How to fix team dysfunction?
Many teams suffer from dysfunction where they lack trust and have huge communication overhead. Can we fix it? I do not have directly plug and play solution for this but I have done some experiments in this area which I would like to share during this talk.
To give some idea things like following will get presented with real life experience
- Right Information radiators
- Culture of Accountability
- Fixing the Process or work allocation and monitoring
- Promote Healthy Conflict
- Show vulnerable side of you
- And many more… I am still exploring.
Outline/structure of the Session
Opening : 5 Min with Questions related to Team Dysfunction
Sharing Dysfunction Smells : 10 Min
What worked for us :10 Min
What did not work for us : 5 Min
Conclusion : 5 Min
Q&As : 10 Min
Better Understanding of team dysfunction
Scrum Masters , Agile Coach
schedule Submitted 2 years ago
People who liked this proposal, also liked:
Sanjay Kumar - Refactoring Strategy for Big Design SmellsSanjay KumarAgile Trainer & CoachiZenBridge Consultancy Private Limited
schedule 2 years agoSold Out!
Agile design or emergent design relies heavily on timely refactoring efforts that aim to improve existing design. Yet often, when the code base grows or when someone else's code is handed over to us, there is a reluctance to refactor existing code - despite an obvious design smell. While the reasons to avoid refactoring may be well-grounded – lack of time, lack of understanding or fear of breaking it – in the long term, delaying code refactoring makes the code rot further. And, as a result, technical debt continues to pile up.
This session begins by reviewing common design smells, discusses five key features of good code and then discusses a common yet often overlooked design smell in detail – big methods. Using an example of a big method, it proposes a refactoring strategy that will ensure that a refactoring effort does not cause any negative side effects. During the session, participants are walked through a real code refactoring example – step by step.
Though the session focuses on one particular design smell (big methods), the proposed refactoring strategy should apply equally well to other design smells too.
Sridharan Vembu - Over-selling the "Enterprise Agile Frameworks and Certifications"Sridharan VembuClient Partner and Delivery PrincipalThoughtWorks
schedule 2 years agoSold Out!
IntermediateAgile is only for smaller projects and/or startup organisations - Not Anymore. Taking my own and my organisation's experience, Agile is a proven methodology that is well suited for delivering complex, distributed, multi-year enterprise programs, for many years now.While this is really a great thing for agile enthusiasts and practitioners, it’s a bit of worrying sign for me the increased recognition and popularity the ‘Agile Certifications’ and ‘Agile Frameworks’ are receiving among individuals and organisations who would like to adopt Agile to stay relevant in current world.I would like to share my views on the adoption of these frameworks and certifications, why I feel they are not-so-agile and how am I and my organisation are solving similar problems without the need for any of these frameworks and certifications.I am planning to walk through the complete life cycle of the most recent program that I’m part of (from Inception to Initiation to on-going Execution to Post-Production Support) and bring out the relevant agile principles that we adopted, context based customizations we did and the best practices that we have come up with.
The typical life cycle stages that we follow in any program / project delivery is normally: Discovery - Inception - Initiation - Execution - Transition, whereas the actual set of practices within any of these stages and how they are being implemented could be very different from project to project, team to team.
- For instance, one should know the clear difference between hygienic practices vs context based practices - the first ones are not to be compromised at any cost, whereas the latter ones are to be applied based on the need, not because some framework prescribes it.
To give an idea on the complexity, enterprise and distributed nature of the program, some key data points:
- For example, in the Execution Phase, doing pair programming and following TDD are hygienic practices for us. Having said that, it’s perfectly okay for a pair to split and work on a specific task on a case-to-case basis (we call this Pragmatic Programming) and the pair decides when and how long they would split and when to re-join.
- Started almost 3 years ago, on-going
- 10 quarterly planning workshops done so far
- 10+ teams, 7 timezones
- peak program size: 250+
- peak team size from my org.: 50+
- total no of systems: 10+
- geographical spread: plan: 100 countries, 132 locales launched so far: 53 countries, 56 locales
- 140 page-views / sec
- Av. response time: 1.3s
- Handling 100+K products in the catalog, 15+ K pages , 300+ K responsive images
- Blue-Green production deployment (zero downtime over 1.5 years)
- 3 weeks cycle of production releases