agilethinking.net Blog

I went to Canada for the first time on Wednesday.  This trip followed hot on the tails of my recent UK jaunt, so I was still reeling from lack of sleep.  The reason for the visit was to run an in-house CSM course, in partnership with a Scrum colleague. The course was being held at the hotel where we stayed, so all I really saw of Canada on this trip was the inside of the hotel, and then on Friday morning some of the rather bland surrounding streets leading to the local golf course where I went running; dull, but it was the only green place within miles.  So no memorable impressions of “Beautiful Canada” for me yet. 

The CSM course started shakily.  There was a lot of confusion from the participants as to why they were there and what the course was actually about.  This is a feature of many in-house CSM courses where Scrum is being introduced in a top-down way.  Many participants did not actually know it was a CSM course, or what that implied.  Mental note: assume nothing.  After a bumpy start, with a sense that the course was limping painfully along, the second half of Day One eventually picked up in pace, and then Day Two was fast-paced and a lot of fun.  My co-facilitator and I both recognize that the course needs still more experiential and interactive content.  It is these aspects of the course that work the best – according to both our own observations and participant feedback.  It was the actual simulations, i.e. 59-Minute Scrum, Plan A Party, The Velocity Game and Prisoner’s Dilemma that were the most engaging aspects of the course.

The first half of Day One sorely lacks participant involvement.  The other problem we always face on the first morning is a myriad of “how will this work for me” and “what if” questions.  Usually we are firm about deferring those questions until late into Day Two, where we find they are mostly answered by the preceding course content, but sometimes I find I can too easily get caught up in discussions which take us off onto unwanted tangents.  Such discussion, although possibly interesting, is usually not constructive early on in the CSM course. Action is what is needed.  I am now working on tuning the early part of Day One to incorporate more action-based activity: Learning by Doing.  The difficult part of this is finding simulation-type exercises that will work when there is little knowledge of the Scrum process.

The nature of an in-house course is very different from a public course where the participants are almost always there by choice, and are either practicing Scrum (in some form), or have made some effort to learn about it from books and articles; a level of engagement and an excited anticipation exists from the start in public courses, and it generates energy for both the facilitators and the participants.  In-house course participants are too often there because they are told to be; they are not there willingly, and that is a major contributing factor to why the early part of in-house CSM courses tend to drag: we have to “sell” the idea to the group. 

The other big issue I have with the CSM course is that it is a CSM course.  Most participants on this particular course cared nothing about being ScrumMasters, and having to cover certain ScrumMaster-specific material began to make little sense.  Team training is what is required in many of these cases, but sadly the Scrum Alliance does not offer a Certified Team Training course and it is the Certification part of the name that sells the course.  We do companies a disservice by only having this course to offer. 

The Scrum community does not need tens of thousands of Certified ScrumMasters; the idea is nonsense.  What the community needs is informed team members, who recognize that successful working relationships and healthy work environments are formed from something more than a quick-fix two-day course and a certificate. It is time for the Scrum Trainer community to rethink their (our) strategy for introducing Scrum into organizations.

Boris Gloger and I ran our first public Agile Product Owner course last week in Cambridge, UK.  It was an interesting experience, especially in that we had no actual product owners on the course.  Instead we had a physicist, a software engineer, a CEO, an IT director, a partner, a scrum master, a consultant and a PhD student.  The latter two were perhaps the closest to the role in terms of previous experience, but not engaged in that position at the current time.  The material was of course essentially aimed at those immersed in the role, so its applicability was somewhat lost, and the course became rather academic in nature.  Still, it was an interesting first run and most of the feedback at the end was very positive.  Interestingly, one of the most skeptical and questioning people on the course gave us the best feedback.  That always feels good.  You can read some of the feedback comments here.

One of the roles we asked participants to take on after the course was that of critic.  I have always felt that the Agile world lacks serious and informed critics in its midst and I have an aim to cultivate that skill on my courses.  The participants were asked to write a three paragraph critique of the course in the style of a film or book review.  Only one participant (to date) rose to the challenge, Paul Oldfield.  Paul’s critique begins with “This course is good.  It has the potential of being excellent, but it isn’t there yet.” and then goes on to pinpoint some areas of concern in the “usual ‘critic’ style guaranteed to get up the noses of authors, actors, presenters or whatever” (Paul’s words).

I have uploaded a PDF of Paul’s critique, somewhat nervously, but hey – it’s all about transparency, right?  You can view the document here.

Do I agree with Paul’s criticisms?  Not completely, but yes, in part. He and I have entered into a short dialog on some of the points, and perhaps Paul will comment further here.  Whether or not I agree is really beside the point;  Paul took the time to attempt a serious critique of the course, and that is what I was seeking with this exercise.  I hope other trainers take up this idea.  Scrum needs critics or it is in danger of becoming watered down and half-baked.  All we have now it seems, are evangelists and skeptics (often uninformed skeptics).  Criticism is an art, and we need to cultivate it among those entering the Agile field. 

Boris and I plan to run the Agile Product Owner course again in the fall in Palo Alto, California and Manchester, UK.   Criticism is optional (!)

It seems that a requirement like “meet me at Starbucks on Wardour Street” is simple enough and leaves little room for misunderstanding.  Or so I thought.  Turns out there are two Starbucks cafes on Wardour Street now, and as a result Jo Cranford and I ended up half a street apart, each breakfasting alone, and puzzling at the unreliability of the other.  I originally met Jo when she was a participant on the Certified Scrum Master course that I ran with Boris Gloger in Manchester (UK) earlier this year.  Our meeting yesterday was to catch up, share experiences and discuss some vague ideas of a London Scrum event in early 2007.  Jo is the first Scrum Master at Expedia UK, and is recording her Scrum adventures in her wonderfully named “Spike The Poodle” blog at http://spikethepoodle.com/.  It is fitting that Jo is the subject of my first Agile Thoughts blog post, as this blog was inspired by Jo’s blog.  I enjoy her writing, and I like the way she combines the professional and the personal in one space; this is not a combination that always works, but in her case it does.  I hope to achieve the same thing with my own blog.

So Jo and I failed to meet up this time, but I got to wander the London streets and visit the National Portrait Gallery before going on to meet my friend-of-many-years, Miche, at her office near the Bank.  We ate lunch at Wagamama’s, and then drank coffee at yet another Starbucks.  Miche is always an inspiration; she is continually learning and expanding her horizons, and she has me believing that anything is possible.  Conversation flows… and she paid for lunch too.  Thanks, Miche. 

London was hot today, but you know, as always very cool.  Being here always makes me realize how much I love this city, and how I miss it.  I am fortunate that my work brings me back here from time to time.  Maybe next time Jo and I will define our meeting requirements a little better… inspect and adapt.  Progress.

Footnote: When I told my mother the Starbucks tale, she listened with a bemused look before finally saying “But what is this ‘Starbucks’?”. Seriously.

Welcome to my blog. My name is Tobias Mayer; I am a freelance Agile consultant and trainer. From time to time I may add thoughts, ideas or news updates in this space, but it will probably not be on a very regular basis. If you happen to come across something that is of interest, please add a comment. Blogs are more interesting, and potentially more useful when they become community dialogs.

Thinking… of something to write about.

Links
» This is who I am
» Agile Thinking Home
» Agile Thinking Services

…and welcome.  This is my new blog.  I’ll write something soon.