Spikes And Stories

Scrum tips and agile insights from a Silicon Valley agile coach

Are Agile Coaches Actually Coaching?

by 7 Comments

I almost didn’t publish this post since it felt derivative. People much smarter than I have covered this topic in greater depth and elegance than I ever could. Lyssa Adkins comes to mind. Nonetheless, I think André Gide sums up why we’re here:

Everything that needs to be said has already been said. But since no one was listening, it must be said again.

Many–maybe even most–agile coaches aren’t operating as coaches and aren’t actually coaches themselves. Many of them are often operating as consultants or mentors and may not even understand the difference. That’s not to say they’re not offering a valuable service. Many are. However, this kind of disregard has led to autocracies like Dark Scrum and the Agile Industrial Complex, and we should work to mitigate the continued damage.

Isn’t it coaching 101 that teaches us that we can’t coach someone subversively? That we require explicit permission from our clients? Why then do so many supposed agile coaches impose their will on teams rather than invite them to be part of the process? As I work with teams, the scars of this are obvious, and the trouble it creates endless. So today let’s talk about how the roles of consultants, mentors, and coaches differ.

[Read more…]

Why Transactional Leadership Sucks

by Leave a Comment

Transactional leadership makes me cringe. Transactional leaders focus on title and hierarchy. They search for and crave prestige and authority. It all feels so political, and it’s a real problem for me.

You manage things. You lead people.

Grace Hopper

Maybe it’s quotes like this that began my rub. Or maybe it’s my preference for what I typically call relational leadership. Research agrees that transformational (aka relational) leaders have a positive effect on employee retention so why wouldn’t we always leverage a relationship-first style of leading our people?

Then again, maybe I’ve had it wrong all this time. Maybe they’re not so bad, and at times, maybe I’m a transactional leader myself.

Scary thought.

[Read more…]

No One Thinks They Lack a Bias Toward Action

by 2 Comments

People often talk about the value of a bias toward action. I know I did, but I believe I was mistaken. Why? No one thinks they lack a bias toward action. After all, busyness and productivity are hard to tell apart. For example, I remember a younger me who didn’t have GPS. When I was lost, I would never stop and ask for direction. So while I was putting miles on the car, I really wasn’t going anywhere.

My point is I think it’s time we reframe our notion of action. Let’s call it a bias toward progress instead. It’s forward movement we’re after, right? Or maybe it’s conscious or intentional movement since sometimes going backward or sideways teaches us something important. So how does a bias toward action differ from a bias toward progress? Let’s talk about that today.

[Read more…]

Trust Is Consistency Over Time

by 2 Comments

I can’t tell you how many times I heard LinkedIn’s former CEO Jeff Weiner echo these words.

Trust is consistency over time. There’s no shortcut for either.

It’s great advice whether we’re an aspiring or experienced leader. And I think it’s just as appropriate for coaches. Why? We don’t have this pesky thing called authority, which tempts managers to impose their solutions on others. Instead, we coaches are naturally curious and have a desire to bring awareness to those around us. And since we’ve previously talked about trust, let’s talk today about what consistency looks like and why it matters.

In 2016, researchers conducted a study to investigate the relationship between uncertainty and stress. In it, participants were asked to play a computer simulation where they would turn over rocks. They received a mild electric shock when a snake was found under a rock but received no shock when no snake was found. The results were astounding. I had imagined that those receiving the shock 100% of the time would be the most stressed, but that’s not what the study found. Instead, those shocked 50% of the time–those dealing with the highest amount of uncertainty–had the highest levels of stress.

[Read more…]
%d bloggers like this: