I am currently writing weekly here and have all my 2020 posts here.
Continuous Improvement Vs. Continuous Suckage
Published: August 24, 2017
- A facilitator helps the team run a good retrospective (and learn how to run their own retrospectives)
- Underscore spirit of blameless retro. Establish safety. Provide coaching prior to retro if needed. Team able to “get real”
- Accentuate the good. What’s working? What should we amplify?
- Review output of prior retro. Team bubbles up new internal and external issues impacting their performance (ideally supported with qualitative and quantitative data).
- Team also reflects on success of continuous improvement efforts
- Team prioritizes issues to fix and brainstorms possible interventions
- Team secures help for resolving external blockers (and establishes way to track these blockers)
- Team tries limited number of interventions
- If certain issues persist, agree to escalate issues to a trusted leader for help and support
- Manager facilitates retro without prior experience
- Team afraid to “rat out” co-workers and/or threaten their individual job prospects
- Punt on dealing with interpersonal issues. Doesn’t “get real”
- New processes created to fill trust void and “prove who is slacking”. Manager opts to deal with individuals directly, and not whole team. Manager dictates process
- Turns into blame session
- Team gets tired of bringing up chronic issues (especially external issues, that never get addressed) or brings them up and gets chastised for not being team players
- Lack of accountability for continuous improvement efforts. High “change in progress”
- External communication owned by manager, who attempts to preserve optics. Lack of coherence
- Repeat. Long delivery cycles masks actual progress
- If issues persist, manager and team develop alternate narratives to protect their self interests