Agilifying Agile Coaches: Part 4 of 6 - PURITY vs PRAGMATISM

PURITY vs PRAGMATISM: Dissecting The Core Of Agile

We are now half way through our journey. We have explored a variety of angles into the practices of Agility. I now wish to turn that lens onto the core of agility itself.

I finished the last article with a warning about methodologisation. The idea that we can know all about the handling of a problem in the complex problem space is, by its very nature, the very behaviour that spawned our traditional waterfall processes. If we adopt this thinking in the Agile space, we will begin to reinvent the waterfall wheel. It may seem safe. The faux certainty may make us more content, but it will lead us back to from whence we came.

This is a huge danger for us coaches. We can easily fall prey to the very behaviours we claim to hope to help change. Frederich Nietzsche said it best:

“[You] who fights with monsters, should look to it that [you] do not become a monster. For when you stare into the [abyss], the [abyss] stares into you.”

You can substitute for abyss the word waterfall, or enterprise.

My favourite was this quote from twitter:

There is another side to methodologism as well. By taking apart an idea and analysing it in detail, you may lose site of the overall experience. I have heard it said that “Humour is like a frog. You dissect it. You kill it.”

The trouble is, the spirit of AGILE is like a frog. You dissect it, you kill it.

So what has this to do with core fundamental practices?

That is the subject of this article. “PURITY vs PRAGMATISM: Dissecting The Core Of Agile.”

As a scrum person and Certified Scrum Trainer, I am quite strict about the base core practices of Scrum. For one simple reason. I have found through experience that keeping discipline around those patterns has helped me and others deliver valuable products more effectively and with more success that when we have adopted those patterns in a weak or piecemeal fashion. In that sense, I am a purist.

The trouble with the phrase purist is that it can give people the wrong idea. It brings to mind the zealot, the fanatic, the person unconstrained by real world concerns.

They may prefer the term pragmatic. “We want a pragmatic coach who can help us make this work in the real world.”

I adore the phrase “the real world”. As if all Agile coaches live in Narnia! I used to lash back at this phrasing… until I realised by over reacting to it, all I did was give them more evidence that I was indeed the zealot they feared.

Then I had a realisation. I am pragmatic. I am a pragmatic coach.

How? Well I could argue that the last three articles have all been about pragmatism. Taking and adjusting good practices to suit teams in different contexts. Understanding the inherent agility in Agile.

But it’s more interesting than that. The term pragmatism means:

“An approach that evaluates theories or beliefs in terms of the success of their practical application.”

This is exactly what I have done with Agile and Scrum since I started "doing" it as a developer back in 2003.

You see, this is a false differentiation. It does not have to be Purity vs Pragmatism.

It could be Purity Through Pragmatism.

So, I will admit I am a FUNDAMENTALIST on the FUNDAMENTALS.

What are those fundamentals? For me, it is the Agile Principles over particular practices. (Though, as a Scrum person, I think those practices require great discipline, as well.)

The Agile Principles are NS1. The absolute core that is often overlooked. The Agile Manifesto is too high level to really be implemented beyond a mild cultural sensation, but the principles have teeth. And they bite.

When people water down Agile, they start there.

Let me introduce to something produced by an old colleague of mine, Kerry Buckley (@kerryb). He was inspired by a range of people including Ron Jeffries, one of the creators of Extreme Programming and one of the seventeen writers of the Agile Manifesto:

THE HALF-ARSED AGILE MANIFESTO. (https://www.halfarsedagilemanifesto.org)

This is a gigantic issue across industry. I cannot think of a company where they are struggling because they have been too disciplined in their Agile values, principles and practices.

I could start a list of companies suffering from a half-baked Agile approach today and would be still reciting it next week.

Watering down Agility does not make it stronger. This is not homeopathy. The placebo of visual walls and post-it notes will only carry you so far.

Depending on your particular flavour of Agile you prefer, there will be other practical things falling into this categorisation. Visualisation and minimisation would probably be in a Kanban fans box. Test Driven Development, probably in an Extreme Programmers. But those agnostic types? Those that follow no flavour? This is where we (coaches from that space) have to be careful. It is too easy for all of us, for our principles to falter in the face of pressure, pain, pleasure or pennies.

So we are going to need to be stiff. Really stiff on those values and principles. We are going to need to be unwavering in those. Remember as an Agile Coach, you have an agenda. Agile.

You are working to help them transform their own personal world of work through Agile.

I have seen arguments made by people far more successful than me, about how "Agile isn’t the destination, but an approach. A mindset to take you on a journey." True.

I have seen others use this to say that this means they are not really an agile coach, but more of a leadership/business/improvement coach. Maybe.

My fear, though, is treating Agile like another thing or widget or process is doing it a huge disservice. It is a big deal. It is a vast culture change for nearly all organisations. It is a huge structural change for anyone taking it seriously. “Flattening hierarchies”, is a euphemism for large reduction of middle management roles. It is a big thing. If it is just another tool in your toolbox, then you are not being pragmatic, you maybe being mercenary. And the one thing we must bring as a coach is passion.

You see that is often the real differentiation. Passion vs Cynicism. The one thing you can bring as a Coach is positivity. An enthusiasm. It requires no training or certificate to be an engaging and upbeat person. This makes you very different from a traditional life coach, for example, who is supposed to keep a constant neutrality.

So those issues brought up by methodologisation, corruption of the coaches behaviour and the deconstruction and thus destruction of the fundamentals of Agile approaches and Scrum? They can both be mitigated by a strong focus, deep appreciation and discipline around the twelve principles of Agile.

Be aware though, we still want to ensure these principles are not treated like religious texts. We should as coaches be able to build them with a team from first principles. Whilst that maybe overkill in some situations, having the ability to do so when needed will increase buy-in. I often find I need to do that with more senior management. Get past the jargon and back to basics. Then build.

So education and coaching of the principles can be done through different stances, whilst perhaps reinforcement or defence of those principles can be done with more direction if needed.

And that’s easy right? Well, let’s look at some of those principles:

“The most efficient and effective method of conveying information to and within a development team is face-to-face conversation.”

Do you do that? Or are you dislocated across the globe? Are you looking at the word most and thinking, “Well, actually, it doesn’t preclude distribution…”

Or “The best architectures, requirements, and designs emerge from self-organising team” and you are thinking “Well actually, it says best, and whilst I agree in principle, my product owners will still be writing all the stories..”

Or even “Business people and developers must work together daily throughout the project.” And you are thinking “Well, actually, we have ex-business analysts as proxy Products Owners. You see the word must could mean… err… Maybe….. Damn.”

Beware the Actual Well. Voltaire said: “Best is the enemy of good.”

Well, Nigel says: “Clever is often the enemy of good.”

I’m sorry if this is harsh. I’m just passionate about principles. They are bigger and harder than many realise. Let’s work on them with a bit of passion!

Being positive and passionate does not mean you have to be naive. There is an area we have to bring not only pragmatism. But a dose of cold dark reality.

CHANGE AGENCY.

Making real organisational change happen is a messy, difficult, dirty affair. It is the world of politics, and not many ScrumMasters or coaches are equipped for that challenge. There is no point us coaches being iconoclasts like Leon Trotsky (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leon_Trotsky) cursing the system from the outside. We need to be deeply wrapped in the experience, without being corrupted by it. 

I took two great pieces of advice on change from the autobiography of Tony Blair. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Blair)

Now whether you liked him or hated him, Tony Blair was one of the most successful British Prime Ministers in modern times. He came from a left-wing party but portrayed himself as a centralist on most topics. He struck me as an excellent politician, with all the positives and negatives that word infers.

The first bit of advice I have followed, is his belief that “one should never confuse strategy with tactics.”  He would (especially around the situation on the island of Ireland), often do very machiavellian acts, (such as claim that each side of the conflict wanted to speak to the other, to get the other side to admit it would speak to them.), but he would do so with the positive strategy of trying to bring peace. A far greater good. Now as a Coach, I think these are two extremes examples, but the overall metaphor does hold true. We need to mentally separate acts we take in organisational change from the aim of the change. There will be tactics that may not align 100% with our intended direction in the long-term, but are necessary for now, and we should not confuse them for the end goal. This is not being flexible with principles but with how we get there.

His second piece of advice, was around the concept of goodwill or karma.

Blair broached the idea that every Prime Minister (elected leader) has a certain amount of goodwill or karma with parliament, with their party and with the general public themselves when they are elected.

Many leaders waste this goodwill, frivolously. Later in their leadership, they have a great need for this goodwill. They need to use it for some great and important change. And it is all spent. The leader is in trouble.

When we think of “the cost” of organisation change, we often think in cash money. Never in goodwill. All ScrumMasters and Agile Coaches (and organisational leaders!) have a bank of goodwill they can draw upon. Many go overdrawn pretty quickly and expire. Whether resignation, firing or sidelining, they are no more. They are an ex-coach. Coaches need to nurse their bankroll and build it up. Carefully and intelligently. And then spend it wisely.

I have a big concern that the way many Agile Coaches are employed, has a huge effect on goodwill. “Low level” team coaches are employed as contractors for six month “gigs”. In this model, we are given little reason to care about genuinely improving people’s lives. We may be interested in keeping our day-rate. Mercenaries do not incite great loyalty. Perhaps the model we use to engage could be destroying our ability to engage? We are in checkmate from the first move? Your level of goodwill starts low, lacks the structural ability to go up in any sustained way and the clock is ticking…..

Again, this is where we have hard choices to make. Years ago, I was given the advice that the price you charge has a huge influence on the huge influence you can bear. If you charge more, people take you more seriously. That’s easier said than done.

COMMERICAL WARNING –Whilst you may not believe it reading these articles, I am a capitalist not a communist. I have personally tried to influence this troubled world of organisational change by putting together some online training videos.

Enterprise Agile Transformation For Coaches.

Available for purchase here: (https://www.frontrowagile.com/courses/enterprise-agile-transformation-for-coaches/overview)

The videos consist of one or two grand philosophies, but mostly a range of practical tips. After all, Rome was not built in a day!

My philosophy was to try and lower the cost of entry into some of that knowledge, whilst still commercialising them and making some money.

After all, even the most passionate coach is not a priest. This is a job, and requires pay.

That is being pragmatic! :-)

So, over four articles we have visited a range of ideas, concepts and models on putting some agile into the phrase "Agile Coach".

For the last two articles, we are going to visit the other word. Coach.

See you all next week for "Get By With A Little Help From My Friends."

Here is article 5: https://lnkd.in/d4N9jsd