The conversation went something like this.

“People who know they are being assessed will pay more attention in a training course or at their daily work. We need to use exams and assessments to getthem to pay more attention because otherwise they will just flake off. People are inherently lazy and we need to make sure they work.”

The conversation above sounds like a hidden threat. The threat I see goes something like… If you miss something you are in trouble on the exam or “Pointy Haired Dude” is watching…. This is an old school paradigm that destroys critical thinking in my experience. For example, the issue of an Exam has dogged classic PMP training and has generally pulled down the quality of critical thinking across the spectrum of corporate environments. It dogs classic workshop training when the conversation moves from “whats the best way to think about this ….. to ….. will this be on the Exam? If not on the exam then, can we move on to stuff that will be on the exam?”

When people become more concerned about the exam or assessment they have often stopped thinking critically. For agile training, which is most of what I do these days, people can easily fall back to old learning styles of known answers to known questions. Most of today’s business problems are demandingly complex and do not have predictable outcomes. A test or exam is a simple predictive Q/A model and that includes the situational stuff as well. For situational stuff, I just memorize the abstract pattern for which the situational question is written for and then answer according to the pattern. To deal with complexity people need an empirical thought process for the finding stuff we don’t know we don’t know. Cramming more factoids into adult heads is counter productive. As adults we typically have more than enough information crammed in our heads. The question becomes “Can we make better use of what we already know or have experienced to deal with uncertainty?”

In my experience, open reflective learning will occur and empirical behavior will result when, as a trainer/leader to I make the environment safe for learning. As a manager/director of people the same policy holds true, if you punish people for making mistakes they will stop making mistakes by trying not to do to much beyond what is painfully obvious that needs doing. In either case, learninig is shut down for knowlege workers. Sharing of knowledge, both tacit and explicit, comes to a halt and the organization’s ability to learn atrophies because those muscles are no longer being used. At this point the best we can achieve is a pursuit of efficiency and what you find is a focus on faster / cheaper / quicker. Anything that is different and innovative gets squeezed out by the fear of not doing something that is well understood and controllable.

Innovation is needed across most areas of today’s corporation. Learning should be part and parcel to every engaging job and challenge. For innovation to occur people need to focus on learning and that means expect mistakes. If they do not feel safe they will make feeble attempts to do some new things but, never really bravely reach out of their comfort zone. If you are hiring for factory / robot type positions then expect robots but, knowledge workers are key for innovative culture and fresh ideas.

People in my workshops pay attention because they care and I care. It is a social bond. As a leader/trainer you set a behavior pattern that will be modeled. Are you modeling “I am watching you!” ? People that work/report to me pay attention because we both care to do the best. Those that don’t care can and should be asked to leave or excuse themselves until they sort out their destructive tendencies. I call not caring destructive because it destroys empirical behavior .

Generally, it is useless to retain people that do not care. In most cases the overhead of managing them is in excess of not having them there. Which sadly means I am better off doing the job myself. As a leader or trainer your first job should be to foster an atomosphere where learning is safe and encourage your people to become learning machines. Better teams make better people who make better products.

• At the forefront of learning is where innovation occurs.
• Learning is about knowledge creation (see Nonaka’s paper).
• Knowledge creation is an interactive process.Organizations that foster learning reach new heights.
• People that are in learning mode are paying the best kind of attention.
• A good scrum process enables the team learning process.

Maybe I am completely off my rocker but, I found the conversation interesting.
Comments?
- Doug

VersionOne was kind enough to invite me as a presenter to a small conference event in Austin on December 7th 2009. The Austine keynote went well and I was lucky enough to be ranked as the best presenter at the event. There were 90+ people in attendance and 78 people filled in an evaluation.

Catch me in Austin, TX delivering a Keynote for the Agile Journal December 7th,  http://www.accurev.com/seminar/austin20091208-4

Recommended

If you are in the San Francisco Area then check out this conference. This conference is being organized by experts in the field of product development. They will be using the power of serious game play to identify what will make for a great product that people will love.  Those familar with complex product development already know that “building the right thing” is the greatest risk to development. This  conference offers unique skills to help you reduce that risk.

1 day – June 26th,  2009

Innovation, Design & Serious Games Exchange

Organized by Enthiosys and Other Great Companies

I will not be there because of prior commitments but, would highly recomed for ScrumMasters and Product Owners who face the tough challenge of building world class products that people love.

Register

Cost: $50-$90 (depending on options money well spent)

A great recent blog post by Vikas Hazrati caught my eye.

The story starts like this …

You have been feeling great. Recently, you met a lot of people in \the software community who knew little about Agile and you felt good telling them on how you are practicing Agile on your new project. You tell them about the wonders it has done to the business value delivered to the client and how your work life balance has improved since you started following Agile methodologies religiously. How you have felt so committed to the project that you are working on a that you have a great team of professionals.

So far so good.

The climax in the story comes on that dreaded Friday evening when the less committed people of the organization, which includes all of your team, are give the pink slip, and of course you are one of them!

You wonder, Why us, Why me, How the hell am I not committed? I thought that after years of developing software the wrong way this is the first time that you have done the things right, then why? The reason is that somehow your organization believes that you are not committed. Neither to the organization nor your work.

This is not a surprising outcome and all to common. Agile has gone mainstream but it will be attacked from many angles.

My Observations

The current systems are thought models, essentially living thought models, changing them is slow and painful.  Like any living thing when it is attacked or challenged it will fight back and lash out in fear, anger, igonorance and for pure simple survival. The people defending the old tired models of thinking are simple acting reasonable from their frame of reference.

Additionally, for big companies to even recognize that they have an incredibly valuable asset in a well formed team is a huge step acknowledge that performing teams are capital assets. With a great team I can deploy it towards a challenging business problem and generate a myriad of ways to thrive. Knowledge is a commodity, it is the ability to do something useful with that knowledge that will distinguish these companies long term. Eliminating your good teams (capital assets) from the business is fiscally irresponsible and it will come back to haunt the organization.

Expect real change to take years. You can do things to dramatically accelerate this change but, you have to be very thoughtful about your approach. It will not rely solely on a rationalized conversation (i.e. 1+1 = 2) people just don’t care when it comes to habits and perceptions driven from an emotional bases. And like it or not we are most often dealing with emotional issues since our rationalizations are anchored by an emotional part of our brain. Intentionally changing behavior is a long haul propositioin and the scrum framework is an means to inspect and adapt a change state into existence.

- Doug

http://3back.com

I hope you enjoy. Please leave a comment on your experience.

Look for more videos coming soon from a wide audience of practitioners, coaches and trainers.

1.) http://friendfeed.com/dailyscrum/a57c3474/scrum-users-group-controversy-agile

2.) http://www.infoq.com/news/2009/04/scrum-alliance-user-group

Context

“As discussed here previously, the Scrum Alliance plays an important role in helping to preserve the Scrum framework through its certification process. Because it has standardized the experience required for various “certified” positions in Scrum, the terminology used to describe Scrum, and, of course, the framework itself, the Alliance has armed thousands of software professionals with the practical knowledge they need to advance in a career in Scrum. I’ve always considered their work to be obviously valuable for individuals seeking training, but also an important reason why Scrum has flourished in recent years.”

Why

Scrum user groups, Agile user groups, XP users groups many of these I have seen come and go. I have tried and been unsuccessful at sustaining these groups and have seen similar patterns from others. However, I have followed others who were experienced and they have taught me.

It is my experience that these groups are driven by people who are not use to some necessary deliberate (self included) structure. Deliberate structure includes officers, organizing boards, keeping it interesting, volunteering, stimulating vibrancy and “marks (like SCRUMUSERGROUP)” from International organizations that help with credibility. These structures help groups sustain their existence. SPIN Groups have years of history, PMI groups have years of history, APLN has better success (different make up of people on average)Agile groups often seem to pop and die like grapes on the vine.

The Scrum Alliance is offering help by holding these marks and building brand value. Structure / value so that the group adopts some deliberate structure to stay organized enough to sustain it’s existence. We (agile community) need to learn from other groups that have a history and stop being so scared when something looks restrictive.

Doug Shimp
http://www.3back.com

Remote coaching or distributed coaching can be done through numerous mechanisms.  You can connect with me via phone, Various Online Meetings, Skype, ooVoo, or high definition video. You can connect with me directly on my Contact. Follow my micro blog on Daily Scrum on Twitter or ping me via Skype.

Are you ready to frame scrum in your organization? – Read Promises to Frame Scrum

I have mixed feelings about the exam. Will it be good for the community and agile in general. Will we start to delivery courses that teach to the exam and stop delivering courses that encourage people to think agile.

There is more than enough training out there that teaches people to pass tests. What is needed and lacking are courses that encourage people to think through problems, especially, in an agile way.

Both the students and I fear that something might be lost from the course if we (trainers) are forced to teach from an exam. The forces on us will be students/clients who only take the course if it helps them pass the exam.

- More later

Doug

More thoughts on twitter