4. Not making the decisions that need to be made for fear of rocking the boat
People frequently say the right things but when it really comes down to it, they balk at making the tough decisions that need to be made. Numerous examples abound:

Some senior managers have the dangerous need to be well liked by the people whom they lead. This is problematic as it makes them hesitant on holding people accountable for their behavior or failure to deliver results. Not giving people feedback they need to improve ultimately hurts the organization’s ability to produce results. This situation is particularly true in small companies where the executive team has a relatively close personal relationship with the employees. The prospect of alienating an employee who is also a friend, can make even the most results-oriented executive pull back.

Another common occurrence is when “paper-pushers” — who desire to maintain the status quo as that is what has gotten them to the position they are at now — consistently ask “innocent” questions that seem reasonable on the surface, but only serve to delay the implementation of any change initiative. Their incessant requests for more documentation and more supporting data only serves as a delaying tactic. Unfortunately, these folk are extremely adept at politics and will go to extreme lengths to not make waves.

Companies “adopt” Scrum but then fail to hold teams accountable Sprint after Sprint. In some companies, executives shy away from upsetting the applecart — holding people accountable may cause churn. Some teams may have very poor performers who are clearly unsuitable for the job, but none of the other team members have the courage or the desire to raise the issue. Problem individuals (freeloaders) will usually not be tolerated by high performing teams. A team’s performance is limited by the least invested individual. Such people dampen everyone else’s morale and it is essential to quickly counteract people who habitually over-promise, make excuses, reject responsibility, complain, and lack commitment.

In the examples above, the person must decide whether they are really for improved performance or rather for continuing to live with mediocrity. If the former, then they should clearly define and communicate behavioral expectations up-front and also clearly communicate the consequences of not changing. Teams that commit to decisions and standards do not hesitate to hold one another accountable. They also do not rely on the leader as the only source of accountability.

Clearly, a major determinant of the ultimate success of any agile transformation initiative is the degree of personal agility present in the employees. Executives and C-level management has to first model the desired behavior and then set clear behavioral expectations for their subordinates. Failure to do so usually results in the agile transformation initiative to not be successful; when front-line employees realize that their management is just paying lip service to the change effort, they usually lose interest — those who have internalized the agile principles and values often jump ship to another organization where they feel they will be supported in actually delivering value to the customers.

Pages: 1 2 3 4