Agility Evolved

Tired of “What went well?” and “What didn’t”? Brian Milner is here to help you cook up retrospectives that actually get your team thinking, collaborating, and improving. From creative themes to actionable frameworks, this is your behind-the-scenes guide to better retros.

Overview

Do your retrospectives feel more “check-the-box” than game-changing? Brian Milner shares his full recipe for planning and facilitating retrospectives that actually matter.

Whether your team is stuck in repetition, tuning out, or phoning it in, Brian’s step-by-step approach will show you how to bring structure, creativity, and energy back into the room.

Brian walks you through the five essential components of a retrospective, including how to match formats to your team’s personality, align activities with Agile's three pillars (transparency, inspection, and adaptation), and spark meaningful change with every session.

References and resources mentioned in the show:

Stranger Things Retrospective Download
Agile Retrospectives by Esther Derby & Diana Larsen
Retromat
Blog: Overcoming Four Common Problems with Retrospectives by Mike Cohn
Blog: Does a Scrum Team Need a Retrospective Every Sprint? By Mike Cohn
#139 The Retrospective Reset with Cort Sharp
Retrospectives Repair Guide
Better Retrospectives
Subscribe to the Agile Mentors Podcast

Want to get involved?

This show is designed for you, and we’d love your input.

• Enjoyed what you heard today? Please leave a rating and a review. It really helps, and we read every single one.
• Got an Agile subject you’d like us to discuss or a question that needs an answer? Share your thoughts with us at [email protected]

This episode’s presenters are:

Brian Milner is SVP of coaching and training at Mountain Goat Software. He's passionate about making a difference in people's day-to-day work, influenced by his own experience of transitioning to Scrum and seeing improvements in work/life balance, honesty, respect, and the quality of work.

Auto-generated Transcript:

Brian Milner (00:00)
Welcome in Agile Mentors. We are back for another episode of the Agile Mentors podcast, like we always do. And I'm with you as always, Brian Milner. Today we have with us, me, just me. Now, before you get frustrated with that or think we're copping out in some way, this is intentional. I wanted to have an episode to myself because and working through all this stuff around retrospectives, I thought that it might be good to take an episode here. And I kind of thought of it sort of like a cooking episode, right?

Like if you watch a cooking show, you know, Gordon Ramsay show or something, they'll walk you through how they make something. And it's from start to finish. They show you the ingredients. They show you how everything's put together. And then you see this beautiful dish at the end. Well, I've often compared the way that you can format a retrospective to a little bit like a meal, because a meal has different courses in it. And a retrospective should have these themed areas or repeatable sections of it. And so I thought of it a little bit like making a meal.

So I thought I'd just walk you through a little bit step by step. what I'm thinking here and how I would go about doing it. this is, you know, we're cooking up something special here. It's a kind of a recipe here that's, you know, equal parts creative and effective. It's a way to try to keep your retrospectives interesting, but also keep them to be solid and where you can have an actual outcome that comes from this.

And you actually make definitive changes here with your team as a result. So there's a couple of retrospective courses that I have coming out where I go into detail about all these things, but I wanted to take an episode where I could walk you through and just have you kind of peer over my shoulder a little bit about how I might do this if I was going to create a retrospective for a team.

So first starters, I think we have to understand that there is a menu to follow, right? And I kind of use this menu metaphor because one of the great things about when you go out and you have a meal at a nice restaurant is there's a repeatable pattern to it. You kind of expect that they're gonna bring you a drink first and then maybe you have, if it's a really fancy restaurant, maybe you have appetizers first or hors d'oeuvres even before appetizers, then you maybe have appetizers or not. Then you have a main course and maybe you have a salad even before the main course and then you have a a meal, and then you have some kind of a dessert afterwards, maybe even some kind of a cocktail at the end of the meal or coffee at the end of the meal.

But there's sort of a pattern to it. And regardless of what restaurant you go to, you kind of repeat that same pattern. Now, I know that there's times you'll be, this is where the metaphor kind of breaks down a little bit, I get it. You may not have the same pieces every time. And what we're going to be talking about here as a retrospective pattern is that, yes, you should sort of follow the same pattern.

You can't really get to, let's say, dessert. You can't just skip and go to dessert, right? You've got to go through this journey of the other sections so that you can end up at dessert and really fully appreciate it, right, and get the most out of it.

So that's where this metaphor is a little bit of a, starts to break down a little tiny bit. But. I want to talk about here first why retrospectives matter and why they often go stale. I think they often go stale for a lot of reasons, but one of the chief reasons I've encountered when I work with teams is that the Scrum Master on the team really only has a small amount of formats and styles that they have to work with. They have a small little set in their toolbox. And they may even rotate through a few of them. But at the end of the day, it's kind of a small toolbox. There's only a few tools in there. And if I'm a team, if I'm a member of that team, you can imagine how I might get bored.

And I might think this is not really worthwhile if I'm showing up every single time and I'm hearing the same exact questions. What did I do? What do we do well? What do we not do so well? Do I have any roadblocks? If I'm just asked that same thing every time, then I might not feel like this is a very worthwhile thing. Or I might get to the point where I feel like, gosh, I've answered the same question, you know, three sprints in a row. I just, got nothing more for you Scrum Master. I just, I can't dig any deeper.

I've given you everything and it just feels like this is the, you know, groundhog day. We're doing the same thing over and over again, but nothing's really changing. So. I think it's important that we be able to switch things up, but it's not change just for change sake. That's why I think that having a structure of some kind can give you that pattern to fall back on that can make it effective, but then also can provide variety, can make it something that changes over time as you do this with your team. Doesn't mean that you can't ever repeat a format that you've used. I don't think that's a bad thing.

I just wouldn't want to repeat the same, just handful, small little number of them over and over again. That's going to get repetitive and it's going to make people a little frustrated. The other thing is I think you have to match these to the personality of your team. Your team might be more outgoing or they might be more introverted. You might have people who prefer activities or little more, you know, kind of quiet activities or some that are more verbal, you know, require more discussion. That's really an individual thing for your team.

So I think you have to think as you go through this, what's going to work for these people, right? For this set of individuals that I am working with. You know, I always say there's kind of a first commandment for Scrum Masters, know thy team. And I think that's really something that's important for us to grasp onto is we have to know our team. can't coach to the average.

Right? We have to coach to the individual, to what we have on our team, because your team is unique. That set of individuals has never come together anywhere else in the world. Right? Those personalities. And what you want is to find out how to make that set of people work well together. Right? How do they work best together? Not how does every other team in the world work best or how does the average team work best? How does your team work best? Right? So with all of this is sort of setting this and saying that there should be a pattern.

I do want to give the hat tip here and say that the Esther Derby Dinah Larson book on retrospectives is one I strongly recommend. In fact, pretty much my whole career as a trainer, I have said, when people say if there's one book, if I'm to be a Scrum Master, if there's one book that you would say would be really impactful to me from pretty much day one, I have pointed to that book. It's called Agile Retrospectives, Esther Derby, Dinah Larson. And in that book, they lay out a pattern of kind of five phases that go through it.

I'm going to distill it down because to me, it's sort of the three middle ones that are the most important. I will talk about the two on the ends here as well and kind of put that on top of these three. But sometimes I find people find it easier if they just remember what I'm gonna teach you here about the three that are in the middle. So in Scrum Master classes, we will talk often about how there's these three pillars of the Agile process or three pillars of empiricism. Empiricism says that we learn through experience. Well, I always say in class, it's not enough to just do the wrong thing over and over again. I gain a lot of experience by doing the wrong thing over and over, but I don't learn from it.

And the three pillars are what's needed to make sure you learn from them. And I'm sure you've heard these before, but if you haven't, transparency, inspection, adaptation. Those are the three. Transparency meaning we're not going to be clouded about how we do the work. We're going to be very transparent, open about it. We're going to try to reveal how we work best as much as possible. Inspection, that we're going to actually take time and pause and try to figure out not just what happened, that would be transparency, right?

What's the reality of what just happened? But inspecting says, why did this happen? Right? What's the root cause of it? I don't want to just deal with the symptoms, right? If we just try to cure the symptoms over and over again, we still have the same disease, we still have the same illness, and we're not really getting to the root cause.

So inspection says, we're going to take time out to actually get to the root cause. And then adaptation, the last one, is probably the most important step here, because if you figure out what's wrong, but you don't ever do anything about it, well, we're doomed to have the same exact discussion again. So adaptation says, now that you know what the problem is, what are you going to try different? We may not even know exactly what the right thing to do is, but we got to try something. What we know for certain is what we did didn't work.

That's the one thing we absolutely can't do again, is exactly what we did. We've got to try something new so that we move on, right? So that we find out more information and get closer to whatever our final solution is. So transparency, inspection, adaptation, those three actually serve as a good guideline or three phases you can think about for your retrospectives.

There needs to be a transparency phase where you try to figure out what happened this last sprint. there needs to be an inspection phase where now that we know what happened, we got to ask the question, why did it happen? And we need to get to the root cause of why it happened. Now that we know what that is, then we have to move on to adaptation to say, what are we going to do about it? How are we going to take this knowledge we just gained and actually make a change? So we need activities around all three.

And what I'm saying here to you is that can serve as your menu. I can do lots of different activities that would match these three areas. Now, I do, again, want to go back to the Esther Derby, Dinah Larson book, because their five phases adds one on the beginning, one on the end, which I actually do think are very helpful. The first one is kind of opening the retrospective. It's a way of trying to just start to get voices in the room. And this is something I will often do as well. Just a quick, quick exercise to just get people to start talking.

And that's one of the ways you can start to get a quieter group to get involved is throw them something really easy to respond to right out of the gate. And then the last one is to close the retrospective. Closing the retrospective is a great way to then try to sum it all up and say, well, here's the takeaways, here's the things we're going to do about it, and we're going to move forward from here.

Opening the retrospective to that introduction can also then review what you talked about at the end of the last. retrospective. You can say, here are the things that we decided, and let's talk about what's been done about them before you start to inspect the current retrospective. So given that, right, I know I'm going fast here, but you can rewind and listen back to this if you need to.

But if you think about that, that you have these kind of phased approaches, and think of it like a menu, right? There's different courses to my menu. Well, I'm not going to serve the same meal every time. That would be boring. So I got to find out different things I can serve for each course of my retrospective. Now, here's where it gets interesting, right?

Because there are lots of tools out there. And there's a website that I often recommend called RetroMAT. RetroMAT is a great site where you can go to, and it has those five phases. You can kind of scroll through different exercises for each of the five phases. they sort of have, you you can kind of mix and match and create your own menu based off of that.

And doing that is absolutely free. Now they have paid things there as well. They're not a sponsor. I don't get any kickbacks or anything from them. But they have some paid activities as well as far as having things like Mural and Miro templates that you can use if you want to do that as well. So there's lots of things you can do there to thank them for what they put together. But there are times when Maybe you're trying to fit this to your team specifically, or you've grown tired of the exercises that you're used to, and you want to find some new dynamic to add into your retrospective.

So what I'm going to do is kind of walk you through what I would do if I wanted to take some kind of a theme and create a new retrospective that's themed around a certain topic. Now I will say that this theme is gonna go just in one of our sections. So it's not going to go throughout it. I'm not gonna be that creative here with you on it, because I don't think you need to be. I don't think you need to have this, it's not like a theme to party, right? You can just take the theme and use it in one of the sections. So what would I do for something like this?

Well, I'd start with, as I said, some way to kind of open the retrospective. And I like to have little quick activities as I said, that just get voices in the room. an example of things I've done in the past. Ask the team a quick question like, if this last sprint were a song title, what song title would you use to describe this last sprint? And people can use whatever kind of music they like, right? It doesn't matter.

They can just call it any songs that they're familiar with. Or do movie titles. I've had a lot of fun in the past doing that with teams where I'll say, hey, shout out a movie title that might represent this last sprint. You just want to find something quick that people can shout out like one or two word answers, right? Or a small sentence in the case of a song title or movie title or something like that.

But something that they can tie it into, right? And it doesn't have to be anything that makes perfect sense, right? It can be kind of crazy. It can be... You know, if this last sprint were a flavor of Starburst or, you know, an color, what color would it be and why? And just have people, you know, shout out whatever they think the answer would be.

They might have to be a little creative with their answers when they do that. But that's okay. You're just giving them an opportunity to have a few voices start to enter the conversation. Don't force anyone, right? Don't force anyone to shout out, but give them an opportunity to. So I'm going to open the retrospective with some kind of fun, quick exercise like that.

Probably won't take more than five minutes, okay? Then I want to move into that transparency section. And the way I frame transparency is what actually happened this last sprint?

What was the reality of what happened this last sprint? So here's where I'm going to inject a themed kind of approach. And I just, I go through a couple of examples in our courses where I talk about doing this, but I picked a different one here for this podcast episode that I've put together right before this recording to try to walk you through a little bit of how I did this.

So I tried to pick something that was a little more relevant to today. I know that this is popular and people are looking forward to the next season, which is about to come out. sometime soon, I know they've been shooting it, but I picked the theme, Stranger Things. And I just thought, what if my team, you know, had, I knew there were some people on my team really into Stranger Things, or what if I just knew they were aware of it, they knew what it was, and I wanted to have a theme built around this.

So here's how easy it is to do this. I went to chat GPT, and I asked it to give me some, you know, putting together a retrospective that I want to theme it around stranger things. And give me some major themes from Stranger Things that might align to Some different ways of collecting information around what actually happened this last sprint. And. They gave me a long list of different things.

And I read through these and kind of tweaked them, talked back and forth with it a little bit, kind of refined. And I distilled it down to five sort of themes or categories I thought would be fun and would kind of challenge the group to think along different lines of thought. So here's what I came up with with Chat GPT's help. My first category. I called running up that hill.

And what I put for the prompt for this one is what felt like an uphill battle this sprint? Now just think about that, right? In traditional sprints, there's lots of things that are just, I'm essentially asking what was the obstacles?

What were the hurdles in this sprint? But I'm getting them to think about it in little different way by saying, what was an uphill battle in this sprint? And even that subtle rewording, of that prompt can trigger people's brains to work in a different way and get them to think along different lines. If I just ask over and over again, you know, what was a blocker of this sprint or what blockers do we encounter this sprint? If I use those same words over and over, I get sort of immunized against them and I can't really think about anything new.

But just phrasing it that little slightly different way, what felt like an uphill battle this sprint I think can really trigger some new ways of thinking. So that was my first category. The second one that I came up with, big theme here in Stranger Things, was the upside down. And I related it this way to say, what is completely upside down right now?

What is the opposite of what it should be right now? Now here, I'm trying to get them to think about things that are not really going well, right? Things that are going the opposite direction that they should, and it's upside down from what should be the normal. Right? And again, we're just thinking along this theme of stranger things and I'm tricking their brains a little bit into thinking along a different line, right? To examine it from a different point of view. My third category that I thought would be fun was I titled Vecna's Curse.

And what I prompted here for this one was what haunted the team this sprint or kept coming back up to bite us. And The idea here is to get them to think about things that were maybe decisions we wish we had made differently. These could have been decisions in the past. It didn't have to be a decision from this sprint. But what are those things that we felt kind of like was like Vecna's curse?

It was just something that kept rearing its ugly head. And it was just a struggle for us to get around. My fourth one, just to have a little fun. I call the fourth one Surfer Boy Pizza. And what I put as a prompt on this one was, where did we bring the chill? Where did we bring the creative spin to a tough solution during the sprint? So here I'm wanting to celebrate good things, right?

And I'm asking that in a funny way. So it brings some humor to it, puts them in a better mood, and also gets them to think along a maybe a little bit of a different line in this area to think, all right, well, what do we get really creative about? What do we have to be really creative about in this sprint? What kind of tough solutions did we really conquer? Did we really nail in this sprint?

And I'm just theming around that loose theme of that surfer boy pizza from the last season. And then the last one, I couldn't have categories here without mentioning Hellfire Club. So the last one was Hellfire Club. And the prompt I put for it was, where could we bring more of kind of that Hellfire Club vibe, planning, teamwork, shared adventure, right? Just the fun.

Where could we put more of that vibe into our team and to how we operate? Now, this is getting them to think about something that might otherwise be a little bit of a uncomfortable thing to think about, right? Because Now we're getting into interpersonal dynamics. We're getting into how the team actually works and fits together. And that's why I chose this theme, because I wanted it to be just kind of a, even maybe a sneaky back doorway of getting their brains to start to examine, yeah, what would have made this more fun?

Or what would have made this, how could we have, I've asked often in retrospectives, what would it take for us to be the team that everyone else wishes they were on? Well, That's what I'm asking here, essentially. So I've got my five themes. And I even then went forward and created and kind of get some images for each one of those, like icons for each one of those things.

Just created a board and mural for this and put each of those things up. Had a big block space next to each one where people could put Post-it notes. So what I would do here in the retrospective is I'd introduce this. I'd give them the prompts for each of the section and say, all right, let's take a few minutes. Everyone can add Post-its to any of these sections, but try to think through several of them and put several of them up here on the screen or physical board if we're in the same space. But take a few moments here to think through each category and see if there's anything that you can think of that you would add to each area.

So we take, I don't know, five, 10 minutes to do that. normally time that, I just see when it starts to slow down. And there's generally a point there where you can kind of intuitively feel it and feel like, you know, the group's ready to move on. So whenever that time comes, I'll call a halt to it and I'll say, all right, now that we've done this, I want us to try to narrow down what's on the board. So let's give you each three votes.

And I do this usually with dot voting or something along that line. where they have three dots they can place on three different sticky notes across all five categories. And what I tell them is find the three that are the most important of all the things here, what are the three that are most important and put your vote on those top three. And by doing this, having the team vote on it, then we surface the most important three out of the entire group, right? It's not to say we ignore the others, but we're going to try, we can't focus on everything in our time that we have.

So, whether our top three, and then I start with the first one, right? So right now, all we've done is kind of the introduction of the sprint. We've done a transparency section. Now we move into the inspection. Now there's lots of different things you can do here, but what I put together for this retrospective was taking them through sort of a five whys activity.

So I would take that first one, I'd have them examine it and look at it and say, all right, let's ask the question why five times for this one. Why did this happen? whatever they answer, then we say, all right, well, why did that happen then? And we ask why, it doesn't have to technically be five times, but you need to ask it enough to where you get down to something that you can say, yeah, that's definitely the root cause, right? That's what's underneath all this. All that followed it, all that came afterwards was all stuff that came as a result of us making that decision.

So once we have our root cause, we can repeat that again for the other two. if we have time, but if we're starting to run out of time, I kind of watch my time box there. And once I realize we need to move into solutioning, then we'll move on into the adaptation portion. In adaptation, we just take each single one, and we kind of repeat this process of getting possible answers across the team.

So for the number one issue that you guys identified, here's our root cause. Let's take some post-its here. or let's take some suggestions of what we might possibly do to counteract this in the next sprint. So we get those things that come up. Then we'll talk through each one, and we'll try to build consensus as a team as to the most important step to take. So for each item, I want what's the one most important thing to do. So we'll identify that, again, as time allows, I want to at least do the most important thing.

If we have time for more than that, great, we'll get to the second and third. But I think it's so important to just, whatever the biggest, most important thing is, make sure you have an action item for that thing. And here's where I just caution you. It doesn't have to be, hey, we've knocked it out. We've cleared it. We've solved it in the next sprint. It just has to be that we've taken a step towards solving it, right? What's the old phrase, a journey of a thousand miles starts with a single step. Well, the same thing goes for our teams.

And this is oftentimes why teams get stuck, is they just feel paralyzed. Hey, there's nothing we can do about this. It's such a huge issue. Well, that's not true. What's the next step you can take? So take the next step.

Make sure that the team understands what it is. And make sure we understand who is going to be responsible for that. And do that for as many as you can get through. Then get to the closing the retrospective part of it. Kind of wrap up. Remind them, here's the journey we've taken, here's what we've uncovered, and here's what we're gonna do differently for next time.

And now those items, they should go straight into your next sprint backlog, not product backlog, sprint backlog, right? They don't need to be prioritized because the product owner has been with you, they should have been with you in this meeting, it's the entire Scrum team. So the product owner has weighed in as well. This has been a team collective decision. So now those items should go into your sprint backlog, and you should do something about them in this next sprint. That's the whole concept of the Kaizen comes first, right?

The good change should happen before we do anything else so we can get the benefit of it over a longer period of time. So that's kind of the idea here. And I wanted to give you that kind of really quick flyby to help you kind of see how to go about doing something like this, right? And I just picked one theme. I just picked Stranger Things because I thought it would be fun to work on. I thought it would be a fun kind of theme. And it might be fun for a team I was working with. But maybe that's not something that aligns to your team.

Maybe your team has a bunch of people who are really into cricket. Well, do a cricket-themed one. Maybe you have a team that's around the Academy Awards time. And everyone's talking about, and now people don't do this as much anymore, but. Maybe they're all talking about who's going to Oscars this year or something. Well, do an Oscar-themed one. Or it can be around anything. Do it around award shows in general. It doesn't have to be just Oscars, but do it around any kind of award show. And you can pick up different themes.

Again, if you're stuck, ask your favorite large language model and see what it comes up with. It's not all going to be gems that comes from that, but you can pick and choose and refine it, which is exactly what I did with my five themes for this. So I hope you see how easy it is to do that. It doesn't have to be complicated. You don't have to be extremely creative to do this.

You can make use of the tools that you have available to you. And as a Scrum Master, you can keep this fresh. You can tailor this to the team that you have. What is your team really into?

What's the theme that they would really resonate with? Choose that. Go with that. Create a theme around that and see what they think about it. Afterwards, ask them, hey, did this work all right? Did you like this? I hope that's been useful to you. If you like this and you want to hear more like this, come to our website to mountngoatsoftware.com and check out our courses that we're launching actually this week, Better Retrospectives and the Retrospective Repair Guide. Those are the two that we really want to have you kind of think about.

Come to our site, find out more about them. Better Retrospectives is all about just the expert level retrospectives course really gets into the heart of a lot of these issues at a very, very deep level. The retrospectives repair guide is taking the 10 most asked questions that we have about retrospectives at Mountain Goat Software and giving you really deep dives on how to solution those, how to problem solve those top 10 issues. And the great news for you is if you're listening to this in real time, right, when we've launched this, We're launching this as a two-for-one special. We'll not have that special again. So it's $99 that you get both of those courses. You don't have to pick and choose from them. You can give $99.

They're prerecorded. You can watch them at your own pace. This is for people who want this knowledge, who want these answers. And I know when I was a Scrum Master starting out, there was a lot of, I followed a kind of the pattern that Mike established with his sprint repair guide. I bought that when I was coming up as a scrum master because I needed answers to some of the questions that he had in that scrum repair guide. Well, take a look at the 10 that we have for our retrospective repair guide. Maybe you'll find one of those things that's really tripping you up and maybe just getting the answer to one of those is going to be worth the money for you. I encourage you to go to our site, check it out.

Don't miss this. It's a limited time cart that's opened. It's only going to be open for a week. So if you're listening to this when we launch it, don't delay, don't wait until next week. If you hear this next week, then you're running out of time. So make sure that you take advantage of the time that you have here so that you can get these two courses, two for the price of one here at our launch.

Again, we won't do that again. So I hope you found this to be useful. It's just a little taste of the kind of thing that's in those courses for you. And if retrospectives are something that you're struggling with, or if retrospectives are something that you just feel like, man, it really could be more. It really could deliver more for my team. Check out these two courses. I really think they're gonna help a lot of teams out there. That's why we put them together. So that'll wrap it up. I hope you've enjoyed this and we'll talk to you next time. on another episode of the Agile Mentors Podcast.

What do Spotify, Google Meet, and your expense report tool have in common? They could all delight your users—if you design for more than just function. In this episode, Dr. Nesrine Changuel breaks down the emotional motivators that transform average products into unforgettable ones.

Overview

What separates a good product from a great one? According to Dr. Nesrine Changuel, it's not just meeting functional needs—it's creating emotional delight. In this episode of the Agile Mentors Podcast, Brian Milner sits down with Nesrine, a former product leader at Google, Spotify, and Microsoft, to explore how emotional connection is the secret sauce behind the world’s most beloved products.

They dive into Nesrine’s “Delight Framework,” reveal how seemingly mundane tools (like time-tracking software or toothbrush apps!) can create joy, and explain why delight isn’t a nice-to-have—it’s a competitive edge. Whether you're a product owner, product manager, or just want to build better user experiences, this episode will change how you think about your backlog forever.

References and resources mentioned in the show:

Dr. Nesrine Changuel
Product Delight by Dr. Nesrine Changuel
Blog: What is a Product? by Mike Cohn
#116: Turning Weird User Actions into Big Wins with Gojko Adzic
#124: How to Avoid Common Product Team Pitfalls with David Pereira
Join the Agile Mentors Community
Subscribe to the Agile Mentors Podcast

Want to get involved?

This show is designed for you, and we’d love your input.

• Enjoyed what you heard today? Please leave a rating and a review. It really helps, and we read every single one.
• Got an Agile subject you’d like us to discuss or a question that needs an answer? Share your thoughts with us at [email protected]

This episode’s presenters are:

Brian Milner is SVP of coaching and training at Mountain Goat Software. He's passionate about making a difference in people's day-to-day work, influenced by his own experience of transitioning to Scrum and seeing improvements in work/life balance, honesty, respect, and the quality of work.

Dr. Nesrine Changuel is a product coach, advisor, and speaker with over a decade of senior product management experience at Google, Spotify, and Microsoft, where she led major consumer products like Chrome, Meet, Spotify, and Skype. She holds a Master’s in Electrical Engineering and a PhD in Media Processing and Telecommunications and is based in Paris.

Auto-generated Transcript:

Brian Milner (00:00)
Welcome back Agile Mentors. We're back for another episode of the Agile Mentors podcast. I'm with you as always Brian Milner and today I have a very special guest with me. I have Dr. Nesrine Changuel with me. Welcome in Nesrine.

Nesrine (00:14)
Hi, Brian. Thanks for having me.

Brian Milner (00:16)
I'm very excited to have Nesreen with us. I think this is going to be a really, really great episode for all of you product owners out there or product specialists, anybody who works in the product area. I think you're going to find this really interesting and you're going to want to bookmark this one. Maybe even come back to this a little bit. Nesreen is a coach, a speaker, particularly in the product area. She has previously worked at Google. She's worked at Spotify, at Microsoft, so no stranger to large enterprise, very high profile products that she's worked on in the past. She has a book coming out in May, so look for this book. It's called Product Delight. And that's really what we're going to be focusing on here is the concept of eliciting or generating kind of an emotional response to our product. I guess I'll start by, did you stumble upon this? What drew your interest to people's emotional response to products?

Nesrine (01:19)
Yes, so maybe I can share the story how I came to this topic and how I became so vocal about it. So in addition to being a product manager and leader over the last decade, I was always and I always enjoyed being a speaker. So I always wanted to go on stage and share insight. This is probably coming from my research background, because when I used to be a researcher, I traveled the world to go and present my research work and When I became a product manager, I kept this habit with me. So I always been on stage and I spoke about different topics like product discovery, product operation, different topics. Until one day I got reached out by a conference organizer and he said, Hey, Nisri, we want you on stage, but we have an idea for a topic for you. I'm not that used. Usually I come up with idea myself, but I said, okay, what do want me to talk about? And he said, Hey, Nusreen, you have been working for Spotify, for Microsoft, for Google Chrome and Google Meet, and we all admire those products and we consider them very successful products. What if you come and tell us what's the common thing that probably is there any common thing that made those products successful? Being an insider, being within those company, could you share with us something that you consider in common between those products? To be honest with you, I found it challenging at the same time interesting as an exercise. I was not, by the way, able at that time to answer the question, what's in common? So I sat down and I did the exercise myself and I started to think what was really in common? What made Skype Skype? What made Spotify Spotify and those Google products so successful? And I came to the following conclusion. I found that what made those products so successful is that they don't only solve for functional needs, but they also solve for emotional needs. So when we use a particular product, we use it for a certain functional need, but we also use it for an emotional need. And without even knowing that I have been doing it for more than 12 years, I came to the conclusion that, my God, during all those years, I have been focusing so much into users need from both angle, functional and emotional. So I came on stage and I spoke about that topic and from that day, I started to give it a name. I'm calling it emotional connection. I'm calling it product delight. And I'm here to share more about it as well.

Brian Milner (03:50)
That's awesome, yeah. I mean, I think we do hear a lot and we focus a lot on that functional kind of need, the way you differentiate there. think that's a good differentiation, functional and emotional kind of needs or motivators there. yeah, I mean, I've always heard, know, kind of that kind of general product advice is, you know, find the things that... people really, really have as huge needs, the things they would pay someone to do for them. And that's the key to success is finding those huge needs. But we're actually going beyond that to say, yeah, those are important. It's not to say that we should skip that, but it's when there's the emotional connection to a feature or to something that we do that really the light bulb kind of comes on for our customers. Is that kind of what your research is leading to?

Nesrine (04:40)
you're getting it right. Don't get me wrong. Of course you have to honor the functional needs and serve the functional feature, but the delight or the emotional connection happens when you go beyond exactly how you said it. Let me explain. If you serve only functional needs, you know what you get? You get satisfied users because they are asking for something and they are satisfied about what they are receiving. Now,

Brian Milner (04:41)
Okay, okay. Haha.

Nesrine (05:05)
If you surprise them by going beyond, by anticipating their need, by exceeding their expectation, you're not only satisfying them, you're surprising them in a positive way and delight is the combination of surprise and joy. Actually, the theoretical definition of delight is a combination of two emotions, surprise and joy. So going beyond, anticipate need and exceed expectation. is what we should aim for in addition to the functional needs.

Brian Milner (05:35)
That's awesome. Yeah, I use this example sometimes in, we use this example in the agile world to talk about, you know, the part of the agile manifesto that says customer collaboration over contract negotiation. And, you know, there's an example I use from my past where I used to work at a company that was very contract driven. And, you know, the thing that I always used to kind of take away from that was the very best we could ever do or hope to do. was to meet our customers' expectations. We could never, ever exceed it because we were only doing exactly what they told us to do. So I think this is a really important distinction here to make that just meeting the customer's needs, just meeting the minimal customer satisfaction bar, that's not going to keep you with loyal customers. That's not going to have repeat customers, or they're not going to tell their friends about, you know. That product did exactly what I hoped it would do. But it didn't really surprise me. It didn't really go beyond that. I know you talked about, because I've read your blog and a little bit of the discussion about this. So I know you talk about in the blog kind of the connection to Kano analysis. And I've always thought that's a really great way to try to determine things to target and go after. So talk to us a little bit about that, about Kano analysis and kind of what that uncovers and how that connects to what your research has shown.

Nesrine (06:51)
Yes. I love Kano by the way. I, I mean, that's one of the framework I have been considering throughout most of my product career. But this framework comes with a limitation and let me explain. So first of all, for those who are not very familiar with Kano, Kano is a visualization or categorization, let's call it. It's a categorization framework that allows to categorize features among different categories. One of them is must have. So these are the things that absolutely have to be in the product. Other that are performances, which are the more you have, the more satisfied users are, the less they less satisfied they are. And of course there are the delighters and delighters are those feature that when they are in the product, users are surprisingly happy. And when they are not, are not even the satisfaction is not even impacted. So the limitation of Kano is that it doesn't tell you how to achieve delight. Let me explain. I think we live in a world that everyone agree that we should delight our users. I mean, this, this concept is now globalized and everyone is talking about delighting users. The issue is that we don't know how to delight them. So we know category, there's a category that called delight, but we don't know how to. So the, the framework that I'm introducing and I'm calling it the delight framework is the framework that allows to first identify. So it's usually, represented into three steps. The first step is to start by identifying the emotional and functional motivators. So let me give you an example. I've been working at Spotify for about four years and as a Spotify user, imagine yourself, you are a Spotify user. You do have, of course, functional motivators. What could be the functional motivators? Listening to music, listening to podcasts, maybe listening to an audiobook. So all those are functional motivators. Now, what could be the emotional motivators as a Spotify user? It could be feeling less lonely. It could be feeling more productive because when you're working you need to listen to something. It could be about changing your mood. It could be about feeling connected. So all those are emotional motivators that drive users to use a product like Spotify. So what I encourage every product manager or every product team to do at first is to dig into identifying, of course, the functional need. And everyone is good, by the way, in identifying the functional needs. But also, while doing that exercise, pay attention to what could be the emotional motivators. So that's step number one is about listing the functional and the emotional motivators. Once you have those, Now we get to the second part of the framework, which is look at your backlog. And I guess you have a very busy backlog and take those features one by one and see for this particular feature, which motivator am I solving for among the functional ones and among the emotional ones as well. So the delight grid, for example, is a visualization tool that I came and created in order to allow product teams to visualize their backlog and see how many of my features are only solving for functional motivators. In that case, we call that category low delight. How many of my features are only solving for emotional motivators? These are very rare, but the best example I would call is, for example, I'm having an Apple watch and one month ago it was New Year Eve and at midnight I get fireworks popping out of my

Brian Milner (10:35)
Ha

Nesrine (10:36)
Apple watch and it was a happy new year there's nothing functional in there but it's all about creating some smile I call this surface delight and then how many of your features are solving for both functional and emotional motivators and I call this deep delight so maybe I deviated a bit from your question compared to canoe but it's actually about adding this dimension of connecting features to the real motivators of the users.

Brian Milner (11:07)
No, maybe a little bit, but you connected it to where we end up going anyway. So I think that's a great connection there. And by the way, for anyone listening, we'll link to all of this so that you can find this and follow up. But I like that differentiation between surface delight and deep delight. I know some of the examples that I've heard used kind of frequently in looking at Kano analysis and kind of trying to find those delighters. And that is kind of the area that it specifies there in Canoe, right? You're trying to find those things that are not expected, but when people find that they're there, they like that it's there, but they don't expect it's there. So if it's not there, there's no negative response that it's not there, but there's a positive response if it's there because they like seeing it. And my boss, Mike Cohn, tells this story about this

Nesrine (11:59)
Yes.

Brian Milner (12:03)
There's a hotel in California that became famous because at the pool, they have a phone that's by the pool that's the Popsicle Hotline. And you can pick up the phone and you can order a Popsicle to be brought to the pool. And it's the kind of thing where you're not going to go search for a hotel. Does this hotel have a Popsicle Hotline? I'm only going to stay at hotels with Popsicle Hotlines. It's not that kind of a normal feature. It's a delight feature because when you see it and you find out it's there, it's like, that's really cool. And it can be the kind of thing that says, yeah, I want to search that hotel out again next time I'm in this area because I really thought that was a nice little attention to detail and it was fun. But I think what I'm hearing from you is that might be more of what we would classify as a surface delight. It's not really meeting a deep need.

Nesrine (12:35)
Yes.

Brian Milner (12:56)
But it's fun, it's exciting, it's not expected, but it doesn't really cross that threshold into, but it also meets kind of functional delights. Is that kind of what you're saying there? Okay. Okay.

Nesrine (13:08)
Yes, actually I heard about that hotel story just to tell you how much viral it went. It came to me. So actually you get it correct that I consider that as surface delight and I have nothing against by the way, surface delight. You can add surface delight. The issue is you can end up doing only surface delight and that's not enough. So the idea is to do a combination and I do have two stories to share with you just to compliment on this hotel story. One is personal and one is professional. Brian Milner (13:21) Yeah. Okay.

Nesrine (13:37)
The personal one just happened to me a month ago. I went to Sweden and I went to Stockholm. That's where I worked for eight years. And I went there for business and I decided to meet some friends and some ex-colleagues. So we all gathered and went to a restaurant, a very nice restaurant in Sweden. And came the time where we had to say goodbye and to pay. And I guess you can feel it immediately when it's about paying and we are a large group and you start to get that anxiety about who's paying what and what did I order? What did I drink? What? I mean, I honestly hate that moment, especially in a large group where you don't necessarily have a lot of affinity with us. Like, should we split in 10? Should we pay each one paying its piece anyway? So that was a moment of frustration, of anxiety.

Brian Milner (14:09)
right. Yeah.

Nesrine (14:28)
And I loved how the restaurant solved it for it. You know how they solve for it? I mean, maybe it exists in the U.S., but for me, that's something I never seen before. The waiter came with a QR code on a piece of paper and you scan the QR code. And when you scan your QR code, you get the list of items that got purchased by the table. And all you have is to pick, and that happens automatically real time. Everyone is picking at the same time. You pick the things from the list and you pay. for the things that you order. You can even tip on the bottom. You can give feedback. Everything happened on that QR code. And you can guess how much that anxiety could be removed. So that's the personal story I wanted to share. The second story, which is more professional, I want to share how we try to improve experience at Google Chrome. So I've been the product manager at Google Chrome.

Brian Milner (15:13)
Yeah.

Nesrine (15:25)
And we started from the observation that people do have plenty of open tabs. I guess you are one of them, especially on mobile. Like on mobile, you go and check how many open tabs you do have on Chrome and you realize that they are have, we realized at least out of numbers, out of data that people do have plenty of open tabs. So it started as

Brian Milner (15:32)
You

Nesrine (15:47)
technical issue. Of course, the more tab you have, the heavier the app is, the slower the app could be, et cetera. So we wanted to reduce the number of unnecessary open tabs in Chrome. So we interviewed users and we started to check with them, why do they even leave their tabs open? So some of them leave tabs because they consider them as a reminder. I mean, if tab is open, it means that you need to finish a task there. Some people really leave tabs just for ignorance. mean, they moved from a tab to another and they completely forget about them. Actually, we realized that the fact of leaving tab open, the reason for leaving tab could be completely different from a person to another. And the other interesting observation, and when I say identify emotional motivators, you will realize that people feel a bit ashamed when they show to us that they do have plenty of open tabs. Some of them would say, sorry, I usually don't even have so many open tabs. It's only now. And I'm like, it's okay. But the point is, if you have this mindset of trying to track the emotional insight from your users, you will take note. And the note was anxiety, feeling ashamed, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. And that was in introduction for in...

Brian Milner (16:42)
You Yeah, right.

Nesrine (17:04)
improving the tab management experience later on in Chrome.

Brian Milner (17:07)
That's actually a really good parallel, though. I think that's a good example because it reminds me, too, even going back, I remember one of the things, and I'm going way back here, but I remember one of the things about Gmail that was kind of a selling point initially was the concept there of you don't have to worry about maintaining an inbox. keep all your mails and search. And you can search through your mails and find whatever it is. And I remember prior to that, most people would use something like Outlook or something like that to have their mail, there was always this constant struggle of, I've got to keep it down. I've got to delete things. I've got to categorize things. And Google had this different approach of, don't worry about it. Just leave it. And that's a good, I think, example as well of kind of that emotional response of,

Nesrine (17:48)
Yes.

Brian Milner (17:56)
Gosh, I'm kind of anxious. I feel bad that my inbox is so big. And I know that's bad, but Google comes along and says, don't worry about it. You're not bad. It's OK. Yeah.

Nesrine (18:05)
Yeah, yeah. And by the way, I think Gmail is filled with plenty of deep delight features. One of them I can quickly highlight is, you know, when you send an email, we're saying attached file and the file is not there. And when you try to hit send, you get that pop up like a be careful or like a mind, there is no attached file inside. These are for me like very attached to the fact that You don't want to feel ashamed. You don't want to look stupid later on saying, Hey, sorry, I forgot the file. Here's the file. That's, that's a great example. And the other example that come to mind again in Gmail, you know, that smart compose when you're trying to answer an email and you can just hit tab, tab, tab to complete the sentence. I mean, the functional need is to write an email. The emotional need is to get it in a relaxed way. And the combination would allow for something like.

Brian Milner (18:49)
Yeah.

Nesrine (19:00)
Smart Compose.

Brian Milner (19:01)
That's awesome. Yeah, so I guess that leads to the question though, when we're talking about something like Spotify, mean, music intrinsically is emotional anyway, right? It's something that you have an emotional connection to and you feel a certain way when you hear music. But if my product is a, I don't know, expense reporting software, right?

Nesrine (19:23)
Mm-hmm.

Brian Milner (19:25)
I can just hear people out there kind of asking, know, and kind of thinking to themselves, yeah, but my product, right, my product is not that kind of, it doesn't elicit that kind of emotional response in people the same way music would. So does this apply to me as well? So how would you answer those people who feel like my products might be a little bit more bland or boring and don't really intrinsically have an emotional connection to them?

Nesrine (19:47)
Mm-hmm. So my answer is that if your product is boring, then it's even more priority now to focus on emotional connection. But let me elaborate. So that's one of the reflections that came to my mind while writing the book. So while writing the book, I wanted the book to be a storytelling book. So I was writing a lot of my stories, stories from Skype at the time, Spotify and all the Google product. But at some point I said, hey, hey, Nisreen, you need to get more insight from other people and other experiences. So I get to interview product leaders from completely different industries and completely different domain. I interviewed leaders from B2B like Atlassian or Intuit and so many other companies that I don't have so much insight from. I even interviewed people from hardware, like I interviewed someone from Dyson and I was, hey, what makes Dyson so emotionally attractive for me? Cause I love my Dyson vacuum cleaner. But let me get to your point because when I interviewed someone from Intuit, that person told me something super interesting. She told me that at some point she was working at a tool called Tsheet. And Tsheet is a tool that allows you to enter your time report. There is nothing more boring than that. I think I'm picking the one that you're looking for here because it's, it's as a user. The only reason I would use this tool is to report my time so I can get paid.

Brian Milner (21:06)
Hmm. Right. Yeah.

Nesrine (21:19)
There is nothing exciting, nothing emotional. And what I got out of that product leader who used to be the head of product at the time, she told me that they were completely aware about the fact that the product is not that attractive. And instead of living with that observation, they did all what they could do to make it even more attractive. So they added some fun. They made the messaging less aggressive and less about enter your time. report but rather into more playful and even the images are more playful. When you press the enter time report you get the congratulation and some confetti if needed. So they explicitly turned and that's a strategy. They turned that boring moment into something even more attractive and they had to do that otherwise the experience will keep on becoming more more boring and the perception of users toward the product will be even less, more and more gray, I would say.

Brian Milner (22:22)
Yeah, yeah, just that little dopamine kind of kick, right? Just that little bit of chemical reaction in your brain can make a huge difference. That's awesome. That's a great story and a great answer to that question. So I'm curious, we're talking about trying to find these things and trying to see, your matrix here, it thinks about the emotional motivators, the functional motivators, and trying to find those things that kind of cross both planes.

Nesrine (22:24)
Yep.

Brian Milner (22:52)
How do you verify at the end? Because if you're lining your features up and think, I think this solves this emotional thing. I think this solves this functional thing. Is there a way to follow up to ensure that it actually is doing that? How do you follow up to make sure it's really doing what you thought it would do?

Nesrine (23:09)
Yes, so let's imagine you did the exercise well, you filled in the delight grade and you observed that you do have plenty of low delights, which is most of the cases by the way. The very first thing I recommend is to see opportunities for moving or transforming these features into deep delight. And in the book, for example, I talk about the nine delighters. Nine delighters are ways that could be sometimes cheap even to introduce. in order to make those low delight features into more deep delight. This could be, for example, through personalization. We love when the features are personalized, and that's one of the reasons, for example, why Spotify is so successful, is through features like Discover Weekly or RAPT or these kinds of super personalization related features. It could be through seasonality. That's, for me, the cheapest and the most delightful feature you can or aspect of feature you can add to your product. So for example, when I worked at Google Meet, I've been working at the background replace features. So we have been, of course, introducing static image. We have been introducing video backgrounds as well. But from time to time, we always use seasonality to introduce what we call seasonal background. So when it's Easter, we introduce Easter background. When it's Christmas, we introduce Christmas background. Guess what? Even like for Olympic game, we introduce Olympic game background. When it's the Earth Day, we introduced Earth Day background. So there is always an opportunity to introduce some seasonality to the product. And guess what? We relate to those, especially if the product is global. We relate like last, when was it? Like last Wednesday. It was the new year, the Chinese new year. And I was checking when is exactly the exact date for the new year, the Chinese new day. And I put that and you know what happened in Chrome? It got these dragons and those like the celebration within the product, like within Chrome. These of course are surface delight, but you know what? Why not? You see? So there are some tools. Some of them are not that...

Brian Milner (25:17)
Right.

Nesrine (25:22)
expensive to introduce to the product. Some would require a bit more thoughtful and thought into it, but there are ways that I detail in the book in order to introduce more delight. And then if you want to validate through metrics, and I guess that's your question where it's heading to, then the good news, and that's something that I discovered recently because there's been a study that was conducted by McKinsey. And you know what they studied? They studied the impact of emotional connection on product adoption. So they actually studied over, I don't know how many industries die, like tourism, IT, energy, whatever. And they interviewed more than 100,000 users or whatever. So the conclusion that they found out of that very interesting study is that emotionally connected users will get you more twice as more revenue, twice as more referral, and twice as more retention compared to satisfied users. I'm not talking about the non-satisfied. So if you take two groups of users, those that you satisfy their needs and those that you go beyond and they are emotionally connected, those that are emotionally connected get you twice revenue, referral and retention.

Brian Milner (26:19)
Hmm.

Nesrine (26:43)
So this is just to highlight that for people who say, no, but this is the cherry on the top. This is just like the extra. It's not the extra, it's the way to stand out. I don't know any company that is standing out nowadays without investing into emotional connection, none.

Brian Milner (26:54)
Yeah. That's a really good point. Yeah, I mean, the example that comes to my mind when you talked about seasonality and other things like that, know, I love my, you know, they're not a sponsor, Oral-B toothbrush, you know, the electronic toothbrush, and you know, there's an app with it and it keeps track of, you know, did you get all the areas of your teeth and did you hold it there long enough and... One of the things I always love about it is when it gets to December, the opening screen when you open up the app starts having snowfall. It's kind of a funny little emotional response, but you look at that and you think, that's cool. Yeah, it is kind of that season where now it's time to get ready for Christmas and it's that special. It's only this month that it's going to be like that. It's going to go away at the end of the month.

Nesrine (27:45)
Yes.

Brian Milner (27:49)
feel little sad when it's gone, it's back to normal. But it's such a silly little thing. Does that make any difference in really brushing my teeth at all? Does it change how well I brush my Not really. It's just a fun little thing that when it pops up there. And think how little that took from someone to do that. It's a little animation that they just pop up on a loading screen. But that little tiny bit, think, again, maybe a little bit surface.

Nesrine (28:10)
Yes.

Brian Milner (28:16)
but it takes something that would have been routine. It takes something that would have been kind of boring otherwise, and it just added a little bit of fun to it, you know? And I think you're right, that emotional connection is really, really important in situations like that, yeah.

Nesrine (28:21)
Yes. Yes. Yes, yeah. And the thing that I'm very vocal about nowadays is the fact that this emotional connection is actually not a new topic. It's something that has been extremely popular among marketers. For example, if you think about the best marketing campaign, they are all very emotional. The most successful marketing campaign are. If you think about designers, there are plenty of resources about emotional design. There is a great book by Don Norman. It was called emotional design. Aaron Walter as well wrote something called Designing for Emotion. But you know, the problem is that among engineers and among product manager, we don't talk that much about that. And you know what happened when we are not informed about this topic? There is a gap between the language of marketers, designers, and the engineers and product manager. And that gap doesn't allow things to succeed. I'm trying to educate the engineers and the product world towards this well-known domain outside of the product in order to have this consistency and start making real impactful products.

Brian Milner (29:40)
Yeah, yeah, this is such a really deep topic and it just encourages me, think, even more to recommend the book there. It's not out yet, time of this recording it's not out, but it's going to be in May of 2025. That's when this book is coming out. And I know it's gonna have a lot of really good information in it. Again, the book is gonna be called Product Delight. by Nesrine Changuel, Dr. Nesrine Changuel. I should make sure I say that. But I really appreciate you coming on because this is fascinating stuff. And I think the product managers, the product owners that are listening here are going to find this really fascinating. So I appreciate you sharing your time and your insights with us, Nesrine.

Nesrine (30:26)
Thank you, it's my pleasure. I love talking about this topic.

Brian Milner (30:29)
Ha

Retrospectives shouldn’t suck the energy out of your team—or get skipped entirely. In this episode, Brian and Cort share how to fix the most common retro fails and announce two brand-new tools to help you run retros that actually work.

Overview

In this episode of the Agile Mentors Podcast, Brian Milner and Cort Sharp break down why retrospectives are more than just a “Scrum box to check.” They’re the powerhouse behind continuous team improvement. From battling retro fatigue and quiet-room energy to creating psychologically safe environments and tying retrospectives to real results, they cover it all.

Plus, Brian reveals the launch of two new on-demand courses—Better Retrospectives and The Retrospectives Repair Guide—designed to help teams stop skipping and start optimizing their retros. Whether you're a Scrum Master, coach, or facilitator, this episode is your practical guide to making retrospectives worth everyone’s time again.

References and resources mentioned in the show:

Cort Sharp
Blog: Retrospectives With a Quiet Team
Blog: Does a Scrum Team Need a Retrospective Every Sprint
Mike Cohn’s Better User Stories Course
Scrum Repair Guide
Subscribe to the Agile Mentors Podcast

Want to get involved?

This show is designed for you, and we’d love your input.

• Enjoyed what you heard today? Please leave a rating and a review. It really helps, and we read every single one.
• Got an Agile subject you’d like us to discuss or a question that needs an answer? Share your thoughts with us at [email protected]

This episode’s presenters are:

Brian Milner is SVP of coaching and training at Mountain Goat Software. He's passionate about making a difference in people's day-to-day work, influenced by his own experience of transitioning to Scrum and seeing improvements in work/life balance, honesty, respect, and the quality of work.

Cort Sharp is the Scrum Master of the producing team and the Agile Mentors Community Manager. In addition to his love for Agile, Cort is also a serious swimmer and has been coaching swimmers for five years.

Auto-generated Transcript:

Brian Milner (00:00)
Welcome in Agile Mentors. Welcome back for another episode of Agile Mentors podcast. I'm with you as always, Brian Milner, but today we're gonna have a continuation of something we tried, a little experiment we tried a few weeks back here. I've got Mr. Court Sharp back with us. Welcome back in court.

Cort Sharp (00:18)
Hey, Brian, thanks for having me on again. I had lot of fun last time I was on here and it was a great discussion. So thanks for bringing me back.

Brian Milner (00:21)
Yeah. Yeah, it's, oh, absolutely. Yeah, know, got a lot of people said, hey, we kind of like that court guy. Kind of like hearing from court. So we wanted to have court back, you know, because you guys told us that you liked him. And we also wanted to have him back because we just thought this format kind of worked for various reasons. And last time we kind of hit on some things that were kind of more hot button issues of the day. things that have been flowing through social media or other things around Agile. But we wanted to have a little bit more of a focus for today's episode. And we're going to focus really on the topic of retrospectives. And maybe make a little announcement here along the way as we go along. But we're actually going to switch roles here a little bit. I'm going to kind of pass the ball over to Court. And I'm going let Court drive this, just like he did in the last episode. Ball's in your court. Ha ha, get it?

Cort Sharp (01:18)
Ha ha, court, there you go. Well thanks, Brian. Once again, I love coming on here, I love chatting with you. And like you said, yeah, we're gonna be talking about retrospectives today, mostly because I have been struggling with answering questions about retrospectives. I think this is one of the more common meetings within Scrum that just gets skipped over, just people don't find value in it.

Brian Milner (01:42)
Yeah.

Cort Sharp (01:43)
or people just struggle with understanding why we have retrospectives. And sometimes I get a little slipped up and I struggle with answering the questions about why do we do this? So can you give me some clarification? Why do we have retrospectives? Why do they matter?

Brian Milner (01:58)
Yeah. Yeah. I mean, it's a great question. And I think everyone should, should, you know, want to know that answer. If you're doing this, you one of things I say in class all the time is, you know, it's important to know the purpose behind the meetings that we have in scrum. If you don't know the purpose, then, you know, that, how are we gonna, how are we gonna have a successful meeting? How are we gonna get the most out of it? so yeah, it's, it's a funny kind of meeting, because all the other meetings and scrum are, are really, around one ultimate purpose and that's building the increment. This is not, right? This is sort of a timeout. It's an intentional kind of timeout to step away and say, all right, now that we've done that, how did it go? What kind of happened along the way? I think it's a vitally important meeting. And when I hear people sometimes say, is it okay to skip it or should we do it once ever so often? you know, again, I try to be pragmatic and say, you know, I don't, I don't know any possible situation out there, but, you know, I would tell you, I would advise you not to, I don't think that's the right path to go. I know scrum doesn't teach to do that. I think it's really, really important because it is that, that moment of let's pause for a little bit. Let's figure out what we need to do differently and then let's actually take a step to do it. There's actually an interesting little background for this. So I'm going to take a little side trip here. Retrospectives actually come from an idea that has been around for a while that actually started kind of in lean manufacturing, some of the things that came out of Japan. There was actually a phrase that they would use on the assembly line at the auto assembly plants there in Japan. They referred to this concept of Kaizen. Kaizen was kind of a, I don't speak Japanese, but what I understand is the word loosely kind of translates to good change. And they had this concept there on the assembly line floor that anyone who was on the floor had access to the big red button that could stop the entire thing. They could stop the entire assembly line, which you know, on an auto assembly plant, that's a huge deal to stop the entire production. And they were very deliberate about it and said, no, we want everyone to have access to that because the phrase they use was the Kaizen comes first. And what they instructed the employees was if you along the way, as you're doing your job, if you see something that we could change that would make it more efficient, that would be a better way of doing this, then we want you to hit the red button because we want to implement whatever that change is as soon as possible. The sooner we implement the change, the longer we have as a benefit, like an investment. The earlier I invest, the more I get as a return. So the same thing here, the earlier I invest in this good change, the longer I have to have a return from it. So that phrase, the Kaizen comes first, is sort of a central thing that we think about here with retrospectives. It's identifying those good changes. there's actually even an intention behind it that it doesn't go on the product backlog. It goes in the next sprint backlog. Because we don't want to have any even inkling of deprioritizing something that comes out of a retrospective. It's that Kaizen portion. So we want to make sure that comes first. So yeah, it absolutely is going to go into the next sprint. Whatever we decide is the most important thing, we're going to make an impact on it in the next sprint. So that's why I think that it's the most important thing for us is it's the engine that really drives continual improvement. And without it, I think teams stagnate. I think they just get kind of stuck in a rut. problems that we have, we just continually repeat. if we don't have the time to stop an exam.

Cort Sharp (06:00)
Yeah. All right. So I kind of got one bigger idea from there. And for whatever reason, when you were like, we gave everyone the red button to stop the assembly line. And that's kind of, we're stopping, we're pausing, we're inspecting, and then we're going to come up with a plan to adapt. Whatever reason, this phrase stuck in my head, it just popped out to me. But it sounds like we're giving power to the people.

Brian Milner (06:06)
Okay.

Cort Sharp (06:26)
where we're, you know, the team has the power, the people have the power to say, whoa, let's stop here. Let's hang on a second. Let's take some time and let's figure out a better way to move forward. And from that, I just think of sports. I think of sports teams. We're in the middle of March Madness as we're recording this right now. And I can pretty much guarantee you that every single one of those teams who's advancing on past, I think round one is going on right now, so passing on through round one, they're probably watching some film on their opponents. They're trying to see, what are they gonna do? What are some plays? How can we kind of counteract it? But more often than not, I would wager, I'm not a gambling man, but I'd wager, that they're looking at their own film and they're trying to see what did we do well in this game that got us the win? What can we improve? so that we could maybe have a little bit more of a bigger margin of victory. And what is it that we should probably stop doing? What is there that wasn't working out? Maybe our pick and rolls were not good, maybe we weren't executing well on those, or not to get too into basketball terms there, but maybe we should stop shooting so many threes or something like that. I don't know, right? But yeah, that's, yeah.

Brian Milner (07:42)
I think you're right. I think you're absolutely right that, you know, sometimes we think this retrospective thing is maybe, is this just a weird thing that we do in software development? No, this happens in a lot of professions. There's a lot of different professions out there that take time to analyze. And by the way, I'll throw this out there as well, because you mentioned kind of sports. Sometimes people will, I've encountered teams at times that think, You know what, we're good enough. We don't need to do this anymore. This is really only for teams when they're starting. We don't need to have retrospectives once we've become mature. Well, to them, I'd say, well, then why do championship teams continue to watch their film? Right? If a team won the Super Bowl last year, don't you think that they still go through training camp and get ready for the season? Yeah, they absolutely do. But they're on top of their game. So if they think it's necessary when they're on top of their game, is there really a moment that we would be so on top of our game that we have nothing left to learn and get better at? I'd say no. I think that there's always something that we can get better at. And I think that's a great analogy to kind of drive that home.

Cort Sharp (08:54)
Yeah, awesome. I totally agree with you there. Even just outside of the team sports world, I come from a more individual sport background. And it's so important to take some time and just reflect on, how did I perform? How was my performance, even on an individual level, so that I can take some action steps throughout this next period of training or work or whatever it is that I'm doing so that I can make the next next performance or the next time I race or the next time I get out there on the court or on the field or whatever. That's how I can make that next time better than this last time. So awesome. Thanks for clarifying. Thanks for.

Brian Milner (09:28)
Yeah. Well, yeah, yeah, no, no, it's a great question. I think this is, probably time for us to kind of let the cat out of the bag here a little bit and just say, one of the reasons we wanted to focus on it for the episode is, drum roll, we kind of have a couple of courses coming out. here that we're going to offer at Mountain Goat Software that you can take around retrospectives. They're on demand videos that I worked on. They're two different separate courses. And we just thought this was an area that really needed some focus and attention and we were getting lots of questions around it. So we always try to listen to what you guys are telling us. And what we were hearing was, this is where you wanted us to focus. yeah, not a lot of details that I'm going to say right out of the gate. But yeah, we do want to kind of announce that those are coming here very, very soon.

Cort Sharp (10:22)
Yeah, so if I heard you right, I think you said this, but there's two courses coming out, right? Okay, cool. We're letting that out of the bag.

Brian Milner (10:28)
That's correct, yeah, two. right, right. I mean, you might think, one course I can understand, but two? Yeah, there's so much material that there was too much for one. And people could not consume all that in one go. And so we created two and kind of found different aims, different goals for both of them. to target what people were really asking for. So yeah, there are two separate courses. One that's going to be called Better Retrospectives, and another one that's called Retrospectives Repair Guide. So yeah, you can sell just from the names, kind of taking two different approaches here on focusing on retros.

Cort Sharp (11:07)
That's so awesome to hear that we have two separate types of courses that solve kind of two problems. So what were the reasons why you decided or Mountain Goat decided, hey, we probably need to make these to help solve some pain points. What were those pain points and what are these common struggles that you're seeing?

Brian Milner (11:19)
Yeah. Yeah, completely fair question, right? I mean, why didn't we do one on sprint planning? Or why didn't we do one on daily scrums or whatever, right? Well, maybe we will in the future. I think the kind of genesis of this idea or why we decided to focus on it was we periodically survey users. We watch what people do when they come to the site, what they search for. And one of our top search terms and one of the top search areas that we've seen over the years, really, it's been consistent, is around retrospectives. So we know that's an area people want to know more about and want to get help with. So that gave us the first little inkling that this might be something to focus on. That led us to doing just a free open webinar that we did. I hosted that, I put together a presentation to give some tips around it and help people, just a short little presentation, but wanted to just give some really quick tips people could apply. And we had over a thousand people sign up for that. not, I shouldn't say that. We had over a thousand people attend that. just, lots of people sign up and don't come, but. We had over thousand people who showed up and attended to hear that. And that kind of blew us away. think, wow, this is really, know, people made time in their day to come and listen to this, you know, short little webinar on it. There's interest here. And with a thousand people, we didn't have nearly enough time there on that webinar to answer everyone's questions and get through everything that was coming at us. But, you know, we love data. So. We pulled all that data from all the questions that had been submitted and people had presented to us and grouped them, categorized them, tried to sort them through and try to find what's the biggest kind of pressure, pain points that people are having that they wanna know answers to. And that's what led us to really create these courses is there were reoccurring themes, right? There was a kind of set of things that are common amongst people. common issues, common problems that people are having, common root causes of those problems. And we just thought, this is doable. It's not an impossible thing to fix. There are actually practical, real ways of solving these things. And we wanted to give people solutions to the things they wanted to hear about. So that's why we decided to focus on retrospectives.

Cort Sharp (13:50)
Awesome, sweet. That's still crazy to hear. I knew that you had a thousand people or a little over a thousand people attend that live stream, I think is what you did, right? Because it was like a YouTube live stream or something like that. That's still mind blowing to me that there was that much turnout and...

Brian Milner (14:09)
Actually, I just wanna say, I don't know that it actually even was on YouTube. That's what makes it even more kind of impressive to me is people had to like get a link and go into it. So it wasn't just, hey, I'm flipping through YouTube on my lunch break and it turned up. It was people who deliberately said, no, I'm making an appointment to go to that. Yeah.

Cort Sharp (14:29)
Man, that's even, yeah, that's crazier to me too. That's awesome. That tells me, yeah, there's a ton of demand for this, right? So can you give me just a brief overview without oversharing or sharing a little too much about what each course kind of offers and what problems they're working to solve or we're solving within each course?

Brian Milner (14:31)
Yeah. Sure. Yeah, I guess it's probably important to know the strategy of both of them and why there's two. As I said, there's just a lot of material, so it was too much to fit into one. But I tried to follow the pattern in creating these that we've established at Mountain Goat with previous classes. So the first one that I put together, we titled Better Retrospectives. And that's following the pattern that we've done with other things like better user stories. So better retrospectives, the focus is sort of the expert deep dive on retrospectives. We go deep on the meaning behind things and kind of facilitation techniques that are useful to do, patterns you can use in creating a retrospective, ways you can create brand new. themes for your retrospective that no one's ever done before in the past because it's yours. It's something you created on your own. And just kind of all the ins and outs of how to really make a retrospective work and be productive, produce things that actually make differences on your team. So that was better retrospectives. But we wanted to then address head on those most common questions that people have. Again, try to follow the pattern that we've established with some previous things here at Mountain Goat. Mike has a course that I took years ago called Scrum Repair Guide. And it was about the most common problems that Scrum teams have. so I follow that pattern here. And the second course is called Retrospective's Repair Guide. And what we did was we took those highest volume asked questions, the most common questions we got from that webinar. got just the top 10 and said, these are the biggies. These are the big ones that people are asking about that really want to know the answer to. And we put together a repair guide course for it so that people can maybe consume that in a little bit different way. If I'm having one big problem right now and I need an answer to that, or maybe I have two or three problems, I'm not having all the problems, but I need an answer. I need help with this big thing that's going on with my team. We wanted to get that to them as soon as possible. So the retrospective repair guide is that ability for someone to look at our list of top 10 questions. And you'll probably find three or four of them on there that you'd say, oh, yeah, that's one I've experienced. Yeah, that's one we're having right now. And then you can just kind of to the chase and get right to where it is that you need to get help. And then practically go and make those changes immediately. So better retrospectives. The expert course, Deep Dive on Retrospectives, makes you an expert at delivering them and working with them. Retrospectives Repair Guide, more for those finding the solutions to the problems you're having right now.

Cort Sharp (17:37)
Awesome. I want to kind of double click a little bit into the retrospective repair guide. Man, tongue twister, right? The retro repair guide. Can you share just like one or two, maybe three of those questions that are answered or some of those bigger questions that were asked that are answered and that you give a solution to and a very clear solution to within that course?

Brian Milner (17:43)
Yeah, it is a little. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, absolutely. just know for each one of these, it's not a, the answer is, here's a sentence. Each one of these, we go really deep on how to answer that and strategies. And I give you multiple things that you can do. Because a lot of these maybe even have multiple root causes to them that could be causing them. And there could be something different you might need to do to solve that for your team. But you know, Like one of the biggest questions that we heard, probably the most popular question that we got was, how do you handle retrospectives when you have a quiet team? When you have a team of people that are a little more introverted or shy, not uncommon with a group of software developers. So how do you get them a little bit out of their shell or how do you get them to just feel safe enough there to actually contribute? That was a big one. Um, you know, a big one for our, our day and age is how do you handle retrospectives when you have people that are remote? Uh, you know, do you have an entirely remote team? Do you have people that are, uh, you know, parked your team? Part of your team is, is in-house part of your team is remote. Uh, how do you, how do you handle that split? Um, that was another big one. Um, you know, how do you handle it when you're, you have a team that just hates retrospectives? Um, you know, how do you, how do you, uh, How do you get your team to start really making progress, real progress, from the things that you talk about in your retrospectives? So these are just a couple of them. we really thought that these, for each one of them, as I went through each one of them, I thought, yeah, this is a big one. This is one I get questions about all the time in class. So there was none of them that I looked at and thought, this is a filler. Am I going to make it to 10? No, mean, it was hard to limit it to 10, you know? But yeah, we limited it to 10 and all of them are really, really important ones.

Cort Sharp (19:47)
You Yeah, nothing but heavy hitters here. Nothing but bangers. Here you go. Yeah, that's it. Awesome. OK, well, thanks for the overview. Thanks for introducing these courses. That last question there, what do I do? How do I manage a team within my retrospectives when they hate going to retrospectives or despise that? That'd be super useful for me. Man, I might buy this course right now.

Brian Milner (19:55)
Yeah, yeah. Yeah. Ha Yeah.

Cort Sharp (20:23)
But I would like to, we strive to have some pragmatic approaches. We strive to provide practical, immediately useful tips on this podcast. I know that's a big point for this podcast that you really work on and you really focus on. Do you have any just practical, immediately useful tips? Let's start out, I guess. This might be a little teaser, a little preview. You might repeat something that you gave out into the Retro's course there, the Retro Repair Guide. With quiet teams, can you just share something that I can immediately take away and go off if I have a really quiet team and it's like pulling teeth to get them to talk and participate in Retro's? Can you give me just some useful tips or something that I can go away with?

Brian Milner (21:08)
Yeah.

Cort Sharp (21:13)
after listening to this episode and go off and use with my team to help my quiet team be a little more active and a little more beneficial. Show them that, this retro is for you. What can I do to work with my quiet team here?

Brian Milner (21:29)
Yeah, yeah, no, mean, how can I tease the number one thing without giving any kind of advice on it, right? And no, I mean, we're doing this because we want to get this information out route. We want to help teams to be successful with this. So no, I don't mind at all going into some things that might help there on it. There'll be much more in the course because I just have more time to do that. I think that the number one thing when you have a quiet team is trying to understand the why behind it. So for starters, I think it's important for us to understand that there are different personality types. I mentioned things like introvertedness. There are people who are more introverted than others. And if that's a of a spectrum in itself. There are people who are extremely introverted, and there's people who are only mildly introverted. Not to mention, one of my favorite topics, thinking about kind of different neurodivergent traits and how they interact and participate and things of that nature. So all that's to say, that I think the number one thing that we have to do is know our team. We have to understand who is in the room. Because I think we make the mistake a lot of the times of, I'm gonna just put together a retrospective. Let me go find out what that guy on YouTube said about doing a retrospective. yeah, that was a fun little theme that he came up with. Let me go put that in place. But that may not match at all. the personality of your team. It may not match the way that they prefer to interact. If I have a team full of introverts, I'm not gonna do a big role play kind of exercise in my retrospectives, because everyone's gonna be uncomfortable and everyone's gonna shut down. They're gonna go into defensive kind of stance, right? So I think that's the number one thing I'd say is, first of all, just understand and respect. respect the differences there in personalities to understand that they're not broken or in need of repair in any way. If they are quieter, that's just who they are. That's just how they're made. So I think that's part of it, right? I think part is that you have to understand your team. But there are other possible root causes here as well. One of the biggest is they could be quiet because they don't feel safe to actually speak in that room. That's a huge one, right? And it's so important. If they come into that room and they are fearful that what they say in that room is going to be reported outside the room to someone else, or they're going to be made fun of in that room for voicing their opinion or belittled in some way for it, well, That's a killer to a retrospective. If there's not that sense of safety in the room, doesn't matter how brilliant your pattern is for the retrospective or what great idea you came up with for it. If I don't feel like this is a safe space where I can speak up and not be made fun of or not fear retribution for something I've said, I'm not gonna speak up. whether I'm an extrovert or an introvert. It doesn't really matter my personality type at that point because the fear is what's driving everyone in that room. So I think you have to maybe even gauge the team. Maybe even ask them in an anonymous poll. I've done this before by just giving slips of paper and everyone puts in a hat. And you can do something like a safety check where you say, give me a number from one to five. five being the highest and one being the lowest, how safe do you feel today in this room to speak honestly without fear of retribution or being made fun of, that sort of thing? And it could very much surprise you what the answer is. That's actually an activity that I repeat periodically when I have a team because I want to chart it. I want to see where they are now. I want to see if it goes up or down. If there's some kind of a change, how does that affect it? We had, we lost a team member or two team members and we had new people come on. Safety is going to drop because we have new people. God forbid if we have somebody who's an outsider who insists on coming into it. I try my best to keep them out, but hey, if my boss says, well, I'm overruling you, I'm coming in. Well, are you gonna quit immediately because that happens? Probably not. What can you do? Make it transparent, the effect. You can say, hey, we periodically take these safety checks. So here today, I took another safety check. Our normal average is 4.2. Today, it dropped to 2.1. Why do you think that happened? It's data. So I think safety is another big reason.

Cort Sharp (26:13)
Right. Right.

Brian Milner (26:18)
So let's, personality type, gotta understand personality type, gotta make sure the environment's safe. And by the way, kind of corollary to that is not only that it's safe, but that their opinion matters. So if they speak up and say things and no one pays attention to them, no one listens to them, well again, you're telling them your idea doesn't matter, learn this lesson, next time don't speak up, right?

Cort Sharp (26:30)
Mm-hmm.

Brian Milner (26:44)
So they've got to have a safe space. And then I think you've got to match your activities to your team. You've got to find ways of connecting to them that will feel comfortable for them, that make them feel. I say this all the time in classes, facilitation, the root word in facilitation is facilis. It's a Latin word. means to make easy. So we're facilitating a retrospective. Make it easy. If your team doesn't want to role play, and you've got an activity that's a role play thing, then that's not easy. That's difficult for who they are. But if your team, another kind of difference, are they verbal processors? Do they need to talk things out to find a solution? Or do they need quiet space? that they need introspective time to find solutions. If that's the case, well, maybe I start with something like quiet writing. I don't even have an activity where they're talking to each other at the beginning. So I think that's third thing I'd throw out there is to say, Once you know your team, make sure you are matching the format, matching what you come up with for that retrospective to the personality of your team. It's hard, right? Someone can't walk in off the street and deliver a great retrospective to a team they don't know. But the good news is you know your team, right? You work with them all the time. You're the expert on this.

Cort Sharp (28:08)
you Yeah, yeah, as a more introverted person, nothing sounds worse to me than trying to, to do any kind of role playing, putting myself in some position that I just don't normally put myself into and I'm not comfortable with right that that is not my jam. That is not my thing.

Brian Milner (28:27)
Yeah. Yeah, and can you blame it when, if that happens, can you blame the team for saying they hate the retrospectives and that they don't want to do them anymore? Yeah.

Cort Sharp (28:39)
No, not at all. Not at all. If my scrum master came to me and said, right, we're going to, Brian, you're acting as this person, Court, you're acting as this, and we're going to reenact little Romeo and Juliet, bring that into there in this. And it's like, what? No, this isn't valuable.

Brian Milner (28:47)
You Right. Yeah, it's one thing to say, we're going to pretend to be each other and talk through. But it's another thing to say, pretend you are a peanut. you're like, that kind of thing. When you're an employee, you're like, god, really? I have to be a peanut now? Great, great. Yeah, no, this is fun. It's that kind of thing that if you don't, maybe your team would enjoy that kind of thing. If so, then match it to them.

Cort Sharp (29:10)
Yeah. Yeah.

Brian Milner (29:19)
They're not in that mode. No, no, no, no, no, no.

Cort Sharp (29:23)
Yep. Well, awesome. think I have a couple more questions for you here. Should be relatively quickly, right? Thanks for giving a little preview and giving some practical advice for what we can do to help our more quiet teams. But I want to take a step back. I know we double clicked into that one course, but I just want to take a step back a little bit. how do I decide which courses is right for me?

Brian Milner (29:28)
Yeah, yeah. Yeah.

Cort Sharp (29:48)
Do you have any guidelines for that? Any advice for if I'm interested in both courses, but I don't know which one would be a little more beneficial for me? How do I make that choice?

Brian Milner (29:58)
Yeah, that would be an extremely difficult decision to make because you have to really know these courses intimately, think, to make that, or maybe not intimately, but you probably have to dive a little bit deeper into what the agenda is for each one to kind of know the answer. But here's the good thing. When we're launching these, I can tell you this as well. We're going to be launching it as sort of a two for one. So. The good news is when we, know, for the initial launch of this, that's going to be the bonus for being in the first group is you don't have to decide. You'll get them both and you can then, you know, choose on your own. can dip in and see, you know, if one's better for you than the other, great. But you can consume it any way you want. And, you know, I'm just really excited for people to get to see the stuff and to hear it. I think there's some. there's some stuff that's really gonna help people in it.

Cort Sharp (30:47)
Awesome, great. Helping my decision fatigue there, Brian. That's great. Wonderful. One less choice that I have to make. Well, great. Awesome. That's kind all the questions that I have for you. Are there any kind of key takeaways or anything that you want to single out about retrospectives as a whole or anything about these courses that are going to be offered here anytime soon or anything like that?

Brian Milner (30:50)
Yeah, exactly. Exactly. Yeah, I wanted to do this kind of an episode about this because, you know, I feel like the listeners here to our podcast, you guys know me, you know, the kind of stuff that I talk about. And, you know, I wanted you to be the ones who kind of heard this and knew about it first. I think it's going to be really beneficial and it's going to really kind of turbo charge a lot of teams. We talked about why retrospectives are important. Well, as I said, it's the engine for that continual improvement. If you don't have it, then the team stagnates. If you do have it and they buy in and this is, they're really all in on that Kaizen continual. improvement, know, Kaizen comes first mindset that kind of comes along with it. Then they look forward to this meeting. It's not just, know, something to check the box at the very end of our sprint, but it's actually, you know, when are we going to have that retrospective? I've got some stuff I want to talk about and that's our time now. You know, we can shut out the rest of the world. We can shut out, you know, everyone who's not here in our team. And now we can focus on us. You know, the question I often ask the teams when I do this is, do retrospectives is, what would it take for us to be the team everyone else wishes they were on? And, you know, that's really what you can accomplish through a retrospective is you can be that team, everyone else in the group and the organization looks at and goes, man, I wish I was on that team. That team's the, that team looks like a great team to be on. You know, I know there's, we're not given a lot of details here because this isn't We're not opening sales to this at the time that you hear this, when this podcast comes out. This is just a preview. I wanted to announce it here in the podcast first and let you guys know about it. Stay tuned. We're gonna have some stuff coming out soon. You can come to our website, mountaingoatsoftware.com and you'll find more information about this. But stay tuned here to the podcast as well. We're going to talk about some other things around podcasts in the next few weeks. we'll let you know when it's going to be open. I'll tell you as well, this is going to be a limited time thing. It's not something that we're launching and then kind of keeping open forever. This is something that we're going to launch. And there's a window for you to actually purchase this. receive both these at the same time. We'll talk about pricing and all that other stuff later down the road. But I just wanted you guys to know that these two things were coming. And hopefully, that gets you excited. And you can start now saying, hey, boss, there's something I'm going to be asking you for here for the training budget or something somewhere along the way. So stay tuned. We'll have more information here about it in the coming weeks.

Cort Sharp (33:51)
Yeah So we're starting the hype train now. Hype train is starting to pull out of the station. And the next station it comes into, it's only going to be there for a limited time. So make sure you get on board and get on with this. Because these sound like really awesome classes. And they sound like a really great way to either elevate where you're at already or where I'm at already for retrospectives and whatever techniques I'm using. I know we didn't talk much or really at all.

Brian Milner (34:01)
Yeah, exactly.

Cort Sharp (34:26)
other than the title of the Better Retrospectives course. But having been through the Better User Stories course, that really elevated my ability to write and facilitate user story work or story writing workshops. But it allowed me to be more effective on the user stories front. if it's anything following that trend line, which it sounds like it kind of is, that Better Retrospectives course sounds like a fantastic way to elevate.

Brian Milner (34:46)
Yeah.

Cort Sharp (34:53)
my ability to not only facilitate, but also just get more value out of retrospectives. And then the retro repair guide. Awesome starting point. Sounds like it's a great spot if I'm struggling with anything. Really, really common. Well, not really common. The biggest questions, biggest problems that are seen throughout retrospectives. Great starting point in order to. help myself grow and get up there. And the fact that I don't have to choose between the two, that's fantastic to me. makes me really excited.

Brian Milner (35:25)
Yeah. Bonus, right? Yeah. Well, and I do want to throw out there as well. know, the pattern here, I'm copying Mike, right? This is what Mike Kona has done previously. And I'm with you, Court. When I took the Better User Stories course, you know, I really wanted to go deep on user stories. I wanted to understand them at a level that I just didn't previously. And I wanted to know the ins and outs. I was ready to go deep on it. And I agree with you. did the same thing for me. It helped me to really fully understand kind of what this method is and how to get the most out of it. So that was my idea when I wanted to copy that into the retrospectives. I wanted the same thing. I wanted people who were at that point where they're ready to go deep. Here it is, right? It's ready for you. And retrospectives, the repair guide as well, I was a consumer of Mike's Scrum Repair Guide before I joined Mountain Goats, you know, when I was a Scrum Master on a team. And I remember when I saw that course and I saw the list of things that, you know, he was going to talk about in that course. There were two or three of them on that list that I just said, yeah, star that one, star this one, like that. I need that answer. I just remember that feeling of, I really need the answer to this. So my thought at that time was, whatever this is, It's worth it because I don't know how to do this on my team right now. We're having this problem and I need it fixed. So I need guidance on how to do this. And I know there's people out there that are gonna feel that way about some of these topics they're gonna see that we have in the repair guide. So all that's just to say, it's from the point of view of someone who benefited from that pattern, you know, from Mike and other courses. And I'm hopefully going to be able to do that for people here with retrospectives as well.

Cort Sharp (37:15)
Well, I'm excited. So a couple action points for anyone else who's interested in this. Stay tuned, right? Stay tuned for future episodes on the podcast. Keep an eye out on stuff. Can they visit mountainghostsoftware.com right now and sign up for a list or anything or get any pre-emails or anything like that or not quite yet?

Brian Milner (37:33)
I don't think there's anything that you can do at the moment. mean, if you're on our email list, I think that's probably the best thing you can do. You sign up for our email list. You can do that pretty easily at mountandgoatsoftware.com. And that'll keep you informed when we send out our newsletters. We're gonna have information on it there as well. But it's kind of like, you you get those emails sometimes that just say nothing right now, but, so nothing right now, but, you know, kind of just... File this away, know this is, you in the next few weeks, you're gonna hear more about this and then it'll be that limited window that you can actually, you know, take advantage of it.

Cort Sharp (38:07)
Awesome. Yeah, so keep listening in, keep an eye out, and we'll keep giving you some practical approaches, practical tips that you can use to go into your next retrospective. Maybe your team isn't the quiet team, but maybe they're the ones that just don't really like retros. know, Brian, thanks for helping me out with my quiet teams, or any time that I interact with quiet teams, and even the ones that are a little more just passive and don't.

Brian Milner (38:28)
Nah.

Cort Sharp (38:34)
don't really see the value in retros. Thanks for sharing those tips and for helping me out with all the teams that I work with. So I appreciate that. Thank you.

Brian Milner (38:42)
Yeah, absolutely. If you can't tell, I'm really excited about it. I can't wait for people to start diving into this stuff. more than anything, I can't wait for it to start to make a difference in teams.

Cort Sharp (38:53)
I'm excited, Brian. I can't wait. I'm stoked.

Brian Milner (38:54)
you

Ever left a meeting feeling more drained than before it started? That’s the dreaded meeting hangover. Brian Milner and Julie Chickering dive into why bad meetings have lasting effects—and what facilitators AND participants can do to make them better.

Overview

Bad meetings don’t just waste time, they drain energy, morale, and engagement long after they’re over.

In this episode of the Agile Mentors Podcast, Brian and Julie Chickering unpack the concept of "meeting hangovers"—the lingering negative effects of ineffective meetings. They explore why bad meetings happen, the shared responsibility of facilitators and participants, and practical strategies for turning the tide. From fostering accountability to knowing when to walk it off, this conversation will help you rethink how meetings impact team dynamics and productivity.

References and resources mentioned in the show:

Julie Chickering
#137 Stop Wasting Time with Guests Kate Megaw
HBR The Hidden Toll of Meeting Hangovers by Brent N. Reed, et al.
When: The Scientific Secrets of Perfect Timing by Daniel H. Pink
Remotely Productive by Alex Pukinskis
Working on a Scrum Team Class
Subscribe to the Agile Mentors Podcast

Want to get involved?

This show is designed for you, and we’d love your input.

• Enjoyed what you heard today? Please leave a rating and a review. It really helps, and we read every single one.
• Got an Agile subject you’d like us to discuss or a question that needs an answer? Share your thoughts with us at [email protected]

This episode’s presenters are:

Brian Milner is SVP of coaching and training at Mountain Goat Software. He's passionate about making a difference in people's day-to-day work, influenced by his own experience of transitioning to Scrum and seeing improvements in work/life balance, honesty, respect, and the quality of work.

Julie Chickering is the brains and brawn behind JC Agile Consulting, believes that Lean and Agile practices are packed with potential — to enable positive culture change, business agility, and breakthrough results. Julie is a past president and board member of the Agile Project Management Network (APLN), a Certified Scrum Trainer (CST), PMI Agile Certified Practitioner (PMI-ACP), as well as a traditional Project Management Professional (PMP).

Auto-generated Transcript:

Brian Milner (00:00)
Welcome back Agile Mentors. We're here for another episode of Agile Mentors podcast. I'm with you as always Brian Milner and haven't got to say this for a while. So I'm happy to say again, welcome back to the show, the fabulous Julie Chickering. Welcome back, Julie.

Julie (00:15)
Thanks, Brian. Glad to be here.

Brian Milner (00:17)
Yeah, very excited to have Julie back. Julie is a friend of the show. We've had her on multiple times and it's been too long. We just need to have you on more often again. So thank you for making the time and coming back. We wanted to have Julie on sort of as a little bit of a continuation from our last episode that we had with Kate McGaw. You we talked a little bit about facilitation there and there was a lot that we talked about initially to set that up to talk about

Julie (00:30)
Sure.

Brian Milner (00:44)
just the fact that there's an epidemic of bad meetings. There's kind of a harmful thing happening where it's extremely prevalent that meetings are going poorly. There's not a lot of attention that's given to this. There's not a lot of focus in a lot of organizations because it's such a prevalent issue. of our meetings being so bad. And Julie pointed out to me this Harvard Business Review article that sort of became a touchstone, I think, for what we wanted to talk about. It's called the hidden toll of meeting hangovers. And we'll link to this in the show notes. But the idea behind the article was just to say, they quoted a stat early on saying that they did a study and found that more than a quarter, 28 % of meetings left employees with lingering negative effects, such as impaired engagement and productivity. And so that's what they were referring to this sort of this meeting hangover, that bad meetings take a toll beyond just the lost time in the meeting. And that's kind of what we were talking about more with Kate is, you know, yeah, we want to make our meetings better, but there is sort of this ongoing lingering that, you know, from my reading of this and what I've experienced, kind of compounds, you know? One bad meeting then can lead to another bad meeting and another one and that feeling of anxiety and disconnectedness and like I said here, impaired engagement and productivity, those kind of grow and get worse and worse the longer that you have these bad meetings. So Julie, I'll just start with you and say, you know, when you read this article, what was it? What was it that really stood out to you, that jumped out to you, that made you think this was an important kind of area of focus?

Julie (02:27)
First of all, I love the title because I can relate to it. So when you're having a hangover, you just feel terrible, right? And this person that they talk about first, Jacob, about like, he was so frustrated when he left the meeting. So the introductory story when he was so frustrated when he left the meeting, he canceled his one-on-one right after because he knew he couldn't concentrate. And then he was just like so upset. for the rest of the day and talking about how he just didn't even want to work on the project anymore. So just this, I just got this physical sensation reading this around how it feels when you're in a meeting that's ineffective. And we've all been there and I could just like feel it in my body when I read this story. And I also feel like once you know what I, what an ineffective meeting feels like, the ineffective one is more noticeable and draining. yeah, so and then this this lingering effect of morale and just wasted, just wasted opportunity. And it feels like

Brian Milner (03:32)
Yeah. Yeah.

Julie (03:47)
in the corporate world, this is the norm. That we just have meeting after meeting after meeting that's just sucking the life force out of everyone. And then we wonder why nothing gets done.

Brian Milner (04:00)
Yeah, I mean, this article is packed with statistics and it's tempting for me to just kind of read them all off to you. I'm not going to do that. But there's a couple of things that kind of jump out to me. they talk about how around half of people have this feeling of that as a result of the hangover from the meeting, that they have negative or harmful impacts on their interactions with coworkers. They feel more disconnected from their team. and they want to spend more time alone based on the fact that, I went through this really kind of, there's no other way to say it, traumatic experience of having this really harmful, bad meeting. they connect the dots by saying, people will leave these meetings and oftentimes they will then go commiserate with coworkers and say, share their frustrations, which is helpful, it's good. But it also, you know, they noted here, this can kind of spread some feeling of negativity or hopelessness, you know, that it's always going to be this way. You know, yeah, I had a meeting like that as well. Boy, I guess this place is doomed. It's always going to feel like this. And so they have this kind of ongoing, as I said, compounding almost nature of it that one bad thing leads to another leads to another leads to another. And pretty soon you've got this really harmful, negative work environment and it's not necessarily something that's just happened. It's just the repetition of going through those things lead to this ongoing negative psychological impact in the organization.

Julie (05:28)
Yeah, I'm just smiling because I can just think of some meetings that I used to have a leader that would always show up late. Always show up late. We'd be halfway through the topic and then he would show up and we'd have to stop what we were doing and go circle back and just speed and you could just feel. the whole mood of the meeting change. We were actually making progress and we have to stop and we have to go all the way over. And this is constant. So what we would do afterwards is then have meetings after the meetings to complain about the leader doing that. The more adult thing would have been of course to say to the leader, when you do this,

Brian Milner (06:15)
Yeah.

Julie (06:22)
This is the outcome.

Brian Milner (06:25)
Yeah. So, so that's kind of, you know, what we want to talk about a little bit in here as well is, in the last episode, we, focused a lot on facilitation and the idea that, Hey, there's a lot of responsibility to the meeting organizer, whoever's facilitating this to not have it be this negative kind of environment. And I don't disagree with any of that, that we talked about in the last episode. I think there is a lot of that, that is true, but I think it's, it's. important for participants to not look at that as, it's all the facilitator then, right? I'm just a participant, I'm showing up and it's your job to get all this stuff out of me. And if the meeting goes poorly, that's entirely your fault. And I think it's important for us to recognize, no, if I'm a participant, if I accept that meeting invite and I'm here, I have a role to play. I have a contribution to be made and I can have, you

Julie (07:14)
Right.

Brian Milner (07:19)
as kind of Pollyanna-ish as it sounds, I can have a negative impact or a positive impact on this meeting. And I think that's an important kind of responsibility to take a hold of.

Julie (07:25)
you Yeah, I agree. And I think about that in a couple of ways. So actually, in both Scrum Master and Product Owner class, I remind them at the end of every meeting to ask two questions. The next time we have this kind of meeting, what would you want to do differently? But you gotta ask the question. And if you ask the question and nobody says anything, then they can't feel victim to a poorly run meeting. But you gotta be able to listen. You gotta be able to listen to it. Doesn't mean you have to say yes in the moment. It could be that you would follow up after, but just ask the question. What would you wanna do differently the next time we have this type of meeting And then ask them, what did they like?

Brian Milner (07:48)
Yeah. That's good.

Julie (08:11)
I used to do it the other way around. I don't know if I told you this story before or not, but do you remember Daniel Pink did the he was our keynote speaker at the Scrum Gathering, our conference a few years ago when he talked about. OK, when he talked about timing. OK, so something he said is like, yes, he said, as people, if there's two, if there's good news and bad news to always start with the bad news first. And end with the good news, because as people, we remember the last thing we talked about it.

Brian Milner (08:20)
Absolutely. Yeah. Yeah.

Julie (08:40)
So if I say to you, okay, the next time we have this type of meeting, what would you want to do differently? And nobody says anything. Okay. What did you like? And then they leave going, we actually got something done. Unless of course we didn't get anything done.

Brian Milner (08:57)
That's awesome. Yeah. I mean, I think about like how in classes, a lot of times when we talk about forecasting and estimation, you know, I make a little joke. It's not really a joke. It's the truth. But when I present, I've learned over the years when I present information to stakeholders about timings, I, know, if, if I do calculations and it says it's going to take between five and six sprints to do something, I've learned to say the maximum amount of time it will take is six sprints. there's a chance it could come in as soon as it's five sprints and yeah. Yeah. I mean, I learned to do that because what I say in classes, I've learned a lot of people stop listening after the first one. And I think actually though, I may be wrong. It may be more what you're saying that, you know, we, we remember the last thing that we hear. but it may be a combination, right? Cause if, if I hear the low number first and I I'm happy with that, I stopped listening and I don't want to hear the bad news.

Julie (09:27)
Brilliant!

Brian Milner (09:50)
So if I say the bad news first, it could take as long as this, but there's a chance it could come in earlier, then I'm leaving them with the good news that it could be this, you know, as soon as this, but they've set their expectation that, you know, it could take as long as, you know, the bad news that I gave them initially. So I don't know, maybe there's a combination of that there as well. But yeah, I agree with what Daniel Pink says about that. And timings do make a big, difference for sure. and how we present things.

Julie (10:18)
Okay, so a key though in that is that you can only ask those questions if you're staying within the time box and you've allocated time to actually ask the question. And like some of these things that came up as the root causes of like poor time management, like running over or stuff like that. If you're running over, nobody's going to really want to take the opportunity to give you feedback. So what do you think about, so what you talked with Kate a lot about when we talking about here is the role of the facilitator. And I think we should talk about what people can do if they are feeling like they're the victim of the lack of facilitation or poor facilitation. So what do think about that?

Brian Milner (10:52)
Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, I mean, I think we have several roles to play, right? I I agree. If I'm not the facilitator, then it's important for me to come into that meeting, well, knowing what the expectation is. know, like if I'm coming into a meeting as a participant, I don't think it's responsible. to show up to the meeting. And I've shown up to meetings like this, showing up with the attitude that, hey, it's not my meeting. It's the other person's meeting. You got me. I'm here. But now it's on you to get out of me, whatever it is that you're hoping to get. And maybe I put in very little prep work for it. So there is some kind of interplay here between the facilitator and the participant. Because you could say, well, that's the facilitator's responsibility to help you understand. Yes, it is. That's, this is what I'm trying to say is I, I think it's a mistake to shirk that responsibility entirely and say, I'm not the facilitator. Don't look at me. Right. If, if they didn't ask me to prepare or, or, you know, here's what I need you to, to, come prepared to talk about. Well, then I've got a bad facilitator and you know, we're just, we're hopelessly going to be in a bad meeting. No, when I get the invite, you know, Kate said last week, you know,

Julie (12:17)
Mm-hmm.

Brian Milner (12:22)
You can decline invitations to meetings. You don't have to accept every meeting invite that you get. But if you do accept it, I think that there's an accepting of responsibility there to say, all right, I'm going to be a participant in this meeting. What do you need from me? And in advance, making sure you talk to that meeting organizer and saying, hey, I agree. This is probably a good thing for us to meet about, but I want to prepare. I want to know that I can come to this meeting armed with information that's going to be helpful to others and I can play my part. So meeting facilitator, meeting organizer, what did you have in mind for me in this meeting? What is it that you were hoping to get from me in this meeting so that I can show up prepared? And that small little question, I think, does several things, right? mean, one, it says, to the facilitator, do you know what it is that you want from this person? If they come back at you and say, I don't know, I just thought maybe you needed, well, if they say, you know, we just thought maybe you needed to be in the loop or whatever, well, I might come back at that and say, that sounds like an email, you know?

Julie (13:31)
Yeah, I'm also thinking though there's the flip side of then people, there's two different things. I want to go back to how I can also help. what also struck me when you were saying that is that I think there's also this cultural part of am I being excluded? That, you know, that sense of They're not inviting me. A lot of times people don't need to be there. What you're afraid if you're not there, does that mean something? Does it mean you're being cut out? You're not important? There's that whole ego part. Yeah.

Brian Milner (14:04)
Yeah. Right. Sure, mean, especially if there's a decision to be made, right? You could feel like, they don't want my voice in that decision. And I think that that's a legitimate concern. If I'm responsible for an area and decisions are gonna be made in the meeting and I'm left out of that invitation, I might have a concern and say, if there's gonna be a decision made around this, I probably should have an input. Is there reason why you didn't want my input in this meeting? And, you know, even asking that question can sometimes just trigger, well, this is lower level things. This is not really at the level that you weigh in on. Usually we didn't want to waste your time, you know, something like that. You might find out it has nothing to do with the fact that they didn't want your opinion. It was more of, we were trying to be conscious of your time and, and, and didn't think that this was the kind of thing that you would need to weigh in on. So you might have a micromanaging kind of problem there that you need to address as well.

Julie (15:11)
Yeah, this is all people's stuff. It's what makes it fun.

Brian Milner (15:14)
Yeah. I want to, want to just, I'm sorry. I don't want to mean to interrupt you, but there's one thing I've been thinking about this whole time as well, because we've been talking about bad meetings and bad meeting hangovers. And I think initially the first thought that kind of comes to our heads about that is facilitation and maybe the meeting not being organized well. But I think there's another thing that makes a meeting a bad meeting that it's important to call out as well.

Julie (15:37)
Mm.

Brian Milner (15:40)
I'll just give you an example. I remember there was a job I took the very first day of the job. It my first day on the job. We had a meeting with some of the other leaders in that organization, and I got called into this, and they introduced me. Hey, this is Brian. I remember them saying, he's the new whatever, whatever the last guy was that had my position. OK, he's the new whoever. And we got into discussion about upcoming things, the status of different projects and other things. in the middle of that meeting, there became a shouting match and there were F bombs dropped left and right. And I remember walking out of that meeting going, what the hell did I get myself into? You know? so what I'm trying to call out there is there are sometimes bad meetings. It's not about the facilitation or the order or the agenda or anything else. There's sometimes bad meetings because we don't bring kind of the

Julie (16:15)
Mm-hmm.

Brian Milner (16:29)
best parts of ourselves to the meeting. We bring the worst parts of ourselves to the meeting. And sometimes we don't censor that and we don't let those, we don't kind of, I don't know how to put it. We're not engaging civilly, right? And I know that sometimes when I've been in those and I've had multiple of those kinds of meetings like that, that I would say, yeah, that was a bad meeting. But it wasn't because the facilitator did a bad job. It's because the participants were kind of letting their inner demons manifest through themselves in the meeting and they weren't really treating everyone with respect. They were very disrespectful to their coworkers. And I think that that's maybe more common than we care to admit.

Julie (17:05)
Mm-hmm. Yes, when you're sharing that to me, that goes back to meeting working agreements. like, what can I, so if we go back to, if you're in a situation where you're in a bad meeting, even if the facilitator is doing the best that they can, there's things that you can do. So to me, if we've had, and I know you were brand new, but you said that that was not. uncommon. If we had meeting working agreements and you let out an F-bomb and that was against the meeting agreements that anyone else in the room can say, you just broke one of our, you can, you, anyone can call people on that behavior. shouldn't have to be just the facilitator because the facilitator might be like just trying to run through, okay, now what am I going to do? It might be needing to just take a little breath to figure out what do, right? But I can imagine if that was the norm in that environment that people got that disrespectful in the meeting that when people left, there was a hangover effect. Like you kind of was like, what am I doing?

Brian Milner (18:07)
Right.

Julie (18:27)
What's happening here? What's going on? What did I sign up for on day one? This is day one. What's day two going to be like? Are we holding back? Right. Here's the new guy. Let's be on our good behavior. We'll only drop three F bombs instead of four. So, at, I was very fortunate that at,

Brian Milner (18:27)
Right. Right. Right. Yeah. Yeah, they were on their best behavior, right? Guess I was new. Yeah.

Julie (18:50)
rally software, just, this was norm. It was normal to learn, everyone learned how to facilitate and be good participants and all that, except it was really quite funny at our coaches events because we had to have the working agreement that the facilitator actually got to choose how to facilitate, but we didn't get to facilitate the facilitators. But anyway, I have started recommending Alex Bukinski's book, remotely productive. took a lot of what Jean taught us and help is helping people apply that remotely. So like chapter four is how to help in a bad meeting. So if you're a participant and it's going bad, how can you help get back on track in a respectful way? So not being, not being a jerk about it. But even, so he just even gives examples of things like. when somebody makes a recommendation. like noticing when people agree on an action and you type it into chat. It doesn't have to be the facilitator who types it into chat. Like as a participant, you can go, okay, the action was or a decision was made noting decisions, decision, write the decision down, but helping the facilitator be like, we would talk about that. Actually, I forgot until I just started speaking out about it that often, especially in

Brian Milner (19:54)
Yeah. Yeah.

Julie (20:11)
big significant meetings, would have a scribe, a facilitator and a scribe. So this is what he's talking about actually is somebody scribing.

Brian Milner (20:22)
Yeah, yeah, that's a very important component because if we just shout things out and no one's really capturing what the next steps are, those are going to get lost. And we could have to repeat this meeting because we just didn't really follow up in any way. We didn't take any action. So I agree. That's an important component of it is at least designating that it doesn't have to be one person, but just designating that, hey, here's the expectation. Here's what we're going to do. Yeah.

Julie (20:49)
Um, yeah. So there's a bunch of really good tips in here and like the Kindle version's 1499 or something. So I've been telling people like, if you can have just one meeting that sucks less, you're going to get your 1499 back. So if you could have one less meeting hangover, you're to get your 1499 back, think for sure.

Brian Milner (20:49)
That's a great tip. Yeah. Yeah, absolutely. I should clarify with my story earlier that I'm a big boy. It wasn't the language that bothered me. It was directed at someone else, like kind of F-U, that kind of thing. That's a very different dynamic than just saying, those effing suppliers, I sure hate that. That's fine. Or maybe more fine for others than some, but.

Julie (21:21)
Mm-hmm. Right.

Brian Milner (21:38)
That didn't bother me, was more just that the attitude behind it was a negative one towards someone else. But yeah, that's a great tip there, just understanding that when I'm a participant there, when I show up, that I have a role to play in it as well. There's things I can do and if there's not notes being taken, then I can maybe step up and do that. Hey, someone said we're going to need to do this? All right, let me put that in the chat. Remember, this is what needs to happen.

Julie (22:05)
Yeah, and he gives nice, some like a template here on when we're making decisions like data, diagnosis, direction, do next. So he's given a nice, he gives a lot of really great tools. I'm really, and like liking it quite a bit. back to your, your example that is, in the, the behavior part. was a lack of respect versus really the content. Yeah, I get that. The conflict that's going on.

Brian Milner (22:42)
Yeah. The tip from the book you just mentioned kind of aligns also to something that's in this article, the Harvard Business Review article. One of the things it says is they have some tips in this as well. And one of the things they say is demand accountability every time. And I think that's a good kind of takeaway as well is they're specifically talking about these action items, things that we would do as a result. As a participant, think it's important to, I like that language, demand accountability. If we have this meeting, all right, what is it that you're hoping to get out of this? I'm showing up, I'm here, what do you need from me? What are we gonna do as a result of this? Any participant can ask that. Any participant can say, so that we don't just waste this time, what are we going to do next?

Julie (23:11)
Mm-hmm.

Brian Milner (23:29)
I think you demand accountability when you do that.

Julie (23:33)
Yeah, and I would say too, the first thing we should ask is what's the purpose of this meeting? And so if you go up to turn agendas into action plans, Jean taught us is you have a purpose statement. And then actually she taught us that what are the questions we need to answer in order to meet the purpose? Those are our agenda topics. When we've answered those questions, we're complete with this meeting. And then like where the

Brian Milner (23:39)
Yes. Yeah. Yeah.

Julie (24:01)
come back down here to make every minute count. Don't run over. Alex also gives some nice gentle waves of doing like we would say time check. We have 10 more minutes left. You could just put that in chat time check. We have 10 more minutes left. You don't have to be the facilitator to be like time check. So I do like that. He's helping people think about what they can do versus just being victim to

Brian Milner (24:05)
Yeah.

Julie (24:29)
the lack of facilitation.

Brian Milner (24:31)
Yeah. And as a participant, I can, I can check in at the start of the meeting and say, all right, just, want to, I want to, have a time box check here. Our meeting is scheduled from this time to this time. That's our time box, right? We can't, is there, or I have something right after this. just so you know, here's my time box. can't go further than this. and you know, I think as a participant, it's.

Julie (24:46)
Hmm.

Brian Milner (24:56)
you can have those same effects just like you said, hey, time box check, it's this, we got this much time left. And as a facilitator, I know I've reached the end of our time boxes sometimes when we haven't really gotten as far as I had hoped, but I've been okay saying this was a good start. This was a good start to what it is we need to decide. Obviously this is gonna take more time. We are at our time box, so we're gonna have to wrap this meeting up, but we'll schedule follow-ups and we'll take it from here. If I'm entering a meeting where I need a decision by the end of that time box, then by all means, make sure people are aware of that from the start. If I'm a participant or if I'm the facilitator, we're here together, but we all need to understand that we need to leave this with a decision on this.

Julie (25:37)
Yeah. So the other thing, Kia, I believe, around the decision is, and also be clear about how we're going to make the decision. So is this going to be a collaborative decision? We're all going to vote? Or are we getting, everyone going to give their opinion? Somebody else is going to make the decision? And then we'll check, like, how are we, how is the decision going to be made? So that's not a surprise as well.

Brian Milner (25:50)
Yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah, yeah, extremely important. I know when I talk about in our product owner classes about doing things like buy a feature as a way to prioritize, one of the things I always try to say to the stakeholders is, hey, we're going to play by a feature, but this is no promise that this is going to be what the final prioritization is. You're helping me to prioritize, but I want to set the expectation. I have to take into account your opinions and other people's opinions and market factors and lots of other things. So make sure we're on the same page. We need to understand this is a component of the decision. I will make the final decision outside of this meeting, but I really appreciate the input and I need your input to help me make the decision.

Julie (26:32)
Right. Yeah, love that example. So moving down when they say press paw, how to recover how to press.

Brian Milner (26:55)
Yeah, yeah, yeah. If you find yourself having a hangover from one of these bad meetings, yeah.

Julie (27:01)
Well, even if it's a great meeting, I am a fan of Adam Grant and I can't like pull up the where he said it. And he said it someplace that the studies show that people actually need like 10 minutes between topics. So if you're going to finish a meeting, you should have at least 10 minutes before the next meeting to be able to.

Brian Milner (27:19)
Yeah.

Julie (27:27)
focus and reframe. So I also feel like sometimes these meetings are bad because people are rushing from meeting to meeting. They don't have time to take a bio break or get a bite to eat. So now they're hungry and all that kind of stuff. But we do this to people on a regular basis.

Brian Milner (27:46)
Yeah, yeah. But, and I agree with that. if it's a good meeting or a bad meeting, I'll find myself, because I work from home exclusively. Well, I shouldn't say exclusively. Sometimes I'll go and work on site with different companies. But when I'm working from home, I'll leave the meeting of something I've just talked about and I'll have to go get more tea or something. And there's a little decompression of, wow, let me kind of throw that off, right? Let me take a deep breath. And now I can reset and I'm ready for whatever the next thing is. But I find I do that kind of naturally and I can't imagine not doing it. I can't imagine kind of going one thing to the other all the time and never having that break. That would kill me. Yeah.

Julie (28:31)
It happens all the time. It happens all the time. back to meeting working agreements. That's another one that I suggest is people don't start like at the top or the bottom of the hour. Like they offset it a bit to build in breaks. But when you're setting that time box, you got to set, you got to leave space in your agenda time. You have to leave space in your time, your meeting time to close your meeting properly.

Brian Milner (28:59)
Yeah. Yeah.

Julie (29:01)
We don't think about how much time that takes either. So it all adds up for sure.

Brian Milner (29:09)
I like the idea too that they have in here of walking it off. I know just in my work history, kind of like the example I gave you, there have been times when I've been through meetings where I feel like, yeah, I just got to get this off of me. And I have taken... remember, know, in certain circumstances, I'm not a smoker at all, but I, I had, I've always had developers that smoke in some way, shape or form. I, I wouldn't be uncommon for me to go and just stand outside with them while they smoke. or I'll walk down to the corner and get a drink or something and come back. there's something about taking that walk, getting outside the office. or if I'm here working at home, you know, maybe I'll even just go take the dog for a quick walk around the block. And by the time I come back, that's such a good way to. just kind of let whatever that is go away and reset. Now I'm ready to do what I need to do next, but it all goes to know, eliminating that hangover effect that I might have that came from a bad meeting.

Julie (30:12)
Yeah, so another facilitation tip around that, especially if you've just done a big meeting, if you can, walk it off with someone else. But do it in a debrief way, like what did you learn? And so we would talk about walking the walls. If we're physically together, we have stuff all over, like grab a friend.

Brian Milner (30:21)
Mmm. Yeah.

Julie (30:34)
or grab something you don't usually talk to and then walk the walls, so to speak. So at the end of class when I do have enough time, I like them in their breakout rooms to just debrief each other. Like what are a few things you want to try and remember? Because we all remember different things. So there's different ways you can do it. The way they talk about walking it off is it

Brian Milner (30:38)
Yeah.

Julie (31:01)
to avoid the hangover, but hopefully we're gonna switch the culture and people are gonna have good meetings and they're gonna wanna talk about positive stuff at the end. I mean, there's both ways of thinking about that physically, I think.

Brian Milner (31:13)
Yeah. Yeah, I agree. Well, I hope people have gotten a lot of this. You know, we kind of debated, we do this? Should we talk about this? It's so close to kind of the last topic, but I do kind of see it as a part one and part two. You know, there is a part one of that that is, bad meetings sometimes are very much a cause and effect of not facilitating well. But I would hate for people to entirely think, well, it's just the facilitator. there are only one person in the room. And if all the other people think that's not really my responsibility and I don't really have a part to play in this, then the facilitator can only do so much.

Julie (31:45)
Yeah. Yeah, and depending on what type of meeting it is, like really big, significant, like quarterly planning meetings, then the facilitator needs to do more work, in my opinion, to set everybody up for success. So depending on the size, the length, the... Some meetings need more structure than others, but I agree that as participants, you gotta have accountability to and how it's going and do I need to be here? What's the purpose? If the purpose isn't introduced, then you would ask kindly, what's the purpose of the meeting? What are we trying to accomplish here? I'm just wondering, I'm just checking in. just, not like, the hell am doing here?

Brian Milner (32:38)
Right, right.

Julie (32:39)
was to make sure that I'm, you know, whatever. But I do like what Kate said. don't know. You should be able to ask the questions. You should be able to decline all of that. So here's what I'm thinking now, Brian. Another thing people could do, though, is if they start to pay attention to the cost.

Brian Milner (32:44)
Yeah.

Julie (33:05)
of being in meetings just through their own health and well-being, then yes, they can be proactive. They can learn a few tips from Alex, but then maybe they, even if they're not the Scrum Master or someone who would normally be assigned to becoming a facilitator, maybe they can get some of the facilitator training because... The training that Kate was talking about really is applicable to any kind of role. It doesn't have to be the scrum master or product owner or team lead or manager. It's really applicable to all people. And then the other thing too, if it's something that say you're in the developer level role, even if you're a business analyst, quality, whatever, quality engineer, whatever, and you wanna become a facilitator. get the training and see if you like it. Then you can kind of be stealth-like in there with, and I feel like that's some of the things Alex is trying to teach people as well. If you're going to be the facilitator or the participant, that there's ways that you can make a difference in a positive way.

Brian Milner (33:59)
Yeah. Yeah. Absolutely agree. agree. Well, this has been a great conversation. We got to have you on more often. So I apologize it's been so long, but I really appreciate you taking the time and bringing this topic up. And it's a great, great focus for us, I think. thanks for bringing it, Julie.

Julie (34:21)
Beautiful. Well, I don't have a meeting hangover, do you?

Brian Milner (34:36)
I do not. I feel great. I don't need to walk anything off right now. Awesome. There we go. I'm right there with you. All right. Thanks, Julie.

Julie (34:39)
Me either. I'll just go back to drinking tea. Okay. right. Thank you. Yep.

In this episode, Kate Megaw joins Brian Milner to share simple but powerful techniques that can turn those soul-sucking meetings into dynamic, action-driven conversations. If you're ready to make meetings worth attending, this one’s for you!

Overview

Brian Milner and Kate Megaw uncover the secrets to running highly effective and engaging meetings. They tackle common facilitation pitfalls, the staggering amount of time wasted in ineffective meetings, and how simple tweaks can transform team collaboration.

Kate shares practical strategies for keeping participants engaged, fostering psychological safety, and ensuring meetings lead to real action—because no one has time for another pointless meeting.

References and resources mentioned in the show:

Kate Megaw
ARCLight Agile
Katanu
Katanu’s Facilitator Certification Course
Katanu Resources
#44: Transformations Take People with Anu Smalley
Advanced Certified ScrumMaster®
Mountain Goat Software Certified Scrum and Agile Training Schedule
Join the Agile Mentors Community
Subscribe to the Agile Mentors Podcast

Want to get involved?

This show is designed for you, and we’d love your input.

• Enjoyed what you heard today? Please leave a rating and a review. It really helps, and we read every single one.
• Got an Agile subject you’d like us to discuss or a question that needs an answer? Share your thoughts with us at [email protected]

This episode’s presenters are:

Brian Milner is SVP of coaching and training at Mountain Goat Software. He's passionate about making a difference in people's day-to-day work, influenced by his own experience of transitioning to Scrum and seeing improvements in work/life balance, honesty, respect, and the quality of work.

Kate Megaw is the Founder and CEO of ARCLight Agile, specializing in helping organizations create empowered, high-performing teams through agility and collaboration. A dynamic Certified Scrum Trainer (CST), Certified Team Coach (CTC), and Project Management Professional (PMP), Kate is a sought-after speaker known for sparking ‘aha’ moments that drive real transformation.

Auto-generated Transcript:

Brian Milner (00:00)
Welcome in Agile Mentors. We're back here for another episode of the Agile Mentors Podcast. I'm here as I always am, Brian Milner. I'm with you as your host. But today I have the one and only, amazing Kate McGaw is with us. Kate, thank you for coming on.

Kate Megaw (00:17)
Thank you for having me.

Brian Milner (00:19)
Absolutely. If there's some of you out there that aren't familiar with Kate, she is a CST, a Scrum trainer like myself. She's also a certified team coach. And she also has the other side of things, the dark side. She's a PMP. So she has that project management kind of background that she brings to the table as well, which I think is awesome. She's a CEO of a company called Arclight Agile. And she's a co-founder of one of our favorites here that's come on the show, Anu. But they team up together. So it's Kate and Anu. And so their company is Katanu. I love it. love it. So why we decided to have Kate on is because Kate and Anu both have done a lot of work around facilitation. And we did have a user request.

Kate Megaw (00:57)
That's it.

Brian Milner (01:09)
to have an episode where we focused on facilitation. And listeners of the show know there's nothing I love more than being able to fulfill listener requests here and try to do those as soon as possible. So let's dive in. Let's talk about facilitation. It's a funny word. There's lots of different misconceptions and things about it, I'm sure. What do you find people misunderstand most about facilitation?

Kate Megaw (01:34)
think one of the key misunderstandings around facilitation is that you're part of the meeting, you're part of the event, you're actively involved. And when you're facilitating, you're actually, taking a step back because you are accountable for making sure that everyone is speaking and that we're keeping an eye on the agenda and things like that. And if you are actively involved in the discussion, You can't be doing that because you're missing body language. You're missing people who need to talk and who aren't talking. So I think one of the main misconceptions is, or that people forget is a facilitator is neutral. So if, for example, you have a scrum master facilitating a retrospective and they need to be actively involved in the retrospective, they should be inviting somebody else in to facilitate it. and I think We're beginning to see a lot more interest in it now because it's one of these key things. If it's done badly, people generally will notice. If it's done well, hopefully you don't notice that much other than, you know what, that meeting was very efficient. We achieved the goal and I feel as though it was worth my time. One of the things I like to say to people at the end of a meeting is the fist of five, how worth your time was this meeting? And I'm looking for fives or fours. If we're getting threes, twos and ones, we've not facilitated it well, or the meeting didn't achieve its agenda and things like that. think a lot of the statistics around facilitation that have come out recently, and you and I were talking about these briefly before we started that the average at the Microsoft trend index shows us that average time spent in meetings by employees at the moment is 21 and a half hours a week, which is an increase, I know, an increase of 252 % since the pre-pandemic. So.

Brian Milner (03:36)
That's incredible. Yeah, I mean, that's more than half of a work week, right? I mean, we're spending more than half our work week in just locked in meetings. So you're right. We had this conversation beforehand and you were telling me that stat and it just kind of floored me that we're spending that much time in meetings. But it was the next one you told me that really floored me. And it's a combination of these two, I think, that people need to really grasp onto. So tell them what you told me next.

Kate Megaw (03:49)
Mm hmm. Yep. Yep. Yeah. So the next one is that the Harvard Business Review indicates their research, 67 % of meetings are considered by executives to be failures. So if we look at the financial impact of that, and this is something I didn't share with you, but the financial impact of that is for a company, imagine you have a company with 100 employees, unproductive meetings are wasting upward of $1.7 million a year. If you have a thousand employees, increase that number. it's one of these things that it is not difficult to do. It is just understanding why we need someone in the facilitator role. And the basics around the basic facilitation, the basic getting ready for the meeting, facilitating during the meeting and properly closing the meeting. takes those unsuccessful numbers up to successful numbers where you're getting those fives and people are sort of, yep, that meeting totally achieved the purpose and the outcome and it finished early. So I've got 20 minutes back before my next meeting.

Brian Milner (05:24)
Yeah, it's so incredible that combination of those two stats. I thinking that we're spending over half our time in meetings and that 67 % of them are failures, we're having a lot of them and we're not doing them well, clearly.

Kate Megaw (05:36)
Absolutely. I think with, I don't know with Zoom, well, I think with Zoom, it's got easier to have meetings. So we're probably having meetings where we don't need to have meetings. That's one of my favorite things to ask is, does this need to be a meeting? Or are you just going to talk at me and roll data out? In which case, send it to me in email. Don't tie me up for a meeting.

Brian Milner (05:44)
Yep.

Kate Megaw (06:02)
Because so many meetings are a waste of time that a lot of people are spending meetings multitasking. So we're taking an hour for a meeting that we could do in 25 minutes if people were 100 % engaged and following the agenda and things like that.

Brian Milner (06:22)
Yeah, yeah, that's so fascinating. it seems like such a, it's hard to believe that there's not more of that skill in just basic business training, right? Because if we're having all those meetings, then it would seem natural that there would be more segments that would say, you know, a little facilitation skill for, you know, a, you know, bachelor's in business, you know, like that might be a little helpful, right?

Kate Megaw (06:41)
Yep. Mm-hmm. Yeah, absolutely. And it's a small investment for something that will make a huge difference. I mean, one of the things Anu and I have been working on is the mnemonic of ready, reach, and wrap in order to make sure we have effective meetings. And the ready part of it is setting the foundation. So before you even get to your meeting, this is ahead of time. You're understanding, okay, what are the Rs? What are the roles and responsibilities? So if I'm facilitating, then who are the decision makers? Who is mandatory? Who's required to be there? Who are the, you can come if you want. Let's stop doing meetings to 30 people and expecting 30 people to show up. So we've got to understand the roles and responsibilities. The other, the E for the ready is expectations and engagement.

Brian Milner (07:29)
Ha ha ha.

Kate Megaw (07:41)
So if the expectations are that this is an interactive meeting, we're using Lucid or Mural or Mira, whatever tool we're using, it's going to be collaborative, webcams are going to be on, multitasking is going to be at a minimum, everyone knows going into that meeting what the expectations are. And then the A again is the agenda and the alignment. The agenda should be very clearly saying these are the items that the D is making sure where we have defined the purpose and the outcome. So every meeting, we need to know what the purpose of the meeting is, what the outcome of the meeting is, and they should be included in the agenda. We shouldn't be accepting meetings. Imagine the power of being able to decline a meeting if it didn't have an agenda in it. And if you think about it, why do we attend meetings?

Brian Milner (08:27)
Ha Yeah.

Kate Megaw (08:33)
with no agenda and people turn up to the meeting and said, okay, so what's this meeting for? Pretty sure we've all got better things to be doing. So make sure for every meeting we have a defined purpose and outcome. And then the why is making sure we as facilitators have your logistics ready. If it's Zoom, if we're using a remote whiteboard, do people need to practice it? Do we need to set up an environment? Do we need to make sure webcams are on? All that type of thing. So a huge amount of meetings would be better if we did nothing other than better planning with the roles, responsibilities, the expectations, the agenda, the defining the outcome and the logistics. If we just did that.

Brian Milner (09:09)
Yeah.

Kate Megaw (09:23)
I bet we're going to see the amount of productive meetings increase considerably.

Brian Milner (09:29)
Yeah, there's so much transfer here too as well, just to the normal scrum meetings that we have because, you know, one of the things I'll talk about lot in class is just to say, you know, you can't just expect to show up to something like Sprint Planning and have it go smoothly. You have to put in some work beforehand and get ready for it. Same thing with like a Sprint Review. You got to put in some work beforehand and make sure you know who's going when and who's speaking, you know, that speaking order and all that stuff.

Kate Megaw (09:42)
Yeah.

Brian Milner (09:55)
goes miles in making those more successful meetings. But the other thing that really interested me in that is you talk a little bit about purpose and that we don't really understand the purpose of the meetings. And that's something that's really stuck out to me is when I talk to people who don't like their Scrum meetings, it feels like 90 % that is just Brian math, but it feels like 90 % of the time, right? Feels like this. It feels like 90 % of the time.

Kate Megaw (10:04)
Mm-hmm.

Brian Milner (10:20)
that the people who have a problem with those meetings don't know the purpose of the meeting and that's really the root cause of it, right? If they knew why we were here, then the meeting makes sense. Now I understand what we're trying to do.

Kate Megaw (10:26)
Yep, absolutely. And I think one of the interesting things, I would love to repeat these numbers around the Scrum events, because I think by default, the Scrum events do have a purpose. They do have an outcome. We know what the roles and responsibilities are. We know what the expectations for engagement are. So I think the Scrum events are much more productive than your average event.

Brian Milner (10:41)
Yeah.

Kate Megaw (10:59)
But I do feel if we don't have well-facilitated Scrum events, that's where we get our criticism, or, this meeting was a waste of time. Okay, well, let's look at our facilitation and see, it an error in planning or was it an error in expectations? But it always surprises me when people say, well, Scrum's just so many meetings. And I'm so... No, we should have fewer meetings and if they're well facilitated, we need all of those meetings. So it's not as though we're having a meeting for meeting sake, which I think is unfortunately something we can't say for our non-scrum events.

Brian Milner (11:43)
Yeah, yeah, I mean, I go so far as to say, if you don't understand the purpose of it, don't show up. I mean, there's really no need to be there if you don't know what we're trying to get out of it. One other little side correlation there too, because this kind of ties in a little bit to some of the stuff I did this last year in kind of studying a little bit about neurodivergency and different neuro types and that kind of thing. And one of the things I found really fascinating was certain neurodivergent types,

Kate Megaw (11:48)
Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm.

Brian Milner (12:12)
really need to have an agenda in advance. And if they don't, then it just raises their anxiety level. they're just, you even not, you know, neurodivergent types, just regular, normal, you know, neurotypical people. There are those that just don't respond well when you're just throwing out a blank slate and saying, give us your best idea, right? They need time to process and think in advance and

Kate Megaw (12:15)
Yeah. Mm-hmm. Yep. Yep. Mm-hmm. Yep.

Brian Milner (12:38)
And so yeah, if we could send out that just the day before, it's not that much work. It's just one day earlier, right? It's actually the same amount of work. It's just doing it a day earlier. Right.

Kate Megaw (12:45)
Absolutely. Absolutely. It's just better organized. Yeah. I mean, I even on my team meetings, I know some members of my team want to know, because I always like to start them with segue questions and some of my team completely fine. Ask them a question, favorite food or you want to have any sort of segue question and they're fine with it. But I have my thinkers who want to think about it ahead of time. So I think it's important when we're facilitating any event that we understand the audience. How many of the audience are going to want to maybe read a document ahead of time? How many of the audience are, you know what, they can think on the feet, I can throw anything at them, but there are others that do need the preparation. yeah, I think that the planning that we do, if we can do it just slightly ahead. And then things like when we get into the meeting, of the mnemonic that we use for actually facilitating during the meeting is the mnemonic of reach, which is we're guiding the process. The very first thing we do when we go into the meeting is we review the agenda and open the meeting. So here's the agenda. I've got the agenda visible. mean, what the agenda that we use in classes. Is the to do doing and done. I use that for all my meetings. I've got that up on the virtual board and the topics of the meeting are moving across to doing and done because then our visual people can see how we're doing. But the reviewing, at the start of every meeting we said, OK, let's just review the agenda. Let's just remind everyone this is the purpose and this is the desired outcomes. And if the right people are not in the meeting. There's no point having a meeting that we cannot achieve the purpose and the outcomes because we don't have the right people. So, I mean, I always say open it, open it with a segue question and things like that, but level set on the agenda. And then the middle part of the meeting is the bit that people are familiar with, which is the gathering ideas. It's exploring. It's the A is the assessing, making sure we've got the collaboration and the discussion and the...

Brian Milner (14:39)
Yeah. Yeah.

Kate Megaw (15:07)
The C is our concluding, are we doing dot voting or is somebody else who makes the final decision? But the H is the one that we often forget at the end, which is let's highlight the action items from the meeting. Let's make sure we know what it is, who's accountable for it, when it's going to be done by, and then close the meeting. mean, you...

Brian Milner (15:18)
Hmm.

Kate Megaw (15:33)
you and I will both close out our classes. Maybe we use one word, maybe we use, give us a statement, all sorts of different things, but we forget to close out meetings. go, time's up. Okay. Bye everyone. And we've not reviewed the, this is what we're going to do for next time. And we've not formally closed the meeting, even if it's as simple as one word, but we've got to open and close it. Sorry. Passionate about that. No.

Brian Milner (15:44)
You You mean that's not how you close out a class? I've been closing classes like that for years. No, I'm just kidding. Yeah, exactly. Ding, sorry.

Kate Megaw (16:03)
Yes, sorry, time's up, clunk. Yeah, sorry, dog's barking, dog needs to go out. So, but yeah.

Brian Milner (16:11)
Exactly. Yeah. Yeah, no. And there was something I came across just in trying to put together materials for classes where we have little segments on facilitation in it. Because I think sometimes there's a lot of focus on the different various techniques, like fist to five or thumbs up or whatever. There's different kind of techniques. I'm not trying to belittle those. Those are things we need to know. But.

Kate Megaw (16:21)
Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm.

Brian Milner (16:36)
One of the things I came across was that the root word of this thing is this Latin word, facilius. stands or it means literally to make easy. And I've always had that kind of in the back of my mind when I'm a facilitator is like, what are they trying to do? And whatever they're trying to do, just, my job is just to make that as easy as possible, right? You know, it's always difficult when you're trying to make a decision and you have no direction about how that decision is going to be made.

Kate Megaw (16:46)
Yeah.

Brian Milner (17:05)
But a good facilitator can give the structure to it and say, no, no, no, it's OK, I got you. We're going to go through this little journey together, and we're going to end in this other side, and you're going to have something to take away from it.

Kate Megaw (17:16)
Yeah, we're going to have heard everyone's voices as we go through. We're not going to let one person dominate the conversation. We're going to use techniques like, that's a great point. Can we also check in on the other side of the table? Let's hear some counter points here. It's pulling people in, it's summarizing. So if I'm hearing you correctly, Brian, you're saying A, B, C, D. It's all of that going into it. And I think one of the other... big has when we teach facilitation is the facilitator is not the scribe. So people say, well, I'm the project manager or I'm the facilitator. need to be taking all the meeting notes. And I'm like, well, what direction is your head pointing when you're taking notes? And it's down at a piece of paper. So you're not seeing who's yawning because you're tired and you need to take a break. You're not seeing people who are confused or wanting to talk and things like that. sort of either you turn on the AI tool and have the AI tool summarize the meeting for you. Do check it before you submit, it out or B have everyone in the meeting as a grown ass adult. They can take their own agenda items. mean, their own action items, have an area on your virtual board or in the room you're having the meeting in that is action items. And again, what is it?

Brian Milner (18:18)
Sure.

Kate Megaw (18:36)
Who's gonna be doing it? When's it gonna be done by? And I think one of the key criticisms of meetings is, and you'll hear this as well, particularly by retrospectives is, well, nothing changes. And I'm sort of, well, who has the action item? well, there isn't an action item. And I'm sort of, at the end of every meeting, we should be doing the mnemonic we use here is rap. The first thing is retrospect.

Brian Milner (18:53)
you

Kate Megaw (19:04)
How was this meeting? We talked about the fist of five. Give me one word. Anything we need to do differently next time. And then the A is make sure we have all of these action items assigned to someone. And then the P is the one we forget about. Tracking that progress. How are we going to hold each other accountable for making sure that something changes as a result of the meeting? So.

Brian Milner (19:22)
Mm-hmm.

Kate Megaw (19:31)
If we're doing retrospectives, if the team is voting whatever technique they're using to choose the one thing they want to do differently, how do we make it visible? Do we put it on our scrum board somewhere? Do we talk about it every day as part of after we've done daily scrum? How are we doing with the communication techniques that we wanted to try and do differently going forward? We've got to have that visibility. Otherwise nothing changes.

Brian Milner (19:57)
Yeah, yeah, that's so awesome. I completely agree. And that's something that I think you're right is missing, not just from retrospectives, but just a lot of meetings in general. We don't really understand, all right, well, what's the takeaway? What's the thing we need to do as a result of this to make this not a waste of our time, to make this something that was a useful, not the 67 % that were failures, but something that actually leads to success. I want to.

Kate Megaw (19:59)
Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Yep. Yeah, yes, so that we're not having the same meeting again next week and the week after and nothing's changing.

Brian Milner (20:30)
Exactly. Exactly. I want to ask you one question about facilitation. I've heard this a lot in regards to retrospectives, but probably it's more a facilitation thing than it is a retrospective thing. But I think probably the number one question we get from people about retrospectives is, how do you handle a quiet team? so I'm just kind of curious. When you talk about facilitating and working with individuals who are a little more introverted,

Kate Megaw (20:50)
Mm-hmm.

Brian Milner (20:57)
or just not as comfortable speaking out in public, are there special considerations or are there things that you do differently just to try to accommodate and make those people feel more comfortable when you're facilitating them?

Kate Megaw (21:09)
So yes, several things. So one, I will look at a theme. So do they have a team name and do I want to set up a mnemonic around the team name to gather the data? Are they a visual team? Do I want to do something like the sailboat that's interactive and people can add things to the board? Are they a movie buffs? Do I need to do a Star Wars themed retrospective? So I'll generally try and find something to connect the team. I've done it before where I'm working with airlines. Okay, what is it keeps our planes in the air? What is it that grounds our planes? What are the storm clouds we need to be aware of? What are causing bumps during the air? So all of that type of thing, it's a theme relevant to the team. And I generally will find that if I can start a team talking, I can keep them talking. So if... one of the ways that I will often start a retrospective is if the retrospective, if your last retrospective was a ride at Disney, what ride would it have been? and get them talking or give me one word that describes the last retro or in a scale of one to the, mean, the last sprint, give me one word that describes it or scale of one to 10. How well do you think we did at the last sprint? But I love to get people talking. If I'm in the office, I sort of adapted the Adam Weisbart's retrospective cookies and I'll use candy bars and I'll wrap questions around candy bars and the team grabs a candy bar and there is a question on it which they answer and then other people in the room will then answer as well. Maybe things like, what can I do to better support you as a scrum master? Or, What can we do to better support each other as team members? So I think it's getting people talking, making sure the big reminder for me is as a facilitator, if you did not write the Post-It note, you should not be reading the Post-It note and you should not be moving the Post-It note. The team owns the Post-It notes. Everyone should be adding their own Post-It notes, whether it's virtual or in person.

Brian Milner (23:07)
Yeah.

Kate Megaw (23:28)
They should be grouping their own Post-it notes. They should be moving them. And the other one, people always say, well, what happens if there's the elephant in the room and this thing on the board that nobody wants to talk about? And I'm said, well, often I will say, okay, I'm going to add, we're going to do something different for this round. This time, I'm going to ask you to introduce something you did not write on the board. And let's talk about, I'm going to ask you to choose a topic and we're going to talk about that. Just read it, you read it out.

Brian Milner (23:39)
Yeah.

Kate Megaw (23:58)
and then we'll have a discussion around it. So as a facilitator, I can uncover the elephants in the room without anyone feeling too uncomfortable.

Brian Milner (24:07)
Yeah, that's great stuff. of parallel to this, think is kind of, I know we've, I've heard you talk about this, but the sense of safety in the room and just that people feel safe to talk about that. Are there things we can do as facilitators to actually raise that sense of safety?

Kate Megaw (24:25)
There are absolutely, there's a lot of things we can do. And I, every now and then I will hear something and I will just cringe. And there's, well my team doesn't really like sharing. They're not honest in the retrospective until the CTO disconnects from the retrospective. And I'm sort of, okay, so maybe what do you think this is maybe telling us? I'm sort of retrospectives are Vegas rules. It is the team. I will do retrospectives even with non-scrum teams, but it is the team that is there. There are no visitors. It is the team only. The other thing that makes me cringe is, yes, well we sent out the minutes of the retrospective and I'm sort of, excuse me, the retrospective again, Vegas rules. What is the one thing we're going to do differently as a team in the next sprint? Okay, is everyone okay if I put this up on our scrum board so it's visible?

Brian Milner (25:07)
Ha

Kate Megaw (25:20)
Okay, that's the one thing we're taking away. But back to the question you were asking, one of the biggest signs of a lack of psychological safety is that the team just doesn't want to talk. They're worried that the minutes are going to be captured. Somebody, one of the leaders is in there and, well, everyone's fine with my leadership. They're completely open and honest in front of me. And I'm sort of, okay, let's try a retrospective then with you there.

Brian Milner (25:32)
Yeah.

Kate Megaw (25:50)
And then we'll also try retrospective without you there. And let's see which one is more comfortable because otherwise it's a, it's a colossal waste of time. If nothing's going to change, why are we wasting sort of 45 minutes to an hour or even doing it? So I think that the psychological safety is a key one, making sure it is the right people, making sure that minutes are not being captured. The other thing is. A lot of times people say, well, I need to capture it because I need to bring all of the information again next time. And I'm sort of, no, you're trashing the Post-it notes. You're trashing the mural board, whatever. You're starting from scratch next time. they're sort of, well, I'm going to lose all this information. I'm sort of, no, if it's important enough, it's going to come up again next time.

Brian Milner (26:23)
Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. And things change, right? mean, what the universe of things we might identify this sprint could be entirely different for next sprint. I've always loved, Jeff Sutherland had this phrase, he would say about it to say that, you have to remove that one big thing. And when you move that one big thing, then the system adjusts and you don't really know where the next bottleneck is going to come from until you remove that one big thing. Kate Megaw (26:58) Yeah.

Brian Milner (27:02)
So it's likely to be somewhere you wouldn't expect. so you can't just hang on to your number two issue from one retrospective and then say, well, next retrospective, we'll just do that and we can cut out having the conversation because we identified important things in this one.

Kate Megaw (27:14)
Yeah. And it anchors the tea. It stops the creativity. that's the other thing with retrospectives. I occasionally will work with a client and there's the, oh yes, we've been doing what's going well and what's not going so well every two weeks for six months. And I'm sort of, it's not really any wonder your team's bored out of their minds at retrospectives and nothing new is coming up. There's so many websites out there.

Brian Milner (27:41)
Yeah.

Kate Megaw (27:42)
that retrospective should never, in fact, no meeting should ever be boring because we should always be opening and closing a meeting in a creative way. Even if it's, mean, one of the things that we like to do in the morning of class is have music. So when people are joining, the energy is there so that we're getting that interaction and things like that. So people are starting on a high and then... I mean, you'll notice in the afternoons people begin to yawn, especially after lunch. Okay, you know what? It's been 65 minutes. Let's take a break. Let's do a segue question at break. So when we come back, show us something on your desk that tells us a bit about you. Or one of the ones I like is go stand up, go and look outside and come back and tell us something you saw outside. We have chickens. We have all sorts of things that people are saying. but it's encouraging them to get up and go get some oxygen in their system, take a break and then come back and then it's more engaging. But if as a facilitator, I'm not planning that type of thing, the energy is going to go down and I'm not going to achieve the purpose of my half day event or my one day class, whatever it is.

Brian Milner (28:56)
Yeah, it doesn't happen by accident. It's all very intentional. Well, this is fascinating. And we could have this conversation for another several hours, I'm sure. I just wanted to let everyone know that in case you were scrambling to write down these mnemonics and other things, we're going to link that in our show notes. So you can go to our show notes, and we'll put you over to Katanu team.

Kate Megaw (28:58)
No. Yep, absolutely. Yep.

Brian Milner (29:20)
Katanu, I keep on saying cat and Anu, trying to say it right way. Yeah, but we'll link you over them so you can get those three Rs for meetings and know kind of what each one of those little letters stands for in there.

Kate Megaw (29:24)
Yeah.

Brian Milner (29:33)
This has been really eye-opening for me and it just is a fascinating topic and it's so delightful just to hear the intentionality and how we can do simple things. They're not hard things, but simple things that make such a huge difference.

Kate Megaw (29:48)
Yeah, yeah, mean, that's the key. This is not rocket science. It's one or two simple things that helps us take that if we are going to spend 20 % or 20 hours a week, which is half of our time in meetings, let's at least make sure they're productive meetings so that we're not literally burning money by having unproductive meetings.

Brian Milner (30:12)
Yeah, absolutely. Well, I also forgot to mention here at the beginning, and we'll put this in the show notes as well, but Team Katanu also has a facilitation course. The Scrum Alliance has a certified Agile facilitator designation that you could obtain if you were interested in that. We'll link that off as well. But yeah, I couldn't recommend any better people for you to take that from than Kate in a new idea. We were saying that she had a, when she was younger, used to have the nickname Cat, and now everyone's calling her Cat from that. Well, thank you again for coming on and sharing your wisdom with us. I really appreciate it.

Kate Megaw (30:46)
Yep. Yep. Thank you very much for having me, Brian. And I look forward to hearing amazing facilitation stories from everyone once they've implemented some of this stuff.

Brian Milner (31:03)
Absolutely.

What’s next for Agile coaching? Brian Milner and Andreas Schliep dive into the shifting landscape of Agile coaching, the differences between Scrum Masters and Agile Coaches, and how to carve out a sustainable career in a changing industry.

Overview

In this episode of the Agile Mentors Podcast, Brian Milner and Andreas Schliep explore the evolving role of Agile coaching, the challenges coaches face in today’s market, and the skills needed to thrive in a shifting industry.

They break down the differences between Scrum Masters and Agile Coaches, discuss how to develop a personal coaching style, and emphasize the importance of integrity and resilience. From navigating layoffs to redefining what it means to be an Agile leader, this conversation offers valuable insights for anyone looking to grow in their Agile career.

References and resources mentioned in the show:

Andreas Schliep
Certified ScrumMaster® Training and Scrum Certification
Certified Scrum Product Owner® Training
Mountain Goat Software Certified Scrum and Agile Training Schedule
Join the Agile Mentors Community
Subscribe to the Agile Mentors Podcast

Want to get involved?

This show is designed for you, and we’d love your input.

• Enjoyed what you heard today? Please leave a rating and a review. It really helps, and we read every single one.
• Got an Agile subject you’d like us to discuss or a question that needs an answer? Share your thoughts with us at [email protected]

This episode’s presenters are:

Brian Milner is SVP of coaching and training at Mountain Goat Software. He's passionate about making a difference in people's day-to-day work, influenced by his own experience of transitioning to Scrum and seeing improvements in work/life balance, honesty, respect, and the quality of work.

Andreas Schliep is a Certified Scrum Trainer and executive partner at DasScrumTeam AG, helping organizations navigate complex projects with agile methodologies. A thought leader and co-author on Enterprise Scrum, he empowers teams—from startups to Fortune 500 companies—through high-impact coaching, training, and a passion for continuous learning.

Auto-generated Transcript:

Brian Milner (00:00)
Welcome in Agile Mentors. We are back here for another episode of the Agile Mentors Podcast. I'm here as always, Brian Milner, and today I have someone we've been trying to get on here for a little bit, and I'm excited to have him here. Mr. Andreas Schliepp is with us. Andreas, thank you for being on.

Andreas Schliep (00:17)
Thank you for inviting me.

Brian Milner (00:19)
Yeah, very excited to have Andreas on here. Andreas has been in the community here for a long, time. He's been just really generous with his time and he's mentored a lot of people. He's a CST, a Scrum trainer. He's also a certified enterprise coach. So he has kind of those dual high level certifications with the Scrum Alliance. But he mentioned to me earlier, he's kind of always considered himself a Scrum trainer. But he's also a coach in this group called the Leadership Gift, or there's also another name here that they've used recently, Responsibility Immersion. So that might come to play in our conversation here because we wanted to talk about sort of the future of agile coaching and agile coaches in general. There's a lot of turmoil, there's a lot of upheaval and things that are shifting and changing every day in our profession. So I guess, you know, let's just dive into the topic here. Andreas, how do you see things currently? And, you know, in a broad sense, where do you see them going?

Andreas Schliep (01:18)
Yeah, so first of all, why am I concerned? So typically I say that I kind of, train coaches and I coach trainers. So most of my work is centered around the path of scrum masters and how they can kind of acquire the necessarily skills and insights to become actual coaches themselves. Or scrum coaches as I would prefer to say it. And that includes a lot of stuff like we want to equip them with facilitation, with training skills, with coaching skills, with systemic observations and other methods. And we've been doing that for a couple of years. And so of course we came across lots of good people, good coaches and good trainers, good consultants out there. And we kind of kept our community open. So it's not like people attend our classes and then we forget them or we only have closer relationships to our corporate customers. It's like we kind of managed to build some kind of little community. People keep coming back and we keep chatting about what's going on, what's happening in their environment. And as a mainly training focused company, one of the first effects that we notice is that our classes are getting emptier and emptier. So what's going on, especially advanced classes are not that well. So we still have some, well, yeah. basic attendance, but it's not as it used to be. well, a couple of years ago, we had like full classes and everything, and then COVID hit and we could say, okay, so COVID kind of reduced the demand for edutraining. And then the next crisis came and the next catastrophe and the next disaster. But there have also been some structural changes. I think that we are currently experiencing two effects that happen at the same time. So the one thing is that, well, Diana Larsen put it that way, Agile has won. So there's no doubt that organizations employ Agile methods and want to use Agile practices, some of them with, some of them without any clue about what that even means or what Agile thinking or Agile attitude behind it is, but still, there's no shortage on like the use of Agile or the, but there's also no shortage of the Agile basic training or educational videos, content or whatever. So people get lots of more resources than we used to get back then when we had like this one scrum book by Ken Schwabe. So read this and then you went out and said, how do I do that? So. And then came the second book by Mike Cohen and the third book and so on. had to, had all these puzzle pieces coming together where we needed to find our own way and build our proficiency. And now you get a flood of books and stuff going on, which is fine. So the one thing is that of course our profession is developing and it's kind of natural that you will notice some kind of within that. But there's another effect and this is one thing where we scrum trainers can kind of take responsibility for our own contribution. It's the fact that organizations can hire an unlimited number of low-level agile coaches nowadays. There's been no quality control. Anyone who went through a two-day CSM class could call themselves agile coaches and they got hired for lots of money and eventually produced nothing. some of them, some agile coaches or people who call themselves agile coaches even caused chaos. So, and the systems. that they were affecting started to kind of fix themselves and heal themselves from the Agile coaches by expelling those. So, and of course, maybe you have a third effect, which is sometimes it just doesn't work and you blame the Agile coaches. So if you just lay on your couch and you do nothing and your doctor tells you, you have to get moving, you have to get up and get moving and say, yeah, it's a bad doctor because... I still lie on my couch and my health is deteriorating and this doctor doesn't help me. He doesn't give me what I want. What do you want? Yeah, I want just, I would just want a pill that I can swallow that I'm healthy. It doesn't work that way. And then we had those people who were selling those pills, yeah, who were telling people, here we got a, we got a safe way that you can do this. All you need to do is implement this process, hire our consultants.

Brian Milner (05:26)
Yeah.

Andreas Schliep (05:43)
We kind of made all the thoughts and the heavy thinking ourselves beforehand and you just need to install it. Here's the roadmap, here's the process manual, here's the 300 page guide. Just do it this way. And this is also detrimental. now we have, I've been talking to many people, many great people, you've been laid off, who are looking for a new orientation.

Brian Milner (06:05)
Yeah, yeah, I agree. I mean, I think you laid that out really, really well because there's I think you're right. It's kind of a multi effect scenario. There's a lot of things affecting it. And I know I've had conversations with with friends and colleagues about this. And, you know, we've talked a lot about the I think more kind of the second thing that you're talking about, just that and It's sort of a chicken and egg thing because the industry has built up and spread agile concepts through offerings of usually two day classes. You and I both do those quite regularly. And I think we probably both would say that's a very valuable thing. to go through sort of that immersion kind of a couple of days to learn it and get a foundation in it. But there may have been sort of a misconception or it may have been sold incorrectly to say, now you're ready to lead an organization and transforming from zero to 60 in Agile. when you're not, right? I mean, you've got a good grounding. You're ready to begin learning with a team, but it's the first step. There's gotta be some sort of ongoing support system that when you come up against something that you don't really know how to handle, that you have someone to ask. You have somewhere to go to get help and get answers. Even the, you I work with Mike Cohn, I think he's a great trainer. But even a two day class with Mike Cohn, I don't think is gonna make anyone an expert that now you're ready to, you know, take on the huge challenge of cultural change within the organization, you know?

Andreas Schliep (07:53)
Yeah, yeah, it's like with anything agile, these classes are a starting point or a waypoint and not a designation. It's not the goal. So when I made my driving license, my driving instructor told me, and in Germany you have to spend lots of hours with your driving instructor. And my driving instructor told me gladly, now you can get to practice on your own. He was happy that he didn't have to co-practice with me any longer because I wasn't the best driver. So I actually aced the theory test, but the practical driving was a little more difficult and kind of probably was bad for the blood pressure of my driving instructor. yeah. And that way, but I never thought about this. So the idea was I get the permission or I get the next level to the next step. And the next step will be, I want to learn proper driving. And that's something that you need to do on your own. And with this understanding, we try to kind of provide a path for people to become better scrum masters and agile coaches by kind of revamping the CSP path, the scrum aligns and other things. A glorious project that also failed gloriously. I'm still not entirely sure why, but probably because the Scrum Alliance and many other people failed to understand the similarities between Agile Coach as a profession and the Scrum Master as a role. So they claimed that there were two different things. And I think that's also a structural issue in organizations.

Brian Milner (09:16)
Yeah.

Andreas Schliep (09:25)
that they see Scrum Masters and Edge of Coaches as different things. So the Scrum Masters work on the team level and they just know their Scrum and they facilitate the meetings and then they come up with nice cookies for the retrospective so that everybody on the team is happy. And occasionally they take one of the team members aside when they have some issues and help them go through that. That's totally fine, but the Edge of Coaches do the real stuff. release train engineers and the others, do the organizational thing and they don't bother with what's happening on the team level because they need to do the important things on the higher level. And with this attitude somehow fueled by some decisions by Scrum Alliance and other organizations like, yeah, in order to become a certified team coach or certified enterprise coach, you have to kind of prove that you're... had coached like 2000 hours or 2500 hours. But by the way, the scrum master worked. It doesn't count towards this coaching, which is totally ridiculous. So that means the misunderstanding of the role is a structural problem. Another structural problem is that the organizations that would need the most experienced scrum masters, they attract all the rookies.

Brian Milner (10:16)
you

Andreas Schliep (10:34)
because they don't even know what a good scrum master would cost like. They have those two day or even less day. I heard about a transformation at a large automobile builder in Germany. They had something like a half day class for scrum master training within the safe environment. And they wonder why they fail. They wonder why they're failing.

Brian Milner (10:53)
Ha

Andreas Schliep (10:54)
On the other hand, we have organizations, even here in Germany, they have great leadership and coaching concepts. So they develop the Scrum Masters. They have the finest Scrum Masters ever on such a high level that the teams actually don't need them because the teams also evolved by taking care and taking responsibility for themselves and paying attention to the work. So they're kind of over-coached. So like, I think it was at Rally 10 or 15 years ago. There was a period when the external rally coaches didn't get so many contracts. And so they went inside and coach all the software teams and rallies at Rally. And after three or four months, the software team said, please, please give us a timeout, give us a break. We over coach. It's just too much. We just want to do some work and maybe not get better for like a month or two before we, because it's

Brian Milner (11:42)
Yeah.

Andreas Schliep (11:47)
It's hard always to get better and even better and you're so excellent coaches, cut us some slack. So that's so, but this is the structure. So on the individual level, it's just the same as with any major shift in any kind of industry. If your current profession or your current job title doesn't fit any longer, focus on what you're good at and see that you

Brian Milner (11:54)
Yeah, yeah, yeah, right.

Andreas Schliep (12:13)
become excellent at that. So that's, it's an old formula. It's an old formula and it can be different things. So I know about some scrum trainers who go and went into software development again, because they said, actually, I'm passionate about software development. I can understand that. I have a developer background as well. So sometimes I'm not that unhappy about taking care of a website and other stuff. It's a nice distraction. But some are really great facilitators. But if they only go out with a label, agile coach, and do not let the facilitation skills and experience shine, then they might get a mis-hired. So we have great personal coaches in there. So people with various skill sets. And if you take a look at the agile coaching growth, we have Biomark, some of them others.

Brian Milner (12:37)
Right.

Andreas Schliep (13:00)
You see that it's a vast field. So you cannot expect anyone, maybe the two of us, but you cannot expect anyone to be, not even me, so anyone to be excellent in all these knowledge areas and to be such a light and catalyst in everything. So the idea is to find your own way how you can contribute best. and then collaborate with others in their fields. So for me, the most interesting areas in that field are training and facilitation. Because I think that's the main thing that agile coaches or scrum masters can shine in.

Brian Milner (13:41)
Yeah, I've always loved, know, Lisa Atkins has that kind of different aspects of a coaching stance. And one of the ones that she had there that I've always loved is the idea of having a signature presence. And I remember when I first kind of encountered that, was, when it kind of sunk in, it was a very freeing idea for me.

Andreas Schliep (13:49)
See you.

Brian Milner (14:01)
to, you know, kind of like you're describing there, there's so many different aspects that you could, you know, try to do and you could do well, but it's too much for any one person to do all of it. So that signature presence to me, one of the things that I really kind of took away from that was know what you're good at, right? I mean, there's something about you that you bring from your own personality and your history and and everything that's made you who you are that is unique. And when you can find what that is, then it's almost like prior to that recognition to me, I was almost even a little ashamed that that was where my strength was. And I felt like I had to make up on these other areas that I struggle with or I didn't do as well. But that concept to me,

Andreas Schliep (14:47)
Mm-hmm.

Brian Milner (14:52)
kind of help me see, no, there's something that's really unique about how you approach things. And if you recognize that, lean into it because nobody else can offer that, right? Nobody else brings that to the table because that's uniquely you.

Andreas Schliep (15:06)
Yeah. Yeah. I have to admit, well, we're both with Scrum Alliance and I've been with Scrum Alliance for more than 20 years now. But some of the biggest insights about Scrum and the role of Scrum Master were some things that I actually learned by looking through the Scrum.org certification parts. So just out of curiosity, I started digging into the... Professional Scrum Master Series by Scrum.psm1. Okay, PSM1 is a walking part, so that's no big deal. 50 minutes without preparation, A's are done. Okay, next thing, PSM2, was a little more chilling. Okay, there are some different concepts in the way they address Scrum. And I completely faded PSM3. So that's interesting. So I should have known that. And the point is that...

Brian Milner (15:52)
Huh. Yeah.

Andreas Schliep (15:58)
There are differences in the message and the Scrum Master and the Scrum.org framing of Scrum is far more of a leader. So they take far more responsibilities. They are much closer to a sports team coach actually, even taking care of the crew and even throwing people out of the team if necessary. Then the fluffy Scrum Master social worker thing. with no real responsibility always in the background that we appear to propagate sometimes that I even have propagated lots of times. And I see this in my own style as well. So I'm rather strong at the facilitation part and working from the side of the background of people. But sometimes I see, and I think that's a big challenge for many agile coaching scrummers out there.

Brian Milner (16:32)
Yeah.

Andreas Schliep (16:48)
When it comes to the situation where I should take the lead, I'm still reluctant when I say, okay, yeah, somehow I don't want to step under the feet of others. I want to give them room. I want to be in my facilitator stance because I love that stance and that's my personal brand or whatever. The calm way and listening to people and integrating all voices. But all of a sudden, I encounter situations where say, my voice first. So, yeah. So let's do it that way. this week, I kind of stopped the client workshop in the middle. I said, so yeah, what is that? here you booked me for the entire day, but I noticed that you're very upset about important stakeholders missing.

Brian Milner (17:19)
Yeah.

Andreas Schliep (17:39)
I also noticed that you don't see the point in reiterating some other concepts that I prepared. you could use these methods and then talk to your stakeholders, but you rather want me in this room with your stakeholders and have this discussion together. So let's just stop this now. And I offer you a gift. I will come back for another half of days. So we stop this half day. You can use your time for something else. I can use my time for something else. And then I come back, but only if you have your manager in here. So if you bring your boss, I will come for another half day and then we finish this and deal with these questions. And they were kind of impressed that I was offering them. But where's the point? I needed to change the mode. I couldn't stay and I think this is something

Brian Milner (18:20)
you Yeah.

Andreas Schliep (18:29)
which is another great opportunity for Scrum Masters or agricultural coaches to say, what if I stepped into this leadership role?

Brian Milner (18:37)
Yeah. Yeah, that's a great kind of approach to it. And I know we've had some similar things at Mountain Goat as well, where we've worked with some clients and you kind of show up and you start to get into the things. Or even sometimes in the kind of just pre-work calls where you're trying to arrange things and talk through what is it you want to get out of this. And you sort of get that feedback and understanding that this is really just checking a box, right? They wanna check the box that they did this, but really making the change. No, they really don't wanna make the change. They really don't wanna have to change what they do on a day-to-day basis. you kind of are, as a coach or a trainer, you kind of get to that decision point where you have to say, at what point do I call this out? At what point do I say, you know what? You're gonna waste your money. Right? mean, I can come and do this. I can take your check. I can go away, but it's not going to make any difference. And you're not ready for it yet. and, that's, that's always a really hard decision. When you get to that point, when you realize, you know what? It's not serving your needs for me to, move forward here. You know, it's, it's, you're not going to be happy with me.

Andreas Schliep (19:48)
Yeah. I think it's important to maintain the personal integrity. the whole point about resilience is that you kind of are able to change while you maintain your own identity. So the path that you are trying to. And this change can mean a lot of things. So if someone would tell me, you've got to stop with Scrum now because Scrum is now forbidden everywhere. I would kind of dig into the facilitation. So I joined the IAF, the International Association for Facilitators. I don't have a credential there yet, but this is something if I would go into more facilitation gigs, this would be very interesting for me. I also became a coach in the responsibility program with Christopher Avery. First of all, I think that was a nice addition to my training or to my work with leaders. But then I also discovered that this is kind of navigation aid for myself. So whenever I do something, I start with what do I want? So what do I want? How do I want the situation to evolve? What is the outcome that I want to achieve? And how am I blocking myself from that? So what is kind of my inner blocker that prevents me from getting what I want?

Brian Milner (21:03)
Yeah.

Andreas Schliep (21:04)
So I could also talk about external blockers, but these external blockers are sometimes just things on my path that I choose to say, okay, I can't go there because there's this blocker. And when I found these two things, so what do I really want and what is blocking me? I can go and make a decision. I can confront myself. And with this ability, I'm pretty sure that I'm able to respond to any kind of situation. So, and... whether I pursue the facilitator part further or whether I go into the coaching way. I love to work with groups so that just the one-on-one coaching is not so interesting for me. But these are kind of independent from what I'm doing now, but also based on what I'm doing now. So I can derive lots of good skills and insights and approaches from what I did as a scrum trainer so far, what I have done as a scrum trainer.

Brian Milner (21:58)
Yeah. Well, I think when I'm hearing and tell me if I'm misquoting this or saying it or misunderstanding, but it feels like there's sort of an element here that, you know, I think a lot of us sometimes, have some kind of a title that we've earned. and we, we sort of inherit from that, set of, activities or things that we feel empowered to do. based on that title. And what it sounds like I'm hearing from you is it should kind of be the reverse. You should think about what you do well and the titles may come and go. They may change the descriptors that people use to describe what you do, it might change, but what you love to do with the activity, what you're good at, that can shift and change a little bit and don't be so concerned with the title.

Andreas Schliep (22:45)
Yeah, so edge-hired coaches still can keep this kind of title for the tribe to identify a peer group. And I've also joined edge-hired coach camps even as a scrum trainer. because this identification is important to say, okay, I know a couple of people who have different skills or different things who are some more similar to me, but I don't think we should stick to Agile Coach as a job title and only look for Agile Coach offers. But rather go out and see what's out there, what opportunities do we see. Apply for weird stuff. So at the beginning of this year, I applied as a facilitator for United Nations volunteer program and even made an extra language proficiency exam before that because I had to kind of prove that I'm at least at level C1. for this job. I just did it because it was there because this opportunity came through the International Association for Facilitators. I just said, okay, I don't know. They didn't even throw me back. I don't have anything, but I just, I want to apply for this. I want to get this material together. I want to show that I'm potentially able to do this. I will be far too expensive with my current rate, but yeah. And I think anyone currently in the situation as an edge on coach being laid off or looking for another job should kind of step back and go through these steps. So what do I want? What are the activities that I'm really passionate about?

Brian Milner (24:13)
Yeah.

Andreas Schliep (24:13)
And the answer might be surprising. So sometimes, it's actually coding. Maybe we'll get back to the basics.

Brian Milner (24:19)
Yeah, yeah, you're right. I've known a lot of people or I've known several people, I guess I should say, that have kind of maybe migrated backwards. If you think of it in that way, I don't know that's backwards, but migrated to their roots a little bit more, you know, and maybe left training, but went back to doing, you know, managing software teams or even coding just because they enjoy it. And I think that's a great thing if that's...

Andreas Schliep (24:41)
Yeah.

Brian Milner (24:45)
brings them happiness, you know?

Andreas Schliep (24:47)
Yeah, you know, when the whole agile thing started, they came up with a little website and the website says something like, we're discovering better ways to sort fire customers or so. I don't have a probably and helping others to do it. And if even if you go back or if you go to actually start working as a developer again. You still bring the edge of spirit and you still bring the ideas and methods of collaboration. It's going to be so helpful in your environment. Especially with new technologies, AI stuff and remote work and all these things kicking in. Everything looks like it's making your work more difficult. Massive layers like even media firing developers now, not only edge of coaches. So we have... so many disruptions to deal with. And I think that, well, kind of resilient HR coaching tribe stance is helpful in whatever role you fulfill afterwards.

Brian Milner (25:43)
That's really good. Yeah. Well, this has been great. I really enjoyed the conversation. Sometimes you're not really quite sure where we're going to end up and where we're going to travel, but I've really enjoyed all the directions we've taken here, Andreas. So I can't thank you enough. Thank you for making time and coming on and sharing your experience and wisdom with everyone.

Andreas Schliep (26:00)
Mm-hmm. Yeah, was great fun and thanks for the opportunity and I hope that this will help some people find little more guidance, least a little more confidence if they don't find guidance yet.

Brian Milner (26:13)
Yeah, I agree. Thank you very much.

Andreas Schliep (26:15)
Thank you.

In this episode, Brian Milner and Pete Behrens explore the difference between managing and leading, the critical role of middle management in transformation, and how anyone—at any level—can drive real change in their organization.

Overview

In this episode of the Agile Mentors Podcast, Brian Milner sits down with leadership expert Pete Behrens to unpack what it truly means to be an Agile leader.

They dive into the difference between leadership by authority and leadership by respect, the importance of competency in leadership roles, and why middle managers often hold the key to lasting organizational change.

Pete shares insights on how leaders can navigate cultural shifts, manage organizational tensions, and empower teams to operate effectively in today’s fast-moving world. Whether you're a Scrum Master, Product Owner, or executive leader, this episode is packed with actionable strategies for leveling up your leadership impact.

References and resources mentioned in the show:

Pete Behrens
Agile For Leaders
Join the Agile Mentors Community
Subscribe to the Agile Mentors Podcast

Want to get involved?

This show is designed for you, and we’d love your input.

• Enjoyed what you heard today? Please leave a rating and a review. It really helps, and we read every single one.
• Got an Agile subject you’d like us to discuss or a question that needs an answer? Share your thoughts with us at [email protected]

This episode’s presenters are:

Brian Milner is SVP of coaching and training at Mountain Goat Software. He's passionate about making a difference in people's day-to-day work, influenced by his own experience of transitioning to Scrum and seeing improvements in work/life balance, honesty, respect, and the quality of work.

Pete Behrens is a leadership coach and Agile pioneer, shaping organizational agility for over 20 years—long before scaling frameworks took center stage. As the creator of the Scrum Alliance® Certified Enterprise Coach (CEC) and Certified Agile Leadership (CAL) programs, he continues to empower leaders worldwide through Agile Leadership Journey™, a global network dedicated to leadership growth and culture transformation.

Auto-generated Transcript:

Brian Milner (00:00)
Well, welcome back Agile Mentors. We're back for another episode of the Agile Mentors podcast. I'm with you as always, Brian Milner. And today I have the one and only Mr. Pete Barron's with us. Pete, welcome in.

Pete Behrens (00:15)
Thank you, Brian, for the invitation and happy to be here.

Brian Milner (00:17)
Very, very excited to have Pete with us. If you're not familiar with Pete's work, you're in for a treat. Pete has been doing this for a long time and he has been really a foundational person in some of the things that the Scrum Alliance has done over the years as far as being involved with the coaching program and the leadership program and helping to design and put that together. His main focus has been in leadership. for several years now. And that's why we wanted to have Pete on, is to have him talk a little bit about Agile leadership. Because in today's world, in the context of a lot of the things that are shifting and changing in our day and age, I know that there's just a lot to consider in the area of Agile leadership. why don't we start, and I know this is kind of a softball, you probably get this question a lot, how do you define that? How do you define, is Agile leadership different than leadership, or is it... Is it essentially the same thing?

Pete Behrens (01:12)
Yeah, good, good starting question. So think of leadership as, you know, the ability or capability of influencing others towards a common goal. Right. That's that's what we look at as a behavior, a capability. Some people confuse that with being a leader. And that's actually different. We think of that as being, you know, having a title of authority. Right. So if you think about influence, there's really two aspects. One is I actually have a title that gives me the authority or I have respect. that allows me to do that regardless of title. So we do that a lot with leaders to actually kind of reset some of that and think about, right, this is a capability anybody at any level, any title can do as somebody. Now, the agile, you know, part of that, obviously, you you and I live in an agile industry and world. Why? Because things are changing, right? Things are changing faster than we've seen. Things are more complex. software has created endless possibilities of paths. And we like to use the metaphor of fog. So think of your operating in the fog. You need to sense and respond to make appropriate decisions. It's no longer available to us to kind of leverage the plan, follow the plan. And so Agile is simply a capability of leadership to operate in that complex, fast-changing world.

Brian Milner (02:31)
Love that. Yeah, I love that analogy. mean, I think about like all the times I've done cross country road trips and you drive into a fog bank, you're a lot more alert. You have to be really on point the whole time versus, you know, driving out in middle of Arizona somewhere where you can see, you know, the next five miles ahead, maybe relax a little bit more behind the wheel. That's a great analogy. So if we have to be kind of There's a difference here between being, I'm a leader in the organization because they've given me a job title and I'm a leader because I'm recognized as a leader. I'm recognized as such. What kind of characteristics, qualities come with that recognition? How do people, what differentiates somebody who is a recognized leader in an organization from someone who's not?

Pete Behrens (03:14)
Yeah, you know, certainly title is a recognition, right? So it's one way, you know, people and it's in effect, probably the most desired way to become a leader is I want the title. you may have seen this. I know I did when I was, you know, I was a director of engineering, VP of engineering before I became, you know, a coach and consultants. And a lot of times I'd get people coming to me and say, Pete, I want that job. I want that leadership position. I want to be the tech lead. I want to be the development manager. I'm like, well, prove it to me. They're like, well, no, can't until you give me the title. And one of the things we've realized over time as we've been studying leadership and developing leadership programs is people who receive a title before they develop competency actually are worse leaders because they end up depending on the title to influence. And leaders who develop the capability and now where do you get this? You develop respect. How do you get respect?

Brian Milner (03:47)
Yeah.

Pete Behrens (04:11)
you develop respect through expertise, right? This is some combination of education and experience that people are willing and choosing to follow your lead. And this is the basis of where most people kind of get into leadership is they've developed a certain respect in the organization. Others are willing to follow them. And so that's a typical starting point, a typical entry into leadership. One of the things we also help leaders understand is that's also a trap. And I'll just pause there to let you reflect on it. We can go into that rabbit hole if you'd like to.

Brian Milner (04:48)
Yeah, no, let's talk about that because you're right. There's a lot of times when you see someone in an organization that they've been there, they don't necessarily have to have been there for a long time, but they've been there and they've developed the respect of their peers. They're the best programmer on the team. So the organization recognizes that, recognizes that others in the organization see them as being exceptional. So they elevate them. Now they're no longer just programmer where they did an exceptional job. Now they are manager of of the programming team and they've been elevated simply because they were the best among the bunch. Is that the right thing to do?

Pete Behrens (05:22)
Right. Well, it's definitely a common thing to do. And it's not it's not the wrong thing to do. I think the mistake a lot of organizations make and you know, you can go back to Marshall Goldsmith, who wrote the book What Got You Here Won't Get You There. And what he's alluding to is exactly that. The skills you need to get into leadership aren't the skills you need in leadership. And so the trap that that leaders fall into is, okay, and this is my path. And maybe your path as well is I'm the best engineer. I'm the best salesperson, marketing person, whatever that is. I'm now coming into leadership. What is your comfort? Well, your comfort is in the work itself. And so all this new stuff about working with people and projects and project management and people management culture and, and other things are very uncomfortable. So I go back to my comfort zone and that's when I start to micromanage. start to redo other people's work. I start to get too detailed into the weeds and I'm not doing the job of leadership, which is really influencing others down this path. And this is one of those traps that many leaders fall into is we get these steps up to leadership, but then we're not properly educated and provided the tools we need to do that job. I think the studies we've seen of only about a third of leaders get proper education, mentoring or coaching to be a leader. And the way we look at this is, is, you know, hiring anybody into an organization from the outside world. You would never hire somebody without a detailed resume that outlines every bit of education, every bit of experience. And then you're matching against 30 applicants or 100 applicants picking the best one. Yet every day. We're promoting people with zero expertise, zero education in leadership into those positions, and it's just It's really silly and it's really backwards. And yes, we want to give them opportunities, but we also need to help them. And that's what we're not seeing, is we're not seeing that help.

Brian Milner (07:20)
Yeah, yeah, I mean, I'm old enough. I know that I remember in my dad's day and age, you know, it was not uncommon for any large organization to have a leadership training program within the organization. You would be recognized as being exceptional. You would be put forward and then you'd enter the leadership training program of the organization that would help you to elevate and become an effective leader. And we don't see that. as much anymore. You just kind of are elevated and hey, kids, you're on your own.

Pete Behrens (07:51)
Well, and what they're teaching is management, not leadership. And I think one of things we differentiate with leadership is we manage things like projects. We manage programs. We manage technology. We can manage documents and even HR programs, things like that. We lead people. And so, yes, there are a number of things that organizations, HR programs, et cetera, do to kind of help. Oh, you need to do a one-on-one. or you need to do basic communication. Like there is some, but it's not the things we realize help elevate. You know, we separate this concept of vertical development from horizontal development. we often teach or organizations often teach the horizontal. That's the skills. OK, so you need to communicate. You need to delegate. You need to empower. But we're not teaching what we call the vertical development. And so what they're doing is their mindset is stuck in this kind of one stage. They got all this like this toolbox, but they don't know how to use the tools. And what we're trying to do is help them understand and give them a bigger toolbox to help them understand how to use these tools effectively to be better leaders. And that's a much different problem. It gets into self-awareness. gets into my focus as a leader from shifting in terms of the system and what I'm focused on and what my goals are. as well as just the time horizon I work in and how tactical, strategic or visionary am I. Those are harder things to teach, yet that's where leadership starts to emerge.

Brian Milner (09:29)
Yeah, well, it makes me think back to what you were saying about the person that would come to you and say, I want to be promoted. I want to be put into this next position. And your response of, me, kind of help me see that. I know you're right. There's a lot of times when people will look at things and say, I need the title or I'll be a leader when I am called this or when I'm put in this position. But what I'm hearing from you and what I hope everyone's hearing as well is, this starts far before that. If you're going to be on that road to being a leader, then it's actually something that you begin wherever you're at. And these are skills you can start to build over a lifetime to venture into that vertical area as you describe it. Does that sound correct?

Pete Behrens (10:10)
Exactly, exactly. And, you know, one of the things that, you know, I want to, you know, maybe warn the listener on here, we get a lot of people who come through and we work with a lot of, you know, agile coaches or leaders who want to become a coach or, you know, we have change agents, right? People who are, you know, their focus is change in the organization, right? This is where you see a lot of scrum coaches and things like that. And one of the things that we've realized over time is this notion of individual as change agent is incredibly challenging. And for the most part, we, the way we visualize or we talk about this to leaders is it's like, you know, you start singing a song and everybody looks at you like, okay, he's crazy. Like he went to like this evangelical school. He drank this Kool-Aid and he's coming back and he's like, yeah, yeah, that's just Tom or that's just Susie. And, and nobody listens to him. And we see this over and over again. And, and You know, one of the things we talk about is we've got to shift that solo into a chorus, right? So the construct of leadership, we think of often as an individual sport, but truly the only way change really starts to take hold in an organization, and that's where we're starting to shift from me to we, is how do we catalyze that choir to start singing? That's when organizations start to excel. And that's one of the things that when I'm starting to work with leadership teams, we start to understand this isn't just something we teach individuals. This is something we've got to collectively act on. mean, you think about any sports team and European football or US football or hockey or whatever that is. Those teams are are are awesome because of that choir element, because they all sing in the same tune, because they're all practicing all the time together. That's the other part of leadership that I want us to kind of focus on as we kind of take this journey. This isn't a solo sport.

Brian Milner (12:07)
That's such an important point. I can't agree with you more. just the concept there that I hope people kind of pick up on is, yeah, I mean, the Scrum Guide has for years talked about change agent and the Scrum Master being a change agent, but the kind of maybe indirect association from that was, you know, it's your job to take it on yourself to go and do this thing where You're right, it's too big of a job for one person to do this kind of thing by themselves. We have to have help, you have to have compatriots, you have to have someone who comes alongside you, because like you said, otherwise you're singing by yourself and everyone's looking at you like, what's that guy singing?

Pete Behrens (12:48)
Yeah, unless you're Satya Nadella, know, or somebody who has that capability on top of the org. And we actually see change happen, from people like Satya Nadella is kind of a rare example, I think, in our world and how he shaped Microsoft. But we actually see more change happening from the middle. You know, when we're teaching organizations and working with them, one of the things that I often

Brian Milner (12:51)
Yeah.

Pete Behrens (13:15)
I'm speaking to is the middle tier, you know, it's it's the frozen middle. It's the the between the rock and the hard place. They often feel the most pressure because it's the pressure from above, but the incapability of delivering below. But I try to help turn it around for them. And I say, you're the only one in the organization who feel the pain, but have access to the top layer for change. And and when it comes to organizational change. We actually find more change happening from the middle than we do from the top. Just because the top is so risky and they already have so much power, they don't really need or want change so much. They want to push it. But oftentimes that change happens from the middle.

Brian Milner (13:54)
Well, I know we've all seen the surveys and studies and things that talk about, you know, agile transformations and change movements and stuff and organizations that have identified leadership as being a kind of a ceiling or some kind of a blockage to real change taking place. So I guess what I'm hearing from you a little bit is don't let that become a blocker for us if we're not the top leadership, that doesn't need to be something that we need to look at and say, that's out of my hands. I can't do anything about it. We actually do have a role to play to that in the middle or other layers of our organization that we can affect the change through the leadership. Is that right?

Pete Behrens (14:35)
It's a perfect, perfect point. something we try to iterate all the time. Yes. You know, the number one thing we hear when we're working with organizations is I wish my manager could hear this, right? Because they are feeling constrained. They are feeling bound by certain rules and policies and governance and, you know, all the things that feel like our constraints. And that is true. And, you know, the only one who has access to these constraints is leaders. You know, we often describe, I call it the two games we play. You know, we get the agile and you get involved in a lot of these agile transformations. So we get the agile game played at the team layer. And maybe we get a little at the program layer, you know, if you've got some some cross team kind of coordination going on. And then we have the leaders and they play a different game, different rules, a different ruleset. And and then they've got the conflict, right? That's happening between these two layers. And I see this so often. right in the organization. Again, it's that middle tier who sees both games, has access to both games. And I think a lot of the problem we have in our agile community is we don't speak leadership. We don't speak the language leaders speak. I've been working, I worked with the organization and I talked to, know, this is like the CFO and the chief risk officer and, you know, the CIO. And I had a comment that came out and he said, Pete, For about three years, I've heard Agile blah, blah, blah. And I just didn't get it. And now I'm starting to understand the value because what we've learned how to do is speak leadership, risk, right? What is the risk in the approaches we're taking that are or aren't Agile? And what are the pros and cons of that risk? know, oftentimes our Agile evangelists. put agile on the good side and traditional on a bad side. And that's not true at all. Agile lives in kind of what I'd call a peak. Aristotle called this the golden mean, right? There's a peak. And on one side, there's a deficit of agility, and that is too much planning, too much rigidity, too much bureaucracy. But there's an excess agility. And this is where a lot of our coaches land. It's like hippie agile. Hey, man, what are you going to be done? I don't know, man. We're agile. Hang with us. hear that and they're like, I don't accept that. And so yeah, we've kind of swung right across this hillset down from deficit to excess and leaders aren't buying that. And I think that's been some of the downside of our agile community, our agile messaging. We've never broken through that ceiling of leadership.

Brian Milner (17:12)
Yeah, by the way, just I'm going to interject this a couple of times throughout, but if you like what you're hearing here from Pete, you can find out more from his site, agileleadershipjourney.com. Pete does a lot of classes and coaching and teaching and other things. And there's a lot that you can connect with Pete on through that site. And we'll put this in the show notes so you don't have to scramble to write this down. You can get back to this later. So I love that. that explanation, though. And it kind of resonates with me in a way, because I know one of the things I've talked about when I talk to product owners is the idea that product owners sort of serve as translators between the two worlds a little bit, right? Because they have to speak with developers who speak in very tech-speak kind of language. They have to speak to stakeholders who speak in very business-speak kind of language. Are product owners kind of that function? Are we losing the as product owners in doing that? Or is it not really a product owner thing? It's just more of an entire Scrum leadership thing.

Pete Behrens (18:13)
Well, yeah, take the word Scrum out. It is a leadership thing. Product owners are leaders, right? They are leading product. And again, the role of product ownership is a role of influencing others towards common goals. And I used to teach product ownership. was a certified Scrum teacher and taught product ownership, Scrum Mastership. I found product ownership to be the most challenging role ever because

Brian Milner (18:16)
Yeah.

Pete Behrens (18:39)
you're essentially optimizing for a solution that doesn't exist. So you have all these stakeholders who have all these needs and there's no possible way to meet the demand. And so the role of product ownership is how do I find the optimal across this dimension? so it kind of gets us into this world of, in business, there are often no right answers. Should we do strategy A or B? Well, it depends. You know, we're often as leaders chasing answers when there isn't one. I often talk about this as managing tension. And if we can kind of switch our mindset from there is an answer to this is a tension that will never go away and give you an example of this, like product owners struggle between tech debt and features. Well, that's something that will never go away. No matter how much we work on tech debt, no matter how much work on features, they will always be there. This is a tension that We simply need to learn how to manage. It's never a solution we can come up with. The same is true with strategy and tactics. Should a product owner be more tactical, live with the team, or should they be more strategic and sit with the stakeholders? Yes. The answer is yes. And again, this is not something a product owner will ever solve, but it is something that they can learn to manage. And you start to shift this mindset. And all of a sudden, my role as leader

Brian Milner (19:50)
Ha

Pete Behrens (20:01)
starts to change. We had one product owner speaking of that that I was working with years and years ago. And she said, Pete, I feel like a tennis ball getting whacked around the court by my stakeholders, you know, and she'd go talk to the state. I need this. Bam. You know, and she got to talk to the team. we can't do this. Bam. And another thing, bam. And she's like, just I can't survive this. And so we talked and we said, OK, let's let's think about your role different. And what she did, she ended up doing is she brought the stakeholders together and she said, OK, stakeholders, you guys can never agree. I'm forming a meeting that you must come to and you must fight each other for the feature prioritization. And if you don't come to the meeting, you're likely not to get prioritized. So that incents you to come. And number two, you got to convince your peers that that's more important than their need. And it just completely changed her association of her role from this. I'm the tennis ball to. Now I'm managing the court and they're all hitting balls back and forth at each other. And she's facilitating, you know, and that's just kind of one of those switch of mindsets where I can start to change my association, my work and get out of this, this sense of, there's an answer and I can figure it out to how do I manage this tension?

Brian Milner (21:11)
Yeah, 100%. Yeah. I mean, we believe in working in teams as a Scrum team. Why wouldn't we believe in working in a team of stakeholders as well? Right? Yeah, this is such great stuff. So I'll throw out another really loaded term at you because I know that whenever the term, whenever we talk about leadership, whenever we talk about agile leadership, or just leadership in general, you got to talk about culture. You got to talk about the idea of culture and changing culture and affecting culture and

Pete Behrens (21:19)
Yes, exactly.

Brian Milner (21:38)
You know, year people talk about, culture's a whole ball game, culture's everything. And other people who say, no, we focus too much on culture. It needs to be more about tactics and actually how we carry things out. And if you just do that, then the culture will follow. What's your take? Are we focused too much on culture? Is culture something that people care too much about? Or are we not focused enough on it?

Pete Behrens (22:01)
You know, I think as a as a word, just as like words like servant leadership or words like agile to get they get used and abused and people get tired of them. So I do agree culture as a word has is tired. But if you look underneath, what is culture representing? One of the terms we like to use is, you know, culture is like a shadow. It's simply reflecting something about us that we can't touch or change directly, but we can influence it. And people feel it like they feel the shadow of culture. They can sense it. And this is where, you know, again, we get into these tensions. You know, this culture is one of the things I use is culture's attention, not attention, but a tension like this, this fighting between sides. And, know, one of these is empowerment or alignment. You know, do we do things together like. Let's take a safe approach and everybody's in the same framework and the same process and the same RTE and the same rhythm. you we have the same rules and we use the same methods for estimating and that's alignment. But we know that taking alignment too far becomes routine and rigid and a death march and, all those negative sides of being in that heavy rhythm. But then we go the other way. Well, let's empower, let's Spotify, like everybody their own ruleset and they can just follow on principles and And then we know we take that too far and we've had this kind of wild chaos and people like, what's going on? And every team's different and we can't align. And this is like one of those elements of culture. You what we talk about is culture is that representation of that tension we're feeling. And it might be about speed and quality. You know, it might be about this empowerment alignment, but it's there. And whether we talk about it or not, it exists. And it influences. We like to use the metaphor of culture is the opposite side of the coin to leadership. And so we can choose to ignore it, but it is going to influence or it does influence us every day. I don't believe while the term is overused, I don't believe our focus on it is enough. And we've shown over and over again when we work with organizations that when leaders put a spotlight on some aspect, of that tension that's happening to your culture, they improve the system. And whether that's tension between leaders and employees, whether that's tension between quality and speed, whether that's tension between, you know, giving autonomy and freedom to doing things together, we can improve that system. And so what we try to help leaders understand is you need to make this part of your understanding and your focus, because if you don't, it will take care of you.

Brian Milner (24:42)
Yeah, yeah. Well, if I'm part of that, I mean, we talked about that, you know, people in the middle have kind of the biggest impact or you can have the biggest impact. That's where a lot of change takes place. If I'm in that middle and I recognize the culture of my organization is not what it should be, you know, we're not really in align with some of this stuff and we're definitely out of alignment with several of these things. What can I do? I can't make an edict across the organization, but how can I start to make that change if I'm in that middle section?

Pete Behrens (25:13)
Yeah, we had a leader that went through a number of our programs for a few years. you know, we have both educational programs, but we also have coaching programs and development programs that can kind of work on developing leaders. He moved to another company and for two years he sought to bring about what he knew to be a better way. Right. He saw the gaps. He saw the tension. He's like, I got it. I know this. But again, single voice. Everybody's looking at him crazy. He hires another person who's been through our programs to help him on his team as an agile coach. Now they got to. OK, now they're starting to sing together. It's a duet. And, know, from him for his perspective, simply it was these these conversation after conversation after conversation, the tenacity, you know, to to to say, give this a shot now. From that, we've been able to provide some more education to some of the HR, some of the senior leaders in this organization. And all of a sudden, the cascade, the dominoes start to fall. And they start to think, now I see what you've been saying all along. And so my message here is everybody can be a catalyst. Everybody can influence. But you're correct in the fact that it is not easy. What we try to help some of these catalysts, these one offs do is simply activate a second step, activate another voice that can help you bring about, you know, a message of change. And that's enough. And I think a lot of leaders get stuck because they like, I can't run a transformation. I can't get focused on this change of metrics or policies or governance. And you're right. You will never probably have access to some of those levers unless you move up the chain enough. But you can influence one other person. You can influence a few people. You can influence one class or, you know, bring someone in to help change our voice. So that's what we try to aim for some of these change agents.

Brian Milner (27:12)
Yeah, I love that. It's kind of the cascading effect, right? I mean, if you spark that one spark into something else, well, as long as that continues, that chain continues, it can spread. It's the old, if I tell two friends and they tell two friends, then this thing is going to work. Yeah, I love that. And that's a great practical thing too, right? mean, because I think a lot of people in that middle start to feel frozen and feel like, What can I do? I can't do anything. I think that's a great point. If you can just affect that cascade into one other area, one other person, one other department, then that's all it takes for it to start to get rolling. I love that. Well, this has been a great conversation. And it's never long enough. And this one, we could go on for another several hours on this one. If you really like this, I'm

Pete Behrens (27:38)
It's hard.

Brian Milner (27:58)
I'm going to encourage you again to visit Pete's site, agileleadershipjourney.com. There's a lot of resources for you there. You can get connected to Pete. And there's a lot of things you can move forward with in your agile leadership journey from Pete. So I can't thank you enough. Thanks, Pete, for taking the time out and sharing your wisdom with us.

Pete Behrens (28:16)
Thank you, Brian. Appreciate the conversation.

Is workplace stress just about long hours? Not quite. Brian and Marcus Lagré unpack the real equation behind stress—how pressure, complexity, and security interact—and why your team’s performance depends on getting the balance right.

Overview

In this episode of the Agile Mentors Podcast, Brian Milner sits down with Marcus Lagré, product organization coach and author of The Stress Equation, to break down the science of workplace stress.

They explore the differences between mental and emotional stress, how pressure and complexity impact teams, and why security in the workplace is a game-changer for performance. Marcus shares research-backed insights on interruptions, stress contagion, and how leaders can create an environment where teams thrive without burning out.

References and resources mentioned in the show:

Marcus Lagré
The Stress Equation by Marcus Lagré
Certified ScrumMaster® Training and Scrum Certification
Mountain Goat Software Certified Scrum and Agile Training Schedule
Subscribe to the Agile Mentors Podcast
Join the Agile Mentors Community

Want to get involved?

This show is designed for you, and we’d love your input.

• Enjoyed what you heard today? Please leave a rating and a review. It really helps, and we read every single one.
• Got an Agile subject you’d like us to discuss or a question that needs an answer? Share your thoughts with us at [email protected]

This episode’s presenters are:

Brian Milner is SVP of coaching and training at Mountain Goat Software. He's passionate about making a difference in people's day-to-day work, influenced by his own experience of transitioning to Scrum and seeing improvements in work/life balance, honesty, respect, and the quality of work.

Marcus Lagré is an author, speaker, and consultant with 20 years of experience in software development, from small-team Scrum to massive 50+ team LeSS transformations. Creator of The Stress Equation, he helps organizations tackle workplace stress systematically, ensuring teams thrive under pressure without burning out.

Auto-generated Transcript:

Brian Milner (00:00)
Welcome in Agile Mentors. We're back for another episode of the Agile Mentors Podcast. I'm here as I usually am, Brian Milner. And today we have with us a really special guest, Marcus LeGray is with us. Welcome in, Marcus.

Marcus Lagre (00:13)
Thanks, Brian, pleasure to be here.

Brian Milner (00:15)
We were saying before that I'm actually kind of butchering or Americanizing his last name.

Marcus Lagre (00:20)
Nah, Americanizing, yes, but butchering, no. I wouldn't say that.

Brian Milner (00:24)
So I'm gonna give you a chance to set the record straight. Why don't you tell us the actually the correct pronunciation? Because I probably can't do it.

Marcus Lagre (00:31)
Well, my... I would say La Gré, but that's with a Swedish southern accent and not even most Swedes do that, so...

Brian Milner (00:34)
Okay. OK. Do the Swedish people look on people in the South like we do here in America? Like they're kind of more laid back and slower and... That's funny. OK. Well, we have Marcus on because, first of all, Marcus is a product organization coach. He's an author. He's a speaker.

Marcus Lagre (00:48)
Yeah, yeah, I would I would say so I would I would say so yeah

Brian Milner (01:03)
And he has a really great book that we wanted to kind of dive into the topic of here. Because in this day and age, this is a really important topic, but his book is called The Stress Equation. So you can kind of see where we might be going there with that. Well, so let's dive in. Let's talk about that a little bit. And I think probably a good place to start would be, how would you define then stress, when you, if we're talking about stress and the stress equation, how do you define stress?

Marcus Lagre (01:30)
I usually use the definition of stress because I let's start like this. I think that most people have like a too narrow perspective of what stress is. Like most people probably see it as working long hours and you know, spending a lot of time at work, but it doesn't necessarily have to. And there's this definition of stress from the Oxford English Dictionary that I found really well that stress is the result of, of, of, emotional or mental strain due to adverse or demanding circumstances. So yeah, so there's differences there. And I think that most people, if you're not in a very toxic environment, you don't suffer from emotional stress a lot at work, but mental strain is probably what we're looking at most often.

Brian Milner (02:04)
Yeah. Okay. Yeah, I mean, I, you know, I wouldn't discount that entirely. I think that there's probably a lot of people out there that have the emotional strain of a bad boss or manager or something like that, right? But yeah, hopefully, you know, hopefully you're right that the majority might not be, you know, dealing with that. It might be more of the mental side of this. So what is mental stress then? What is a mental strain?

Marcus Lagre (02:38)
Well, mental strain is usually diversified by saying like emotional strain is like the stress from being like in a toxic environment, for example, which is more common than it should be. But mental strain is more of the when you have too much of a mental load, like you're trying to solve a complex problem, like you have high cognitive load in order to solve it, or you need to

Brian Milner (02:48)
Hmm.

Marcus Lagre (03:03)
Well, it's also related to cognitive load that you have a lot of context switching. So you need to change information in your working memory quite often and a lot. And that can lead to mental strain. And the problem with mental strain, as I see it in white collar worker or knowledge workers, is that most of us are, we like mental challenges. We like puzzles, we like solving problems. So we're not great at identifying when a mental challenge becomes a mental strain for us. We're used to just pushing on. we try to just, you know, it's just something that I haven't figured out yet. If I push myself just a little harder, I'll crack it. Yeah.

Brian Milner (03:42)
Yeah. Yeah, that's great. Yeah, I mean, I think you're right. We do like puzzles. We do like challenges. I I know one of the popular things here in the US is the escape room kind of thing. I don't know if you guys have that there as well, but we actually pay people in our free time to give us puzzles and challenges that for fun, we'll go and put ourselves under some mental duress and try to figure out. So I think you're right. there is part of us that really wants to do that. Well, if that's true, then the other side of that is, shouldn't we all be under some kind of mental stress then, since work is challenging and complex and hopefully.

Marcus Lagre (04:20)
Well, yeah, I mean, not all stress is bad. So I usually say that the stress that we feel at work usually comes from two different sources. So this is the equation. Like the mental strain comes from the complexity that we need to, now that we need to handle. Either the complexity of the problem that we need to solve, or if we're working in, the complexity could also be like the frustration of working in an inefficient organization. That could be part of the complexity.

Brian Milner (04:23)
Yeah.

Marcus Lagre (04:46)
So I usually say that pressure is our sense of urgency. The pressure comes from our sense of urgency in order to finish the work that we're, the task that we have at hand or whatever it is that we're trying to solve. And the complexity is whatever makes it harder for us to actually finish that work. So to relate back to what you were saying, shouldn't we be under some kind of stress? Yes, we should. If we don't have any sense of urgency, we're probably not delivering at all. And if there's zero complexity in what we're doing, That should probably be an automated task long ago. We will probably suffer from severe boredom if there's zero complexity in what we're doing.

Brian Milner (05:25)
Yeah, I always, you know, this comes up sometimes in classes where, I think, you know, I want to find those people who are under zero pressure at work, because I've never been in that situation. I've never had any kind of boss or organization that was like, just take as long as you need. It doesn't matter. There's always some pressure and some places it's more than others and some places it's extreme. But yeah, I think you're right. There's a right amount of pressure. that can be applied.

Marcus Lagre (05:48)
And there's also constructive stress. I usually diversify like constructive stress is when you try to achieve something because if you're under a lot of pressure solving something very complex, there's also pleasure in actually solving it. So there's some kind of release in the end. But if you're constantly under a lot of pressure or...

Brian Milner (05:51)
Hmm.

Marcus Lagre (06:09)
I usually say that the pressure usually comes from things like how we set deadlines, how we handle our backlog. So if you have two short deadlines, then you're under negative stress or unconstructive stress, or we have an ever-expanding backlog. We can never finish everything in this backlog. have no way of saying no to things. They just keep piling on. That's unconstructive stress, but...

Brian Milner (06:30)
Yeah.

Marcus Lagre (06:34)
A sense of urgency to reach like a goal? That's more of positive kind of stress.

Brian Milner (06:39)
Yeah. Yeah. I I've heard, my boss, Mike Cohn talk about before how scrum has just the right amount of pressure that it's, it's not, you know, it's, it's not the kind of, when we think about commitment and stuff inside of a sprint, it's not the kind of thing of, you're going to lose your job if you don't make this sprint commitment. But it is kind of, you know, my, my word is on the line. My name is on the line. And if I don't deliver. I'm letting down my team, I'm letting down those around me. So that's way he describes it. It's kind of just the right amount of pressure that's kind of baked into the way Scrum works. I've always liked that. I've always thought that's kind of a good take on that. So we're kind of in these pressure cookers a little bit, right? We've got pressure and sometimes more than others and we do need some kind of pressure. So we have some sense of urgency in what we're doing. How does this align with our Agile Manifesto kind of ideal of working at a sustainable pace? Is the pressure going to crack us under trying to keep a sustainable pace? And what if we don't have any say over the amount of pressure we have?

Marcus Lagre (07:46)
Well, if you don't have any say, then I usually say that the pressure isn't a force of nature, that it usually stems from someone's decisions. And if we don't have a say in it, then we can't influence that pressure really as a team maybe. But from a leadership perspective, if you put unlimited pressure on the team, you're gonna see decreasing results anyway. It's not... constructive, you're going to burn your people, you're going to lose, worst case, lose them from the company, either because they change jobs or because they burn out and they have to go on sick leave. So and that's going to cost you in the end. But also that you're going to see either a lot more well, as I said, either a lot of people leaving or people doing quite quitting. That's that's what's going to be because once caring about your own performance becomes dangerous, people are gonna put in the bare minimum. That's the people you're gonna keep.

Brian Milner (08:41)
Yeah. Yeah. I'm sure there's lots of research baked into this and you've probably crossed a lot of different studies and things that have kind of jumped out at you. And to me, that's always one of the things that's the most interesting when I dive into a topic like this and go really, you know, kind of knee deep into it. what, was there any kind of research that you stumbled upon as you were preparing for this or, you know, creating this book? that really kind of surprised you or that you found extremely interesting? Any studies out there around the effects of stress that kind of shocked you even maybe?

Marcus Lagre (09:18)
I wouldn't say shocked, but one thing that surprised me was that there was this study that showed, because I talk in the book about complexity, and I mentioned earlier that if you need to change the information in your working memory a lot, that leads to mental strain. But there were actually studies that showed that interruptions in work does not lower the quality of the work. It does, however, increase the sense of stress. But it doesn't necessarily lower the quality of work, which was something that I was absolutely convinced it would. However, there was a correlation between how far if you got interrupted, if it was on topic, so to speak, so that you didn't have to throw everything out of your working memory, then the quality level was still on par with what you would have seen if you weren't interrupted. However,

Brian Milner (09:48)
Yeah.

Marcus Lagre (10:06)
if it was something that was diametrically different to what you were actually doing, then yes, the quality would also drop. But I actually thought there would be like a clear correlation between interruptions and lower quality of work. And it wasn't.

Brian Milner (10:20)
Yeah. So it's not, I mean, what I'm hearing is it's not necessarily the interruption itself. It's the content of the interruption. And if the interruption is, you know, taking you wildly off track from your thought process, that's higher stress kind of a reaction to it. And that leads to more problems. But if it's, if it's an interruption that's near in the same area of what it is you're working on and thinking about, then it's not as hard to get back to it. Less stress, less, let's kind of end result effect, right?

Marcus Lagre (10:52)
Yeah, there's less mental strain in that scenario. However, you do often feel like you're less efficient, that you get less joy out of what you're doing if you get constantly interrupted, and that the workload is heavier than it actually is. So there's negative sides to getting interrupted a lot, but as long as it's sort of on topic, as you say, it's not really that harmful.

Brian Milner (10:54)
Okay. Yeah. Well, I know you do a lot of work with organizations and with leaders and organizations. And I know one of the difficult things, difficult kind of parts of having these conversations with leadership is trying to help them to understand the importance and kind of the impact and why this is important in a business sense to them. Not just that, you know, the way I phrase it in classes, it's not just that it makes you a better person, right? which there's value in that. not negating that being a good person is bad. I'm just saying from a business sense, oftentimes leaders want more than just saying, yeah, I'm a better human by doing that, but is it better for the business? So how do you have that conversation with leaders, with organizations to say, this is actually an important thing to focus on. This makes an impact on your business.

Marcus Lagre (12:07)
usually the challenge is to get leaders to understand that they are also affected by this. Because a lot of the challenges I see in organizations is that I come in and I usually do like an analysis of the organizations, ask around, do interviews and analyze everything. And what I come up with is rarely news to the leadership. They have seen the same thing. The problem is that they never had the time to just sit down and figure things out because they're constantly rushing between meetings. They're constantly rushing to do various budgets, updates, stuff like this, just keeping the mill going. So I usually say that they're too operationally occupied to take a look at the strategic goals and the strategic direction that they need to be going in for the business to run smoothly over a period of time. And so I usually tell them that the most important thing that you can get yourself is like an hour, at least every week that you just sit on your rear end and just contemplate things. I usually use a different word than rear end when I tell them this, just to drive the point home. But yeah, they need to find time. where they can just like no phone, no computer, just sit down for an hour and let whatever enters your head, enter your head because otherwise you will never figure this out. And you don't have to pay people like me premium to come in and tell you things that you are actually clever enough to figure out yourself.

Brian Milner (13:41)
Right, right. Yeah, so that's so interesting. So it's hard to convince them that stress plays a big impact on their work. I hadn't really thought of it from that perspective, but that's a great point to make. If you can help them understand the impact it has on their work, maybe it's an easier conversation than to say the impact it has on your teams or on your employees' work. Yeah.

Marcus Lagre (14:06)
I have never, mean, stress is contagious and it ripples down. If you have a really stressed out management, you're gonna have stress in the rest of the organization as well, like on the floor and in your teams. That's just a given, I would say.

Brian Milner (14:11)
Yeah. Yeah. All right. Well, so I'm following along. I think this is good. So we're talking about how you kind of explain this a little bit more to leaders and help them understand the impact. What about when you get one of those leaders who's just, and I know I've had these before where they're kind of more old school and they look at things and think, you know, you... Well, on your graph of pressure, right? They're much more leaning towards the higher pressure side to place on employees because they take that attitude of, you know, the old phrase that we all hate, work expands to fill the time allowed or whatever that thing is, right? How do you convince that person that, you know, there's an okay amount, but you're kind of really skewing it to the high end and this is now going to have an adverse effect?

Marcus Lagre (15:00)
yeah, yeah,

Brian Milner (15:12)
on what you're ultimately trying to do.

Marcus Lagre (15:14)
My usual angle of attack is to address the complexity of the part of the equation. I probably can't get them to understand or accept that they're applying too much pressure, but what they're actually trying to achieve is to get more output. I mean, that's the goal of their actions. And so I try to get them to understand the complexity that their teams are working under and try to get them to understand that you need to reduce this in order to free up more time and mental bandwidth for output. And that's usually a better way forward than trying to get them to accept that you only get so far with a whip. Once you've whipped one time too many, people are going to just stop caring.

Brian Milner (16:02)
Yeah. Yeah, you can't come back and use that tool over and over again. It's going to have kind of the opposite effect that you're hoping it will have eventually, right?

Marcus Lagre (16:14)
People are going to start telling you about problems, for example, because these people are usually the same people who don't want to hear about problems. Don't tell me about problems, tell me your solutions kind of attitude. And I usually get them to understand that you have absolutely no idea what the problems of this organization is, because people are afraid to tell you.

Brian Milner (16:22)
Yeah. Right. Yeah, that's such a huge point, I think, for leaders to kind of soak in and understand. If you have that culture, if you are generating that culture of fear in the organization of, don't come to me with problems, only come to me with solutions, then you're right. You're absolutely right. You're closing yourself off. And you're kind of establishing the norm that if there is an issue, The last thing to do is to raise it, to let people know about it, live with it, right? Just kind of exist with a status quo. If there's a problem, then you just have to learn to live with the problem.

Marcus Lagre (17:09)
Live with the problem or game the system so the problem isn't apparent.

Brian Milner (17:13)
Right, right. So back to the equation then. So your equation here, pressure times complexity over security. I don't know what we've talked much about security so far. So how does that come into play when you calculate this kind of pressure equation, stress equation?

Marcus Lagre (17:25)
Bye! Yeah, well, we kind of touched on it now, like with leaders who act in a way that lowers the security or the sense of security. So I define security as the freedom from fear at work. And psychological safety is one part of that. But it's also that you feel that you have... I'm sort of reluctant to use the words servant leadership anymore because there's sort of... sort of become a tainted word in some ways. People see it as a passive leadership style, which is not really, I don't quite agree with that, but security is in essence that you are able to take high pressure and high complexity if you feel that you have the management in your back, that you're taking it on as a team, that you're not alone with all of that pressure and all of that complexity, but you have people around you who you can rely on and ask for help. If you have that, then your security is higher and then you can take more pressure, you can take more complexity without burning out.

Brian Milner (18:32)
Yeah, yeah, that makes complete sense because if I have the kind of that sense of security that I'm not at risk, I don't feel like I'm being put in a position to fail so that I'm now in danger, but I've been given difficult problems because I have been trusted to conquer them. I've been trusted and empowered to kind of overcome them. That's such a different approach and mindset from an employee standpoint than, my gosh, I got to do this or I'm going to get fired.

Marcus Lagre (19:05)
Exactly, there's probably, management has probably let me know that we understand, we're handing you like a really tough thing to solve. if you need anything, if you need any resources, if you need any extra help, just ask us for it and we'll solve it. And in that situation, you're a lot more likely to... be able to get into that without burning out simply because you know that I have the management backing me up.

Brian Milner (19:37)
if I'm one of those employees who's under a high pressure environment, and I don't really feel like I have the power or authority to make that change, what can I do about it?

Marcus Lagre (19:50)
I mean, the thing that you can do is to change what I usually, one of the reasons why I wrote this book is that stress is one of the leading causes of mental illness and sick leave in our line of work, which is software. So if something is the leading cause of a problem, it's probably systemic, it's not individual. So one of the most important thing, that you can do is to identify what in the system is causing the stress in me, because ultimately stress is a subjective feeling. it manifests itself in people, but you can get the tools to identify what in the system is causing the stress in me. that can be quite a relief to not put that... I mean, put additional pressure on yourself by thinking that you're the one who's bad at your job or you're the one who don't have the correct coping mechanisms for the situation. The situation might actually be insane.

Brian Milner (20:51)
Yeah. Yeah, it's that subjective nature, I think, that is kind of a variable that I would throw into this equation. It's sort of like, I know one of the things I found really fascinating in kind of the earlier history of Agile and the idea of a sustainable pace was originally there was kind of talk about saying, using words like, no one should work more than 40 hours a week. But then that got changed to sustainable pace because of the realization that for some people 40 hours was too much and for other people 40 hours was not enough. And so that idea of sustainable pace was, it's individual, it's different to different people and that's part of what we got to do is know ourselves enough to know, hey, I'm kind of slipping beyond that point where I can sustain this indefinitely.

Marcus Lagre (21:37)
Yeah, and I think that's one of the myths that I want to bust a little bit is that, you know, it's not about 40 hours. It's not about the hours. I mean, there are some people who can work 60, 80 hours without burning out. So it's not the hours. It's something else. You know, so it's the end of the... Maybe it's the pressure that we have too much pressure. Maybe it's that we have too high complexity in combination with pressure. Maybe it's that we are in a toxic environment. So it's like how much mental energy do I need to handle the context that I'm in? That's.

Brian Milner (22:13)
It's almost like there needs to be kind of this balance between those three things that you've got to, one thing might go a little higher, but the others then have to drop a little bit so that it kind of equals out, right?

Marcus Lagre (22:22)
Yeah. That's what I, like, I always say that if you want to put high pressure on your teams, on your organization, you have to reduce the complexity because you can't do both at the same time. Those are the two variables that increases the stress. But then as we mentioned, like feeling of security is the lowering factor. So you always do well working with

Brian Milner (22:38)
Yeah.

Marcus Lagre (22:46)
the sense of security within your teams and working with your culture and making sure that toxic behavior is simply not acceptable in this organization, for example. And so that's always, you always get a reduced level of stress from that kind of work. But as I said, if you have high complexity and you put too high pressure on something, it's gonna break sooner or later. You're either gonna break your people or you're gonna break your product. because you're going to reduce the quality of the work because you have to stress through everything. And quite frankly, I don't care about your product. You're free to break it if you want to, but breaking people, that's just not okay.

Brian Milner (23:18)
Ha ha. Yeah, now we're back to being a good human, right? mean, these are humans. They're not AI programs, at least not yet. And they have lives. the more that you, like you're talking about, the more that you increase that pressure on them or decrease their sense of security, the less complexity they can handle. And you know, You have diminishing returns on your employees, on their productivity.

Marcus Lagre (23:48)
It is unsound business.

Brian Milner (23:50)
Yeah, yeah, absolutely. Well, this is fascinating. I really appreciate you coming on and talking about this. Again, for anyone listening, if this topic is interesting to you, highly recommend you check out the book, The Stress Equation by Marcus Le Gray, even though that's not actually the way to say the name. it's L-A-G-R-E, just so everyone knows. I don't want you to struggle searching for it if you're looking for it. We will put the links to it in the show notes for this episode so that you don't miss out if you're trying to contact Marcus or you want to know more about the book. We'll make sure you find a way to do it. So Marcus, I really appreciate you coming on. This has been a fascinating topic and I appreciate you sharing your wisdom, your research and your knowledge on this with us.

Marcus Lagre (24:31)
The pleasure was all mine, Brian.

The Agile Alliance partners with PMI—what does it mean for Agile’s future? Plus, how AI is reshaping Scrum Master roles and why honesty (even when it stings) is the key to career growth. Brian Milner and Cort Sharp tackle these hot topics in a no-holds-barred discussion.

Overview

In this episode of the Agile Mentors Podcast, Brian Milner and Cort Sharp dive into the recent Agile Alliance-PMI partnership and its potential impact on the Agile community.

They also explore AI’s growing influence on Scrum Master roles—will it replace them or elevate their value? Finally, they tackle a tricky but crucial topic: when to speak up in the workplace, balancing honesty with career preservation.

If you want to stay ahead in Agile’s evolving landscape, this is a must-listen!

References and resources mentioned in the show:

#32: Scrum in High School Sports with Cort Sharp
#82: The Intersection of AI and Agile with Emilia Breton
#129: 2025: The Year Agile Meets AI and Hyper-Personalization with Lance Dacy
#132: Can Nice Guys Finish First? with Scott Dunn
Mike Cohn’s Better User Stories Course
Join the Agile Mentors Community
Subscribe to the Agile Mentors Podcast

Want to get involved?

This show is designed for you, and we’d love your input.

• Enjoyed what you heard today? Please leave a rating and a review. It really helps, and we read every single one.
• Got an Agile subject you’d like us to discuss or a question that needs an answer? Share your thoughts with us at [email protected]

This episode’s presenters are:

Brian Milner is SVP of coaching and training at Mountain Goat Software. He's passionate about making a difference in people's day-to-day work, influenced by his own experience of transitioning to Scrum and seeing improvements in work/life balance, honesty, respect, and the quality of work.

Cort Sharp is the Scrum Master of the producing team and the Agile Mentors Community Manager. In addition to his love for Agile, Cort is also a serious swimmer and has been coaching swimmers for five years.

Auto-generated Transcript:

Brian Milner (00:00)
Welcome in. Welcome back, everybody. This is the Agile Mentors Podcast. I'm with you as always, Brian Milner. And today, we're going to do something a little different. We're in this mode right now. We've kind of been open to some suggestions recently about maybe we should try some experiments and try some different things. And so today's going to be one of those little experiments. We have someone that's going to be with us, Mr. Cort Sharp. So welcome in, Cort.

Cort (00:23)
Hey Brian, thanks for having me on.

Brian Milner (00:26)
Absolutely. Cort is our community manager for the Agile Mentors community. And Cort and I do classes together a lot. He is often the producer in the classes. So we see each other a lot. We talk a lot. Cort's also a certified Scrum professional. So he's been doing this and has encountered Scrum in some kind of unusual circumstances as well. He's a high school swim coach. There's an episode that we talked about that. way back so that anyone wants to dig that out, they can go back and find that and learn a little bit more about it. But we just thought it would be good to have maybe periodically a little check in about maybe some stories that have come up in the news about Agile or things that have been flashing through social media feeds or anything like that. know, Cort and I are a little bit different age groups, a little bit, more than a little bit. And I'm sure the of things that cross court's radar may be a little bit different than the things that cross mine. And we just thought maybe it would be an interesting kind of thing to have a little discussion, the two of us, about some of these major burning issues and things that people are talking about on LinkedIn and Twitter and, I'm sorry, X, anywhere else. I'm going to kind of... Give the reins over to court here a little bit, because I know he's pulled some things that he wants to talk about, and we'll just kind of see where we go.

Cort (01:40)
Awesome, yeah, thanks Brian. Not just X and LinkedIn, we're also looking through Instagram, YouTube Shorts, where the cool kids hang out, I guess is. That's at least what my swimmers tell me.

Brian Milner (01:50)
Okay, okay I Got it I got a yeah, I you know, I had to learn a lot about an Instagram with my daughters and I still don't get it. just I mean I have fun flipping through stuff but I don't I could never like get a following there because I just don't understand how to Do all the but that's old guy talking. So

Cort (02:11)
It's a weird place, Brian. I don't blame you. It's totally good. But I've seen a few things come across my feed, and we've kind of had lighter versions of this conversation, whether it's in classes or just kind of on the side or something like that. So we just kind of thought, hey, let's sit down and actually go into depth about this, because I'm curious what your thoughts are on some of these things. And I don't know.

Brian Milner (02:14)
Yeah

Cort (02:35)
Hopefully I'm able to add into the conversation a little bit more than just here's a young guy yelling at a cloud instead of an old guy yelling at a cloud, right? No, I hope not. But let's come out and I'm gonna come out swinging at you. So the biggest news bite that I have found over the last couple of months or the last month-ish is that the Agile Alliance and PMI

Brian Milner (02:37)
Ha ha. young guy and old guy yelling at each other. That's not what anyone wants to hear. Yeah. Yeah.

Cort (03:02)
have entered, have announced that they're entering a partnership. We don't really know a ton about what that partnership looks like, but it is presumed that the Agile Alliance will be hosting some kind of content through PMI or PMI will be hosting some kind of content that the Agile Alliance has created. So I'm just curious, like, what are your thoughts on that? Do you think it's a good move, bad move, any kind of potential impacts that you see? It's a big one.

Brian Milner (03:30)
Yeah, way to start with a softball that we just, yeah, mean, it's obviously a hot button topic right now. I've heard lots, I've read lots of opinions of people on different kind of forums and discussion boards and things where people are talking about kind of, what does this mean? That kind of thing. And so here's kind of,

Cort (03:34)
Hahaha

Brian Milner (03:57)
Here's kind of what I've heard from both sides, right? The people who are kind of anti feel like this is maybe a little bit of a betrayal. And I think that the reasoning behind that kind of feels like maybe historically or somewhere maybe further into the past, the PMI may have been a little bit of an antagonist towards the Agile movement, or some people feel that way. I'm not saying this is my opinion, but this is what I've heard. Some people might feel that way. And so they feel like, would you attach your name to something like that? But I've also heard from people who are pro and have said, look, the basics of the deal are that it's not going to change anything for the Agile Alliance other than the name. It's officially the PMI Agile Alliance. But other than that, what I've heard from people who are board members that have posted

Cort (04:43)
Sure, yeah.

Brian Milner (04:50)
from the Agile Alliance have said, it's just nothing more than our name is now different. We're autonomous. We can still do the things we've always done. And we feel like the connection to this larger organization will enable us and help us. And I know the Agile Alliance has gone through some tough times, as a lot of us in the industry have, with the conferences. At least I know the conferences last year was kind of not what people have hoped, and not just the Agile Alliance conference, but other conferences have had down attendance and other things. Maybe just a sign of the times, I don't know. But personally, I kind of look at it and I got to preface this. got to, before we talk about anything else, right? Because now we're going to get into opinion. But I would just say, let me preface by saying the opinions you are about to hear. are not the official opinions of Mountain Goat Software. They are just the opinions of the individuals that you will be listening to. So this is just one guy's opinion, right? I think I would just say I get it from both sides. I understand. I see kind of the concern. From the people who are pro and they say, look, it's just the name, I don't know why anyone would freak out about that. It's just a, we're just putting letters PMI in front of our name. hear that, but I've also heard other people counter that to be like, yeah, but it would be like Greenpeace saying, you know, we're now Exxon Greenpeace, you know? And I don't think, I think that's quite, you know, a huge overstatement. I don't think that's the same thing at all. And I, you know, I recognize that the PMI has, you know, they've adapted. anyone who thinks that they're the same way that they've always been, I think is wrong. I think that they have incorporated over time more and more agile ideas into their certifications and other things. they certainly, I feel like they've recognized the agile sort of the future and they've tried to invest more heavily. I think this is a sign of that as well. They're trying to invest a little bit more into agile because they see it as, you this is the future of project management. You know. But they also see it as one of the paths. It's one way of doing project work. And it's not the only way. There are other ways that are good as well. I don't know that I disagree with that. Depends on the project. It depends on what it is you're trying to do. But we talk about this in class. If I know what it is that we're going to make, I know exactly how to make it, the customer knows what they want, and we're not changing anything along the way, then

Cort (07:02)
Yeah. Yeah.

Brian Milner (07:16)
Agile may not be the right way. But if any of those things are not true, then I think Agile is the right way. end of the world, no. I don't see it as the end of the world. I don't see it as the sky's falling. I think it is a sign of the times. I think it is sort of a benchmark kind of thing to say, wow, things have reached this point where they've joined forces. I think that's not an indication of either side bending a huge amount, but that both sides have bent and met in the middle. And that's kind of my opinion on it. The sky's not falling, but I don't really know how it will change things moving forward. They tell us it's not going to really. We'll see.

Cort (07:58)
I think I agree with a lot of what you're saying. And that's what I've seen as well amongst the social media spheres. Kind of a lot of discourse of, this is really bad, or, this is not as bad as you think it's going to be, or, this is actually really good. Because I think one point that I agree with a little bit more so is, in principle, at face value, This might not be what the Agile Alliance was founded on or anything that goes, or I wouldn't say anything, but it doesn't align with the foundational values of the Agile Alliance. But in the long run, I think this might be pretty beneficial for Agile as a whole, because PMI is massive. They have a huge reach, very big name recognition, and for them to acknowledge, not only acknowledge, but acknowledge in this way and bring in Agile into this space within their reach, I don't see a ton of harm that could really be brought to it purely on the basis of our reach, PMI's reach is significantly larger than the Agile alliances. So it just helps Agile grow a little bit more so and get a little further reach. Do you agree with that? you disagree? Thoughts on that?

Brian Milner (09:14)
Yeah, I mean, I've heard Mike say this before, where he says, you we talk about partnerships, you know, who's bringing more to the table? Is the Agile Alliance funneling more attention, eyeballs to the PMI by this Alliance, or is the Agile Alliance getting more eyeballs and more attention because of the audience of the PMI? I would think it's the Agile Alliance is getting more. Like you said, I think the PMI is a huge behemoth, pretty highly recognizable. their certifications have been out. They're kind of one of the first of those kinds of certifications that existed out there. And I just think that they're probably bringing more to the table to the Agile Alliance than the Agile Alliance is bringing to them.

Cort (09:56)
Yeah, yeah, the Agile Alliance is kind of getting the better end of the deal, so to speak, as far as exposure goes.

Brian Milner (10:00)
Yeah, but I think time will tell. I think that's really what I would say to anyone is just don't freak out too much yet. You need to just wait and see what will happen. When the moves happen, if something happens, it's like all of a sudden now the Agile Alliance can't in any way talk about how traditional waterfall is not a great way of doing things. Well, now I would raise the alarm and say, OK, well, now you see the compromise. But if that doesn't happen, if it truly is, as I've been hearing, it's just a naming, we're autonomous, I don't see the grave harm.

Cort (10:33)
Right, right. Right. I think one thing that's kind of overlooked or maybe just a little glazed over that people didn't pay too much attention to is they didn't announce this as a merger. They announced this as a partnership. So to me, when I hear partnership, hear two entities working independently with a common goal of whatever it may be.

Brian Milner (10:54)
Yep. Yep. Yeah, a little insider baseball on that because I have heard some discussions around that as well. And just what I've heard is, there is a trickiness there because the agile Alliance is a nonprofit organization. And so from a for-profit organization, you cannot acquire a nonprofit organization unless that nonprofit organization changes and becomes a for-profit entity.

Cort (11:28)
in for profit. Yeah.

Brian Milner (11:31)
I'm not a lawyer. I don't know any of that kind of insider, the legalese that's around that. But I've heard a little bit of conversation around the fact that it might have been an acquisition had they been a for-profit company. But since they were a nonprofit, it's a partnership. So that may be the case or not. I don't know.

Cort (11:50)
So that brings up just a question to me then. A lot of times when companies merge, they tend to merge as either an industry or a sector is kind of starting to go down, trickle down a little bit. And they merge as a method of of like bulking up, strengthening where they can, trying to... that they acquire, they merge in order to withstand the rough times. Do you think that that might be what's at play here? Where just from a business perspective, this is kind of the business smart move for both entities, both organizations, so that they can withstand, I think I saw somewhere like a 35 % reduction in middle management positions, postings or something like that, right?

Brian Milner (12:31)
Yeah. Yeah, absolutely. mean, I think, the, the past few years have been kind of difficult economically. please don't think I'm being political and saying that at all. I'm just, yeah, I can only state what I've, I've seen and heard from other people in the industry. And I've, you know, I've heard about people talking about less job postings, those going down. I've heard about, know, trainers and coaches and other things. you know, losing percentages of their students or their coaching engagements or other things. So I've just heard that it's been, and we've kind of experienced some of that as well, decline a little bit. I don't think it's that one of those two entities had a decline. I think they both are kind of recognizing this is a tough economic climate and strength in numbers. You know, if we can support each other and maybe that's the path forward is that we kind of combine forces and combine and conquer a little bit. So I think you're right. I think that may have forced it and it's just the opportunity presented itself.

Cort (13:37)
Just kind of a contextual thing where the context of kind of where we're at right now. That's really what drove it. Yeah, I can see that. could totally see that. Awesome. Well, let's jump over to our next kind of topic right now. Everyone's favorite topic right now, AI, right? We've talked about it substantially. But kind of with that whole idea of

Brian Milner (13:52)
Sure. Yeah. Yep. Yeah.

Cort (14:03)
or that little note that we had there of these mid-level management positions, we're not seeing them rise in open positions. We're kind of seeing them get squeezed down a little bit. We're seeing them reduced. And a lot of that is attributed to AI, where a lot of these mid-level management positions are tasks that can be done by AI, because a lot of it is kind of this data analysis stuff and what do we move forward with? Relating it to Scrum specifically with AI being on the rise and Scrum Master roles appearing to be bringing less value as a result, because I think you've seen it, I've seen it a lot. A lot of my friends are talking about it. I've seen it a lot on social media. Actually one Instagram reel that sticks out to me right now is someone was like, hey, do you want to get into tech without having to learn how to code, be a scrum master. It's super easy. You just take a two day course and you're going to make $110,000 a year or whatever. And it's like, you know, little tongue in cheek, but at the same time, I think there's some truth to what that real was saying. Um, however, with that, I think a lot of scrum masters are being shoehorned into roles or have been shoehorned into roles of. Logging meetings. creating meetings, facilitating those meetings and then entering in the next one and saying, Hey, everyone has to show up here and, you need a story point this. I need point values for this bug before we start working on anything. and a lot of that seems to be replaced with AI or at least is able to be replaced with AI. So Scrum Masters now are in a position where they have to drive more value. where, where do you think Scrum Masters? in their role can bring more value? And do you know of any resources that are either widely available, freely available, available at a lower cost to help Scrum Masters learn how to actually bring more value to their role?

Brian Milner (16:04)
Yeah. Well, the first thing I'll start off in saying is, you know, one of the great things about living in today's world is there is so there's such a wealth of information that's free. You know, I can learn how to do, I can learn how to cook anything in the world by just finding the video on social media and not all of a sudden, you know, I've got everything I need to make a great dish. I may not taste the same as the person who did it, but you know, I can learn how to do pretty much anything. I can Google, you know, how to You know change out my doorbell, which is one thing I did over the holidays You know like that's the kind of thing that there's a full video showing exactly it step-by-step Here's how to do everything and and I think that you know for Us a scrum masters. There's there are some skills. I think that are gonna be More and more relevant more and more needed and I think you just have to put yourself in the frame of reference of what would AI do a good job of? this is such a answer because if my job as a scrum master is to just schedule meetings, well, then yeah, I'm in trouble because an AI can do that really easily. And you don't even need AI for that. All you just need is to have people enter when they're available. There's dozens of websites where you can do that. do that. My D &D group does that to try to find the nights we can play. It's easy to do that, and you don't need any AI for it. So if you reduce what a scrum master is down to something as simplistic as let's schedule meetings, well, then yeah, you're in danger. I think what's going to happen is that more and more, it's going to be the soft skill kind of things that are going to differentiate the Scrum Master profession. I think that AI is going to have a hard time with managing interpersonal relationships. It's going to have a hard time helping the team navigate through conflict. It's going to have a hard time picking up on details, how safe does the team feel, how well are they working together. AI can do certain things really well, but there's a reasoning that's not there now. I don't know if that's coming. I don't know if that's tomorrow, if that's 10 years from now, or a year from now, or six months. But I know that now, even though they say thinking or other things like that, it's not really thinking. It's just digging up more data. And it can process a large amount of data and give you some insights from it. That is something that it does well. but it can't intuit, you know? It doesn't have emotional intelligence. And yeah.

Cort (18:47)
Yeah. Yeah, think one spot or one really good definition of where AI is fantastic that I read recently is AI is absolutely incredible when there is a set of very clear specific rules. So the book that was reading that said that they use chess, example, right? Where chess has a very, as a set of very specific rules. and AI can beat any grandmaster easy. Really just like chess.com can beat any grandmaster at this point, right? Because it's able to analyze potential outcomes based on a set of rules and a scenario that it's given in. Whereas a lot of humans, we think, or a lot of human chess grandmasters, they think in a way of like, here's one specific strategy that has worked in this scenario. I'm going to go that down that route. So AI can inference, so to speak, they're going to go down this route because that's what has happened in the past. And based on that set of rules that has happened in the past, here we go. So I think you're entirely right with those softer skills where you're interacting in a space that has some guidelines, but not necessarily a set of clearly defined rules is where AI is going to struggle right now. Absolutely. Yeah, totally.

Brian Milner (20:07)
Yeah, I'll tell you, Cort, too, one of the things that I'm really interested in, and I've talked to you about this and some other people, I'm really interested to see how AI, especially for coding, because more and more coders are taking advantage of coding assistants. And there are some stories out there and some companies that are more and more reducing the reliance on a person to code and using more AI to do coding. Some claim that they can do it all with AI. I would be really suspicious if there's no human involved at all. But what I'm really curious about is how does it change the process? If you are using an AI coding assistant, Does that change any other part of your process? How do you verify that the code that the AI has produced is correct? Is there a pairing? Is there a peer review of that that the team does? I suspect that there's practices and things like that that are popping up all over the place that just haven't been codified yet. There hasn't been a white paper that says, here's what you do. to try to ensure that it matches well with the rest of the code or here's how you know that it matches your standards or other things. I suspect that there's plenty of those kind of things out there and I'm just kind of waiting to hear those reports.

Cort (21:25)
Right? Yeah. Yeah, think, gosh, was, was Mark Zuckerberg was on the Joe Rogan podcast not too long ago. and he was saying like, yeah, by the end of 2025, Facebook is already doing it or Metta is already doing this. Sorry. Metta is already doing this where they're starting to replace their mid-level programmers, their mid-level developers with AI. And Zuckerberg was saying like, it's expensive right out of the gate.

Brian Milner (21:54)
Yeah.

Cort (21:59)
Right. It's going to be a lot of time, but we see the value in this long-term. so I wonder if, if that white paper is going to come from either meta or alphabet or one of those ones, right.

Brian Milner (22:09)
Yeah. Well, the domino effect of this is also going to be fascinating to watch because you said that they're talking about mid-level. I've heard a lot more about junior level being replaced, Like the entry level kind of stuff. And so, okay, let's say you do that, right? And you're hanging on to your senior people who have the experience. What happens when they move on? Right? When those senior people are gone, you haven't had anyone coming up the pipeline because you replaced it with AI for the junior stuff. And you're depending on more senior, more skilled advanced people to verify, to go through and fix the issues that AI is producing. They're going to be gone. They're going to retire. You know? So I don't know how that, that will be my first question to someone like Zuckerberg about that.

Cort (22:54)
Right? Yeah. Yeah.

Brian Milner (23:02)
when they said something like that is, what's your continuity plan for moving up programmers into more senior skill level? How are you going to build that into your long-term process if you're going to replace junior and mid-level people with AI? That's going to be a train wreck that's going to happen at some point.

Cort (23:27)
I, cause a lot of times we talk about in courses or I've heard it a few times and I totally agree with this and subscribe to this idea that the goal of a scrub master is to work themselves out of a job. So I wonder if it's that kind of same kind of mentality that these bigger tech companies have with AI of, know, AI is going to work a developer out of a job or a developer is going to work themselves out of a job through AI being able to. code better than them, faster than them, be more precise, stuff like that. However, caveat to that, Mike was the one that said the goal of a scrum master or a good scrum master should be to work themselves out of a job, comma, I've never seen that happen. So Mike has never seen that happen, right? I don't think you've ever seen that happen. I've never seen that happen. I don't think anyone's really ever seen that happen. I don't think any scrum master has successfully done that.

Brian Milner (24:10)
Right.

Cort (24:20)
so I wonder if it's going to get to that, that kind of same point where it's like a developer will never work them themselves out of a job. It's just the cost of entry to a good developer job or to a developer job as a human. Just got up a little bit more, right? Where, where those senior positions are the only ones open. So you gotta create whatever experiences you can. Right.

Brian Milner (24:42)
mean, should, in reality, it should be like any other tool that people use to do a job. And it should be the kind of thing where, hey, now we have calculators, and I don't have to manually do the computations on my own. Does that mean that I don't need the reasoning and logic of knowing which computations to make? No. Someone still needs to know how to do that kind of thing. And I think that's how it shifts a little bit is. I don't know that it ever, I shouldn't say that ever. think it's, my, I'm not an AI expert, but my experience dabbling with this kind of stuff and reading articles and talking to people in the industry is that it's not there yet. It's, it's, it's good. It does a good job at, you know, being an assistant level, co-pilot level, that kind of thing, but it's not.

Cort (25:29)
Mm-hmm.

Brian Milner (25:32)
hey, let's fire our 10 developers because now we've got an AI that will do exactly what they did. It still takes reasoning and logic to know which path to go down, to ask it what to do. And I think that's just how it shifts a little bit is now there's a tool that does the more mundane part of that, but we still need the information, the logic, the reasoning to design it.

Cort (25:44)
Right. Right. Right. Yeah, totally. This this reminds me a lot of your conversation that you had with Lance. It's the first episode of twenty twenty five. You and Lance sat down and talked about AI and hyper hyper personalization. AI being used as a tool, which you and Lance discussed fairly thoroughly. You guys went into a little bit of depth about that. It's a tool that delivers value, but where do you think it's delivering value to, or who do you think it's delivering value to? Is it developers, the company as a whole, customers? Where do you see that value stream starting? And do you think it could eventually get to somewhere else, deliver value elsewhere?

Brian Milner (26:17)
Yeah. I mean, it's kind of like to me asking like, how do you, where do you see streets and roads and highways deliver value? know, like it's, there's a million places they deliver value. There's a million industries. There's a million different things that they do. And I kind of see AI, you know, as a much, much, much more advanced version of that. But just to say, they're, Does it deliver value to customers? Yes, it delivers value to customers. It might make their lives easier or make it more simple to get to what they need. Does it deliver value to the organization? Sure, it delivers to the companies because it's going to help reduce time to market and speed and maybe cost as well. Although cost, we'll see. That's kind of an interesting thing because, you know,

Cort (27:26)
huh.

Brian Milner (27:33)
You read lot of articles about how OpenAI is not profitable yet. And it's taking a huge amount of data, a huge amount of data centers, a huge amount of energy. So that runway runs out at some point. And even charging $200 a pop for their pro model a month, it's not profitable. I mean, they say that membership level is not profitable right now.

Cort (27:46)
Right. Right. Yeah. Right. Right.

Brian Milner (27:59)
So that doesn't continue forever. At some point, that money runs out. And when that does, how does it get paid for? So will it reduce costs by that point when that runway runs out and the consumers of the AI product have to pay the real cost of what it takes to run it? I don't know. Hopefully, it goes down by then.

Cort (28:18)
Yeah. Yeah. In that same episode with you and Lance, you talk a lot about AI as a tool, right? And it's not something that you are scared of personally because it is a tool and you view it as a tool and an aid to you being more productive. I'm just curious your thoughts on, let's take it back over to our scrum masters, right? So. someone starting out as a Scrum Master role or recently got put into a Scrum Master role, how do you think that AI can be used as a tool to aid Scrum Masters? Do you think it should take over kind of backlog prioritization so that Scrum Masters can focus a little more on those interpersonal connections? Do you think it should take over managing meetings or running meeting ceremonies so that Scrum Masters can focus on more important things?

Brian Milner (29:10)
I kind of, the hair on the back of my neck goes up a little bit or I cringe a little bit about the words take over. Because I'm not sure there's anything I would say that it should take over right now. I think that there are some things that it can assist with and do a better job. Like it can, you can offload the manual portion of doing that to the AI. But you know, yeah. We've talked about scheduling meetings. That's an easy thing for something like AI to do. And it does a good job. One of my favorite things that I've learned is you can dump a bunch of data into it and then ask a big open-ended question like, what are maybe some insights from this data that I'm missing? What are some key?

Cort (29:37)
Right.

Brian Milner (29:54)
takeaways that I should have from this mass of data that you sort through. And that's a really good job of interpreting that kind of thing for us. So I think it's those kind of things that, from a Scrum Master perspective, I think you can probably use it to do a lot of things like charting out velocity and tracking other trends in our velocity.

Cort (30:00)
Right.

Brian Milner (30:15)
or the trends in other data maybe that I collect for my team that I'm not aware of. I think it starts to fail a lot in the creative areas. I'll just give you a practical example from my standpoint. I spoke at couple of conferences. I try to speak at conferences on occasion. And when you do that, you have to submit papers of saying, here's what I want to talk about. I cannot use AI and go to it right now and say, hey,

Cort (30:34)
No,

Brian Milner (30:37)
I want to speak at conferences next year about AI or about Agile and Scrum kind of topics. What are some ideas? What are some things I can talk about? It's not going to give me anything that's worth anything if I ask that question. But if I already have the idea, it can help me flesh out the idea. It can help me kind of with the way I present the idea. But the idea is mine, right?

Cort (30:49)
Right.

Brian Milner (31:03)
And I kind of think that's the thing is from a Scrum Master perspective, use it for the things that would take a lot of manual time to do. But you have to know your stuff to know that you need that thing.

Cort (31:12)
huh. OK, so yeah, just speaking out loud here, use an AI as like, hey, I'm noodling on this idea to get a little more engagement in our daily standups. Walk me through how this would go, or something like that.

Brian Milner (31:34)
Yeah, I mean, there's some particulars there. you probably want to prompt it to say, you know, I want you to act as an agile expert. Ask me all the questions that you need to ask me about why my daily scrums are failing and help me figure out, you know, three next steps I could take to try to improve the daily scrum of my team. That would be the kind of prompt I would enter. and kind of hear what the question, let it ask you questions, let it refine it a little bit, and it'll give you some things to try. Now, maybe only one of those things is worthwhile, but if you have one of them that's worthwhile, it's worthwhile.

Cort (32:10)
Yeah, yeah, absolutely. Right, totally. Cool. Let's step away from AI real quick. I got one more question for you. And this can be like a, yep, we'll wrap it up after this one. One more question for you. And this was actually from the last episode with Scott, where the whole idea of it was you need to be nice by being honest, realistic, and I put in quotation marks, mean. Just being nice by being

Brian Milner (32:16)
All right, then we got to wrap up.

Cort (32:35)
Brutally honest, I guess in a good way of putting it when So again as the younger guy in this conversation as the one who doesn't quite have as much experience in having potentially career altering conversations as I like to call them When should I bring those up when should I be that kind of mean nice guy? Is it any time that I have my my foot in the door of? the CEO or someone who has a little more pull? Is it, should I only do it when I'm prompted or is there some other time that I should be bringing up these topics that are probably important, but you know, not the nice guy way of bringing them up.

Brian Milner (33:13)
Yeah, we were talking about the thing that I mentioned about the scenario where the guy found himself in the elevator with the CEO. And yeah, I do think there's an important kind of thing to keep in mind there where, you know, businesses are gonna expect you to kind of follow the chain of command a little bit. so, you know, I think you've got to balance that in with this. I'm not saying that you should... hey, everything that you think might be wrong in the company, go schedule a meeting with your CEO and go run and tell them. Like that's gonna make everyone between you and the CEO really mad and your CEO really mad, right? You gotta follow your chain of command a little bit. If I have a manager, I wanna be always kind of frank and honest with my manager so that they know they can trust me, that I'm gonna tell them.

Cort (33:49)
Yeah, yeah.

Brian Milner (34:02)
the reality and there it's just how blunt are you? How much do you soften when you say those things and try to say it in a polite way rather than saying, this sucks. You have to be able to play that game a little bit. But I I think you should always be honest with the people in your immediate chain of command.

Cort (34:13)
Right, right.

Brian Milner (34:24)
you, there's no, you know, definitive line about when you overstep that and go above and beyond. You kind of have to interpret that yourself. You can't do it too often, but if there are times when you feel like something is vital and it could actually have a real negative impact on your business, then, know, occasionally maybe it is okay to then go out of your chain of command and say, I just think this is really vital. And I think the company needs to know this. So I've kind of gone out of the normal chain of command. You're going to make the chain of command mad when you do that. So you have to weigh that and say, is it worth it? Do I feel like I can defend that I went outside the chain of command in this instance? that people won't see it as I'm always going outside the chain of command, but this was important enough to do it.

Cort (35:10)
Sure. Right. Okay. Awesome. Well, thanks, Brian. Thanks for getting that last one in there. Yeah.

Brian Milner (35:18)
Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, yeah, no, this has been fun. And we'll do this more often. We'll have some check-ins and try some more experience experiments. All right.

Cort (35:30)
Awesome. Well, thanks for having me on. Thanks for letting me ask these questions. thanks for a great conversation. I appreciate it. Yeah.

Brian Milner (35:33)
Yeah. Yeah. Thanks, Cort.

Can being "nice" at work actually hold you back? Join Brian and Scott Dunn as they unravel the myths around workplace "niceness," explore the balance between kindness and assertiveness, and reveal how honest communication can earn you respect—and maybe even that long-overdue promotion.

Overview

In this episode of the Agile Mentors Podcast, Brian and Scott dig deep into the question: Do nice guys (or gals) really finish last at work?

They discuss the critical balance between being accommodating and assertive, why conflict can be a tool for growth, and how emotional intelligence plays into team dynamics.

With stories, tips, and the psychological truths behind professional success, this episode is a must-listen for anyone looking to navigate workplace interactions while staying true to themselves.

References and resources mentioned in the show:

Scott Dunn
Bill of Assertive Rights
Elements of Agile
Radical Candor
Advanced Certified ScrumMaster®
Subscribe to the Agile Mentors Podcast

Want to get involved?

This show is designed for you, and we’d love your input.

• Enjoyed what you heard today? Please leave a rating and a review. It really helps, and we read every single one.
• Got an Agile subject you’d like us to discuss or a question that needs an answer? Share your thoughts with us at [email protected]

This episode’s presenters are:

Brian Milner is SVP of coaching and training at Mountain Goat Software. He's passionate about making a difference in people's day-to-day work, influenced by his own experience of transitioning to Scrum and seeing improvements in work/life balance, honesty, respect, and the quality of work.

Scott Dunn is a Certified Enterprise Coach and Scrum Trainer with over 20 years of experience coaching and training companies like NASA, EMC/Dell Technologies, Yahoo!, Technicolor, and eBay to transition to an agile approach using Scrum.

Auto-generated Transcript:

Brian (00:00)
Welcome in Agile Mentors. We're back and we're here for another episode of the Agile Mentors podcast. I'm with you as always, Brian Milner. And today we have friend of the show, buddy of the show, Scott Dunn is back with us. Welcome in Scott.

Scott (00:13)
Hey Brian, great to be back as always. Love it.

Brian (00:17)
Love to have Scott on as always and if you've listened to some of the past episodes with him then you know why. If not, I encourage you to check it out after this episode. We wanted to have Scott on earlier this year just to talk about some things that might be percolating in a few people's heads with the turn of the year and kind of as you start to prepare and look forward and maybe even look back a little bit in things. And particularly deal with an issue around how people show up at work and Scott was saying to me earlier, kind of this phrase about, nice guys finish last? Do they finish first? Do they finish last? Can you be nice? Can you be nice at work and be promoted? Can you be nice at work and move upwards? Or do you have to not be nice?

Scott (01:03)
you

Brian (01:11)
in order to do that. So tell me a little bit about kind of the genesis of the idea from you, Scott. What have you been hearing or what's been crossing your path?

Scott (01:17)
Yeah, and I'm so glad we had a chance to talk about this because it's recent. So the first thing that sparked my thought on this, so granted in the leadership class, we talk about being a balance of accommodative and assertive, and I'll usually refer to a... a document called the Bill of Assertive Rights. And I was reading another book this week and actually it referenced the same thing. I thought, switching fast forward a few days and I'm doing an assessment with a company that's asked for help because they're not, they're struggling with quality, they're struggling with predictability. And I know what the leaders goals are for the efforts. And so now I'm meeting with all the team members to do an actual formal assessment for baseline. Now, and this assessment, you're going to go through, I don't know, 30, 40 questions. So it's not lightweight. It's trying to be tactical, like, Is the team well formed? Is the backlog in good shape? Do you have a roadmap? Are the leaders supporting the change? I mean, whether company level, product level, team level, and we even added some advanced questions. And the fascinating thing is over a course of all these questions, the answer was essentially, we're okay at that, right? If you ask them, are they doing this practice or not, they'd say, somewhat. And it didn't matter if it was the most basic thing at the team level or the most advanced thing at the corporate level, everything was okay. So when you look at the dashboard at the end, in our normal red, yellow, the whole thing was yellow. And so I just paused and said, you know, I've never seen this before. I said, yeah, I joke with them a little bit about that, but I said, you know, my friends kind of think about it. It actually doesn't make sense that you would be okay at the fundamental beginning things and also okay at advanced high level things. So it's usually progressive, right? You get the basics down like the satiric change curve. That's kind of what we're following. So now... And then what came out later in the conversations is that someone said basically, we're afraid to say things that are hard to hear. He used the word judgment. Like we don't want to kind of stand in judgment of others, but essentially saying something that someone's not going to hear, whether it's true or not, because they had nothing green, nothing red. So not doing well. And then the last thing that really got me triggered, you know, really start diving into this is this new year and people are getting this promotions and things going on at some of the companies. And there was a story of this one guy, like, I've worked here eight years and never been promoted. And yet everyone loves this person. Everyone likes this person. And I'm hopping on social media and someone asked that question, literally, like, give me an example of when nice guys finish last. And the guy said the same thing. He said, I am the one everyone goes to for help. I'm always ready to help. I'll do anything anyone needs. Everyone likes me. They all praise me. And I haven't been promoted in like 13 years. So partly for our own careers, partly for, you know, being a change agent, et cetera, I thought it'd be worth, you know, just having to... It's a great conversation topic,

Brian (03:51)
Yeah, well, I'll confirm part of that, or at least a couple of crossovers there with what you said, because there's an assessment kind of thing that we do at Mountain Good as well called Elements of Agile. And one of the things we learned early on in doing that was you would pull the data from the survey, from actually asking them. But then before we present it back, we always have a coach who kind of does interviews as well, and then manually can shift and adjust things. And one of the things I've learned as being one of those coaches who does that is if there's something that's negative that's said, if there's, you know, we give like a five point scale, you know, five is really great, one is terrible, and you know, what number is it? If it's a little bit over into the negative side, you never get anything that's like all the way over at one, right? Nobody ever comes back to you and says, that's terrible.

Scott (04:44)
you

Brian (04:46)
but they will say, that's a three or that's a two. If it's a two, that's severe. That's kind of what I've learned is two is severe, three is bad. And you kind of have to shift those things over one notch to say, people are, their niceness are entering into this and they don't want it to be, they don't want it to look too bad. They don't know how it's gonna reflect on them. They don't know how it's gonna reflect on others. And so they don't want it to look

Scott (04:50)
Yeah. Okay. Yes.

Brian (05:15)
too bad, so they tend to like skew it a little bit towards the positive. Yeah.

Scott (05:20)
Yes, and the thing I think is good from that so one I keep coming back to you know self preservation this world kind of wired for this and someone was mentioning recently It's you know, shouldn't say people are selfish. We should say they have self in the center So if I'm gonna I'm just with you like if I'm gonna give feedback I'm honestly just pass facts or for those listening. I think it's totally fine say well Is it really worth it for me to say something that I'm going to have to end up explaining if a manager figures out that was me that said it because I'm the only one working on that project or whatever, right? In some ways, you're like, no, it's not worth it. I'll just kind of gently say it's not going great. Like you said, it's almost like that bell curve you got shifted over because, the professor's like, there's only, I'll only give out two A's each semester because that's truly exceptional. And so it moves it. It's a little like that. But then when you and I were talking earlier, you mentioned that conflict quadrants. And I thought that was really great because I think that's a clear structure that people could refer to as well. It's kind think about how they have interactions not just at work, but seriously in our other relationships. thought I was looking at like, man, this is so fitting. So I just thought that was a good tool to share as well.

Brian (06:18)
Yeah, it's interesting to see how that kind of affects people and how that affects their answers and how it affects how they're reporting. And there's a crossover here as well, because I know if you've listened to this podcast for a while, last year I did a talk on conflict management and kind of how to navigate that a little bit from a team lead or a Scrum Master kind of perspective. And it's a very sticky area that I think there's not enough training and there's not enough kind of education in. And one of the kind of interesting things that comes out from that, or came out from that conversation was, well, a couple things. One is that conflict, oftentimes we attempt to avoid it entirely, but that's a big mistake. Conflict is actually necessary for growth and if there's not any conflict then you get the kind of bad situation of we never question each other, we never challenge each other. There's a story about how that was actually something that happened at Chernobyl. A lot of the research kind of pointed to that's actually part of the root cause of why that happened is that they were all experts in their field and so they had such respect for each other that they didn't question each other when something was gonna go wrong. And so they miss this kind of basic tenet of, no, if I see something that's not, doesn't look right, I should speak up. And it may cause conflict, but it's necessary. It's necessary for us to be better.

Scott (07:44)
Right. Absolutely. And that quadrant that the Thomas Kilman model is so great because, for me, well, two things was one, I love it that they can say, hi, be highly assertive. You can still be highly cooperative. And that's that collaborative environment. So if we're really trying to create solutions, whether that's at work or in our relationships, then you're gonna have to assert, you be assertive and not that I'm gonna raise my voice, but I should share what I think or my opinion or if I disagree. And I think some of that when I was coming back down to it is there's still a tendency for people to feel like I need to be in the goodwill of others, right? So from the, you know, the 10, the bill of assertive rights, the 10 assertive rights, that's one of them. Like I need to be independent of the goodwill of others so I can be honest. I'm not trying to be, we can do this respectfully and winsomely and not be a jerk. But you have to let go of, if I say something I don't like, that would be bad. Or if I say something that makes someone happy, right? And I used to struggle with that. I don't want them to be sad. I don't want them to be upset, right? So now back to that quadrant, I'm not asserting myself and I'm obviously not helping them, so I'm just avoiding. And I'm avoiding the situation. It's the elephant in the room in these meetings. And now everyone's almost like, as a culture, we're kind of in cahoots. We all agree we're not gonna say anything, which makes it even tougher for anyone else not to kind of stand up and do just what you're saying, which I think is absolutely true. Speaking of that, so.

Brian (09:07)
Yeah, well, and just to clarify, too, I mean, you're talking about the Thomas Killen model. If people aren't familiar with that, basically, it's five different responses that people typically have to conflict in one way, form. When they encounter conflict, it's competing, collaborating, avoiding, compromising, or accommodating. those are kind of the, there are variances between anything like that. There's going to be some gray levels between them. Those are kind of the basic points. And I was telling Scott earlier, one of the things we talk about in our ACSM is when we present this information is that you kind of have to get out of your head the idea that any of these are bad. For example, the competing approach to things, the competing approach says, my relationship with the person is not as important as my stance on whatever this issue is. I cannot budge from my position. And I will jeopardize the relationship if that's what's required. That's a competing approach. And you initially read that and think, that's wrong. Nobody should take that kind of approach to a conflict. And in general, that should be our default kind of approach to conflict. But there are times when that's the right approach. When someone says something that's completely out of bounds, completely out of line, I'm going to take a competing approach. And there are times when people need to

Scott (10:08)
Mm-hmm. you Okay.

Brian (10:30)
to be presented with that for their own good. That they kind of recognize, wow, this is so important that he's willing to kind of not have a relationship with me anymore if this continues. And that's important, I think. Yeah.

Scott (10:41)
Yes. yeah, and I think that those examples of the people that get promoted, someone else had referenced and said essentially, it's you telling the, you know, I won't say the ugly truth, but. The thing that no one else is saying, your ability to say what no one else is saying to someone in leadership or management earns their trust. So at some level, whoever is the leadership whisperer, telling the truth on some of these things, and there was only one slot that's gonna influence and lead us to be promoted into, right? I've gotta know, if I'm wise as a senior exec, I gotta have the wisdom to know that I know lots of people probably just tell me what I wanna hear. I'm looking for the person who tells me maybe what I don't wanna hear.

Brian (10:58)
Ha

Scott (11:24)
It does it in nice way again though. From that standpoint, I can see why some of those people get promoted and some don't because you're so nice they actually don't trust you. Because you're not, to your point, I'm not willing to have conflict. I'm not willing to gamble what you might think of me for the sake of the betterment of everyone else. So there's some part where I think it's good. My takeaway looking at some of this is come back around to say, all right, check yourself when you have these conversations, just do that mental pause and say, Are you truly acting independent of what they might think? You know, do you have their best sensors or harder? Are you okay if they might respond a certain way? But it's almost like check that I'm outcome independent. So I'm being straight up and honest with them. Cause in this case, doing this assessment, try to work with the team, like, well, how hard is it to help the team or help anyone else who's actually not being honest about where things are? I don't have anything to work with now, right? Or like, yeah, I got to just take what they say is not great and then slide it down. So I recognize. And honestly, it's actually bad, but for all of us and the change, not just for our careers, but as change leaders anyways, checking that we're comfortable doing that. think growing that comfort, know, comfortability we can do. And I think it's just great for the career. And I see people getting promoted in these opportunities. Absolutely worth it.

Brian (12:37)
Well, there's one other story I want to share here that kind of is, this is a story from my past, one of the jobs I worked at. There was a project that we worked on that a lot of people probably will identify with this. The managers in the organization had set a deadline for it without talking to the people who actually were going to do it. from the, yeah, right. And from the very start, my developers that,

Scott (12:56)
No.

Brian (13:01)
that worked with me there on it were saying, this is impossible. It's not just that this is a little bit off, it's completely impossible. There's no way that we're going to do this. But the managers were like, well, you'll get it done. You'll get it done. And so they went forward and publicized the schedule and went all the way up to the top of the company. And the CEO knew that that was the timeline. And well, the CEO found himself in an elevator with one of my developers at one point.

Scott (13:17)
Board.

Brian (13:30)
just to ask him, hey, how's that project going? And my developer kind of sighed a little bit and said, well, you do you want the truth? Do you want the picture that everyone's painting? And he was like, well, obviously, I always want the truth. And so he told him, and he had a phrase that he used there that has stuck with me to this day. And that is, he said, bad news is not like wine. It doesn't get better with age.

Scott (13:40)
Wow. Yeah.

Brian (13:57)
And I think that's an important thing to keep in mind is that when there's something wrong, when there's something that's not right, the sooner we can identify it and shed light on it, the faster we can do something about it, the more options we have to do something about it. And the closer it is to when it's due or when we're supposed to have that thing happen or whatever, the less that we can do about it. So I'll even give a shout out. know. I can't imagine he's listening, but.

Scott (13:58)
Ooh. Yeah. Mm-hmm. Yeah.

Brian (14:25)
But that was a guy named Dave Ellet. So Dave, if you're listening, it's still stuck with me to this day. But that's a great phrase. And I think it's really apparent here. mean, being a nice guy, it's nicer, I think, to make sure that people understand the truth than it is to let the deception go on.

Scott (14:29)
Ha ha. Yeah, so two things on that Brian is one totally agree with you It might be hard to deliver some of this news But if you fast forward how much harder it will be for them when they have no time to make adjustments for the customer or the DNA Right and I'll tell them that right especially the product owner class You do me no favors by giving me like a week or two to tell the customer actually No, tell me now six months out that there might be some concerns, right? That's a lot easier. It's not easy, but man. It gets a lot worse That's one. I love way there's the example does not get better with age. The other thing is I think on a personal level, those who are not maybe saying what should be said or needs to be said or giving people that kind of, you know, honest feedback, you know, would you rather know now or in your performance review that there's a problem to not tell them that is in some ways what I was feeling for me is I'm actually now trying to control the optics I've seen. So it's actually a weird, it can be seen as a weird way of like, I'm just being selfish. So I'm actually not a nice guy. I'm a guy with these covert contracts about I want you to think this of me, so therefore I'm actually telling you the truth as your own coworker or peer about something that's really important you should know about, or my manager. I'm actually making sure that I, you know, take me first and take care of myself, but actually in a very short-term way out of fear versus a good worker would tell the truth and as I'm saying, probably he has more career opportunities by being one of the few people that. is a truth-telling organization like your developer and with the elevator to CEO because think about what CEO thinks of him now as well as what CEO now thinks about all the other one else is saying like, no, we're on track, we're on track, right? Those just probably reversed opinion in his ideas in his head about who he can trust to tell the truth about where things are going in these critical projects. So great example, great example.

Brian (16:29)
Yeah. Yeah. Well, and I think that gets to kind of the heart of this topic too. mean, you think you're talking about, you know, can you be nice? And if you're nice, is it possible to be recognized and still move ahead? And to me, think there's, this is where it starts to get really deeply psychological because I think you have to question what is your definition of nice? You know?

Scott (16:47)
Hmm.

Brian (16:53)
Because I think some people have a misaligned definition of what it means to be nice. I don't think it's nice to allow the deception to go on. I think that's not nice. I think that's something that, you know what I mean? You don't appreciate, like you said, as a product owner, as the leader in the organization, that's not nice to them to let that go on. And we might sit back and say, I'm not going to...

Scott (17:14)
No.

Brian (17:20)
I'm not going to raise red flags. I'm not going to be the squeaky wheel. I'm going to be the guy who just gets by because I'm a nice guy. We're using guy, but please understand. It's just a term. It's just a phrase that applies to women as much as it does men. So I'm not saying the gender specific thing here. Please, please forgive us for that. But just that that's kind of the concept behind it is I don't want to make waves. I want to be the nice person in this organization. I want to be seen as nice.

Scott (17:40)
Yeah. Yeah.

Brian (17:45)
your definition of nice might need to be readjusted.

Scott (17:48)
Yeah, huge point. think that kind of those words matter. And I think if someone would look at what they like, re-evaluate what you think is going to get you where you want to go, as well as what you would want from others as a teammate. then, and then for me, what I have to do is I have to backtrack and say, so why did you not say anything in the meeting? There's a time way back when I was working with the manager in the meeting that he was very supportive of what his colleague was sharing and the idea of someone she's presenting it to the other peers and the VP, everyone liked it except for one person who spoke out. because that one person, you know, the VP put the whole thing on hold afterwards. just asked that manager said, I thought you liked her idea. He said, yeah, no, I liked her idea a lot. So when the other person says something, why, why didn't you say something back? Right. And said, you stand up for what you thought was a good idea. What she was saying. But was the same idea of like, don't want to make any waves. But he said later, goes, that was the most important question I had to be asked about. I do need to speak out. I do need to be assertive in these meetings and say what my view is too, not just what they say, go along to get along. Like, and now we're just letting, you know, projects and this should go off track, right? No one's calling it for what it is.

Brian (18:52)
Ha Right. Yeah. So I think it's possible.

Scott (18:57)
So I think, yeah, that part.

Brian (18:59)
Sorry, I was just gonna say, I think it's perfectly possible to be assertive at certain points and take strong stances on certain things, but not compromise your niceness. I don't think that makes you a mean person. It may not make you everyone's favorite person every moment of the day, but it's nicer. People respect people who are honest.

Scott (19:25)
That's a good word, respect. Right. Right. Yeah. I wish there was a secondary word and we can be friendly in these other things. and I love what you said. Like it may be nice to not tell the, you know, you think it's nice, but people should know those things that they're not hearing. And that part's not nice. I think that aspect of maybe self-preservation to the detriment of others and then re-examining why, why do I feel like I need to do that? You know, for me, that was probably at work as well. Right. Is it, what was one person said? Harm versus hurt. This might hurt them in the moment, but it doesn't harm. So the shot to the dentist, the needle, that does hurt, but it's not harming them. Sugar tastes great, doesn't hurt at all, but it harms you. So kind of maybe reflect back on what does it mean to have your peers, your colleagues, your company's best interest at heart, and then what keeps us from that, right? And what are we looking out for? Are we that risk anyways? Yeah. In any case, I like that tool. I'm glad you brought that up.

Brian (20:19)
Yeah, I think there's also, I think it's important to say, know, like this with a lot of things, there's a balance. And we probably, know Scott, you probably have had this as well, but I've had a couple of people I've worked with throughout my career who just, they weren't concerned about being the nice person. They were much more of the outspoken and they would say things very bluntly when something was not going.

Scott (20:25)
Mm-hmm. You

Brian (20:43)
in a good direction. I think that's where NICE enters the equation, right? NICE is not letting it go, but NICE is being able to cushion a little bit what it is you're saying so that it's not just a slap across the face, but it's more of just maybe we want to reconsider that. Maybe we want to think about that, or have we thought of, or have we considered what the implication might be in this area. That's a much more digestible way of taking in that kind of news than it is to just say, well, that sucks, or that's going to be terrible, or you're going to fail miserably at that. And I've had people I've worked with who that's the kind of way that they respond.

Scott (21:14)
Yeah, right. Yeah, almost like a judgmental view of that. It comes across and I think some people maybe miss that. I know there's a big, you know, space on emotional IQ or EQ. I think that that's really valid and kind of checking yourself on that. I think some people don't read those. signals or they'll say like, well, someone needs to say it. Well, you didn't have to say it like that though, because we, I think we all want to be effective. So if we're not careful, then you, might be true, but they're not hearing you now. So you're still not effective in what you want to do, which is communicate that concern. So there is some part and that's what I like about radical candor. We do want empathy and we do want to care. So what you're kind of touching on, which I think is really great. If you take it that away, then we're just going to, we could actually make things even worse. So it's not a license. partly I see happen a lot and maybe you've been in these meetings and my friends listening, you know, you probably have too, where something said that you can tell there's a lot more underneath that, like that person's just mad, right? You can just tell bitterness or resentment or something's coming out. And again, other people can read that and it's not helpful. One, probably doesn't help you get your idea across, but two, it's just not helpful for you or to carry that around. So for me, I'm always trying to catch it like, is there emotion underneath this, if so? You gotta deal with that. Like you might need to wait to say this until there's not, you don't feel that emotion coming across. Cause then those things get said like you'd said under the guise of, I'm just trying to be honest with them. But look, that was a lot more that wasn't necessary and there's emotion. We've all sometimes worked at places with people that maybe wrote us the wrong way, or you've been a certain job for a long time and it can kind of bubble out in those meetings. So again, a great opportunity to kind of check and say, Where's my emotional bandwidth as I go and have this conversation? And I think also, what do you want? What do you want from the outcome of these things? Some we can control, some we can't. I might want to raise, but I'm not in control of that. But I'm in control of what time I show up, what I'm reading for work, being ready for meetings. I'm in control of that, and hopefully those things could come. So also, I know it's near the beginning of the year, get opportunity on goals and being clear about what you want. Because I think if we don't have a true north for ourself, it's easy to be what everyone else wants at the workplace. We don't actually have a sense of self anyway. So yeah, sure. I'll do whatever you want for me. And it's not even maybe, you know, maybe helping me move forward as well or maybe I'm sacrificing. So that's good timing for that as well for folks who are into doing goals or you have your, you know, 2025 roadmap in front of you. It might be a personal growth area. think it's good for everyone to take a look at at least.

Brian (23:44)
Yeah, and I think it's good to we propose this kind of can you get ahead? And so there is kind of the the weird marriage here a little bit of of how leadership plays into this. And, know, there is a view of management or leadership sometimes that is one that is much more authoritarian. And so I've known people who feel like, well, if I'm going to get to that level, then I need to.

Scott (23:48)
Yeah. Mm-hmm.

Brian (24:09)
be able to demonstrate that a little bit more. And I think there's a misunderstanding there as well. I don't think that's really what's required or is what's helpful in a leadership kind of position. It's kind of that whole paradigm of, do you feel your job as the leader is to push everyone towards the goal? Or do you feel like the...

Scott (24:12)
Mm.

Brian (24:31)
the job is to clear everything out in front of them so that they can easily reach the goal. That's a big difference in management style that I think can be really reflective in whether they're seen as nice or not nice.

Scott (24:37)
Yeah. Yeah, right. It's funny you say that because I was just hearing this from someone else as well. Like, the amount of leaders out there who don't have clarity on their goals and vision. So to your point, now you made it doubly hard for my people to try to aim themselves towards these goals. You know, of essentially self-organized, self-leadership, work on themselves to get there. It's lot easier if we have the vision, the goals in front of us. That's one thing I like, I was talking to my team earlier today about OKRs can be pushed down or rolled out from the top, of course, because they're the ones with the goals and the vision, but boy, it's an enablement for people then to figure out how to do the things they need to do to get there. And without that, we're rid of a struggle. So... whether I'm showing up as a kind of leader. So now what I'm left with, there's not a vision to motivate and guide my people and support them as a servant leader to get there. Now we're just back down to tasks. And I think those tasks can come down to like authoritarian, I just need you to do this, take out, take care of that problem, fix this, put out that fire. And that's one, you gotta make sure they do it and do it right. Cause it's at that level, there's not a lot of space for creativity and freedom. And we're not building anything big or necessarily. And projects can even kind of break down into that. So I'm glad you're bringing that up on the leadership styles. We don't have to always show up and be domineering. I think I want to be the kind of leader that is more about we than I and you. pulling something together and coaching up, but without the vision guidance, that might be an opportunity. Whatever department people are in, you can always have that conversation. Or even for the people themselves, again, you can always work on that. But those leadership styles, I think, fold in really nicely, say, do we have a vision and goal to catalyze people towards? Or am I just left with, you know, compliance, task type, manager, I just got to make sure people doing the right thing and complete things when I told them they need to all that, like the old school way. I think there's still probably a lot of that.

Brian (26:35)
Yeah. Yeah. And don't get me wrong, I completely understand from a leader, from a manager perspective, there are some basic kind of things that I think we have responsibility for. If you have an employee, let's say, that's stealing from the company or something, you're not going to just approach that as, hey, well, I'm not going to push them about stealing. I'm just going to try to clear the obstacles from

Scott (26:58)
Ask them how they feel about the stealing.

Brian (27:00)
Right, right, right. mean, don't anyone listen to this and think that we're saying that there's not that basic responsibility. I think that that is still part of being that leader and being a manager in some way, or form. I used to have a manager and for a while I sold shirts outside of Phantom of the Opera as part of the merchandise career there for that. And my boss there had this philosophy style of just, hey, you do your job. And, we're friends. We're the time in between, we just hang out and have fun. But if you're not doing your job, then we have to have a conversation. And I think that's kind of the basis there is like, don't, don't put me in that position as the manager. It's not, you know, you're not respectful of me when that's the case. and sometimes that, that, that occurs and you know, sometimes people have to be fired and all those other kinds of things. I get that. but that's, I think you can. You know, I remember one specific person that I had to fire at one point that, you know, it was, I felt after the, the event that it was actually the kindest thing I could have done to that person because they needed that, that to happen to them. Believe me, I know it's not good to get fired. I understand that, but this person had enough going on in their life that they needed that kick to do something else because they were not going into a good place. And, I just think that sometimes that's.

Scott (28:03)
you

Brian (28:16)
That's the kindest thing to do.

Scott (28:18)
my goodness, my first boss that pulled me into his office to say my performance wasn't adequate. He was just, and he, promise you, he probably said it just the way I'm saying it to you. I thought I was gonna die. But it was, I really did. just like, my heart's, you my throat and mouth totally dry. But it was the best thing I did, because I went back and like.

Brian (28:27)
Yeah.

Scott (28:37)
Yeah, why the heck am I not getting as much done as everyone else? Because I literally was just like an office clerk typing in stuff and word. There's no real complexity to that. But it was what I would, because then I started paying attention. I never had to get talked to again like that. Thank goodness. But boy, was like you said, kind of thing you could have done. And again, I thought I was going to die. I didn't die. I needed to hear that feedback and then fix it. You mentioned something that also makes you think of what Google's research had found about that you need to know their best teams are ones that include the they know they have dependable team members. So the managers gotta say, look, if there's an issue on someone your team is not delivering when you need them to, then yeah, I need to step and help. That should be to be fixed. Google's saying the team members need that, but they also need meaning and impact, that their work makes a difference. Their work is bigger than it just has. So I think that's that nice combination of, I will step aside and address this assertively until that's not okay. that we got to perform this way. At the same time, I'm casting a vision about how this has impact bigger than just this team and you're part of something bigger than you show up in your code or your test or whatever. So I like that situational leadership that's going across. It's kind of reflected in their research as well. I'm glad you brought up that story. Thank you for management.

Brian (29:46)
Yeah, so I So I think I think it's uh, you know if I were to try to sum that I just I think You know when I'm asked a question, can you be nice or do nice guys finish last? I I don't think so. I mean, I don't think that you're gonna finish last just because you're being nice Depending on how you define nice You know, you can't you you have to be honest you have to be you know, entering those relationships in a healthy way. But that's not being not nice. That's that's just showing up and and giving your best to the job, I think. And if you do that in a respectful way and in a kind way, I think that makes you a nice person. And I don't think that person necessarily is going to finish last for those reasons. At least that's my opinion.

Scott (30:25)
Yeah. Well, I like that. And again, on your chart, I like the fact that main thing is be assertive. You have an opinion. Reminds you of the JavaScript, right? Assert. You're just saying it. Just saying it needs to be said. And some people might edit themselves to say, well, who am I? And I remember reading somewhere about, look, you have value in what you say because you exist. It doesn't have to be that you worked there for five years and you've got

Brian (30:54)
Yeah.

Scott (30:57)
you've written books, technical books, it could be that you're a thinking human being who is smart and knows stuff and has opinions. That's why we share what we share and not to edit ourselves out of that saying I shouldn't assert myself because of X or Y. anyways, a good conversation for the beginning of the year. And I like what you're rounding out that nice guys don't finish last. Maybe there's another word and maybe also there's a balance for these guys and girls as well.

Brian (31:23)
Yeah, I agree. Well, Scott, thanks for coming on. I appreciate you making the time and it's always great to have you on the show.

Scott (31:30)
My pleasure. lot of fun. Thanks, Brian.

Is Agile still relevant in today’s fast-paced world? Brian and Joshua Kerievsky reveal the four game-changing principles of Modern Agile that prioritize safety, empowerment, and continuous value delivery.

Overview

In this episode, Brian Milner sits down with Joshua Kerievsky, a pioneer in the Agile community and the creator of Modern Agile.

They discuss how Agile practices have evolved, the critical role of safety and empowerment, and how to deliver value continuously in today’s fast-paced world. Don’t miss these insights into creating better teams, products, and results through simplicity and experimentation.

References and resources mentioned in the show:

Joshua Kerievsky
Industrial Logic
Joy of Agility by Joshua Kerievsky
Modern Agile
#33 Mob Programming with Woody Zuill
#51: The Secrets of Team Safety with Julie Chickering
Badass: Making Users Awesome by Kathy Sierra
The Power of Habit by Charles Duhigg
The Lean Startup by Eric Ries
Experimentation Matter: Unlocking the Potential of New Technologies for Innovation by Stefan H. Thomke
Agile For Leaders
Mike Cohn’s Better User Stories Course
Accurate Agile Planning Course
Join the Agile Mentors Community
Subscribe to the Agile Mentors Podcast

Want to get involved?

This show is designed for you, and we’d love your input.

• Enjoyed what you heard today? Please leave a rating and a review. It really helps, and we read every single one.
• Got an Agile subject you’d like us to discuss or a question that needs an answer? Share your thoughts with us at [email protected]

This episode’s presenters are:

Brian Milner is SVP of coaching and training at Mountain Goat Software. He's passionate about making a difference in people's day-to-day work, influenced by his own experience of transitioning to Scrum and seeing improvements in work/life balance, honesty, respect, and the quality of work.

Joshua Kerievsky is the founder and CEO of Industrial Logic and author of Joy of Agility. An early pioneer of Extreme Programming, Lean Software Development, and Lean Startup, Joshua is passionate about helping people achieve genuine agility through principle-based approaches like Modern Agile.

Auto-generated Transcript:

Brian (00:00)
Welcome in Agile Mentors. We're back. And this is another episode of the Agile Mentors podcast. I'm here as I always am. I am Brian Milner and today I am joined by Joshua Kerievsky and really excited to have Joshua here with us. Welcome in Joshua.

Joshua Kerievsky (00:16)
Thank you so much, Brian. Happy to be here.

Brian (00:19)
Very excited for Joshua to be here. Joshua's been around for a while. He's been doing this for a long time. He said, you know, when we were talking before, and he's been involved with Agile before, it was called Agile. And, you know, that probably tells you all you need to know there. But a couple other things here about him, just so that you kind of can place him a little bit. His company is Industrial Logic, Inc. and he's the CEO and founder of that company. He has a book called Joy of Agility that's out there that I highly recommend. It's a really great book. And he's also closely associated with something that maybe you've been aware of, maybe you've heard of, maybe you haven't, but something called Modern Agile. And that's what I thought we'd focus on here for our discussion is really to try to understand a little bit about it. especially for those of you, maybe you haven't heard of it, haven't been around it before. So... Why don't we start there, Joshua? Tell us a little bit about what was the need that was trying to be filled with something like modern Agile.

Joshua Kerievsky (01:19)
Well, it goes back to a conference I attended in Prague back in around 2015. And I was giving a speech, a keynote speech there, and that ended. And then I went and said, well, I'm going to go join the OpenSpace. And I was just looking at what people were talking about at the OpenSpace. And at that point in time, I had already been experimenting with a ton of stuff that just kind of different from what we had been doing 10 years earlier or even later than that. I mean, just this was new things that we were doing, whether it was continuous deployment or ideas from lean startup or ideas from the Poppendiecks and lean concepts applied to agility or just a lot of things that were just different. And none of the sessions I was seeing in the open space seemed to be talking about any of that stuff, like giving up story points or moving away from sprints until continuous flow. just nothing was being talked about. So I just said, well, I'm going to host a session, and I'll call it, I don't know, a modern Agile. And so that's as far as I got in terms of thinking about the name. I just wanted to run a session where we could talk about, there's a lot of new things we're doing that kind of display some of the older ideas. And they're very useful, I found. So the session ended up getting a lot of attention. 60, 70 people showed up there. So we had a big group. And it was well received. People were fascinated by the stuff that they weren't aware of. And so I then repeated this open space event in Berkeley. Like a month later, was Agile Open Door Cal in Berkeley was running and did it again. And again, there was tremendous interest. in this, so much so that I decided to write a blog and wrote the blog and started getting more conversations happening. And that sort of began the movement of describing this thing called Modern Agile. And it took a few twists and turns in the beginning, but it wasn't sort of, I guess, if anything, I felt like Agile needed to be a little more simple. in terms of what we were explaining, because it was starting to get very complex with frameworks, enterprise frameworks coming along like safe and just too many moving parts. And so what ended up happening is I wrote some things and people started to notice, there's kind of like four things there that are really valuable. One of them was The names changed a little bit over time. But anyway, what ended up was four principles emerged. And that really became modern Agile.

Brian (03:58)
That's awesome. just for listeners here, I've pitched attending conferences in the past. If you've listened to this podcast, you've heard me say that, and I'll create things come out of that. And here's an example, right? This is something that was open space discussion. Open space, if you're not familiar with that, at conferences, can, if there's an open space day or a couple of days, then anyone can present any topic they want. And whoever shows up is who shows up. And this one got a lot of attention. And a movement grew from this open space topic, which is awesome. So let's talk. You mentioned there's four principles here. And I like the distinction here we're making also between the frameworks and the practices versus the cultural aspects or the philosophy behind it. And returning to those roots a little bit more from what Agile originally was. So you mentioned there's kind of four areas of this. Let's walk our way through those. I know the first one, or one of the first ones here is make people awesome. So help us understand, what do you mean by make people awesome?

Joshua Kerievsky (04:59)
Probably the most controversial of principles, because you'll get people coming along saying, wait a minute, people are already awesome. What are you talking about? And it comes from my, I'm a big fan of Kathy Sierra. And her blog was incredible. And her book, she wrote a book called Badass, Making Users Awesome. And in her book, she was really wonderfully clear about

Brian (05:07)
You

Joshua Kerievsky (05:24)
that teams that build products ought to focus on the user of the products more than the product itself. In other words, she would say, don't try to create the world's best camera. Try to create the world's best photographers. Big subtle difference there. Like that is focusing so much on empowering the users, making them awesome at their work or whatever they're doing, whether it's art or accounting or whatever, whatever your product does, how can you give them something that elevates their skills, that gets them to a point of awesomeness faster? And that's what she was talking about. So I thought, what a wonderful message. And initially, I used language like make users awesome. you know, having been an entrepreneur myself and created products and sold them and You learn a heck of a lot when you make your own product. And we've made several products over the years at Industrial Logic, probably the most successful of which was our e-learning software. And that has taught me so many, so many lessons. One of them is you have to serve an ecosystem of people. You can't just make your main user awesome. What about the person who's buying the software? How do you make them awesome in terms of helping them buy something that's going to get used? If they buy your e-learning and they never use it, they've wasted a lot of money. So we've got to make sure that their reputation is intact because they made an excellent investment and it got used and it got into valuable, it created value in the company. So how do I make the buyer awesome? How do I make the person that like rolls out the licenses to people awesome? How do I make their experience awesome? How do I make my colleagues awesome so that we love what we're doing and really enjoy working together? So it kind of morphed from make users awesome to make people awesome. And it's so expanded. If anything, we set the bar higher. And all of the principles of modern agile are like unachievable. They're all kind of high bars, right? But they're the goal that we go towards. So that really is it. It's about creating

Brian (07:23)
Ha

Joshua Kerievsky (07:35)
you know, wonderful, you know, the in Great Britain, they use awesome kind of sarcastically sometimes, right? They'll say, well, that's awesome. You know, and so for them, it would be brilliant. You know, I thought of making an English version. We have many translations of modern agile, and I thought of making an English version, which would be a proper British English version, make people brilliant. But it's meant to be to empower folks to give them something. And it's so it is.

Brian (07:43)
Ha You

Joshua Kerievsky (08:04)
It does have a product focus in the sense of we're typically building a system or a product that someone's going to use and it's going to give them skills they didn't have before or abilities they didn't have before that are going to be very valuable.

Brian (08:18)
Yeah, I love that. And there's a sort of a servant nature to that servant leaders, not servant leadership as much, but servant nature of I'm serving these people and how do I, how do I serve them in a way that really empowers them? Kind of reminds me of like, you know, the, the great principle with, with dev ops of just, know, if I can, if I can empower the developers to be able to do these things on their own. And so they don't need someone else to come and check the box and do everything for them. You're making them awesome. You're empowering them to be more than they were otherwise.

Joshua Kerievsky (08:54)
Yes, yes, absolutely. I I think we've seen a history in the software field of a lot of tools coming along and helping. It's not just tools, it's also methods as well. I mean, I'm entirely grateful to the Agile software development movement because it helped nudge everything towards a far better way of working and to make us more awesome at our craft. yeah, you have to have a North Star though. If you're going to build something, You have to know, what are we going for here? What are we shooting for? And with Cathy's influence, again, it's not so much make the greatest product in the world. It's, that focus on the users, the people who are going to be using the work, using the product.

Brian (09:34)
That's really good. Let's talk about the second one then on my list here, the make safety a prerequisite. What was the point here behind this principle?

Joshua Kerievsky (09:40)
Yes. So starting probably around 2011 or so, I could not stand going to the Agile Conference anymore. It had just become too commercial and too filled with just people hocking stuff. And it just was bothering me too much. I couldn't go. So I ended up going to South by Southwest, which is an

Brian (09:54)
You

Joshua Kerievsky (10:09)
Enormous conference tens of thousands of people show up So it'd be 20,000 30,000 40,000 people showing up for these for this event, which is musical film technology just it's just wild and I came across this book by Charles Duhigg called the power of habit. He was there that year and In that book. Well, first of all that particular year was 2012 that I went my first year there it poured The rain, it was every day, it was unusual for that time, but it was just like pouring rain. So what could you do? I bought some books and I was sitting there in my room reading them. And I'm reading this book, The Power of Habit, and I come across this chapter called The Ballad of Paul O'Neill. Now who the heck's Paul O'Neill? Well, it turns out Paul O'Neill is this incredible guy, a complete business maverick. He ended up becoming the treasury secretary under Bush and not. in 2000 for a short period of time, but that's another story. And he ran Alcoa for about 13 or 14 years. And so the Ballot of Paul O'Neill is very much about what he did at Alcoa to turn the company around. And in essence, you could say he made safety a prerequisite. That safety was his guiding light in turning that company around, which meant left people empowered to do all kinds of things. So it went way beyond safety, but started there. And it's an incredible story. I've written about it in Joy of Agility. I got so into Paul O'Neill that I ended up interviewing his main lieutenant. And then I got a chance to interview him a couple of times. the man's a genius. He passed away a few years back. Absolute genius. this concept of safety started to really pull at me in the sense that I felt, first of all, extreme programming, and I'm a big practitioner of extreme programming, brings a tremendous amount of safety to software development. It may not be as explicit in saying safety, safety, safety. When you look at extreme programming, doesn't really talk about safety, but it's implicit. And these days, Kent Beck's much more vocal about, you One of his missions is to make software development safer for geeks. But safety to me is almost like I found my home. Like safety was something that, what I learned through Paul O'Neill was that it's a doorway to excellence. And he transformed a hundred year old company with safety. I would complain about companies we were working with that were 25 years old and had an embedded culture. Like, how are we gonna change this company? But safety started to be this thing that I hadn't really thought enough about, and making it explicit opened up a lot of doors, right? And I became very interested in the work of Amy Edmondson, who's extremely famous today, but back then she was not so famous. And huge fan of hers. I, you know, I can email her and she'll email me back and she wrote a nice thing about my book. So. She has done some incredible work there. And so when we talk about safety in modern agile, it's psychological safety. It's financial safety. It's any of the safeties. There are many safeties that we could talk about. And it looks at all of them, right? It's brand safety, software safety in terms of security. you know, of the software and on and on and on. So make safety prerequisite is vast and big in terms of what we're trying to do there. Making it a prerequisite means it's not an afterthought and it's not a priority that shifts with the winds. It is permanent. It is something that we know we have to have in place. And it's very, very hard to achieve. Just like make people awesome is hard to achieve. Boy, is make safety a prerequisite difficult.

Brian (13:43)
Hmm. Yeah, I love Amy Edmondson's work as well. I'm just kind of curious. does the safety kind of inclusive of things like quality as well? Do you intend that to be part of what you mean by safety?

Joshua Kerievsky (14:11)
Well, mean, to the extent that it makes it safer to do good software development. So if bugs are happening all the time, you can't make people awesome, typically if you don't have quality. If you have really poor quality, nobody's being made awesome. They're experiencing all kinds of problems with your product. So make people awesome and make safety a prerequisite are very much tied together. That is, there is no real excellence without safety. You could think you're having an excellent experience, so that all of a sudden there's a major problem, and boy, are you unhappy. So they really go hand in hand. You could have the most incredible restaurant, and then one day you've got food poisoning happening. Great, no one's come to your restaurant. So you will not make anyone awesome if you don't make safety a prerequisite, and quality is part of that.

Brian (14:57)
Awesome. Well, let's move on to the next one then, because the next category is one that just resonates with me a lot. Experiment and learn rapidly. What was kind of the thought behind this one?

Joshua Kerievsky (15:06)
Yeah, and this is one where it that's shorthand, if you will, because you can only fit so many words on a wheel there. But it's important to know that that really means experiment rapidly and learn rapidly. And that comes a lot out of it in the influences of something like Lean Startup. I'm a huge fan of that book and of Eric's work, Eric Reese's work.

Brian (15:13)
Ha

Joshua Kerievsky (15:29)
And the fact that we can experiment rapidly and learn rapidly rather than just building everything and then learning slowly. Right? How can we do cheap experiments quickly to decide what's important to work on and what isn't? Let's not build stuff nobody wants. Let's find more time with our customers and understand their needs better so we can build the right things that make them awesome. In other words, and a lot of these are interconnected. In many respects, modern Agile is a Venn diagram. ideally want all four principles to be overlapping. And right there in that middle is where you really want to be. Not easy. But experimenting, learning rapidly, yeah. So challenge yourself to find ways to do quick, cheap, useful experiments. You can do lot of unuseful experiments. Amazon experienced that. There's a story in my book about how Amazon had to start just shepherding the experiments a little more and having some better criteria. Because you could do an endless array of experiments and not get anywhere. There's a wonderful book called Experimentation Matters by a Harvard business professor. Wonderful book as well. But I love experimentation and learning. And I see it as critical to building great products. So that's that principle there.

Brian (16:46)
Yeah, there's a real difference, I think, in organizations that put value on that learning process. if you see it as a valuable thing, that we invest time to gain knowledge, then that really can truly make an impact when you go forward. I know I've talked about this in classes sometimes where people will say, isn't it a little bit selfish from the organization to try to always just figure out what's going to sell the best? or what's going to work the best in advance of putting something out. My response is always, well, yes, there is a benefit to the business, but there's a benefit to the customer as well because they would rather you work on things that they care more about.

Joshua Kerievsky (17:24)
That's right. Yeah. I mean, we once put out an experimental product to a large automotive company. And we were really excited about it. We had a whole list of features we wanted to add to it. But we were like, you know what? Let's just get this primitive version kind of in their hands just to see what happens. it turned out that we learned very rapidly that they couldn't run the software at all. There was some proxy. that was preventing communication with our servers from their environment. So it was like, excellent. We learned really quickly that instead of those fancy new features we want to add to this thing, we're going to fix the proxy problem. And to me, that's the nature of evolutionary design is that we create something, get it out there quickly, and learn from it rapidly and evolve it. So it goes hand in hand with that as well.

Brian (18:11)
That's awesome. Well, there's one category left then, and that is deliver value continuously. So what was the genesis of that? Thinking about delivering value continuously.

Joshua Kerievsky (18:19)
So that was heavily influenced by my own journey into continuous delivery and continuous deployment and that whole world. We got into that very early. I was lucky enough to catch a video by Timothy Fritz, who he worked with Eric at IMBU. And he coined the term continuous deployment. And that video is actually no longer on the

Brian (18:43)
Ha

Joshua Kerievsky (18:44)
But this was something that I became enamored of was doing continuous deployment. And we started doing it at Industrial Logic with our own e-learning software back in about 2010. And by the time you get to like 2015, it's like, hey folks, there's this thing where you can do a little bit of work and ship it immediately to production in a very safe way, a safe deployment pipeline. It's friggin' awesome. But the principle doesn't just apply to that because this modern agile is not just about software development. It's how can I work in a way that gets value in front of people as fast as possible? So for example, if I'm working on a proposal, great, I'm not going to work for two weeks and then show you something. I'm going to put something together, a skeleton, I'm going to show it to you and say, what do you think? Does this add value? Where would we improve this? Blah, blah, Again, going hand in hand with evolutionary design. continuous delivery of value is something that is a way of working. With artists that I work with, they'll do a quick sketch or two or three sketches of something first before we start settling in on which one do we like the best and how do we want to craft and refine that. So there's a way of working in which you're delivering value much more finely grained and approaching continuously instead of in bigger batches.

Brian (20:05)
Yeah. I love the connection there between artists as well, because I've got a background in music, and I'm thinking about how when you go to write a song or create a new work like that, you start off with the roughest of demo tapes, and you move from there to increasingly more sophisticated versions of it until you finally have the finished product. But no one thinks that's strange or thinks that's weird in any way. But you're right. Sometimes there's this attitude or kind of I think in some organizations of, we can't let anyone see that until it's absolutely finished, until it's done.

Joshua Kerievsky (20:39)
Yeah, yeah, and that maybe that's that there's some fear there, you know, because they don't want to be thought of as, you know, being lesser because they put something rough in front of someone. Whereas I view it as a, you know, to me, it's a sign of weakness when you when you only send something polished because you haven't had the courage or the sense of safety to put something rough where we can make better decisions together early on. So. There's a lot of learning, I think, around that. But it's a challenging principle of its own, deliver value continuously. And people would say, well, what does value mean? Value is one of those words where it's unclear, because you could improve the internal design of a software system. Is that value? It probably is. But you've got to be able to quantify it or prove that it's going to help make things more graceful in terms of flowing features out. yeah, quantifying, communicating what the value is. is important. I'm also a big fan of maximizing the amount of work not done, as it says in the manifesto. So how can we do less and deliver more sooner? Our motto in industrial logic now is better software sooner. And a lot of these principles go straight into that. that drives it.

Brian (21:38)
Yeah. That's really great. Yeah, I love these four principles and I think that they really represent a lot. There's a lot that's baked into each one of these things. And I'm sure as you kind of put this together with the community and started to talk more about it, I'm sure there were some challenges. I'm sure people came up to you and said, well, what about and how about this? Is there anything now looking back on this that you'd say, gosh, we really... really didn't quite cover this or, know, this is maybe I could fudge it and squeeze it in this area, but you know, there's this other thing that I really think would be important to kind of mention here as well.

Joshua Kerievsky (22:28)
Well, you know, it's funny, because I thought I was going to write a book. I started collecting stories. I love telling stories, and I find stories to be a great way to help educate people. Not the only way, right? But as part of some of the workshops I give, you tell a story. Hopefully it's a story that's sticky, that sticks in the person's brain. And over the years, I collected stories like that, stories of agility. I thought I'd be writing a book about modern agile when I started writing Joy of Agility. Gradually, as I wrote more and more stories, they didn't quite fit into all those four principles. And I think the lesson I learned there was that I was starting to talk about what pure Agile means, the word Agile. What does it really mean to be Agile? Whereas modern Agile is really almost in the context of product development, of building services or products for people. Whereas Agile itself is even more pure. And so the... the book itself got into the difference between quickness and hurrying, which you can relate to this. You could say experiment and learn rapidly. Well, OK, maybe we shouldn't rush it. Don't rush. Be quick, but don't hurry is one of the mantras in Joy of Agility. So adapting, right? Adapting, we talk about adapting all the time. So to be agile, you need to be able to adapt quickly. These four principles in modern agile don't say anything about adapting.

Brian (23:46)
Ha

Joshua Kerievsky (23:48)
So that's kind of implied, but it's not there. So it's a different lens on agility. If anything, I'd say the make people awesome principles are not meant to. It created some dislike, I'd say, from some people. It could have been called empower people, potentially, although a lot of people really love make people awesome. I don't know so much what I'd change there. I'd say we have a .org. So it's a modernagile.org is a website. There's a pretty large Slack community, which, know, four or 5,000 people on that. We don't certify anyone in modern agile, so there's no certifications, but it's something that is neutral in the sense that whether you practice Scrum or Kanban or Safe or whatever, these principles can influence you. And, you know, but again, this all came out of like, when I went to that open space conference in Prague, I had no idea I was going to talk about modern agile. You know, it was not like a predetermined thing. It was just like, my God, they're not talking about the modern ways we're doing stuff. So, and I always encourage people to, you know, keep pushing the limits and keep modernizing. I said to my own company the other day, our wonderful ways of working that we've been doing now for years that have evolved, they're probably antiquated as of today. You know, with generative AI, what would we do differently? Let's have a perspective on our own work as it needs to be modernized constantly. So the term modern in modern agile means always be modernizing, always be looking. Okay, I've had people say, well, Josh, some things don't need to be modernized. There's things that are just evergreen. They're classic. I'm like, absolutely. I'm not changing evolutionary design anytime soon. I find it to be quite useful in so many contexts. So yes, there's the evergreen stuff. And then there's the stuff where you can, indeed, discover a better way. The manifesto itself says, we are discovering better ways of working. Great. Keep that going. Keep modernizing and looking for easier, simpler, quick, easy grace. as the dictionary definition of Agile says, how can we work with quick, easy grace? That's always going to be improving, hopefully.

Brian (26:12)
Love that, yeah. And you're right, I mean, think there's some, to some people I think that there's, I guess at times an attitude of, you this is all new stuff or this is a brand new concept and something they don't really see the connection backwards in time to how these things are all built on other ideas that have been progressive over the years. So the idea of, yeah, this is, you know, we're, we're not saying that certain ideas are bad because now we're trying to modernize them. We're just saying we're trying to apply that same principle forward into kind of the context of today, which I don't see anyone should have a problem with that.

Joshua Kerievsky (26:48)
That's right. That's right. Well, and if you are experimenting and learning rapidly with your own process, which I highly encourage, chances are the way you work today will be different than it was yesterday. You will be exploring, like we use discovery trees today. We didn't use them before. Years ago, no one knew what a story map was. There wasn't such a thing as a story map. Now we have story maps. There's constant improvement happening. And you've got to be open-minded and willing to try new things and drop old stuff. We thought sprints and iterations and extreme programming was absolutely fundamentally part of the way to work. Then we started experimenting with dropping them and turned out, wow, this is pretty cool. We like this. It works pretty darn well for our purposes. That came through experimentation. some of our experiments were terrible, just terrible. It's not an experiment if you already know the outcome. keep pushing the limits of what can make you happier and more joyful at work in terms of producing great stuff.

Brian (27:46)
Awesome. That's great stuff. Well, I can't thank you enough for coming on, Joshua. This is great stuff. just, you know, we'll put all the links to the books mentioned and everything else in our show notes for everybody. But as Joshua said, you can go to modernagile.org and find out more about this if you'd like to. You'll find information there about Joshua himself or his company again is Industrial Logic, Inc. And, you know, his book again, just to mention that, Joy of Agility. We were talking how some people get that title a little mixed up or whatever, but it's just the three words, joy of agility. So just look out for that book. I think you'll find it a rich resource for you. Joshua, thanks so much for coming on.

Joshua Kerievsky (28:25)
Thank you, Brian. Thanks to you. Thanks to Mountain Goat and the folks there. And I really appreciate chatting with you. It was really wonderful.

Ready to spark real change in your organization? In this episode, Brian Milner sits down with April K. Mills, founder of Engine for Change, to reveal how anyone can become a powerful change agent—without waiting for permission. Learn how to drive meaningful change, navigate resistance, and reignite Agile practices with strategies that actually work.

Overview

In this inspiring episode of the Agile Mentors Podcast, Brian Milner talks with April K. Mills, CEO of Engine for Change and author of Everyone is a Change Agent, about what it truly means to lead change.

April explains how effective change agents focus on clearing obstacles rather than forcing compliance, and why fostering curiosity, empowerment, and collaboration is key to sustainable change.

From navigating corporate roadblocks to revitalizing Agile practices, April shares actionable insights and tactics to help you take control and make a lasting impact—whether you're in a small startup or a global enterprise.

References and resources mentioned in the show:

April K. Mills
Everyone is a Change Agent: A Guide to the Change Agent Essentials by April K. Mills
Change Tactics: 50 Ways Change Agents Boldly Escape the Status Quo by April K. Mills
Certified ScrumMaster® Training and Scrum Certification
Mountain Goat Software Certified Scrum and Agile Training Schedule
Subscribe to the Agile Mentors Podcast

Want to get involved?

This show is designed for you, and we’d love your input.

• Enjoyed what you heard today? Please leave a rating and a review. It really helps, and we read every single one.
• Got an Agile subject you’d like us to discuss or a question that needs an answer? Share your thoughts with us at [email protected]

This episode’s presenters are:

Brian Milner is SVP of coaching and training at Mountain Goat Software. He's passionate about making a difference in people's day-to-day work, influenced by his own experience of transitioning to Scrum and seeing improvements in work/life balance, honesty, respect, and the quality of work.

April K. Mills is an engineer-turned-change-evangelist and author of Everyone is a Change Agent and Change Tactics, empowers individuals and organizations to thrive through change using her proven Change Agent Essentials. With a passion for turning ideas into action, April helps people drive meaningful change with the time, title, and budget they already have.

Auto-generated Transcript:

Brian (00:00)
Welcome in Agile Mentors. We're back for another episode of the Agile Mentors Podcast. I'm with you as always, Brian Milner. And today I have April K. Mills with us. Welcome in April.

April K. Mills (00:11)
Thanks for having me.

Brian (00:13)
Very happy to have April with us. April is the founder and CEO of an organization called Engine for Change. That's engine-for-change.com. That's her website. She's also an author. There's a book that she put out called, Everyone is a Change Agent, a Guide to the Change Agent Essentials. And that's what we wanted to have her on to talk about today with a little bit about being a change agent. Now I shouldn't say from the outset, April is a request. We had a listener request for April to come on. And I always love that. I always try to push those people to the top of our list and get them on as soon as possible. And it was such an interesting topic. I thought this would be just a really great way to have a great topic to have early in 2025. So April, let's start with just trying to understand when we say change agent, how do you define that? What do you mean by change agent?

April K. Mills (01:09)
Yeah, a change agent is someone who takes action to bring about the change they want to see in the world. So rather than waiting for a boss or a corporate program or somebody from HR to come in and say, hey, let's improve this process, the change agent sees the need for a change and takes action. And the big thing I talk about in my books and my work is the difference between what typically happens when somebody sees a need for a change in an organization where they decide, I'm gonna go get a boss to go make everybody do my idea. I call that driving people. And I draw the contrast with that and driving change where you choose the change for yourself and you clear the obstacles for others to choose it too. And I love talking about that with Agile audiences especially because Agile is a change agent movement. of folks who want to drive change. I see a better way to create this product and I want to be part of it. And that's always what's drawn me into the agile space.

Brian (02:13)
Yeah, that's awesome. Yeah. And it is a big change, right? To think about the dynamics of someone kind of sitting back and saying, yeah, I see something that needs to be done. I see something that should be a different way, but you know, who am I to say anything about this? Who am I to do anything about versus the person who actually takes action and does things. So that kind of leads to a question about change agents. What kind of skills or traits do you think are really helpful or beneficial to someone to be a better change agent.

April K. Mills (02:46)
Well, the key is that difference between driving people and driving change. It's not what degree do you have, it's not how long have you been in the industry, it's not are you a people person, are you more focused on the data or some of those factors that we usually like to talk about. It really is, are you willing to take the step yourself first and clear those obstacles and encourage and invite people to join you? Or do you want somebody to make them obey you? And that choice is really the key for anybody to be a change agent. Because so many times we've seen people who might be able to convince the boss, hey, our team should be agile. And what happens, right? It goes on for about three months. The team gets frustrated. The boss gets angry. And then everybody starts to have a reaction when you bring it up, right? I'm sure plenty of the listeners have gone into an organization. If you're passionate about agile and you go, hey, have you guys heard about agile? And they go, ooh. And they make like a face. That's because they've encountered somebody who is driving people. And so that's the big focus I always try and talk with people about is can you show up with that willingness to let people join you and understand what their obstacles are to doing it.

Brian (03:57)
What are some kind of warning signs or signals you'd look for to kind of recognize whether I'm actually approaching this from a driving people perspective versus driving the change?

April K. Mills (04:08)
So a lot of times the key is how are you thinking about or talking about in your own head about the people around you or even yourself? We have a tendency to drive ourselves as well. So you can hear it in the language, right? I'm frustrated because so-and-so won't listen. I wish I could get more attention. It's all this sort of vague or... putting the action onto someone else and then complain the action isn't happening fast enough. You can hear it in the language. And so when someone's driving change, you don't hear that. hear, you know, I'm working on, I'm doing, the next thing is my action is I'm going to go talk with this person. I want to understand. I'm going to be curious. And you get this agency, this power coming back into your body almost, and then taking taking the next step from there. And so it's almost easy. You can almost say, well, how far outside your body would you put the power to make this change happen is a useful question to ask people. And if they say, well, it's in the CEO of the company, it's in the industry, it's in my tech lead, but it's certainly not me, well, then you're not a change agent.

Brian (05:20)
So that brings up a good point because I think I can try to channel what the listeners might be thinking here. I know that in times I've been in organizations where, yeah, you have the ideal, you have the thing that you think is the best thing to do. But because the power dynamics in the organization, you don't really have the power to make that change and you depend a little bit on others that have the power to to help affect it. And so there is a sort of an aspect of, I don't really have the capability or the power to cause this change to happen. How can I still stay with that mindset of driving change versus driving people when I know I need someone else's help?

April K. Mills (06:03)
Right. So that's a great conversation. And I've started to call it phase one Agile versus phase two Agile. I'm old enough in this space where when I first joined, a lot of Agile was team-based. Somebody on the team or several people on the team said, yeah, I want better. And these are the things that we can do as a team to deliver better. And let's do them together. And then the problem was the teams could do it, but they couldn't scale it. And they were like, if only we could get the senior leaders to pay attention to us, that would solve all our problems. And then you get phase two agile, which was executives buying agile implementations and forcing it down on people. There is one right way and we will do exactly this and you must conform and no other versions are allowed. And then we got the fractures and all of the fights about all of the different aspects. And so we tried it both ways, right? We tried it with the team effort and then we tried it with this thou shalt effort. And I think the key to actually making Agile work across organizations and deeper into organizations is to keep that energy from the team-based Agile to say, we're choosing something better, but it's that piece of driving change. What are the obstacles for others to choose it to? We didn't do that step. We went from my team does it, now the boss should make everybody else do what my team does. And I think that's where we got off track. in really scaling Agile into something that was sustainable and brought that joy and commitment and everyday wanting to show up and be better across the organization. So that's what I would encourage folks to do is not try to cheat that step of getting your fellow teams and larger systems to join you by finding somebody with the power to make them be like you.

Brian (07:50)
That's fascinating. I know that in some of these changes I've been involved with as well, there can be things that happen that kind of find yourself stalled a little bit, right? The initiative or the changes you're trying to affect just doesn't feel like it's going where it needs to go. What advice do you have for people who feel like they're in that place where they feel like they're kind of stalled out? in the change.

April K. Mills (08:16)
Yeah, so a lot of the things I talk about in that book you mentioned everyone is a change agent are different tactics you can use to overcome that. One of the key things that I talk about is what I call a change buffer, which is how can you make the rules where you're at different than those rules across the organization? I mean, let's take a simple example. Let's say there's five software teams in a business. Very simple example, right? And one is doing some practices and they'd love for those practices to spread. but they're not spreading as fast as they would hope. One of the ways to protect your change is to say, on our team, we will behave this way, declare it, make it what I call a policy buffer. So when one of those other four teams says, well, why are you doing it that way? You can point to the piece of paper and say, we've agreed to behave this way. Now, if you'd love to join us, we'd love to share that with you, but this team behaves this way. So then it's not every developer having to defend in effect the practices, which can get exhausting. But then you can start to ask them, what's your policy on your team? How do you do this? And get curious. Not in a, I'm trying to lure them in and trap them into my way of behaving, but in a, really want to understand, do they have a different measure that they're being exposed to? How can we help maybe get that measure off of them? Do they have a boss who's got a different standard for what quality looks like? Well, should we have a corporate conversation around, quality across the five teams should be the same. We don't tend to have those because we want to skip the step of coming into that alignment together and just have a policy somehow drop from the stars that aligns with my values. yeah, policy buffers are really big to protect a change and help it spread and have those curious conversations at the edges. Think of it like system integration, right? You can't just dictate, you have to understand and merge.

Brian (10:11)
Let's say we put in place a policy buffer like that on our team and our whole team agrees to doing something and we think this is the right way of doing things. And someone higher in the organization, some manager or leader finds out about this and says, no, I don't want that to happen. We've been trying to affect the change, right? And not push the individual. But now we do have the individual who's saying, you shall not do this. How do you overcome that when you're the change engine?

April K. Mills (10:38)
Yeah, so a lot of times you have to understand what are the assumptions that that leader is making and again get curious, right? Because if we focus not on the method but on the outcome, we should be able to get alignment faster. So rather than going into a boss and saying, method A is my choice, method B is yours, you know, it's a cage match, two will enter, one will leave. You instead want to show up and say, Well, I think we both agree we want to deliver quality products on time that customers love at the lowest possible production costs. Are we aligned on that or not? And if they say yes, then you say, okay, now let's just understand what are you asking for? And from my perspective as a person who has to implement that, here's how I think that impacts our ability to deliver quality products that customers love at the lowest possible production costs. And these methods that I'm using are doing this and here's my data or evidence. And so you in effect want to shift it where it's not me looking at you, but as people are probably going to see on this podcast, it's us next to each other. So if we instead frame it as me and the leader looking at the issue together, because we want to win together, we're not in competition. So again, it's about seeking to understand, removing those obstacles so that we can be aligned together to go there together.

Brian (11:57)
I love the idea of backtracking a little bit and finding that common ground and going from that space. I think that's a great approach. I know I've had success with that in my career too, of being able to find, well, we agree on this, right? And if we agree on this, now we're just talking about the best way of getting from where we are to there. And then it's less personal, then it's less about the person, it's more about the best strategy. And we're a little bit less... personally invested that we think it's a you know a personal affront or challenge if it's if it's more about the idea So I agree. I think that's a that's a great kind of approach to doing that How about the differences in just the the context of this if I'm a change I know you know I've been in some small organizations. I've been in some medium large-sized organizations and You know I think anyone who's been in large organizations would say Well, yeah, that's nice and easy when it's in a startup, right? If I'm in a startup, then yeah, everyone's wearing a lot of different hats and it's really easy to make change, but you know, the institutional kind of inertia that can take place in larger organizations, how do you overcome that as a change agent?

April K. Mills (13:00)
Yeah, well, I can speak to that from deep experience because my background started as a civilian nuclear engineer for the US Navy in a hundred year old shipyard. And I started six weeks before September 11th. So I came into a nuclear shipyard, a hundred years old, very staid in the way they did things, optimized for the shipyard and the world changed.

Brian (13:03)
Ha ha ha ha.

April K. Mills (13:25)
And I watched as that organization struggled to deal with the rate of change that was being imposed upon them. And a lot of the things that I talk about in everyone is a change agent came out of that experience of understanding what tactics worked, what didn't, what philosophy worked, what didn't to be able to empower people to make changes happen. And we made amazing changes happen in the shipyard. And then I went on and did 10 years with Intel Corporation, right? The chip maker and taught these things globally and saw people do amazing things within the company. Now it's true, if you don't get the main rudder of the company, you're not gonna steer it. But there's a lot of change you can make in an organization from where you're at. And I think that's the powerful, powerful thing. And so these tactics work at scale. They work for an individual, right? If you stop talking to yourself like, you know what you need to do? You have to do this or so and so is gonna get mad at you and you instead say, What's our obstacle for getting up early and going to the gym? And how can I clear that? And how can I choose to do that every day all the way up to a team, all the way up to an organization? I've seen these things work all the way through that scale. So I've used it in community projects to deliver an accessible playground in three and a half years when everybody said it would take five or 10. And these tactics have also been proven, although they weren't listed this way, in historical successes. If you think about when Admiral Rickover founded the nuclear Navy back in 1950, they went from approval to use nuclear power to USS Nautilus underway in five years. We can't deliver anything in five years anymore because we constantly are looking for who's going to make people, how are we going to force them? Can we keep them forced to do it? And with employee turnover, with system turnover, with the rate of change, I would argue this era of driving people has to end because it wasn't ever really effective, but it's getting less and less effective. And that's the name of my second book, which is Change Tactics, which is both you should change tactics and here are some change tactics to help people accelerate their results.

Brian (15:36)
That's awesome. Yeah, I mean, it gets really deep really quickly here too, because you start to think about even the way we manage our projects and the fact that a lot of more traditional project management is sort of, when we talk about this change agent approach, is sort of managing the people and trying to push and drive the people towards deadlines, some, not even an outcome, but a timeline. versus trying to affect the outcomes that we're trying to achieve as an end result instead. So it really is interconnected, isn't it, through even the way we set up our projects?

April K. Mills (16:13)
Yes, it totally is. And I have that in the book and in the classes I teach is where is the force? So I'm an engineer by training, right? So I'm constantly looking and thinking about where's the force in the system if it was a pump or a reactor plant or whatever. And you can see it to your point with the program management is your, are you spending most of your time trying to push people to do something? Or are you moving the form, fit and function of whatever the product is? If that's delivering code and integrating code, if that's a physical product, are you clearing the obstacle so that product moves forward faster? And you hear this and see this in stories of what's going on at SpaceX, right? When they're confronting something about, can't get a part for six months or I can't get a part for a year and it's gonna cost me $50,000, they're saying. Isn't it just sheet metal? How could we make that in two weeks with what we've got? Because they're not talking about you should be able to shrink that timeline. What are you doing? Why aren't you talking to the vendor enough? aren't you pushing on the vendor hard enough? They're saying, what is the physical thing we need and how fast can we get it? And it's allowing them to shrink product costs. It's allowing them to shrink durations. It's what Rickover did in the 50s. It's what Andy Grove did with Intel back when it was Intel delivers in the 80s and 90s. Focus on the product, focus on the physics, focus on the engineering, the mechanics to support the engineering, the operations to support the mechanics, and you'll deliver products faster. And at the heart of all of that is change agents because they're not trying to get somebody to obey. They want to get something amazing done.

Brian (17:50)
One of the things I found kind of in when I've worked with organizations and talked with organizations about kind of moving from point A to point B is the fact that you kind of need help. kind of need, know, a lot of times people will try to make these changes all on their own and they sort of take the weight of the world on their shoulders. I can't figure out why it's not working. How do you kind of co-opt others into your strategy?

April K. Mills (18:14)
Yeah, well, the best way is to share with them what you've learned about being a change agent. I've had countless folks who, know, one person will read my book or come to a class and they'll go back and try it and people will get curious because you show up differently. So a simple example that I give in the book is rather than sending a mandatory meeting, which we're all guilty of, right, we get an assignment. and we go into the global outlook calendar and we pick people and we make them mandatory and we order them to come to our meeting. We say, Brian gave me this assignment. You have to come. Brian said this is really important. Come to my meeting or else. And we do that. That's the default. And I encourage folks from a driving change perspective to instead, maybe Brian, you gave me that assignment, but my meeting notice would say, I've been asked by Brian to lead this. I'm excited to do that. Here's why I've chosen this as the thing I'm going to focus on. I've marked you all optional. I think you have the skills and capabilities that would be amazing on this team. And if you're as passionate as I am, I'd love you to partner with me. We're going to start meeting on Tuesday. If you're not the right one, feel free to tell me. But I'm moving forward on Tuesday with whoever's there. And I'm really grateful that I get to work in an organization with you. Now. Who's gonna come to, which meeting are you gonna come to? The April says Brian's gonna be mad at you if you don't, or the one where April's gonna go off and do something amazing, I don't wanna miss out. And anybody can do that because everybody send in meeting notices out to people. So the simplest actions have the most powerful results.

Brian (19:31)
Ha It really is a cultural change too, right? mean, that's a very different cultural kind of approach to it to say, hey, it's optional, but, you know, get on board with this idea. If this is something that you're excited about, I want you to be a part of this versus, hey, you've got to, that's your job. you know, I've been given the authority to, to demand that you be here and, and, and, you know, really want. So, so how do you. You know culture changes is obviously one of the hardest things to do in an organization. How do you start to if you're a change agent? How do you start to? Change the culture in the organization to be more in line with that

April K. Mills (20:25)
So my focus is always on the culture starts with one. So people will treat you the way you show up. And so show up as a change agent and the world will bend around you in reaction to it. Now I do have a chapter in the book where I talk about my son who's got special needs and he took a long time for him to walk. He had to walk with forearm crutches. And the first time we were really out in public, he was walking with his forearm crutches. And you could tell that people were really confused and concerned, right? It's different. He's a small child. He looks very fragile. And you had all these reactions from people about, well, you know, where's his mother? Cause I was watching him from a little ways away. I always joke, no one ever asked where's his father if a child is wandering off. But you know, they're watching him and you could tell there were people that wanted to either pick him up and do it for him. Take him someplace because he looks so fragile, let me help you. Or they were mad that he was off on his own and I wasn't hovering. And I use that story for the same thing here. Because when you go off and you say, let's make this optional, I'm passionate about it, I'm committed, and even if I'm alone in this room, I'm going to move this forward, people are going to look at you funny. Like my son with his forearm crutches because they're used to somebody walking off strong, demanding, creating space. But it doesn't mean that that's necessarily the best way to do it. And so you have to be comfortable being different. And I use the concept of change buffers to help people with that. A personal buffer might be like Richard Feynman, the noted physicist. I don't care what other people think. I'm going to be me, their concerns to the wind. A friendship buffer. I'm going to go off and do this. when somebody goes, April's crazy. I call my friend Brian and you go, you're not crazy. You're doing the right thing. Keep it up. Let's go for coffee, let's go for the beer, whatever. A leadership buffer, maybe you're my boss and you believe in this, you've seen it. I go off and do it, people give me a hard time. I go, hey, take it up with Brian, my boss. We do things this way in his group. Or back to that policy buffer. In my group, we drive change, not people. So when somebody shows up differently, folks go, you know, why are you doing that? it's just the way we work. And that's what I've built in organizations over the years. The people that were in The groups with me that were doing this, depending on how comfortable and how strong they felt, could either say, I'm different, live with it. Or they could say, we're different. Or the policy is different. Whatever they needed to feel strong enough to show up differently. Because when you show up differently, you get amazing results.

Brian (22:58)
Yeah. That's so, that's so awesome. I completely agree. What if people are listening to this and hearing all this and getting excited about it and thinking, yeah, this is, this sounds like something I want to participate in. is, it sounds like something I want to start to do. if someone feels inspired by this conversation and wants to be, become more of a change agent, uh, but they really just don't know where to start. What are some practical things that you would give them to say, here's, here's a good way to start to, to move down this path.

April K. Mills (23:27)
Yeah, well, the simplest one is that's why you write books, right? So my book is available. I self-published it on purpose to make it very affordable. So it's, think, $9.99. Everyone is a change agent. It's $14.99 for change tactics because I accidentally wrote a longer book than I intended. sorry. When I got the first copy, I'm like, oh, that's more than I thought it was. OK. But so both of those. So for, you know, the price of a meal.

Brian (23:44)
You

April K. Mills (23:54)
for one person these days with inflation, right? You can get two books that help you not only have the basis, but have some just simple tactics, almost like a recipe book you can use. And then later this spring, I'm rolling out with my Engine for Change Company, this Change Agent Essentials class, which is based on that content. I've been teaching it now for 10 years in corporations. As we were talking before we started, right, I'm a recovering hider in corporations, I guess. Now I'm coming out into the world. And so it's going to be available for folks if they want to take the class to get that more immersive experience. So I'm really excited to bring it to the world because it works. And I'm especially passionate about agile people using it because there's too much conversation around agile dying and we need better products delivered faster that customers love at the lowest possible costs. And I don't know a better way to get there. So we got to reclaim agile from the driving people.

Brian (24:47)
Yeah, I completely agree. you know, anyone who's been involved in Agile in any significant, you know, way I'm sure would probably agree that it's not that the core concepts in any way are, are less, valid or, or, or no longer practical or anything like that. It's just people have seen so much bad versions of things that now that that definition has been marred a little bit, I would say. And so now we, we, we have to kind of take Like you said, take back control of that a little bit and say, now here's what it really is, and here's why we do things this way. And I like your approach there. Find the common ground and say, here's, you know, we both believe in this. Well, what's the best way of doing that? You know, here's what we think.

April K. Mills (25:28)
Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. And I think it's going to be a really exciting time as we go into 2025. There's so much change happening, but so much of it is at that default of driving people. So there's a huge opportunity to show up differently, to create a ripple. That one person can create that ripple. You three people can support each other while they try these new things. By the time you get to five, you almost have critical mass, right? At least two of you will always be online at any one time to support each other. And you can grow it from there. And I've seen great, great things happen. And it really is an unleashing of energy. If people can remember the first feeling they had when they found Agile and it was like, yeah, that feels more like what a professional does. And that excitement and that energy, you can get back to that and you can get back to that by driving change.

Brian (26:24)
Love it, love it, this is awesome. Well, this has been a great conversation. I really appreciate you coming on. We're gonna put links to everything in our show notes for everyone so you can get to April's company and find out more about her classes and also find out more about her books there as well. So April, thank you so much for coming on.

April K. Mills (26:40)
Thanks for having me. It was an honor to be recommended.

Brian (26:43)
Well, and our honor to have you on as well. So thank you for our listeners and recommending people and thank you April for making the time for us.