Who’s looking at you?

I’ve just survived my most recent 360° review, and was reminded once again that there is always room for improvement. As a personal development tool, it has to be amongst the best for making you really reflect on the impact you’re having as an individual.

It is important though to get the questions right. Asking something that only one group of stakeholders can answer is not going to generate the insight you need. Questions should therefore be targeted at behaviours and skills – which can be commented on by the ‘many’ – rather than tasks – which can only be commented on by the ‘few’.

Feedback is predominantly subjective, but in this context that’s fine. You are really looking for patterns across the data rather than specifics. If each stakeholder group highlights the same issue then you probably need to take note; there’s a message in there somewhere!

It is however too easy to fall into the trap of trying to justify and rationalise the feedback. Stop! This is a mistake. A 360° is one of the best opportunities you’ll get to really dig deep and question why your behaviour is being interpreted in a particular way. Don’t make excuses for it, learn from it.

Most HR departments can now facilitate a 360° review, so if you get the chance, I recommend that you give it a go. You may be surprised by the results.

Now I remember

I recently started a distance learning MBA - just a little something to while away non-working hours - and 20 year old memories of being a student have started to flood back. Didn’t I always say ‘never again’? So what possessed me?

Well, it can’t be a mid-life crisis. They’re much more fun and I’ve already had a couple of those.

Having an MBA is certainly an entry criteria for some roles, but isn’t that just a way to reduce the number of candidates that apply? How much difference does having an MBA actually make? What does it tell you about the candidate? I’ve known too many well-qualified people (MBAs included) that fail to make an impact in the workplace. However, if not having an MBA is a potential blocker then it’s definitely a factor worthy of consideration.

Perhaps (naively?), I simply thought that I might be able to learn something useful.

I’m a great believer in life-long learning. As a student, I learnt how to learn. As an employee, I learnt how to apply my learning and deliver results. Learn something new every day and that’s one more problem I can solve tomorrow.

I’m at the beginning of (at least) a 2 year journey, so I’m not in a position yet to assess the relevancy of the curriculum or the effectiveness of the teaching methods or, indeed, the dedication of the student. All of which I can reflect upon at appropriate junctures in the future.

One thing that I can say is that the thought of assignments and examinations remains as daunting as ever. The pressure is definitely on.

Inspect & Adapt

Have you ever come across one of those people who, even though they’ve only just arrived on the scene, is keen to tell you that, “(they) know exactly what the problem is” and “what you need to do is...”? Well I have – unfortunately on more than one occasion - and I find them extremely annoying!

I’m sorry, but it doesn’t matter what your background is and how much experience you have, you cannot possible approach a person or team in such a manner and retain your credibility.

It’s not just consultants who can fall into this trap. I’ve also seen recently hired employees make this same mistake. Let me reiterate, this is not a great first impression to leave behind! Having been on the receiving end, my immediate thoughts about the offending individual are generally extremely poor and certainly not repeatable here.

To be fair, I don’t think this is a common trait, which is why it sticks out like a sore thumb when you see it. Most of us understand how to treat people with a bit more respect.

I’m not certain it’s deliberate either. It’s more likely to be a lack of emotional intelligence in the offender. Or am I being too generous?

Anyway, you can probably tell that I’ve just had such an incident and it prompted me to write. It’s actually quite cathartic.

The question that’s just struck me of course is how do I come across when I first arrive somewhere new? OMG, do I make this mistake too? Surely not!?!?!

Perhaps now is the time to state what I actually set out to do and this is where the title for the entry comes in. I believe in the ‘inspect & adapt’ school of thought. Before expounding my opinions, I would much rather take the time to understand the situation, determine if I have any relevant experience to contribute and then tailor my thoughts and suggestions to the context at hand. Experience counts for an awful lot, but it needs to be applied to fit the current environment if it is going to make a difference.

If you read this, know me and think that I have my own challenges and opportunities to improve in this area, then please let me know. However, if that's the case, do treat me gently with your feedback as you now know that at least I think I'm doing the right thing!

"Agile is expensive" - discuss...

I was surprised recently when I was told that "Agile's ok, but it's expensive". That was a first for me. I'd never heard anybody say that before. What could possibly have possessed them?

It's the sort of statement that sets my mind racing. What could I have missed? Is it perhaps true? After all, many say that perception is reality. It was no good, I was going to have to think about this further.

So, here I am, thinking... is Agile expensive?

First, let's understand the basic premise - "I thought 'it' was going to cost X, but 'it' ended up costing X+Y and I got less (of 'it') than I expected.". If indeed that is your reality then I can certainly sympathise. However, can you attribute that failure to being Agile? Isn't this just a classic example of project overspend, de-scoping and, quite probably, time overrun?

Perhaps being Agile has somehow exacerbated the situation? Perhaps the innate ability to embrace and respond to change has been so successful that the only logical conclusion is project failure?

Let's walk through a simple example. Assume at the start of the project I want 5 features delivered and the estimate is 5 person weeks of effort. The team diligently produces the first 3 features, expending 3 person weeks, which are then presented for feedback. Naturally some changes are discussed and prioritised. Being Agile, the team responds. After a further 2 person weeks of effort (reaching the original budget), the team presents the 4th feature, plus the prioritised changes. More changes are approved and the team then expends 1 further person week to complete those...

STOP! Look at what just happened. Because we responded to the changing requirements, we only got 4 out of 5 features delivered for a cost of 6 rather than 5 person weeks. At the micro level, the team took the appropriate direction and delivered the most important features, but at the macro level we have (perceived) overspend and de-scoping.

In my experience, at the iteration-to-iteration micro level, this type of occurrence happens all the time. So, if you're not rolling that up and communicating appropriately at the macro level, it's no wonder that Agile can be perceived as being expensive - "I'm getting less and it's costing me more" screams out, even though what you're actually getting is what you want, not what you originally thought you wanted.

No doubt my example is one of many reasons that might explain the 'expensive' comment. However, I can definitely relate my own experience to that example and, I think, it is an important reminder that managing all stakeholders and their expectations is every bit as important as being Agile in the first place.

Are you consciously choosing your leadership style?

When you have leadership responsibility for a group of people, it is important that you adopt a flexible approach tailored to the individuals on your team. In practice, most leaders naturally do this, however, understanding the mechanics behind the choice will give you more control and help you select the most appropriate style.

The model that I've used to good effect is known as Situational Leadership®, developed by Ken Blanchard and Paul Hersey. The picture on the left gives a good overview.

Here there are 4 clear leadership styles identified - Directing, Coaching, Supporting and Delegating - which mirror the experience level of the team member from low through to high.

It is important to note that a team member will typically have different levels of experience in each functional area of their remit and may therefore need more than one leadership style applied to them.

This reinforces the point that it is the leader who needs to flex their style rather than the team member.

In my experience, it has been very helpful to share this model with my direct reports and agree with them what approach and style they would like me to adopt. It is also a helpful tool in monitoring an individual's progress as they move through each development stage.

Having the right leadership style at the right time will enable you to build a stronger team, so I hope this inspires you to find the time to look into this further.

Post-Holiday Blues? Just remember how lucky you are!

Doesn't everybody suffer from post-holiday blues to some degree? I know I do. There's nothing like a fantastic break with family and friends to make you reluctant to go back to the day job.

It's easy to forget how lucky you are to have a job in the first place. As unemployment continues to rise around us, now is the time to be thankful for what we have and to re-double our efforts as we get back into the groove.

So leave the blues behind and get motivated to make even more of difference.

Who's managing your infrastructure?

If you're spending too much time managing your own infrastructure and still not achieving the service levels you require, then it's probably time you looked at a managed service.

Unlike some forms of outsourcing, a managed service can be relatively straight-forward to set up and manage. Services and service levels can be defined and agreed quickly. Lengthy contract negotiations, asset and staff transfer are all avoided. More services can be added over time as confidence in a new partner grows.

Picking the right partner is key. A good track record is essential, but more importantly the partner should exhibit similar values to your own company if the relationship is to be successful over the long term. Cost should not be the only consideration, as the opportunity to improve existing service levels can be significant. Location may be important to you, but offshore partners are all adept at providing staff to cover 24x7 and therefore shouldn't be ruled out on this basis.

A balanced scorecard is often used to measure the quality of service received. This allows multiple dimensions to be considered as part of the overall service level. Partners can be further incentivised by having bonus payments aligned to achieving certain targets.

As with any form of outsourcing there are pros and cons that you need to consider. However, when it comes to the remote management of infrastructure, the arguments 'for' can be compelling and your time can be better spent focusing on the value-adding part of your job.