4 warning signs that your team is not agile

Agile projects get the most out of people, with huge payoffs in productivity and effectiveness.

Agile projects involve close collaboration and very fast feedback loops. When it works, users' expectations are closely aligned to the project deliverables, and very little time is wasted on nice-to-haves or perfectionism that has no business impact. Agile done right is a thing of beauty, and economical to boot.

But agile productivity typically depends upon the quality of the team members. It requires high IQ, high EQ, and high focus. Put someone in with insufficient subject matter expertise, drive, or decision-making authority, and the team will be chasing its tail. Further, agile depends upon the impedance match between the resources and the tasks: if a team member just doesn't care, or can't stand to be in the room with another team member, close collaboration simply won't happen.

Since agile is all about flexibility and fast iterations, it would be a joke if you did not assess the members of the agile team as early and often as possible to detect and correct the problem children. Fail-fast on team assignments is a best practice.

If, as the Zen masters say, "how you do anything is how you do everything," it should be possible to detect team membership issues before the first sprint has completed. Ideally, you could do that before the first sprint has started. But how?

4 major areas for concern in agile teams

If there's a good thing about a character flaw, it's that the flaw's owner seldom realizes they have it...and they often have it on full display. You just have to know where to look. In most agile teams, there are four major areas for inspection/introspection: users, developers, consultants, and management. Here are forty things (in no particular order of importance) that set off red flags when we see them in agile teams.

Users who...

  • Are not engaged, interested, or motivated; are too busy with their regular jobs to participate deeply
  • Are unwilling to own problems, action items, or deadlines; are unwilling to put their name to anything (particularly requirements, validation, and test scripts)
  • View risk, change, and learning as problems, not ingredients
  • Avoid taking on action items and deadlines; allergic to follow-through
  • Display blaming behaviors and spend time on CYA activities
  • Are outspoken about what they want, but are ignorant of cloud computing realities; assume that the incremental cost of a request is zero
  • Seem to add delay and ambiguity to most decisions; hate cutting to the chase; unwilling to cut "Gordian knots"
  • Fill meetings with inconclusive chatter; tend to magnify clearly bounded issues so that they mushroom into "boil the ocean" problems
  • Are not willing to take action with incomplete information; are always trying to hedge bets
  • Have ADD or are unable to read / write anything of substance

Developers who...

  • Are unwilling to pursue rough-cut solutions
  • Suffer from perfectionism
  • Are over-focused on architecture and software longevity
  • Focus on avoiding criticism rather than getting something out there
  • Are too willing to code first and ask questions later
  • Have poor communication skills, particularly under stress
  • Detest / lack empathy for users
  • Lack project management skills or have an empty-suit manager
  • Are afraid and indecisive
  • Are unable to listen

Consultants who are...

  • Displaying bid-to-win behaviors, are desperate to win a deal or keep the account (hint to clients: interview their CTO about the bid)
  • Too flexible, too compliant, willing to make commitments they cannot really meet (hint to clients: watch out for cultural differences)
  • Unable to deliver "bad news" quickly and effectively (ditto)
  • Unable to say no and make it stick (ditto)
  • Unwilling to take charge in an uncertain situation
  • Unable to listen
  • Unable/unwilling to respond to requests the same day (hint to clients: get an SLA)
  • "Yes men" / empty suits
  • Overemphasizing speed and volume of coding, underemphasizing building the right thing
  • Unwilling to be on site (or at least in the same time zone as the rest of the team)

Management that is...

  • Unwilling to actively participate in the project, as well as champion it
  • Excessively focused on command-and-control, requiring all key decisions to be escalated; unable/unwilling to trust or truly delegate
  • More focused on budget than value; overly interested in narrowly-defined metrics; limited attention span for broad objectives
  • Exhibiting ADD or memory issues
  • Willing to promote someone who really doesn't know the domain and doesn't want to learn it
  • Rewarding fierce intramural competition, so leaders have clear incentives to low-ball budgets, over-promise deliverables, and play games with milestones
  • Holding people accountable but not giving them control of resources.
  • Using fear as a management tool, and publically punishing failure
  • Unwilling to unequivocally prioritize, set realistic deadlines, or acknowledge tradeoffs; unwilling to filter the signal from the noise
  • During contract negotiation, adds unrealistic conditions and asymmetric risk items

The bottom line

There's no scoring system here -- but if you detect enough of the issues outlined above in a team member, seriously consider replacing him/her fast. If you detect enough of the issues in the management area, it's not likely that agile is going to be a success within that part of the organization.

Join the newsletter!

Or

Sign up to gain exclusive access to email subscriptions, event invitations, competitions, giveaways, and much more.

Membership is free, and your security and privacy remain protected. View our privacy policy before signing up.

Error: Please check your email address.
Show Comments

Blog Posts

Why defining brand strategy is vital to capitalising on quick wins

Big brands were once protected from small brands by high barriers to entry. Big brands had the resources to employ big agencies, to crack big ideas and to invest in big campaigns. They had the luxury of time to debate strategies and work on long-term innovation pipelines. Retailers used to partner with big brands.

Troy McKinnna

Co-founder, Agents of Spring, Calm & Stormy

3 ways to leverage the talents of your team to avoid disruption

​According to the World Economic Forum in its most recent The Future of Jobs report, the most important skills for the future are not technical, task-oriented skills, but higher-order skills such as creativity, social influence, active learning, and analytical thinking.

Gihan Perera

Futurist, leadership consultant

CMOs, it’s time to stop squandering customer attention

Businesses continue to highly value the attention they buy through paid media, yet at the same time, many continue to disregard and under-value opportunities to connect with customers using their owned media.

Well written Vanessa!! Agreed with your view that human experience is marketing's next frontier. Those businesses who are focused on the ...

Clyde Griffith

Forget customer experience, human experience is marketing's next frontier

Read more

Great tips for tops skills need to develop and stay competitive

Nick

The top skills needed to stay competitive in a rapidly changing workforce

Read more

The popularity of loyalty programs is diminishing, though I'd say it is because customers are savvy enough to recognise when a loyalty pr...

Heather

It’s time for marketers to rethink their approach to ‘loyalty’

Read more

Thanks Nadia for sharing this blog. It has really useful and amazing information about Salesforce Commerce Cloud and digital engagement w...

Holly Smith

Adidas taps data and technology smarts to build personalised digital engagement with consumers

Read more

clearly someone who's jealous and only comments from the safety of being behind their keyboard

Peter Sibson

The purpose of purpose - Brand science - CMO Australia

Read more

Latest Podcast

More podcasts

Sign in