink
Of course a ‘Best Practice’ exist. There is a best practice for breaking an egg if one is a short order cook. It is very different than my (not best) practice. But all really good short order cooks appear to use the similar best practice - so it must exist.

Perhaps the problem is that you are all mixing up the domain within which you are seeking answers and practices. Do you think that breaking eggs is the same domain “type” as building software? I do not. One domain type is very simple. One domain is very complex. Perhaps that is the distention between when we should look for *A* best practice and when we should avoid the concept that there is a best practice.

See: Cynefin Framework by David Snowden
Post by Cass Dalton
We keep repeating the same action items every retro
SM: Why?
Because we are not making necessary changes to our process
SM: Why?
Because we don't believe the process works
SM: Why?
Because no one follows the process
SM: Why?
Because everyone is getting tired of the process
SM: Why?
Because whenever something goes wrong, people keep asking why
Yup. Good one!
-- Sent from iPhone
Subject: RES: [scrumdevelopment] Retros repeating action items
Sent: Wed, Nov 13, 2013 3:30:00 PM
Hi Charles,
This is a question I always wanted to make: "May I say that 'Avoid Best Practice!' is one of your recommended best practices?".
Marcio
Enviada em: quarta-feira, 13 de novembro de 2013 13:22
Assunto: Re: [scrumdevelopment] Retros repeating action items
http://www.scrumcrazy.com/Best+Practice+-+Make+Retro+Action+Items+Highly+Visible
http://www.scrumcrazy.com/Best+Practice+-+Review+the+Action+Items+from+the+Previous+Retro+in+the+Current+Retro
Please forgive the usage of the term "Best Practice" (on my backlog to fix that). It should say "Popular" or "Proven Practice" or something like that instead. I have come to learn that "Best Practices" are a unicorn. (They don't really exist)
-------
Charles Bradley
Professional Scrum Trainer
Scrum Coach-in-Chief
ScrumCrazy.com
Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2013 5:48 AM
Subject: Re: [scrumdevelopment] Retros repeating action items
Sharmilla,
The pattern I have noticed consistently when coaching teams is that this problem is usually the result of treating symptoms rather than the root cause.
When we pick fruit from a tree, more fruit grows back in another spot to replace what was removed. Keeping the tree clean of fruit becomes daunting and the team lets up so the fruit begins to grow back. Sometimes this re growth makes the team believe the problems are impossible to solve so they settle and become willing to work around them.
If I identify this as the case, I generally work with the team to help them look beyond the painful symptoms and find the true root cause of problems.
Circle of questions
5 why analysis
Asking powerful questions.
Cherie Silas
Sent from my iPhone
Hi,
I have been facing this problem that in retros the improvement gets discussed but after a while when the focus is lost, it comes back in retro that we need to improve this.
Which means that improvements are not becoming business-as-usual.
How do we make sure that the retrospections take teams to the next level and not come back to same areas in a rhythmic way.
Any thoughts on this
Regds,
Sharmila
Adam Sroka
2013-11-20 16:36:15 UTC
Permalink
What works for me doesn't necessarily work for you. What works for you
doesn't necessarily work for me.

We each have our own inherent set of limitations. Some we can overcome if
we strive to understand and train them. For example, if I am not strong
enough to do something I can train to become stronger. However, if I am not
tall enough to do something I may have to find another way.

Because we are all individuals there is no best practice. At the same time
we are often more similar than we are different. So, most of what works for
you probably works for me. Just not ALL of it. To become better I must
understand:

1. What works for me and why, so that I can make it better
2. What doesn't work for me and why, so that I can mitigate or overcome
limitations
3. What works for you and how I can incorporate it. If it works better it
may even supplant something I currently do

This was the philosophy that Bruce Lee used in his approach to the martial
arts, but it works pretty well for software and other things.
Of course a ‘Best Practice’ exist. There is a best practice for breaking
an egg if one is a short order cook. It is very different than my (not
best) practice. But all really good short order cooks appear to use the
similar best practice - so it must exist.
Perhaps the problem is that you are all mixing up the domain within which
you are seeking answers and practices. Do you think that breaking eggs is
the same domain “type” as building software? I do not. One domain type is
very simple. One domain is very complex. Perhaps that is the distention
between when we should look for *A* best practice and when we should avoid
the concept that there is a best practice.
See: Cynefin Framework by David Snowden
We keep repeating the same action items every retro
SM: Why?
Because we are not making necessary changes to our process
SM: Why?
Because we don't believe the process works
SM: Why?
Because no one follows the process
SM: Why?
Because everyone is getting tired of the process
SM: Why?
Because whenever something goes wrong, people keep asking why
On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 1:39 PM, Charles Bradley - Professional Scrum
Yup. Good one!
-- Sent from iPhone
------------------------------
*Subject: *RES: [scrumdevelopment] Retros repeating action items
*Sent: *Wed, Nov 13, 2013 3:30:00 PM
Hi Charles,
This is a question I always wanted to make: "May I say that 'Avoid Best
Practice!' is one of your recommended best practices?".
Marcio
Professional Scrum Trainer and Coach
*Enviada em:* quarta-feira, 13 de novembro de 2013 13:22
*Assunto:* Re: [scrumdevelopment] Retros repeating action items
http://www.scrumcrazy.com/Best+Practice+-+Make+Retro+Action+Items+Highly+Visible
http://www.scrumcrazy.com/Best+Practice+-+Review+the+Action+Items+from+the+Previous+Retro+in+the+Current+Retro
Please forgive the usage of the term "Best Practice" (on my backlog to
fix that). It should say "Popular" or "Proven Practice" or something like
that instead. I have come to learn that "Best Practices" are a unicorn.
(They don't really exist)
-------
Charles Bradley
Professional Scrum Trainer
Scrum Coach-in-Chief
ScrumCrazy.com <http://www.scrumcrazy.com/>
------------------------------
*Sent:* Wednesday, November 13, 2013 5:48 AM
*Subject:* Re: [scrumdevelopment] Retros repeating action items
Sharmilla,
The pattern I have noticed consistently when coaching teams is that this
problem is usually the result of treating symptoms rather than the root
cause.
When we pick fruit from a tree, more fruit grows back in another spot to
replace what was removed. Keeping the tree clean of fruit becomes daunting
and the team lets up so the fruit begins to grow back. Sometimes this re
growth makes the team believe the problems are impossible to solve so they
settle and become willing to work around them.
If I identify this as the case, I generally work with the team to help
them look beyond the painful symptoms and find the true root cause of
problems.
Circle of questions
5 why analysis
Asking powerful questions.
Cherie Silas
Sent from my iPhone
Hi,
I have been facing this problem that in retros the improvement gets
discussed but after a while when the focus is lost, it comes back in retro
that we need to improve this.
Which means that improvements are not becoming business-as-usual.
How do we make sure that the retrospections take teams to the next level
and not come back to same areas in a rhythmic way.
Any thoughts on this
Regds,
Sharmila
Sudipta Lahiri
2013-11-20 19:22:56 UTC
Permalink
IMHO, beyond a certain point there is no alternative to plain and simple execution. This is analogous to meetings with Action Items but nothing happening after that, even after they are circulated with owners.

The fact that the retro happens in the first place tells me that there was a desire to improve in the first place.... But then execution led the team down.

Regards
Sudipta
What works for me doesn't necessarily work for you. What works for you doesn't necessarily work for me.
We each have our own inherent set of limitations. Some we can overcome if we strive to understand and train them. For example, if I am not strong enough to do something I can train to become stronger. However, if I am not tall enough to do something I may have to find another way.
1. What works for me and why, so that I can make it better
2. What doesn't work for me and why, so that I can mitigate or overcome limitations
3. What works for you and how I can incorporate it. If it works better it may even supplant something I currently do
This was the philosophy that Bruce Lee used in his approach to the martial arts, but it works pretty well for software and other things.
Of course a ‘Best Practice’ exist. There is a best practice for breaking an egg if one is a short order cook. It is very different than my (not best) practice. But all really good short order cooks appear to use the similar best practice - so it must exist.
Perhaps the problem is that you are all mixing up the domain within which you are seeking answers and practices. Do you think that breaking eggs is the same domain “type” as building software? I do not. One domain type is very simple. One domain is very complex. Perhaps that is the distention between when we should look for *A* best practice and when we should avoid the concept that there is a best practice.
See: Cynefin Framework by David Snowden
Post by Cass Dalton
We keep repeating the same action items every retro
SM: Why?
Because we are not making necessary changes to our process
SM: Why?
Because we don't believe the process works
SM: Why?
Because no one follows the process
SM: Why?
Because everyone is getting tired of the process
SM: Why?
Because whenever something goes wrong, people keep asking why
Yup. Good one!
-- Sent from iPhone
Subject: RES: [scrumdevelopment] Retros repeating action items
Sent: Wed, Nov 13, 2013 3:30:00 PM
Hi Charles,
This is a question I always wanted to make: "May I say that 'Avoid Best Practice!' is one of your recommended best practices?".
Marcio
Enviada em: quarta-feira, 13 de novembro de 2013 13:22
Assunto: Re: [scrumdevelopment] Retros repeating action items
http://www.scrumcrazy.com/Best+Practice+-+Make+Retro+Action+Items+Highly+Visible
http://www.scrumcrazy.com/Best+Practice+-+Review+the+Action+Items+from+the+Previous+Retro+in+the+Current+Retro
Please forgive the usage of the term "Best Practice" (on my backlog to fix that). It should say "Popular" or "Proven Practice" or something like that instead. I have come to learn that "Best Practices" are a unicorn. (They don't really exist)
-------
Charles Bradley
Professional Scrum Trainer
Scrum Coach-in-Chief
ScrumCrazy.com
Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2013 5:48 AM
Subject: Re: [scrumdevelopment] Retros repeating action items
Sharmilla,
The pattern I have noticed consistently when coaching teams is that this problem is usually the result of treating symptoms rather than the root cause.
When we pick fruit from a tree, more fruit grows back in another spot to replace what was removed. Keeping the tree clean of fruit becomes daunting and the team lets up so the fruit begins to grow back. Sometimes this re growth makes the team believe the problems are impossible to solve so they settle and become willing to work around them.
If I identify this as the case, I generally work with the team to help them look beyond the painful symptoms and find the true root cause of problems.
Circle of questions
5 why analysis
Asking powerful questions.
Cherie Silas
Sent from my iPhone
Hi,
I have been facing this problem that in retros the improvement gets discussed but after a while when the focus is lost, it comes back in retro that we need to improve this.
Which means that improvements are not becoming business-as-usual.
How do we make sure that the retrospections take teams to the next level and not come back to same areas in a rhythmic way.
Any thoughts on this
Regds,
Sharmila
Reply via web post
Yves Hanoulle
2013-11-20 16:58:42 UTC
Permalink
something else I do, is when energy is low for retrospectives, is hold *work
retrospectives:*

that is: during the timebox of the retrospective, ask people to pair up and
thing about something they want to improve in teh code that they never have
time for. and ask them to do it.

one constraint: at the end of the retro they have to check their code in.
(or they should check in multiple times in between)
so whatever they do, it should be small.

What I saw the first time I did this;
- one pair that had totally not finished (aka not able to do work in one
very limited timebox)
- a few pairs had checked in some small improvement
- one other pair had done an improvement where everyone was complaining for
months they should do it, and nobody ever took the time. to their own (and
everyone else surprise) they had finished 18 of the 23 independant tasks.
And the quality had improved a lot. (one of the two developers, finished
the last 5 task the next morning)

I have redone this idea already multiple times at multiple clients ever
since, and always with similar great results.

you can compare it to Fed-ex days, or hackatons, yet now only 1 hour (for 1
week iterations)

yves
Post by Adam Sroka
What works for me doesn't necessarily work for you. What works for you
doesn't necessarily work for me.
We each have our own inherent set of limitations. Some we can overcome if
we strive to understand and train them. For example, if I am not strong
enough to do something I can train to become stronger. However, if I am not
tall enough to do something I may have to find another way.
Because we are all individuals there is no best practice. At the same time
we are often more similar than we are different. So, most of what works for
you probably works for me. Just not ALL of it. To become better I must
1. What works for me and why, so that I can make it better
2. What doesn't work for me and why, so that I can mitigate or overcome
limitations
3. What works for you and how I can incorporate it. If it works better it
may even supplant something I currently do
This was the philosophy that Bruce Lee used in his approach to the martial
arts, but it works pretty well for software and other things.
Post by David Koontz
Of course a ‘Best Practice’ exist. There is a best practice for breaking
an egg if one is a short order cook. It is very different than my (not
best) practice. But all really good short order cooks appear to use the
similar best practice - so it must exist.
Perhaps the problem is that you are all mixing up the domain within which
you are seeking answers and practices. Do you think that breaking eggs is
the same domain “type” as building software? I do not. One domain type is
very simple. One domain is very complex. Perhaps that is the distention
between when we should look for *A* best practice and when we should avoid
the concept that there is a best practice.
See: Cynefin Framework by David Snowden
We keep repeating the same action items every retro
SM: Why?
Because we are not making necessary changes to our process
SM: Why?
Because we don't believe the process works
SM: Why?
Because no one follows the process
SM: Why?
Because everyone is getting tired of the process
SM: Why?
Because whenever something goes wrong, people keep asking why
On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 1:39 PM, Charles Bradley - Professional Scrum
Yup. Good one!
-- Sent from iPhone
------------------------------
*Subject: *RES: [scrumdevelopment] Retros repeating action items
*Sent: *Wed, Nov 13, 2013 3:30:00 PM
Hi Charles,
This is a question I always wanted to make: "May I say that 'Avoid Best
Practice!' is one of your recommended best practices?".
Marcio
Professional Scrum Trainer and Coach
*Enviada em:* quarta-feira, 13 de novembro de 2013 13:22
*Assunto:* Re: [scrumdevelopment] Retros repeating action items
http://www.scrumcrazy.com/Best+Practice+-+Make+Retro+Action+Items+Highly+Visible
http://www.scrumcrazy.com/Best+Practice+-+Review+the+Action+Items+from+the+Previous+Retro+in+the+Current+Retro
Please forgive the usage of the term "Best Practice" (on my backlog to
fix that). It should say "Popular" or "Proven Practice" or something like
that instead. I have come to learn that "Best Practices" are a unicorn.
(They don't really exist)
-------
Charles Bradley
Professional Scrum Trainer
Scrum Coach-in-Chief
ScrumCrazy.com <http://www.scrumcrazy.com/>
------------------------------
*Sent:* Wednesday, November 13, 2013 5:48 AM
*Subject:* Re: [scrumdevelopment] Retros repeating action items
Sharmilla,
The pattern I have noticed consistently when coaching teams is that this
problem is usually the result of treating symptoms rather than the root
cause.
When we pick fruit from a tree, more fruit grows back in another spot to
replace what was removed. Keeping the tree clean of fruit becomes daunting
and the team lets up so the fruit begins to grow back. Sometimes this re
growth makes the team believe the problems are impossible to solve so they
settle and become willing to work around them.
If I identify this as the case, I generally work with the team to help
them look beyond the painful symptoms and find the true root cause of
problems.
Circle of questions
5 why analysis
Asking powerful questions.
Cherie Silas
Sent from my iPhone
Hi,
I have been facing this problem that in retros the improvement gets
discussed but after a while when the focus is lost, it comes back in retro
that we need to improve this.
Which means that improvements are not becoming business-as-usual.
How do we make sure that the retrospections take teams to the next level
and not come back to same areas in a rhythmic way.
Any thoughts on this
Regds,
Sharmila
s***@tieto.com
2013-11-26 08:22:35 UTC
Permalink
HI,

Do you mean to say that you gather for retro and actually touch the code for one hour and improve it?

Can you elaborate more on this?

From: ***@yahoogroups.com [mailto:***@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Yves Hanoulle
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2013 10:29 PM
To: ***@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: RES: [scrumdevelopment] Retros repeating action items


something else I do, is when energy is low for retrospectives, is hold work retrospectives:

that is: during the timebox of the retrospective, ask people to pair up and thing about something they want to improve in teh code that they never have time for. and ask them to do it.

one constraint: at the end of the retro they have to check their code in. (or they should check in multiple times in between)
so whatever they do, it should be small.

What I saw the first time I did this;
- one pair that had totally not finished (aka not able to do work in one very limited timebox)
- a few pairs had checked in some small improvement
- one other pair had done an improvement where everyone was complaining for months they should do it, and nobody ever took the time. to their own (and everyone else surprise) they had finished 18 of the 23 independant tasks. And the quality had improved a lot. (one of the two developers, finished the last 5 task the next morning)

I have redone this idea already multiple times at multiple clients ever since, and always with similar great results.

you can compare it to Fed-ex days, or hackatons, yet now only 1 hour (for 1 week iterations)

yves






2013/11/20 Adam Sroka <***@gmail.com<mailto:***@gmail.com>>

What works for me doesn't necessarily work for you. What works for you doesn't necessarily work for me.

We each have our own inherent set of limitations. Some we can overcome if we strive to understand and train them. For example, if I am not strong enough to do something I can train to become stronger. However, if I am not tall enough to do something I may have to find another way.

Because we are all individuals there is no best practice. At the same time we are often more similar than we are different. So, most of what works for you probably works for me. Just not ALL of it. To become better I must understand:

1. What works for me and why, so that I can make it better
2. What doesn't work for me and why, so that I can mitigate or overcome limitations
3. What works for you and how I can incorporate it. If it works better it may even supplant something I currently do

This was the philosophy that Bruce Lee used in his approach to the martial arts, but it works pretty well for software and other things.

On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 10:56 AM, David Koontz <***@gmail.com<mailto:***@gmail.com>> wrote:

Of course a 'Best Practice' exist. There is a best practice for breaking an egg if one is a short order cook. It is very different than my (not best) practice. But all really good short order cooks appear to use the similar best practice - so it must exist.

Perhaps the problem is that you are all mixing up the domain within which you are seeking answers and practices. Do you think that breaking eggs is the same domain "type" as building software? I do not. One domain type is very simple. One domain is very complex. Perhaps that is the distention between when we should look for *A* best practice and when we should avoid the concept that there is a best practice.

See: Cynefin Framework by David Snowden


On Nov 13, 2013, at 2:39 PM, Cass Dalton <***@gmail.com<mailto:***@gmail.com>> wrote:


We keep repeating the same action items every retro
SM: Why?
Because we are not making necessary changes to our process
SM: Why?
Because we don't believe the process works
SM: Why?
Because no one follows the process
SM: Why?
Because everyone is getting tired of the process
SM: Why?
Because whenever something goes wrong, people keep asking why

On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 1:39 PM, Charles Bradley - Professional Scrum Trainer and Coach <chuck-***@emailchuck.com<mailto:chuck-***@emailchuck.com>> wrote:


Yup. Good one!

-- Sent from iPhone


________________________________
From: Marcio Dias <***@zoho.com<mailto:***@zoho.com>>;
To: <***@yahoogroups.com<mailto:***@yahoogroups.com>>;
Subject: RES: [scrumdevelopment] Retros repeating action items
Sent: Wed, Nov 13, 2013 3:30:00 PM


Hi Charles,

This is a question I always wanted to make: "May I say that 'Avoid Best Practice!' is one of your recommended best practices?".

Marcio


De: ***@yahoogroups.com<mailto:***@yahoogroups.com> [mailto:***@yahoogroups.com<mailto:***@yahoogroups.com>] Em nome deCharles Bradley - Professional Scrum Trainer and Coach

Enviada em: quarta-feira, 13 de novembro de 2013 13:22
Para: ***@yahoogroups.com<mailto:***@yahoogroups.com>
Assunto: Re: [scrumdevelopment] Retros repeating action items


+1 to Ryan and Cherie, also these might help:

http://www.scrumcrazy.com/Best+Practice+-+Make+Retro+Action+Items+Highly+Visible
http://www.scrumcrazy.com/Best+Practice+-+Review+the+Action+Items+from+the+Previous+Retro+in+the+Current+Retro

Please forgive the usage of the term "Best Practice" (on my backlog to fix that). It should say "Popular" or "Proven Practice" or something like that instead. I have come to learn that "Best Practices" are a unicorn. (They don't really exist)


-------
Charles Bradley
Professional Scrum Trainer
Scrum Coach-in-Chief
ScrumCrazy.com<http://www.scrumcrazy.com/>


________________________________
From: Cherie Silas <***@att.net<mailto:***@att.net>>
To: ***@yahoogroups.com<mailto:***@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2013 5:48 AM
Subject: Re: [scrumdevelopment] Retros repeating action items


Sharmilla,
The pattern I have noticed consistently when coaching teams is that this problem is usually the result of treating symptoms rather than the root cause.

When we pick fruit from a tree, more fruit grows back in another spot to replace what was removed. Keeping the tree clean of fruit becomes daunting and the team lets up so the fruit begins to grow back. Sometimes this re growth makes the team believe the problems are impossible to solve so they settle and become willing to work around them.

If I identify this as the case, I generally work with the team to help them look beyond the painful symptoms and find the true root cause of problems.

Some techniques you might explore:
Circle of questions
5 why analysis
Asking powerful questions.


Cherie Silas
Sent from my iPhone

On Nov 13, 2013, at 5:01 AM, <***@tieto.com<mailto:***@tieto.com>> wrote:

Hi,

I have been facing this problem that in retros the improvement gets discussed but after a while when the focus is lost, it comes back in retro that we need to improve this.
Which means that improvements are not becoming business-as-usual.
How do we make sure that the retrospections take teams to the next level and not come back to same areas in a rhythmic way.

Any thoughts on this

Regds,
Sharmila
Yves Hanoulle
2013-11-26 09:16:40 UTC
Permalink
yes that is what I was saying.

Last year I blogged about it. you can read it here.
feel free to ask questsion here or on my blog
http://www.hanoulle.be/2013/03/work-retrospective/
(not use if everyone on this mailing list wants to learn more about a work
retrospective)

y
Post by s***@tieto.com
HI,
Do you mean to say that you gather for retro and actually touch the code
for one hour and improve it?
Can you elaborate more on this?
*Sent:* Wednesday, November 20, 2013 10:29 PM
*Subject:* Re: RES: [scrumdevelopment] Retros repeating action items
something else I do, is when energy is low for retrospectives, is hold *work
retrospectives:*
that is: during the timebox of the retrospective, ask people to pair up
and thing about something they want to improve in teh code that they never
have time for. and ask them to do it.
one constraint: at the end of the retro they have to check their code in.
(or they should check in multiple times in between)
so whatever they do, it should be small.
What I saw the first time I did this;
- one pair that had totally not finished (aka not able to do work in one
very limited timebox)
- a few pairs had checked in some small improvement
- one other pair had done an improvement where everyone was complaining
for months they should do it, and nobody ever took the time. to their own
(and everyone else surprise) they had finished 18 of the 23 independant
tasks. And the quality had improved a lot. (one of the two developers,
finished the last 5 task the next morning)
I have redone this idea already multiple times at multiple clients ever
since, and always with similar great results.
you can compare it to Fed-ex days, or hackatons, yet now only 1 hour (for
1 week iterations)
yves
What works for me doesn't necessarily work for you. What works for you
doesn't necessarily work for me.
We each have our own inherent set of limitations. Some we can overcome if
we strive to understand and train them. For example, if I am not strong
enough to do something I can train to become stronger. However, if I am not
tall enough to do something I may have to find another way.
Because we are all individuals there is no best practice. At the same time
we are often more similar than we are different. So, most of what works for
you probably works for me. Just not ALL of it. To become better I must
1. What works for me and why, so that I can make it better
2. What doesn't work for me and why, so that I can mitigate or overcome limitations
3. What works for you and how I can incorporate it. If it works better it
may even supplant something I currently do
This was the philosophy that Bruce Lee used in his approach to the martial
arts, but it works pretty well for software and other things.
Of course a ‘Best Practice’ exist. There is a best practice for breaking
an egg if one is a short order cook. It is very different than my (not
best) practice. But all really good short order cooks appear to use the
similar best practice - so it must exist.
Perhaps the problem is that you are all mixing up the domain within which
you are seeking answers and practices. Do you think that breaking eggs is
the same domain “type” as building software? I do not. One domain type is
very simple. One domain is very complex. Perhaps that is the distention
between when we should look for *A* best practice and when we should avoid
the concept that there is a best practice.
See: Cynefin Framework by David Snowden
We keep repeating the same action items every retro
SM: Why?
Because we are not making necessary changes to our process
SM: Why?
Because we don't believe the process works
SM: Why?
Because no one follows the process
SM: Why?
Because everyone is getting tired of the process
SM: Why?
Because whenever something goes wrong, people keep asking why
On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 1:39 PM, Charles Bradley - Professional Scrum
Yup. Good one!
-- Sent from iPhone
------------------------------
*Subject: *RES: [scrumdevelopment] Retros repeating action items
*Sent: *Wed, Nov 13, 2013 3:30:00 PM
Hi Charles,
This is a question I always wanted to make: "May I say that 'Avoid Best
Practice!' is one of your recommended best practices?".
Marcio
Professional Scrum Trainer and Coach
*Enviada em:* quarta-feira, 13 de novembro de 2013 13:22
*Assunto:* Re: [scrumdevelopment] Retros repeating action items
http://www.scrumcrazy.com/Best+Practice+-+Make+Retro+Action+Items+Highly+Visible
http://www.scrumcrazy.com/Best+Practice+-+Review+the+Action+Items+from+the+Previous+Retro+in+the+Current+Retro
Please forgive the usage of the term "Best Practice" (on my backlog to fix
that). It should say "Popular" or "Proven Practice" or something like that
instead. I have come to learn that "Best Practices" are a unicorn. (They
don't really exist)
-------
Charles Bradley
Professional Scrum Trainer
Scrum Coach-in-Chief
ScrumCrazy.com <http://www.scrumcrazy.com/>
------------------------------
*Sent:* Wednesday, November 13, 2013 5:48 AM
*Subject:* Re: [scrumdevelopment] Retros repeating action items
Sharmilla,
The pattern I have noticed consistently when coaching teams is that this
problem is usually the result of treating symptoms rather than the root
cause.
When we pick fruit from a tree, more fruit grows back in another spot to
replace what was removed. Keeping the tree clean of fruit becomes daunting
and the team lets up so the fruit begins to grow back. Sometimes this re
growth makes the team believe the problems are impossible to solve so they
settle and become willing to work around them.
If I identify this as the case, I generally work with the team to help
them look beyond the painful symptoms and find the true root cause of
problems.
Circle of questions
5 why analysis
Asking powerful questions.
Cherie Silas
Sent from my iPhone
Hi,
I have been facing this problem that in retros the improvement gets
discussed but after a while when the focus is lost, it comes back in retro
that we need to improve this.
Which means that improvements are not becoming business-as-usual.
How do we make sure that the retrospections take teams to the next level
and not come back to same areas in a rhythmic way.
Any thoughts on this
Regds,
Sharmila
Ali H. Moghadam
2013-11-15 05:34:54 UTC
Permalink
These are really useful practices: making the action items highly visible, and review action items from previous retro.
But before them, the retro should be ended with some *action* items. Not every conclusion is actionable. E.g. we may conclude that we should try TDD in our team. But what is our action plan for reaching it? Should somebody reads more about it and present the results? Shall we change our DoD?
Post by Charles Bradley - Professional Scrum Trainer and Coach
http://www.scrumcrazy.com/Best+Practice+-+Make+Retro+Action+Items+Highly+Visible
http://www.scrumcrazy.com/Best+Practice+-+Review+the+Action+Items+from+the+Previous+Retro+in+the+Current+Retro
Please forgive the usage of the term "Best Practice" (on my backlog to fix that). It should say "Popular" or "Proven Practice" or something like that instead. I have come to learn that "Best Practices" are a unicorn. (They don't really exist)
-------
Charles Bradley
Professional Scrum Trainer
Scrum Coach-in-Chief
ScrumCrazy.com
Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2013 5:48 AM
Subject: Re: [scrumdevelopment] Retros repeating action items
Sharmilla,
The pattern I have noticed consistently when coaching teams is that this problem is usually the result of treating symptoms rather than the root cause.
When we pick fruit from a tree, more fruit grows back in another spot to replace what was removed. Keeping the tree clean of fruit becomes daunting and the team lets up so the fruit begins to grow back. Sometimes this re growth makes the team believe the problems are impossible to solve so they settle and become willing to work around them.
If I identify this as the case, I generally work with the team to help them look beyond the painful symptoms and find the true root cause of problems.
Circle of questions
5 why analysis
Asking powerful questions.
Cherie Silas
Sent from my iPhone
Post by s***@tieto.com
Hi,
I have been facing this problem that in retros the improvement gets discussed but after a while when the focus is lost, it comes back in retro that we need to improve this.
Which means that improvements are not becoming business-as-usual.
How do we make sure that the retrospections take teams to the next level and not come back to same areas in a rhythmic way.
Any thoughts on this
Regds,
Sharmila
Voris, John
2013-11-14 14:46:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Marcio Dias
From: Cherie Silas
When we pick fruit from a tree, more fruit grows back in another spot to replace what was removed.
Keeping the tree clean of fruit becomes daunting and the team lets up so the fruit begins to grow back.
Sometimes this re growth makes the team believe the problems are impossible to solve so they settle and become willing to work around them.
You have a good analogy here, but instead, I use "Barnacles" repeatedly growing on the ship and slowing us down, instead of "fruit" which has a positive connotation for most people.



- John Voris, AgilePhilly.com
Adam Sroka
2013-11-21 15:12:21 UTC
Permalink
First, make sure that you focus the retro on actionable information. Too
often teams tend to focus on what they liked and what they didn't like.
Like David Anderson says, "Improve scientifically, not emotionally." I like
the "More of, less of, same" format, because it focuses on what we do
rather than what we think/feel.

Second, make sure to reserve enough time to distill the items the team
chooses into measurable, achievable experiments. Consider the SMART acronym
usually applied to tasks: Small, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant,
Time-Boxed.

Treat each improvement as an experiment. Determine what you are going to
change and how you are going to measure the results. Make sure that you
review the results and determine what you have learned at the next retro
before taking on anything else. Then you can decide whether to keep the
change, drop it, or do another experiment.

Finally, keep the number of experimental improvements to a minimum. Try
doing one at a time until you get a few wins. You should probably never do
more than two or three in a single iteration.
Post by s***@tieto.com
Hi,
I have been facing this problem that in retros the improvement gets
discussed but after a while when the focus is lost, it comes back in retro
that we need to improve this.
Which means that improvements are not becoming business-as-usual.
How do we make sure that the retrospections take teams to the next level
and not come back to same areas in a rhythmic way.
Any thoughts on this
Regds,
Sharmila
Ram Srinivasan
2013-11-21 16:25:20 UTC
Permalink
I agree we have to improve scientifically. And the "emotional dimension" of
the problem has to be addressed first before we can move people to the land
of logical/scientific reasoning.

If we were making decisions solely based on logic and scientific
reasoning(instead of emotions influencing our decision making process ), I
bet a lot of world problems would be much easier to solve.

Just my thought.

Ram
Post by Adam Sroka
First, make sure that you focus the retro on actionable information. Too
often teams tend to focus on what they liked and what they didn't like.
Like David Anderson says, "Improve scientifically, not emotionally." I like
the "More of, less of, same" format, because it focuses on what we do
rather than what we think/feel.
Post by Adam Sroka
Second, make sure to reserve enough time to distill the items the team
chooses into measurable, achievable experiments. Consider the SMART acronym
usually applied to tasks: Small, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant,
Time-Boxed.
Post by Adam Sroka
Treat each improvement as an experiment. Determine what you are going to
change and how you are going to measure the results. Make sure that you
review the results and determine what you have learned at the next retro
before taking on anything else. Then you can decide whether to keep the
change, drop it, or do another experiment.
Post by Adam Sroka
Finally, keep the number of experimental improvements to a minimum. Try
doing one at a time until you get a few wins. You should probably never do
more than two or three in a single iteration.
Post by Adam Sroka
Post by s***@tieto.com
Hi,
I have been facing this problem that in retros the improvement gets
discussed but after a while when the focus is lost, it comes back in retro
that we need to improve this.
Post by Adam Sroka
Post by s***@tieto.com
Which means that improvements are not becoming business-as-usual.
How do we make sure that the retrospections take teams to the next level
and not come back to same areas in a rhythmic way.
Post by Adam Sroka
Post by s***@tieto.com
Any thoughts on this
Regds,
Sharmila
Ron Jeffries
2013-11-25 13:23:18 UTC
Permalink
Ram,
I agree we have to improve scientifically. And the "emotional dimension" of the problem has to be addressed first before we can move people to the land of logical/scientific reasoning.
If we were making decisions solely based on logic and scientific reasoning(instead of emotions influencing our decision making process ), I bet a lot of world problems would be much easier to solve.
Decisions are about what people want. Logic is sterile without direction. “Logic and scientific” reasoning is inherently mathematical as opposed to addressing real human concerns. As such, it is inferior to the unfortunately messy “emotional dimension”.

Ron Jeffries
www.XProgramming.com
Don't ignore your dreams; don't work too much; say what you think; cultivate friendships; be happy. -- Paul Graham
Adam Sroka
2013-11-25 13:50:29 UTC
Permalink
I don't mean to suggest that emotions aren't relevant. However, they
shouldn't be the driving force.

If I were facilitating a kindergarten class I might want to know what they
liked and what they didn't like. With a group of software professionals I
am more interested in what we can do to better serve the customer.

To the extent that emotions can help us orient ourselves they are useful.
My "gut" might help me identify things to focus on, but that's not even
half of the journey.
Post by Ram Srinivasan
I agree we have to improve scientifically. And the "emotional dimension"
of the problem has to be addressed first before we can move people to the
land of logical/scientific reasoning.
If we were making decisions solely based on logic and scientific
reasoning(instead of emotions influencing our decision making process ), I
bet a lot of world problems would be much easier to solve.
Just my thought.
Ram
Post by Adam Sroka
First, make sure that you focus the retro on actionable information. Too
often teams tend to focus on what they liked and what they didn't like.
Like David Anderson says, "Improve scientifically, not emotionally." I like
the "More of, less of, same" format, because it focuses on what we do
rather than what we think/feel.
Post by Adam Sroka
Second, make sure to reserve enough time to distill the items the team
chooses into measurable, achievable experiments. Consider the SMART acronym
usually applied to tasks: Small, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant,
Time-Boxed.
Post by Adam Sroka
Treat each improvement as an experiment. Determine what you are going to
change and how you are going to measure the results. Make sure that you
review the results and determine what you have learned at the next retro
before taking on anything else. Then you can decide whether to keep the
change, drop it, or do another experiment.
Post by Adam Sroka
Finally, keep the number of experimental improvements to a minimum. Try
doing one at a time until you get a few wins. You should probably never do
more than two or three in a single iteration.
Post by Adam Sroka
Post by s***@tieto.com
Hi,
I have been facing this problem that in retros the improvement gets
discussed but after a while when the focus is lost, it comes back in retro
that we need to improve this.
Post by Adam Sroka
Post by s***@tieto.com
Which means that improvements are not becoming business-as-usual.
How do we make sure that the retrospections take teams to the next
level and not come back to same areas in a rhythmic way.
Post by Adam Sroka
Post by s***@tieto.com
Any thoughts on this
Regds,
Sharmila
Ron Jeffries
2013-11-25 14:17:53 UTC
Permalink
Adam,
I don't mean to suggest that emotions aren't relevant. However, they shouldn't be the driving force.
If I were facilitating a kindergarten class I might want to know what they liked and what they didn't like. With a group of software professionals I am more interested in what we can do to better serve the customer.
To the extent that emotions can help us orient ourselves they are useful. My "gut" might help me identify things to focus on, but that's not even half of the journey.
Pink attributes productivity to Purpose, Autonomy, and Mastery. The idea resonates strongly with me. There's little logical about any of those ...

Ron Jeffries
www.XProgramming.com
I know we always like to say it'll be easier to do it now than it
will be to do it later. Not likely. I plan to be smarter later than
I am now, so I think it'll be just as easy later, maybe even easier.
Why pay now when we can pay later?
Adam Sroka
2013-11-25 18:49:21 UTC
Permalink
Are those things you can identify as part of a retrospective? If an idea
emerged in a retrospective that the team thought might lead to more/better
autonomy, mastery, and/or purpose how would they know if it actually did?
Is it worth discussing how you might determine that and creating an
experiment to validate it?
Post by Adam Sroka
Adam,
I don't mean to suggest that emotions aren't relevant. However, they
shouldn't be the driving force.
If I were facilitating a kindergarten class I might want to know what they
liked and what they didn't like. With a group of software professionals I
am more interested in what we can do to better serve the customer.
To the extent that emotions can help us orient ourselves they are useful.
My "gut" might help me identify things to focus on, but that's not even
half of the journey.
Pink attributes productivity to Purpose, Autonomy, and Mastery. The idea
resonates strongly with me. There's little logical about any of those ...
Ron Jeffries
www.XProgramming.com <http://www.xprogramming.com>
I know we always like to say it'll be easier to do it now than it
will be to do it later. Not likely. I plan to be smarter later than
I am now, so I think it'll be just as easy later, maybe even easier.
Why pay now when we can pay later?
Ron Jeffries
2013-11-26 09:46:09 UTC
Permalink
Hi Adam,
Are those things you can identify as part of a retrospective? If an idea emerged in a retrospective that the team thought might lead to more/better autonomy, mastery, and/or purpose how would they know if it actually did? Is it worth discussing how you might determine that and creating an experiment to validate it?
Don’t know.

Spotify teams directly assess subjectives like that, IIRC. I’d think a little 4- or 5-point scale, responding to questions like:

To what extent do you feel you understand the purpose of the work you do?
To what extent do you feel you have the authority to do the work as it needs to be done?
On a scale of Rank Idiot to God Among Men, where do you assess your ability to do the work well?

That last one might need work, but I am coming to think that productivity is tightly linked to matters like those, and that numeric measures are guaranteed to be gamed.

Ron Jeffries
www.XProgramming.com
If it is more than you need, it is waste. -- Andy Seidl
Cass Dalton
2013-11-25 13:57:39 UTC
Permalink
Emotions cannot be ignored in the retrospective, but the most common
emotions that pop up in retrospectives center around egos. Becoming
effective in agile requires letting go of ego. Ego begets blame. Ego
makes people defensive. Ego inhibits collective code ownership. Ego likes
the status quo because striving to improve necessitates an understanding
that you are not perfect. A side effect of ego is fear, especially fear of
your imperfections showing up on a performance review.

Valuing individuals and interactions requires valuing emotions of said
individuals, but those individuals MUST learn to set aside their negative
emotions or you will continue to experience sub-optimal retrospectives.
Post by Adam Sroka
I don't mean to suggest that emotions aren't relevant. However, they
shouldn't be the driving force.
If I were facilitating a kindergarten class I might want to know what they
liked and what they didn't like. With a group of software professionals I
am more interested in what we can do to better serve the customer.
To the extent that emotions can help us orient ourselves they are useful.
My "gut" might help me identify things to focus on, but that's not even
half of the journey.
Post by Ram Srinivasan
I agree we have to improve scientifically. And the "emotional dimension"
of the problem has to be addressed first before we can move people to the
land of logical/scientific reasoning.
If we were making decisions solely based on logic and scientific
reasoning(instead of emotions influencing our decision making process ), I
bet a lot of world problems would be much easier to solve.
Just my thought.
Ram
Post by Adam Sroka
First, make sure that you focus the retro on actionable information.
Too often teams tend to focus on what they liked and what they didn't like.
Like David Anderson says, "Improve scientifically, not emotionally." I like
the "More of, less of, same" format, because it focuses on what we do
rather than what we think/feel.
Post by Adam Sroka
Second, make sure to reserve enough time to distill the items the team
chooses into measurable, achievable experiments. Consider the SMART acronym
usually applied to tasks: Small, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant,
Time-Boxed.
Post by Adam Sroka
Treat each improvement as an experiment. Determine what you are going
to change and how you are going to measure the results. Make sure that you
review the results and determine what you have learned at the next retro
before taking on anything else. Then you can decide whether to keep the
change, drop it, or do another experiment.
Post by Adam Sroka
Finally, keep the number of experimental improvements to a minimum. Try
doing one at a time until you get a few wins. You should probably never do
more than two or three in a single iteration.
Post by Adam Sroka
Post by s***@tieto.com
Hi,
I have been facing this problem that in retros the improvement gets
discussed but after a while when the focus is lost, it comes back in retro
that we need to improve this.
Post by Adam Sroka
Post by s***@tieto.com
Which means that improvements are not becoming business-as-usual.
How do we make sure that the retrospections take teams to the next
level and not come back to same areas in a rhythmic way.
Post by Adam Sroka
Post by s***@tieto.com
Any thoughts on this
Regds,
Sharmila
Ron Jeffries
2013-11-27 21:49:59 UTC
Permalink
Hi Cass,
Valuing individuals and interactions requires valuing emotions of said individuals, but those individuals MUST learn to set aside their negative emotions or you will continue to experience sub-optimal retrospectives.
I am aware of no requirement for people to submerge their personalities in order to thrive, in Agile nor in most other enterprises.

Ron Jeffries
www.XProgramming.com
Sometimes you just have to stop holding on with both hands, both feet, and your tail, to get someplace better.
Of course you might plummet to the earth and die, but probably not: you were made for this.
Yves Hanoulle
2013-11-27 22:56:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Cass Dalton
Emotions cannot be ignored in the retrospective,
I agree that emotions are important
that is why I start a lot of my retrospectives, with check in, a way to let
everyone speak and mention their emotions in a formulated way, to remove
the drama from the emotions


but the most common emotions that pop up in retrospectives center around
Post by Cass Dalton
egos. Becoming effective in agile requires letting go of ego.
I think I understand what you mean, yet I would not call it letting go of
ego.
people have an ego and that is fine.

I think most consultants and trainers have a huge EGO.
to take a job where we have the gut to think we can change a company/team,
you actually need a pretty big EGO.

question is, is my ego the boss or can I be open about my ego.

Ego begets blame.
Post by Cass Dalton
Ego makes people defensive.
completly disagree. that depends on how sure we are about ourselfs.
with insecure people, with a huge ego, that is true.
peopel with a lot of confidence and a big ego, you won't have that much
defensivenes...
Post by Cass Dalton
Ego inhibits collective code ownership.
again more about being insecure then about ego.
Post by Cass Dalton
Ego likes the status quo because striving to improve necessitates an
understanding that you are not perfect.
I have a huge ego, yet I'm very open to the mistakes I made.
the huge ones in life (burning down a house)
or the small ones inside the meetings (oeps, I was not clear, thank you for
pointing this out)
Post by Cass Dalton
A side effect of ego is fear, especially fear of your imperfections
showing up on a performance review.
for me a side effect of feeling insecure
Post by Cass Dalton
Valuing individuals and interactions requires valuing emotions of said
individuals, but those individuals MUST learn to set aside their negative
emotions
I disagree with the wordings it's not setting aside emotions.it's accepting
the emotions.
(mine as well as yours)

and yes I can do this easier with peopel I trust or with strangers, then
with people I don't trust.
Post by Cass Dalton
or you will continue to experience sub-optimal retrospectives.
failing is also ok in a retrospective
;-)
and for a lot of companies, I would be happy with sub-opttimal retro's. as
I have seen already a lot of retro's that are non-optimal.
sub optimal, means thaye are achieving something
;-)

I rather have that than always perfections, which is in itself setting a
very high standard and givingthe message that "failing is not an option"
which is in my opinion the most dangerous message to give in a company

y
Post by Cass Dalton
Post by Adam Sroka
I don't mean to suggest that emotions aren't relevant. However, they
shouldn't be the driving force.
If I were facilitating a kindergarten class I might want to know what
they liked and what they didn't like. With a group of software
professionals I am more interested in what we can do to better serve the
customer.
To the extent that emotions can help us orient ourselves they are useful.
My "gut" might help me identify things to focus on, but that's not even
half of the journey.
Post by Ram Srinivasan
I agree we have to improve scientifically. And the "emotional dimension"
of the problem has to be addressed first before we can move people to the
land of logical/scientific reasoning.
If we were making decisions solely based on logic and scientific
reasoning(instead of emotions influencing our decision making process ), I
bet a lot of world problems would be much easier to solve.
Just my thought.
Ram
Post by Adam Sroka
First, make sure that you focus the retro on actionable information.
Too often teams tend to focus on what they liked and what they didn't like.
Like David Anderson says, "Improve scientifically, not emotionally." I like
the "More of, less of, same" format, because it focuses on what we do
rather than what we think/feel.
Post by Adam Sroka
Second, make sure to reserve enough time to distill the items the team
chooses into measurable, achievable experiments. Consider the SMART acronym
usually applied to tasks: Small, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant,
Time-Boxed.
Post by Adam Sroka
Treat each improvement as an experiment. Determine what you are going
to change and how you are going to measure the results. Make sure that you
review the results and determine what you have learned at the next retro
before taking on anything else. Then you can decide whether to keep the
change, drop it, or do another experiment.
Post by Adam Sroka
Finally, keep the number of experimental improvements to a minimum.
Try doing one at a time until you get a few wins. You should probably never
do more than two or three in a single iteration.
Post by Adam Sroka
Post by s***@tieto.com
Hi,
I have been facing this problem that in retros the improvement gets
discussed but after a while when the focus is lost, it comes back in retro
that we need to improve this.
Post by Adam Sroka
Post by s***@tieto.com
Which means that improvements are not becoming business-as-usual.
How do we make sure that the retrospections take teams to the next
level and not come back to same areas in a rhythmic way.
Post by Adam Sroka
Post by s***@tieto.com
Any thoughts on this
Regds,
Sharmila
Cass Dalton
2013-12-03 14:53:57 UTC
Permalink
By ego, I mean conceit and self-importance. I use the term ego to
essentially mean "that which makes someone egotistical" and egotistical is
defined as "characteristic of false pride; having an exaggerated sense of
self-importance". That is the ego that I'm referring to. It is this
(sometimes even slightly) exaggerated self importance that is common among
young, passionate developers and older, jaded developers that is counter to
most of the agile principles. This form of ego is almost always associated
with some form of insecurity, which is why I made the leap that it is ego
that causes defensiveness. But you are correct; it is not the ego but the
insecurities that cause many of the problems I describe.

But in the end, that's just semantics. If you search and replace "ego" for
"insecurities" in my previous post the points still hold. It's those
negative self-importance issues that will hold a retrospective back. It's
those negative emotions that need to be worked through before the team can
make progress.

My original point is that you can't approach a retrospective scientifically
and ignore the negative emotions that are the real root causes for some of
the systemic problems the team faces.
Post by Yves Hanoulle
Post by Cass Dalton
Emotions cannot be ignored in the retrospective,
I agree that emotions are important
that is why I start a lot of my retrospectives, with check in, a way to
let everyone speak and mention their emotions in a formulated way, to
remove the drama from the emotions
but the most common emotions that pop up in retrospectives center around
Post by Cass Dalton
egos. Becoming effective in agile requires letting go of ego.
I think I understand what you mean, yet I would not call it letting go of
ego.
people have an ego and that is fine.
I think most consultants and trainers have a huge EGO.
to take a job where we have the gut to think we can change a company/team,
you actually need a pretty big EGO.
question is, is my ego the boss or can I be open about my ego.
Ego begets blame.
Post by Cass Dalton
Ego makes people defensive.
completly disagree. that depends on how sure we are about ourselfs.
with insecure people, with a huge ego, that is true.
peopel with a lot of confidence and a big ego, you won't have that much
defensivenes...
Post by Cass Dalton
Ego inhibits collective code ownership.
again more about being insecure then about ego.
Post by Cass Dalton
Ego likes the status quo because striving to improve necessitates an
understanding that you are not perfect.
I have a huge ego, yet I'm very open to the mistakes I made.
the huge ones in life (burning down a house)
or the small ones inside the meetings (oeps, I was not clear, thank you
for pointing this out)
Post by Cass Dalton
A side effect of ego is fear, especially fear of your imperfections
showing up on a performance review.
for me a side effect of feeling insecure
Post by Cass Dalton
Valuing individuals and interactions requires valuing emotions of said
individuals, but those individuals MUST learn to set aside their negative
emotions
I disagree with the wordings it's not setting aside emotions.it's
accepting the emotions.
(mine as well as yours)
and yes I can do this easier with peopel I trust or with strangers, then
with people I don't trust.
Post by Cass Dalton
or you will continue to experience sub-optimal retrospectives.
failing is also ok in a retrospective
;-)
and for a lot of companies, I would be happy with sub-opttimal retro's. as
I have seen already a lot of retro's that are non-optimal.
sub optimal, means thaye are achieving something
;-)
I rather have that than always perfections, which is in itself setting a
very high standard and givingthe message that "failing is not an option"
which is in my opinion the most dangerous message to give in a company
y
Post by Cass Dalton
Post by Adam Sroka
I don't mean to suggest that emotions aren't relevant. However, they
shouldn't be the driving force.
If I were facilitating a kindergarten class I might want to know what
they liked and what they didn't like. With a group of software
professionals I am more interested in what we can do to better serve the
customer.
To the extent that emotions can help us orient ourselves they are
useful. My "gut" might help me identify things to focus on, but that's not
even half of the journey.
Post by Ram Srinivasan
I agree we have to improve scientifically. And the "emotional
dimension" of the problem has to be addressed first before we can move
people to the land of logical/scientific reasoning.
If we were making decisions solely based on logic and scientific
reasoning(instead of emotions influencing our decision making process ), I
bet a lot of world problems would be much easier to solve.
Just my thought.
Ram
Post by Adam Sroka
First, make sure that you focus the retro on actionable information.
Too often teams tend to focus on what they liked and what they didn't like.
Like David Anderson says, "Improve scientifically, not emotionally." I like
the "More of, less of, same" format, because it focuses on what we do
rather than what we think/feel.
Post by Adam Sroka
Second, make sure to reserve enough time to distill the items the
team chooses into measurable, achievable experiments. Consider the SMART
acronym usually applied to tasks: Small, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant,
Time-Boxed.
Post by Adam Sroka
Treat each improvement as an experiment. Determine what you are going
to change and how you are going to measure the results. Make sure that you
review the results and determine what you have learned at the next retro
before taking on anything else. Then you can decide whether to keep the
change, drop it, or do another experiment.
Post by Adam Sroka
Finally, keep the number of experimental improvements to a minimum.
Try doing one at a time until you get a few wins. You should probably never
do more than two or three in a single iteration.
Post by Adam Sroka
Post by s***@tieto.com
Hi,
I have been facing this problem that in retros the improvement gets
discussed but after a while when the focus is lost, it comes back in retro
that we need to improve this.
Post by Adam Sroka
Post by s***@tieto.com
Which means that improvements are not becoming business-as-usual.
How do we make sure that the retrospections take teams to the next
level and not come back to same areas in a rhythmic way.
Post by Adam Sroka
Post by s***@tieto.com
Any thoughts on this
Regds,
Sharmila
George Dinwiddie
2013-11-25 17:30:41 UTC
Permalink
Hi, Sharmila,
Post by s***@tieto.com
I have been facing this problem that in retros the improvement gets
discussed but after a while when the focus is lost, it comes back in
retro that we need to improve this.
Which means that improvements are not becoming business-as-usual.
How do we make sure that the retrospections take teams to the next level
and not come back to same areas in a rhythmic way.
Any thoughts on this
I've read through this thread, and haven't seen any mention of
double-loop learning. Often people jump to the immediate solution to
their problem, but don't question the assumptions that underlie their
approach. Double-loop learning doesn't stop with the immediate issue,
but addresses the forces that cause the issue in the first place.

- George
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
* George Dinwiddie * http://blog.gdinwiddie.com
Software Development http://www.idiacomputing.com
Consultant and Coach http://www.agilemaryland.org
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Loading...