Agile: Most Enterprise Agile Transformations Suck and this is why!
Victor Hugo Certuche, SPC 6
Holistic Agilist at Scaled Agile Experts, LLC
No mater where we go, the story is almost always the same: Most companies are very aware of Agile, but only few are succeeding with it.
In the previous post we discussed how unless people adopt an Agile Mindset, most of the work around practices (e.g. Scrum) and (e.g. SAFe) result in poor outcomes.
This time we will explore how human attachment to traditional Power causes even more damage when it comes to the now infamous Agile Transformation Office (ATO) and Corporate Agile Culture.
Just like its predecesor, the PMO, the ATO is another abomination that is rearing its ugly head in most organizations and morphing into the same Command and Control BS that was emblematic of the PMO.
It does not help that big consulting companies are trying to get into the game and using the same old Command and Control techniques to make recommendations to companies about how to manage the Agile Transformation.
Most ATOs now have a principal Officer that has become the worst Dictator possible under the disguise of being the Senior ATO officer, Agile Transformation Office PO, etc.
The reality is that the same dictatorships of the past are emerging everywhere causing good Coaches to leave and only mediocre ones to stay.
On top of the new dictatorships, we also have the whole Transformation Group too happy to congratulate themselves all the time for following the transformation recipe and having grandiose ceremonies while at the same time not delivering real value to the end customers.
Agile is a truly powerful alternative to the traditional way of managing work because it encapsulates the best approaches to a relentless change environment of the present.
Focusing on following recipes for the sake of doing so without understanding that our ultimate goal is to Deliver Value to our customers only serve those betting that Agile will fail. Anything that gets is the way of delivering value, even Scrum, Kanban, SAFe, LeSS, etc, need to be revised and altered in order to serve our customers. Thinking that everything can be done with Scrum or SAFe only makes us look like hammers seeing nails everywhere.
Finally, it is appalling to see how Agile is now used to create an inner crowd to the detriment of collaboration and inclusion. There is nothing wrong with considering other approaches and keeping an open mind to them. Agility is about adaptability and close-mindedness is definitely not Agile.
We need to make sure that all true Agents of Change, true Agile Coaches, call out these regrettable actions wherever we go or risk loosing Agile to the pits of ugly human behavior. There is nothing wrong with Agile, there is a hell lot wrong with Dictators and inner-crowd morons using Agile to appear to shine when they are truly black holes sucking the beauty of Agility along the way.
Passionate about marketing, coaching and consultancy | Willing to learn new things and grow continuously
6 年Absolutely right, good detection...?
Marketing Professional | Strategy | SaaS | K12 Edtech | B2B | Product Marketing | Lead Generation | Content Marketing | Sales-led Growth | Build out strategy, processes and teams for start ups with traction.
6 年"Anything that gets is the way of delivering value, even Scrum, Kanban, SAFe, LeSS, etc, need to be revised and altered in order to serve our customers. Thinking that everything can be done with Scrum or SAFe only makes us look like hammers seeing nails everywhere."?? I definitely agree!
Holistic Agilist at Scaled Agile Experts, LLC
6 年To the question of how do we start changing the ATO and the Agile Culture? https://www.dhirubhai.net/pulse/20141010182537-1571894-the-10-principles-of-the-law-of-jante-lagom-and-agile/
Transformation Manager at Sopra Banking Software
6 年Interesting thoughts. I do have an opinion though, the core issue with the ATOs and the role itself could be the decision making centralisation. ATOs could be really effective and "pertinent" to the cause if the organisational design allows teams to really take decisions. That the objective of change is passed to ATO causes people to take decisions to enforce change, and your article reflects those symptoms. I think a good change management programme still calls for a Change Manager, who works with many representatives inside teams and communities to let the teams eventually effectuate the change. But like a scrum master, you definitely need a Change Master !