November 20, 2005

Amplifying Learning Through Fostering Critical Reflection

I have written previously about the tendency we have to limit future learning based on previous learning. This tendency has aptly been termed by Mezirow as the central learning problem of adulthood: "that we fail to notice that failing to notice shapes our thoughts and deeds." In Transformative Learning literature a central method advocated for overcoming this learning problem is critical reflection. Critical reflection is the act of becoming conscious of our beliefs and assumptions (Where do they come from? Are they valid? What are their limitations? etc.) and either expanding, validating or discarding them.

Stephen Brookfield has written extensively about critical reflection and the following is a brief summary of a part of a chapter he wrote in a text on adult and continuing education entitled "The Concept of Critically Reflective Practice."

Brookfield outlines Four Traditions of Criticality found in different fields:

Ideology critique
It is based on a premise that uncritically accepted and unjust dominant ideologies are embedded in everyday situation and practices. The purpose of ideology critique is to examine these assumptions in order to effect change at the social and institutional level. An example of this kind of approach to learning is found in the work of American popular educator Myles Horton. As the founder of Highlander Folk School, during the civil rights movement he started literacy program for African Americans. Study groups would learn to read while engaging in ideology critique in their own lives and communities using the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as a the text.

Psychoanalytic and psycho therapeutically inclined critique
These are traditions that work on identifying and reappraising limitations created through childhood traumas. This tradition advocates individual and group therapy for personal learning and development for the purpose of integration of all aspects of self.

Analytic philosophy and logic
This is the tradition that for most is closely associated to critical reflection. Here critical reflection means to recognize logical fallacies and see the difference between bias and fact and opinion and evidence, and become effective at using different forms of reasoning.

Pragmatic Constructivism
This tradition is based on the premise that reality is perceived, that is, we construct our own meaning out of experiences. The focus here is how people interpret their experience v.s. universal and recognizable truths. There is also a strong emphasis on creating new realities together.

Brookfield proposes that to engage in reflection is not the same as engaging in critical reflection. His understanding of critical reflection is centered on ideology critique rooted in the pragmatic constructivist approach. Renowned Brazilian educator Paulo Friere speaks of a similar process by which adults "achieve a deepening awareness of both the sociocultural reality which shapes their lives and... their capacity to transform that reality through action." Ideology critique is rarely used in the work place. For the most part a culture of conformity and obedience is promoted by organizations.

Brookfield presents a picture of what the process may look like: "The adult educator's task is that of helping people articulate their experience in dialogic circles and then encouraging them to review this through the multiple lenses provided by colleagues in the circle. On the basis of these collaborative critical reflections on experience adults reenter the work to take critically informed actions that are then brought back to the circle for further critical analysis."

To engage in collaborative critical reflection based on a rhythm of action and reflection is not only a process of building collective knowledge and consensus, but also strong foundations for both trans formative learning in the work place and thriving self-organized teams. It is also a way to discover appropriate forms of metrics because it helps people apply multiple lenses of analysis to their work.

Critical reflection should be taught to teams through modeling. For example the coach disclosing his/her won process of critical reflection. Critical reflection should no be associated with self berating and putting others down or the culture of "telling it like it is" without regard for others.

Try the list of questions in the extended text to get a sense of how your work as an Agile practitioner (or whatever work you do) can be enhanced by critical reflection.


Critical Reflection Questions for the Educator
Taken from "Understanding and Promoting Transformative learning"
By: Patricia Cranton


What is my self concept as an educator?

How is my self concept as an educator a part of my self concept outside my profession?

To what degree do I feel I have personal control in my work as an educator?

What do I like and dislike about being an educator?

What personal needs does being an educator fulfill?

How does my personality suit or not suit my being an educator?

Self awareness of sociolinguistics perspective on being an educator:

What are the perceptions of an educator in my community?

How do the media represent educators?

Was my decision to be an educator influenced by my cultural background?

What social role should an educator take?

How does society script or determine educator roles?

What language is used to talk of an educator’s work, and what do these terms or phrases imply about other’s perceptions?

Do people treat me differently when they know that I am an educator? If so, how?

What are my learners’ expectations of the role of educator?

What are my organization’s or institutions expectations of educators?

Where and how did I gain my knowledge of being an educator?

What is my teaching style?

What is my philosophy of educations?

What is my learning style?

How much do I know about being an educator? How much more might there be to learn?

How much do I think about being an educator?

How do I (would I) evaluate my performance as an educator?

What do my learners and colleagues say about me as an educator?

Do I see myself as always being an educator?

What aspects of being an educator am I most interested in?

Posted by Shabnam Tashakour at 11:55 PM | |

November 09, 2005

Agile Work Uses Lean Thinking - Empirical Process Control

This is Part 2 of a 3 part series.
Part 1
Part 3 - not posted yet :-)

Some work processes cannot be perfectly controlled nor perfectly defined. There may be non-linear interactions between steps in a process or there may be creative input from a human required. Processes with these qualities require empirical process control.
The basic attribute of empirical process control constitutes a continuous cycle of inspecting the process for correct operation and results and adapting the process as needed. A simple example of this is detecting impending failure of equipment by constantly monitoring the operation of that equipment. For Agile Work, the book Agile Software Development with Scrum provides an excellent chapter about this topic of Empirical Process Control.

In human processes like those to which Agile Work applies, the frequency of inspecting and adapting must match the needs of the process. Many projects occur in the context of constant change. This constant change makes long-term planning a wasteful effort. Rather, short-term planning with constant feedback provides a simple inspect and adapt cycle. This cycle can play out at different levels: daily for a team, monthly for a client of the team. The team inspects and adapts daily at the level of the tasks that it is performing. The client inspects and adapts monthly at the level of the team's actual delivered results.

Both lean and agile methods claim to increase both speed and quality. Many people believe that there are four constraints in a system that can be controlled: speed (or schedule, or time to market, or process cycle time), quality (number of defects), scope (how much functionality), and cost savings (how much to spend on the work). Frequently, management believes that one has to trade off between these four constraints; spend more money, get more scope; lower quality, go faster. But in fact, lean and agile strongly support the idea that as you increase quality, you also increase speed... you just have to do it right.

In Agile Work, increasing speed and quality is done in three ways. First, increase the frequency and quality of communication among team members so that errors are detected early or avoided altogether. Second, drive the work with the creation and execution of automated testing. No work is done without a test in place to check if it is done correctly. This constant testing means that work is always defect-free and therefore very little time/money is spent on fixing defects. Third, eliminate wasteful work steps or obstacles to performance of work. This last one is difficult to do an bears closer examination.

Wasteful work is done in every process, no matter how efficient. Lean tells us that there are several types of waste in a manufacturing process. Those types of waste have analogies in Agile Work. For example, documenting something you plan to do instead of just doing it is wasteful. Another example is waiting while someone completes work that you depend upon. Any step or task that does not add value to the final product of an effort is waste. This standard is very high and most organizations have about 80% of their efforts going into wasteful tasks. An organization that has done an initial cut of wasteful work might stand at about 50% waste. The leanest organizations, such as Toyota, stand at about 20% waste.

Agile work eliminates waste in the form of barriers or obstacles that come up when a team is trying to go fast. Sometimes this is in the form of waiting for another group to do something for the agile team... an outsourced request for service. Sometimes waste is in the form of corporate standards or policies around documentation of work. The Process Facilitator role in an agile team has responsibility for working with the team and others to help overcome these obstacles.

Posted by Mishkin Berteig at 02:08 PM | |

October 11, 2005

Is There a Single "Most Important" Agile Work Practice?

There are a few times that I have been involved with implementing agile pratices without management knowledge or direct support. In these cases it has usually been necessary to gradually introduce the practices. An unsupportive or apathetic environment cannot be changed instantly and big-bang introduction of agile tends to bring too much negative attention too quickly.

In reflecting on those experiences, as well as "normal" agile implementations, I have felt that there are some specific practices that can stand alone.

Self-Organizing Teams

The practice of a self-organizing team consists of frequent regular status meetings, face-to-face, reporting to the other team members accomplishments, work commitments and obstacles. Scrum has a very strict method of doing this on a daily basis but I have found it valuable to do more or less frequently depending on the team and its environment (generally any less than every second day is not enough). The team, or some assistant of some sort, tracks the barriers and works to resolve them quickly. Management, if it exists, must be contacted through trusted channels to assist with the removal of barriers. And stakeholders must be able to attend the status meetings or receive reports immediately after the meetings.

This single practice tends to have the ability to bootstrap the others. The identification and clearing of barriers provides a way for the team to practice all three Agile Work Disciplines (Empower the Team, Amplify Learning, Eliminate Waste). Reporting accomplishments to the other team members Amplifies Learning. Committing to work is empowering.

Some teams have done only this single agile practice and seen great improvements in productivity, morale, and stakeholder satisfaction. However, there are some pitfalls that must be acknowledged and dealt with.

Pitfall: Speculative Work

The team can tend towards speculative work if there is no strong representative of the stakeholders. This does not always happen since most people are sincere in their desire to "make a difference". However, if as a team you adopt only this practice and find yourselves doing lots of "what-if?" or "wouldn't it be neet if..." or "what exactly is our purpose?" discussions, then you need to find some external stakeholder support for your effort.

Pitfall: Failing to Deliver

In many organizations, failure to deliver is an endemic problem and a self-organizing team will break through and start delivering. However, failure to deliver can also become a cultural mindset for an organization or group. A self-organizing team must maintain a goal (not a plan) for itself, and that goal must include delivering something valuable. Again, finding an external stakeholder to support the team's efforts can help to avoid this pitfall.

Pitfall: No Barriers

Sometimes a team will get into a habit where no new barriers are being exposed. This can often happen when the progress in the work becomes steady and is recognizably better than it was before. The team falls into a "local optimum". In this case, the team needs a fresh way to view their work. This can happen in a number of ways: a crisis, an external observer, or a change in environment among others.

...

Do you have experience with successful but incomplete agile implementations? I would love to hear of other experiences and opinions about this.

Posted by Mishkin Berteig at 02:42 PM | |

October 10, 2005

Agile, the Adult Educator and Ethical Considerations

A review of Tara J. Fenwick's “Limits of the Learning Organization: A Critical Look” (article found in Learning for life: Canadian readings in adult education).

This article is a critique of learning organization literature (as presented in the works of Peters, Senge, Watkins, Marsick, Argyris, Schon and others). I chose to do a review of it because learning organization literature can and does inform the work of Agile practitioners. The writer, Tara Fenwick, offers a critique of this literature as an academic and practitioner in the field of adult education. Even though the language and tone of the article is judgmental and at times affronting to the corporate trainer audience, it is never-the-less challenging and valuable because she raises interesting ethical questions that can serve as cautions against potential trends that can distort agile practice. I will summarize her argument in the some of the areas most relevant to Agile practice.

Fenwick's summary of the model of learning organization found in the literature, is an organization that: “creates continuous learning opportunities, promotes inquiry and dialog, encourages collaboration and team learning, establishes systems to capture and share learning, empowers people toward collective vision and connects the organization to its environment.”

The following is a summary list of some of Fenwick's critiques:

Who's Interests are Served
Although the learning organization literature holds great promise for a more humanitarian and egalitarian workplace, it has the potential to distort learning “into a tool for competitive advantage” and in turn, exploit people as resources in the pursuit of profit. To explore this idea she asks a valuable question: “Who's interests are being served by the concept of learning organization, and what relations of power does it help to secure?” She argues that learning organization literature tends to serve the interests of educators working as trainers in organizations and managers interested in their own self preservation.

How Learning is Defined
Learning, in learning organization literature seems to be defined as that which benefits the organization, all other learning falls into the dysfunctional category. This perspective negates other ways that people create meaning and learn and potentially causes a person to become “alienated from their own meaning and block flourishing of this learning into something to benefit the community.”

Assumptions about Learners
The learning organization literature subordinates employees by seeing them as “undifferentiated learners-in-deficit”. Educators and managers are the architects of the learning organization while employees are busy “learning more, learning better and faster” trying to correct their knowledge deficit. In the learning organization workers become responsible for the health of the organization without the authority to determine alternative ways to reach that health. The fear of being left behind in a quickly changing market environment is used to create anxiety and fear as motivations for learning. All of these factors serve to put serious limits on the potential of people to learn in the work environment.

Diversity and Privilege Overlooked
Perspectives of race, class and gender -which research has shown affects the way people learn and collaborate- are lacking in the literature. Fenwick challenges the notion of achieving a democratically ideal situation for open dialog -that the learning organization literature calls for- when all people in the work place do not “have equal opportunity to participate, reflect, and refute one another” (for example because of the status of ones job, character, gender, class, age etc.)

Fenwick sheds a clear light on where the good philosophies of the learning organization are found wanting. The Agile community can benefit from asking some of the same ethical questions she asks in relation to our work. Her critique is a good challenge for Agile practitioners. It challenges us to:

Reflecting on these issues will go a long way to contributing to the development of agile practice.

The full text of an old version of Fenwick's article can be found here.

Posted by Shabnam Tashakour at 09:35 PM | |

October 07, 2005

Agile Coach/Mentor Job Description (Process Facilitator)

Given the Agile Axioms and Disciplines then an agile coach or mentor should have some really specific experience and capabilities. This list constitutes a first attempt at a job description.

Experience:
- working in strictly timeboxed iterations with adaptive planning using some sort of prioritized work list
- working in a "test-driven" manner (e.g. writing a document for a client where the client specifies acceptance criteria)
- participating in frequent status meetings where the team members report to each other, commit to work and identify barriers
- building and maintaining big visible charts to show progress and status (e.g. the standard thermometer chart to show progress towards a numerical goal)
- fashioning appropriate tracking and performance metrics that encourage team work rather than individual competition
- helping other people to adopt and adapt all these practices

Capabilities:
- promoting collaboration in challenging circumstances
- searching for truth/a solution relentlessly
- honesty and trustworthiness
- a learning attitude (proactive and learning from mistakes)
- humility and assertiveness
- guiding people without controlling them
- detachment (ability to step out of a situation)
- an attitude of service without expecting recompense
- understanding of transformative learning
- conflict resolution as learning (not negotiation)
- encouraging creativity

Not Required:- technical experience related to the work of the team - the Agile Coach (process facilitator) should not be a performer on the team
- domain experience related to the goal of the work - the Agile Coach should not be a direct stakeholder in the results of the work

However, technical experience and domain experience can sometimes help...


Suggestions and ideas are greatly appreciated!

Posted by Mishkin Berteig at 12:33 PM | |

September 27, 2005

Tools Versus Capabilities Approach To Agile Training

Which approach is most valuable in training that fosters collaborative work for the purpose of optimizing the performance of an organization: a tools / methodologies approach or an inner capabilities approach? The typical orientation that most organizations take is often external and rule-based. This consists of creating methodologies, rules, boundaries, systems and processes to enhance collaboration.

These external approaches ultimately fail to have a lasting effect on people and the culture of the organization because they don't address change at the level of habits of mind. People then work in the new structure with the same patterns of behaviour. Behind this kind of surface approach to change are assumptions about human nature. At worst this consists of a belief that people are base (greedy, selfish etc.) by nature. At best that people are fundamentally good but cannot improve except through external measures. It is true that we need external systems and structures to give expression to our inner capabilities, to test, foster and develop them in action. However all the investment that companies make in tools, systems, methodologies are obviously not enough. We need both external and internal approaches to training people in collaborative processes. Systems and tools provide only a framework that then need to be filled in with character. At the core of Agile there are disciplines (such as Empower the Team, Amplifly Learning) without which the methodologies would have no life. The practice of the disciplines fostered by the development of inner capabilities infuses life into the Agile methods and at the same time the methods act on and reinforce the inner practice of the disciplines.

As Agile champions (coaches, facilitators, practitioners) we must invest energy on fostering -through modelling and coaching- the development of inner capabilities. The Agile community will benefit from an identification of core capabilities required and a deep exploration of how to foster their development in individuals, teams and organizations.

Although it is our nature to organize in groups and we may have much experience with collaboration, we nevertheless live in a culture of contest and individualism. Out of this culture comes a set of belief systems which are so deeply rooted in our lives that we are not fully conscious of them and their affect on us. These belief systems cannot change easily through the introduction of external structures alone.

Posted by Shabnam Tashakour at 12:44 PM | |

May 13, 2005

Amplify Learning

Learning is the result of both encountering new experiences and deliberate experimentation. Learning creates new knowledge, increased volition and improved action.

KnowledgeVolitionAction.png

Some of people's best learning comes from “failure”. An essential component of learning is feedback.

Learning and feedback can be amplified in several ways. Provide opportunities for learning through books, training courses, coaching, deliberate exposure to diverse work, and deliberate experimentation. Frequently ask the questions “why?” and “how?” and answer the honestly and deeply. Increase the level and quality of communication among the stakeholders and team members. Inspect work in progress frequently or even continuously. Learning accelerates greatly if a culture of learning is created where individuals feel free to experiment and take initiative even on critical aspects of the work.

Learning and feedback support all three agile principles. People become more effective creators as they learn. People are better able to adapt to and embrace change as they learn. And a person's span of perception increases as they learn. Any increase in learning or feedback leads to an increase in the manifestation of the principles.

Learning and feedback can be amplified rapidly, but an empowered team is necessary to effectively take advantage of this amplification. If a team is not empowered, then rapid learning can lead to frustration. Amplified learning and feedback result in excitement, enthusiasm and playfulness, rapid problem solving, high quality work results and satisfied stakeholders.

An excellent analysis of learning at a social or group level is presented in Progress and Its Problems by Larry Laudan. In this very well written book, Laudan takes a look at the history and philosophy of science and develops a model for learning that is applicable to the development of agile methods.

Posted by Mishkin Berteig at 01:12 PM | |

May 10, 2005

Empower the Team

Empowerment is the ability of a team to make decisions about how to do their work and execute on those decisions without outside interference. If a team is empowered, then it will be more capable of responding to change, and it will be able to focus on manifesting the members' creative potential. Empowerment comes from a combination of several factors:

1. members of the team have a deep sense of self-worth that includes nobility, and contribution to the progress of humanity

2. tacit or explicit authority and responsibility for results as a team and as individuals

3. a team environment which is honest, trusting and allows for mistakes

4. the absence of personal attacks against individuals on the team and in particular a total lack of gossip and backbiting

There are several ways that team members will demonstrate their empowerment. People will derive joy from their work. Team members will be dedicated to the work and the team. Individuals on the team will frequently take individual initiative to accomplish tasks, share insights, and develop improvements. Spontaneous leadership will become common. Individuals will step out of comfort zones or areas of specialization in order to assist the team.

Empowering a team is a process that can sometimes take a great deal of time and effort. In order to start on this process, the team members should carefully listen to each other and ask many questions. More mature individuals should lead and teach by example. And all the team members can start to question and challenge the rules and procedures of an environment that are preventing effective work. If the team is in an organizational environment where team members have management to report to, then management must be aware of this opportunity for empowerment and support it.

An empowered team can gradually understand and internalize the agile work principles (People are Creators, Change is Constant, Perception mediates Reality). By internalizing these principles, a team can move beyond specific agile work practices and become a high performing team setting their own work practices.

Jeff Sutherland has a very brief blurb about the progress of teams as they evolve in their use of Scrum.

Future entries here will discuss the methods of creating empowered teams.

Posted by Mishkin Berteig at 11:04 PM | |

April 27, 2005

Eliminate Waste

Waste is the result of activities or environmental conditions that prevent a team from reaching its goal. The opposite of waste is something that adds value (more, faster or higher quality) to the desired result.

The whole notion of eliminating waste comes from lean manufacturing. More recently, Mary and Tom Poppendieck applied this idea to software in their book "Lean Software Development: An Agile Toolkit for Software Development Managers". In this (excellent) book, the authors list the wastes of manufacturing and the wastes of software. Here I have summarized and generalized these types of wastes so that they apply in any situation:

The Seven Wastes
1. waiting caused by delays, unreadiness, or simple procrastination
2. partially done work or inventory caused by sub-optimal workflow
3. extra processing or processes caused by poor organization or bureaucracy
4. defects and rework caused by insufficient skill, tools, inspection or filtering
5. movement of people or work caused by physical separation
6. overproduction or extra features caused by working towards speculative goals
7. task switching caused by multiple commitments

As wastes are eliminated or reduced, a team will function faster and with higher quality. However, not all waste can be eliminated. Sometimes waste is legislated, sometimes waste is an unavoidable byproduct of work, sometimes mistakes are made, and sometimes it takes a great deal of effort to eliminate a waste.

In order to eliminate waste, first waste has to be detected and identified, then the underlying causes of the waste have to be identified, and finally changes to the work environment need to be made to both eliminate the cause of the waste and the waste itself. Many agile work practices help with this process.

Value stream mapping is one particular tool that can be used by a team or organization to identify wasteful activities. The team describes the amount of time that work takes to go through each activity in their overall work process. Next, the team determines if each activity adds value or does not add value to the end goal. All activities are subject to speed improvements, and activities that do not add value are subject to elimination.

In order to determine the causes of waste, special attention should be paid to incentives and motivations. Wasteful behavior often exists because there is some incentive for people to do it. Sometimes these incentives are explicit, but sometimes they are the side-effects of other things going on in the team's environment. Changing the incentives can be an effective way of reducing waste.

By eliminating waste, the team will find it has reduced frustrations, and enabled greater productivity and creativity. The team will also increase its speed and delivery of value, and at the same time reduce defects.

Posted by Mishkin Berteig at 07:40 PM | |