Agile Mentors Podcast

What does soccer, soda, and software have in common? According to Jim York—everything. In this episode, he and Brian Milner break down what great teamwork really means, why shared goals matter more than job titles, and how understanding your team’s unique contribution can unlock better flow and results. Overview In this episode of the Agile Mentors Podcast, Brian Milner sits down with veteran Agile coach and trainer Jim York for a deep dive into what makes real teamwork tick. They unpack what separates a group of coworkers from a high-functioning team, explore the role of shared goals in driving motivation, and walk through value stream thinking using vivid analogies from sports and soda cans alike. Whether you're part of a Scrum team or leading cross-functional initiatives, this episode will help you think differently about collaboration, flow, and how teams can work better together. References and resources mentioned in the show: Jim York Jim's Blog Jim's Video Library Lean Thinking: Banish Waste and Create Wealth in Your Corporation by James Womack & Daniel Jones Liftoff Vision: Launching Agile Teams and Projects by Diana Larsen & Ainsley Nies GoatBot 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 podcast@mountaingoatsoftware.com 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. Jim York is a business owner helping teams discover how to delight their customers. He uses systems thinking, agile and lean to co-create resilient, learning teams. As a coach, he works with his clients to help them grow in directions that matter to them to achieve their goals. Jim is a Certified Agile Coach®️, holding both the Certified Enterprise Coach and Certified Team Coach credentials; Certified Scrum Trainer®️; Agile Fluency®️ facilitator; LeSS Practitioner. In 2007, Jim co-foundered FoxHedge Ltd with his wife, Melissa York. 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 with you as always, Brian Milner. And today I have the very distinguished gentleman, Mr. Jim York with us. Welcome in, Jim. Jim York (00:12) Well, thank you, Brian. Glad to be here. Brian Milner (00:15) Very excited to have Jim with us. We were just chatting before and Jim and I met years ago at a conference. We got introduced by a mutual friend, Mr. Kurt Peterson, who has been on the show. He came on a little bit earlier to talk about Kanban. And just for those people who aren't familiar with Jim, Jim is a co-founder of a company called Fox Hedge. And he has been an Agile coach, a Scrum trainer for quite a while now and I give him the title Luminary, kind of scrum luminary, thought leader, been around doing this for a while. I hope that doesn't sound insulting in any way, Jim, to call you that. Jim York (00:55) Nope, nope, just trying to shine my light and help others shine theirs. So that's what a coach does. So. Brian Milner (01:00) Awesome, Cool, well, we wanted to have Jim on because we had this topic that it's kind of a broad topic, but it's, I think, actually crucial to today's world. And that's just the broad topic of teamwork itself. So I'll start this way, Jim. I want to get your opinion. In today's world, with the changing kind of landscape with AI and everything else that we see that's kind of influencing how we work, has teamwork had its day? Is it time now for something new or is teamwork still the best way to build things? Jim York (01:34) Yeah, well, teams are universal. I think once you get more than one single individual and you get some task that requires more than what one person can do, it's inevitable. We've to work together. And so I don't see that going away. It might change a bit. But in many ways, think the things that we face today are, in many ways, things that we faced before. They might be showing up in a different way, but I think there's some universality. universality to teamwork. Brian Milner (02:03) Yeah, I agree. And so what do we mean by teamwork? Why don't we define that a little bit for everyone? Jim York (02:09) Yeah, I guess we have to step back and start looking at what's a team. If we talk about teamwork, there's this whole expression, teamwork makes the teamwork. So what's a team? And the classic definition of a team is it's a group of individuals working on a shared goal. And so it's kind of like built into the definition, we're working on a shared goal. So teamwork is that combined action. Brian Milner (02:13) Yeah. Yeah. Jim York (02:32) And so that's kind of the general concept. It's, you know, some of the parts, you know, is greater than the whole. And so it's taking that mix of experiences, knowledge, skills, and bringing them together and having that dynamic, that energy, and kind of focusing it in the same direction. You know, that's really what teamwork is about. Brian Milner (02:55) Yeah, it's good to clarify it, because I think the word team gets quite widely used in today's world. you'll hear people describe that, hey, that's my sales team. When you look at it and how they actually work together, there's not really a lot of teaming actually happening. It's just a group of individuals who have the same job and that. that format. I do think you're right. It's important to understand the difference between that kind of a team and what we're talking about here as a team. Jim York (03:25) Yeah, there are different kinds of teams and people in a sales team, even if they're not working with each other, the fact that they have a shared goal does create some sense of team. And there's different teamwork where everybody's providing kind of their unique thing. And then you have, I think like a team in a rowing, when you have like four people in a rowboat. they might have somebody who's steering the boat, you know, but they have the four people holding onto the oars and, you know, they're working at a similar cadence. You can say to a certain degree they're individuals. I don't know if they're fungible. I don't think they're necessarily fungible, but they're working together to accomplish that shared goal. know, the people in rowing, that's different from people on like a soccer team. You know, on a soccer team, you're... You got the whole pitch, you know, you're all over the place and the ball's moving around and there's this kind of coming together and going apart of various team members interacting at different places and at different times throughout the game. You're kind of acting dynamically to where the ball is and where the opponents are and where they are on the field. And so there's this creativity that occurs there that's kind of a different kind of creativity than you might see in a rowing type of competition. Brian Milner (04:18) Yeah. Jim York (04:42) But yeah, I think there are different kinds of teams, but I think that universal theme of being a group of individuals that are having that shared goal, I think that's the thing that's in common. It's not the nature of the work that some people might call agile versus predictive or planned work. mean, the concept of a team is more universal thing. Brian Milner (04:43) Yeah. Yeah. I like the example of kind of the crew, right? Of rowing and stuff. I think that's a good picture because you're right. I mean, it's very subtle, but there's a lot of combined movement. And if one person is off a little bit, it really affects how others are working. I've used the example sometimes in my classes as a contrast to think about like a golf team. You know, like the idea that you have the group of people who, again, I say this in classes. So anyone listening to this who's a golf expert, it really loves golf. Please, email in and tell me if I'm wrong about this. But this is what I say in my classes. You know, if you're on a golf team, it's a group of individuals who are each shooting their own 18 holes. But then at the end of the round, you just total up the score. And if you have the lowest lower score than another team, then you win, right? But it's, When I'm shooting my 18 holes, I'm not necessarily aware of what everyone else on my team has done or what they're doing at the same time. We don't play off each other, right? I don't take the first shot and then they take the second shot. It's all on me to do my best. And then hopefully everyone else has done their best and we just kind of see how it works out at the very last second. Yeah. Jim York (06:17) Yeah, so teams are different. know, teams are definitely different. And I think it's that idea of the shared goal that is the thing that kind of the glue that holds the team together and that shared goal that can be at various levels. I mean, it can be at this grand big picture level. You know, sometimes what's referred to as a product vision, it can be at a more discrete team level. Sometimes that's referred to as, you know, our our unique contribution to the product division. So that would be like our team mission. And then there's maybe, you know, a specific task. And so, you know, we might be working on a specific, very small, discrete task. And, you know, there's a potentially a group of people working on that thing. And, and, and those people have that shared goal of moving that task, you know, through a process to a completion state. And so there's, there's some variability here in the different kind of levels and Hopefully, there's some alignment between those different levels when you're talking about a team. Brian Milner (07:14) All right, so there's some different kinds of teams and it kind of is wide ranging in how we would describe it. There's different configurations, but we have a single purpose. We're working together towards a single purpose. That's kind of our unifying factor there. So then what makes teams work? What's the glue other than our purpose? How do we actually... Combine efforts, how do we play off each other's strengths? How does that happen? Jim York (07:47) Yeah, well, it depends, right? I mean, that's the classic consultant's answer. It depends. How do we play off of each other? If you're in an environment where you've got a known solution to a known problem and you're just executing steps in a plan, those dynamics are pretty well understood. People in that process can be trained to do different types of activities. They can gain experience in that. Brian Milner (07:50) Yeah. Jim York (08:08) That's a fairly predictable kind of process, but then there are others where it's emergent. And so we have to kind of figure it out on the fly as we go. And even those environments where it seems that we've got a pre-existing solution, there is a very clear variable there, and that's people. People show up different every day. I might have had a poor night's sleep, and people might think, well, Jim's normally fairly easy to work with, but wow, today he's... got a short temper or whatever it might be. And so we have to of figure out on the fly how we adapt to those variables. anything that has to do with people, you're going to have some variability. think stepping back, Brian, I think one of the things that is important to kind of understand or get a sense of what part of the system that we want to understand when we're talking about a team and they are dynamics, they actually are fitting within some sort of product ecosystem. And so where are the boundaries of what we mean by our shared purpose, our shared vision within that ecosystem? There's a classic book called Lean Thinking by James and Womack. And there's a really interesting example, simple diagram in the book of a value stream. And it's a value stream of a cola can. And it's kind of fascinating. You kind of see this very simple value stream in there and it starts with aluminum being, well, not the aluminum, but the bauxite actually being mined. And it goes through a reduction mill and then to a smelter. And then it goes through some hot rolling and cold rolling process. And so finally you get basically rolls of sheet aluminum that go to a can maker and the can maker is cutting the cans that are then formed into the cola can. You know, and that can maker is actually the middle of the value stream because all the things I've described so far are upstream. Downstream of the can maker, once they've made the cans, the cans go to a can warehouse somewhere and they sit there until a bottler says, hey, we need some cans because somebody's ordered some cola. And so, you know, the cans make their journey to the bottler and they get filled and then they get... Brian Milner (10:01) Hmm. Jim York (10:17) go to a bottling warehouse and of course there's transportation, there's trucks carrying these empty cans from the can maker to the bottler and then the filled cans from the bottler to the bottler warehouse and then ultimately they go to some wholesale operation and then to a retail store and then you and I perhaps will go into the store and buy a six pack of cola and we go home and we drink the cola. And so you see this very simple kind of journey, this little value stream. from the perspective of the can maker. And so, first time I encountered that value stream, I'm sitting there looking at the can maker and I'm asking myself the classic question that I ask my clients. One of the first questions I ask is, who's your customer? And so for the can maker, it can be very easy to look at that and go, well, it's the bottler because the bottler is the one who places the orders for the cans. So clearly the customer for the can maker is the bottler. Of course from a lean perspective we look further down the stream We were looking at the end of the stream to see you know, what's what's it all for? What's it all for? And if you look at the diagram you get to you know finally to the end of the stream and there's the home where the person's potentially sitting on their couch and enjoying you know that that cola and so you know if you think about all the different steps along the value stream from the mining to the to the smelting to the bottler and Brian Milner (11:17) Ha Yeah. Jim York (11:38) the can maker themselves, the retail store that's selling the cola. The thing that you would ask them that would be the glue that would hold them together for this would be what Diana Larsson and Ainsley Nees call in their lift off book, the product vision. And so the product vision is really kind of what's it all for? And the cool thing about a product vision is it's very concise, it's very succinct and everybody can hold it in their heads very easily because of that. It's typically one sentence. And so I'm going to speculate this because I'm not a, I'm not part of this value stream where Cola makes its journey to people in their homes. But I'm guessing the product vision for all of these various people along the value stream boils down to something along the lines of our customers enjoy a convenient, refreshing beverage. And so the cool thing about that simple statement is that Brian Milner (12:23) Mm-hmm. Jim York (12:28) If you were to go to the mine and ask a miner and say, some of this bauxite that you're mining, in the context of this soda, what's it all for? Now, they're probably mining bauxite for a variety of different customers and a variety of different products. But in the context of this particular value stream, they could look down to the end of the stream and say, it's all about that person sitting on their couch at the end of a long day who simply wants to have a convenient, refreshing beverage. And so that's what you know, this particular product vision is. And so that kind of calls into view a couple of things. One is context is important. So when we're talking about the product, we have to be very specific about what it is that we mean, who is that customer at the end of the stream, and what is the experience that we want them to have. And so this product vision is, as I said, very simple. our customers experience a convenient, refreshing beverage. Now, that makes it simple in terms of this particular value stream, but it also makes us aware that it's very complex for the miners because they've got to deal with competing interests from a whole lot of different customers. And so if they've got limited capacity, they may be trying to figure out, which customer do we satisfy? And so the usefulness of the product vision is being able to go to that mining company and say, do you find value in, do you want to support this activity of creating this experience for this customer with convenient refreshing beverage? And if they buy into that, if they agree with that, that's your leverage, that's your argument. why you should deliver against this value stream versus some other value stream. Now, you don't always win that argument, which is really what life is about, is we're always dealing with trade-offs and we're dealing with different options or opportunities. And so I think that's one aspect of this. But when we talk about the team in the context of a product vision, The team is huge. The team is absolutely huge because it's not just a can maker and the can maker team. It's also the bottler and the bottler team. It's maybe the truckers union that's providing transportation between these different things. the retail store. It's the retail warehouse. All of them potentially have their own concept of team. And in order to create value, it's not just what you do and provide to your next partner on the value stream. You have to really pay attention to the entire value stream because ultimately anything that doesn't come together in the right way at the right in the right place right time It puts it all at risk It puts it all at risk. So I think it's important that we kind of understand the product vision this highest level glue that holds us together and then at a more discrete level look at your team, for example the can maker and What is their unique contribution? In Liftoff, Diana Larsson and Ainsley Niece call this the team mission. And so what is the team's unique contribution to the product vision? And so for the can maker, it's also fairly simple. It's like, we make the cans. And they could flavor that a bit with, they use the latest technology and they use environment. sensitive manufacturing processes, know, they source things using sustainable, you know, approaches and the like. at the team mission level, we're getting a little bit more discreet in terms of what it is that that team is contributing to the greater whole. So think part of this is just kind of stepping back and thinking about what it means to be a team. Brian Milner (16:12) Hmm. Jim York (16:24) You know, are we talking about we're a team that's the collection of all of these things? At times that might be a useful way of thinking about it. At other times we need to kind put our heads down and focus on what our unique contribution is and make sure that we're doing the appropriate job there. Brian Milner (16:24) Hmm. Yeah, this is fascinating because so what I'm hearing is that really we have to expand our thinking a little bit about teams because teaming teams are, know, in one sense, the small group that you're working with on a on a regular basis, but it's there's a larger team concept as well of the entire value stream from end to end. All the people who are contributing, they all are are working towards that ultimate goal of, in your example, someone having a refreshing beverage at the end of their long, day at work? And how often do we actually realize that or look at that? Are the miners really even aware of the fact that they're contributing to that sort of a larger team goal? I think that's a great question. Jim York (17:21) Yeah, that's an excellent point. And what are the implications of either that awareness or lack of awareness? And I think this kind of comes to play when we think about what motivates teams. If all I know is that I'm mining bauxite, that might work for some folks. That's enough motivation. Sometimes people say my paycheck is enough motivation. Brian Milner (17:44) Ha ha. Jim York (17:45) But if you really understand what it's all about, that maybe ties into a bit of self-worth, that I'm a contributing member of society. It could also help you make the right decisions and perform the right actions if you know ultimately what this is gonna lead to. And sometimes that's a calculation that's done in terms of the quality. of the work that you're doing or the output that you're creating. For certain applications, the quality might have certain characteristics where the quality has turned up very, very high in some areas or maybe it's lower in other areas because it's good enough. And if you overbuild quality, you might be introducing some waste because it's not. It's not necessary for the job at hand. In other places, if you deliver below quality, you introduce some risk that the product is not going to be, or the ultimate customer experience is not going to be what it is. I don't know about you, but I've occasionally gotten one of these plastic soda bottles where they've made the plastic so thin for the soda bottle that the liquid is actually needed inside the bottle to maintain the structural integrity of the bottle. Brian Milner (18:54) Yeah. Jim York (18:54) And if I were that customer sitting on the couch at the end of a long hot day, let's imagine it's a white cloth couch and I'm drinking orange soda and I reach over to pick up the soda and my hand, you know, grasping around the soda bottle, all of sudden the soda bottle just collapses in my hand and orange soda goes all over me and the couch and everything else. mean, that's, you know, there's some quality characteristics, some specifications around that. Brian Milner (19:02) Ha ha ha. Jim York (19:18) container that that plastic container that has to integrate well into the rest of the process. It has to work with the bottler and it has to work with the consumer when they're actually using it. So it's understanding the whole can certainly help teams feel a sense of purpose and also can guide that decision making in those actions around it. Brian Milner (19:30) Yeah. Yeah, I think that's an important thing to keep in mind and remember because, you you mentioned, you know, some people would say paycheck is a motivator. And I, you know, I, I kind of subscribe to the Dan Pink kind of motivation philosophy that, know, that, can only do it so far that it is a motivator, but it is a motivator only to a certain point. Beyond that point, we need more. We need more to motivate what we're going to do. Cause you know, there's a million things out there that can give me a paycheck. I could work in a lot of different places, but I've chosen to do what I do for a reason. There's something that fulfills me from doing that, or I prefer it in some way to what my other options might be. I know I've heard people say this in classes before, the idea of how do you have a vision for somebody who builds clothes hangers? We have this talk about vision, this grand design. Big purpose. Well, how do you do that for someone who has clothes hangers? You know, like I get that, you know, there's not everything, every product in the world has, you know, a save the world kind of vision, right? But I think you can, in your example of kind of the mining thing, I think is a good example of this because you can connect it to that ultimate value. And when you connect to that ultimate value, it doesn't that motivate people more to think, hey, I'm helping someone who's had a hard day. I know what that's like. Have a hard day, sit down on your couch and you just want to relax a little bit. Yeah, I want to help that person. Like that, is something that that'll gets me out of bed, you know? Jim York (21:06) Mm-hmm. Yeah, and I think that does require you to think beyond what we often think of as being the team. Because to make it all come together and result in that ultimate product vision, that, you know, the person having the convenient refreshing beverage, in my example, you know, all of those different parts have to come together. And any one of them, if it doesn't happen, you know, that we don't have that value that's realized at the end of the value stream. And so having that connection to what it's really ultimately about is critically important. And understanding where you fit into that and what your value add work is, I think is critically important. And so we talked about like at high level product vision, we talked about this unique contribution of your team like the can maker, and so our team mission, we make the cans. And then we get to the practicalities of the task that's in flight, the work that we're doing right now. And I think that's a critical piece of this puzzle. What is it that's the thing that's being acted upon right now? The work in process or the work in flight. And depending on what the nature of that is, I think that drives a lot of... decisions and one of them is around, you know, who do we need? So who are the actual people, you know, that have the right skills, knowledge, experience in order to do that work? And also it informs our process and so, know, again, that process could be something where it's a known process and we're just, you know, turning the crank or it might be something where we're having to figure it out on the fly. Regardless of the nature of the work, there's going to be a workflow. When we're trying to get something done, the work is going to be flowing through some sort of process. And it's that flow that really intrigues me. we want to look at the flow, especially if speed matters. And why would speed matter? Sometimes speed matters because customers want what we are building yesterday. So they want it as soon as possible. So time to value is often what's considered there. If we're something new that hasn't existed before, sometimes we're also building quickly so we can get it in front of someone to get their reaction to see whether it's fit for purpose. So we might think of that as being time to feedback. But the flow itself is there's the workflow. And so work, the nature of it is a piece of work is something that maybe an individual can go work on. Other times there's a piece of work that requires more than one person to work on. So there's an element of collaboration with that. Even when it's an individual that can work on a piece of work, usually they've received something from somebody that allows them to start that piece of work. And when they're done with that piece of work, they're passing what they've done along to somebody else and that other person is picking up. So even if... there's an ability to work on a discrete task by yourself, there's still an interaction often on the front end of that and the back end of that. So work is still flowing and we have to figure out how to collaborate in such a way that the work that is not being held up in some queue somewhere where we're getting some bottlenecks and that they're constraints. so figuring out how do you enable the work to flow and how do you enable the people to flow? Years ago, I had an opportunity to coach soccer and on my team, I taught them, in addition to like skills, I taught them three concepts. And so the first one was, everybody on the team should know where the ball is. And so it seems pretty obvious, you should know where the ball is. But if you look at this from a team building software perspective, does everybody know where the ball is? You know, what is the work that's in flight and what's the current state of that? I mean, we use information radiators to try to help people understand where the ball is, but often I don't think we use them as effectively as we might. So I'm always challenging teams to figure out, you know, how do you use your communication systems, your information radiators to enable everyone in your ecosystem to understand, you know, what's the work in flight and what is its current state? And why do you need to know that? Brian Milner (24:55) Hmm. Yeah. Jim York (25:24) Well, if you know where the ball is, you can get a sense of what are the things that are in the way of that ball moving forward. So my second rule for the team was know where your obstacles are. And so in a soccer game, you're seeing your opponents. And so you might have a great plan on how you're going to advance the ball from where it is currently down the field towards the goal. But little problem with that. You've got people on the other team trying to keep you from getting there. So you're having to react real time in the moment to those obstacles. And so in addition to everybody on the team knowing where the ball is, everyone on the team needs to know where the obstacles are. And so when you have that information, and again, for a team building software, this is the kind of thing that should be readily available in some sort of information radiator, real time ability to see where the ball is and to see what's in the way. Why is that important? Well, if you know where the ball is and you know where the obstacles are, you can position yourself as a team member to be what I called the help. And so by the help, that's the one or two people on your soccer team that if you're the one with the ball, you know you can pass to them easily. You know, that they are constantly moving around and positioning themselves to be in the place where it's possible for you to get the ball to them. So who are those two people? Well, it changes depending on where the ball is. And so what the team has to do is kind of get a mental mob. Brian Milner (26:41) Ha ha. Jim York (26:47) in their heads of the actual position of people on the field and get a sense of if the ball's here and the obstacles are here, then I should put myself here. Now, it isn't for all the team members to position themselves to be the help because that would be crazy. Just as we see on Agile teams, when somebody picks up a task, the whole team typically doesn't swarm on that task. It would be too many people on the task. Brian Milner (27:06) haha Jim York (27:16) So who shows up to work the task? The right number of people with the right skills and knowledge. So how do they know to come? It's because the work is made visible. And so they come because they see that they're needed. How fast do they come? Ideally, they're there instantly. Now, why might they not be there instantly? Because they might be working on some other tasks. And so if this were to happen in soccer game, you would see the other opponent, you know, they would be... basically scoring goals against you right and left because when you try to pass the ball, you wouldn't have somebody there to receive the ball. So knowing where your help is, if you've got the ball and passing it to that person helps you continue the flow down towards the goal. So if you're not the person who has the ball and you're not one of those two people that are the help currently, What you're doing as another team member is you are. orienting yourself on the field so that you will be the help when it's needed. And so there's this constant movement of people down the field. And where this really brings it home, I'll use this example, and I'm coaching agile teams, is they'll talk about how all their work and stuff, and I'll use the example of the soccer game and the one ball, and they say, now let's imagine you put two balls in flight. Brian Milner (28:16) Hmm, that makes sense, yeah. Jim York (28:36) Can you optimally move those balls down the field towards your opponent's goal? And typically, there is a limit, right? How many balls can you put on the field? Two, three, 15? It's like, yeah, it really drives home the point of limiting the work in process. the teamwork is made more effective and efficient if we have some sense of where the work is, what is the nature of it so that people can come and go, I call this people flow. so we're looking at things like the, well, out of... Brian Milner (29:05) Yeah. Jim York (29:09) out of the concept of open space, the law of mobility. It's like within our organizations, within our teams, can we have people flow to where the work is needed and also have people flow away from the work when they're not needed? And so enabling that autonomy of the individual to be able to go where they need to go in order to optimize the flow is a... Brian Milner (29:13) Yeah, yeah. Jim York (29:34) is a key organizational design problem. Brian Milner (29:37) Yeah, yeah, this is fascinating stuff. mean, I love the analogy with the soccer teams and that I mean, I, that makes sense to me. I love kind of where you're going with this. If people are hearing this and thinking, well, I like to hear more about this stuff. We're going to put links in our show notes back to Jim's site on this because he's got a lot of blog posts. They're kind of around the same theme on this. And we'll link to those specific blog posts for you so that you can find them. But Jim, I want to be respectful of your time and our listeners' time. So thank you so much for taking your time out to share this with us. Jim York (30:08) Well, I've been very pleased to join you, Brian. Thank you for the opportunity. Brian Milner (30:13) Absolutely.

If your team keeps revisiting the same issues over and over again, Groundhog Day-style, this episode is for you. Leadership coach Marsha Acker shares why it happens, how to recognize hidden conversational patterns, and what to do when you feel stuck. Overview In this episode, Brian Milner sits down with executive team coach and author Marsha Acker to unpack one of the most frustrating challenges teams face: circular conversations that never seem to resolve. You know the ones; same issue, different day. Marsha introduces a practical framework, structural dynamics, to help leaders and Scrum Masters decode what’s actually happening beneath the surface of their team’s conversations. From identifying communication patterns to creating space for dissent and inquiry, they explore how to break out of those conversational loops, build psychological safety, and foster real change. Whether you're leading meetings or just stuck in too many of them, this episode will help you shift the dynamic for good. References and resources mentioned in the show: Marsha Acker The Art and Science of Facilitation by Marsha Acker Build Your Model for Leading Change: A guided workbook to catalyze clarity and confidence in leading yourself and others by Marsha Acker #137: Stop Wasting Time with Guests Kate Megaw #94: Connecting Teams and Leadership with Anthony Coppedge Retrospectives Repair Guide Better Retrospectives 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 podcast@mountaingoatsoftware.com 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. Marsha Acker is an executive coach, author, and the founder of TeamCatapult, where she helps leadership teams break out of communication ruts and lead real, lasting change. With two decades of experience guiding everyone from startups to Fortune 500s, Marsha specializes in transforming how teams talk, decide, and grow—one conversation at a time. 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 the honor of having Ms. Marcia Acker with us. So welcome in, Marcia. Marsha Acker (00:12) Hi Brian, it's good to be here. Brian Milner (00:14) Very very happy to have Marcia with us. Marcia is the CEO of a group called Team Catapult and she is a team coach. She does a lot of work with teams and leaders. She's an author. She's a speaker and we wanted to have her come on because of a book that she has out recently called Build Your Model for Leading Change. She also has another book called The Art and Science of Facilitation, which I'm sure is really appealing to a lot of people here as well. You know, as Scrum Masters, if you're a Scrum Master out there, we do a lot of facilitating. So that's probably a really interesting pickup for you also. But we wanted to have Marsha on because we wanted to talk about an issue that I hear a lot about in classes. This is something that I hear a lot of questions around, and it can be a really big source of issues when you think about working together in close, tight units as a team. And that's how teams communicate. kind of the issues and problems that we have with communication amongst teams. So, you know, when we're talking about this, we're talking about teams not listening to each other, not understanding each other, misunderstanding someone's motives, something like that. And one of the things I know that I've seen a lot, I've encountered this a lot, and this is one of the things that I know you talk about quite a bit in your book, is this kind of loop that we get in a little bit, right? We have these conversations where... It just feels like we're stuck in a loop. We're saying the same things over and over again. it's like, I in Groundhog Day? Am I reliving the same thing we just went through? So let's start there and just say, why do you think that that happens? Why do you think that teams have this kind of Groundhog Day effect where you might have these conversations that just kind of keep popping up over and over again? Marsha Acker (01:35) Mm-hmm. It's a great question, Brian. think a number of years ago, I had a background in facilitation, but I got really interested in this particular question because I found not only in my own experience, I had multiple examples that I could give you of conversations that I felt like I'd have with somebody. then we would be, a week or two later, we'd be back talking about the same thing. And I'd think, I, you know, from my perspective, I thought we resolved that. So, so why are we talking about it again? And then I noticed in my work with teams that they would do the same thing. So, you know, I'd be in a session with a team, I'd help them facilitate a decision. They'd make the decision and then I'd be back with them a month later and the same topic would be up. And I'm I just found myself confused. So I think, I think there are many reasons why that happens. But if I were to, If I were to create a theme for that, think there's a couple of big themes that I see play out. I think there are many places on our teams today where we stay at the surface level of the conversation. Like we get super focused on what we're talking about. So whether it's the tool that we're using, the features that are gonna be in the next release, like we get so super focused on it. And then we're hyper. aware of time boxes. So we want to make sure we talk about the thing, get the decision, and we want to do it in 30 minutes or less. I saw a post on LinkedIn the other day where someone was advocating that there shouldn't be any meeting that would need to go past 25 minutes. And I thought, see it really differently because I think while there are places where we absolutely do need to maybe just quickly exchange information or keep things moving along, or we just want to hear briefly from people. I think if we're advocating that every meeting should only take 25 minutes, we are likely going to have those Groundhog Day conversations because it doesn't give us the space to get to the real topic. So I think that's where we spend a lot of time talking about the thing, the topic, and we really don't create enough time to drop down into focus on are we really, there space here for me to share what I really think or do you just want me to show up here in this meeting that you're running? You clearly have maybe your own agenda. You feel like you've already got the decision made. And so you'd really like my role to be to just receive your information and go off and do it. So I think there's a complexity here of Brian Milner (04:27) Yeah. Marsha Acker (04:32) What's the topic we're talking about? Is it the real topic that we need to talk about? Or is there, is it sort of the mask for what we might be able to drop into a deeper conversation to have? Are we being super focused on a time box? And are we creating enough range in our meetings that we've got spaces where we are efficient and fast and very deliberate about the conversation and then other spaces where, you know, those topics that keep returning. They're great places to go, there's data here for us. I think of them as yellow flags. there's something here for us to explore further. So let's take this topic and let's carve out a little bit more time for it. I'm curious what you see. Brian Milner (05:15) Yeah. No, that's a great observation. And I think you're right. It is a frustration. Looking back over my career and looking back through corporate meetings and things I've been a part of, there is frustration with someone who's coming in and not really having a meeting planned and not really having an agenda. But I think there is another kind of side issue there that can cause a lot of misunderstanding about Marsha Acker (05:33) Yeah. Brian Milner (05:44) what we're trying to achieve and that's the purpose. If we're here for a certain topic, I can understand that, but then what is it that's expected of me in this meeting? Am I here to just receive information? Is this a knowledge dump or a status update from someone else? is this, we have an issue and we need to talk through it and fully understand it. Marsha Acker (05:47) Yeah. Mm-hmm. Yeah. Brian Milner (06:13) And I think sometimes that's what I've kind of seen is that there's this mismatch of, well, I thought I was here for this. And now it's clear that you don't really want my opinion. You just want to tell me what it is. And so now I'm refocused or the opposite. I thought I was here just to receive information, but now I'm realizing that you really need me to dig in and give you my educated advice on this. Well, I wasn't prepared to do that. Marsha Acker (06:20) Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I think this notion, and I see it happen a lot with Agile teams, like somewhere in our professional careers, and I think there's very good reason for, like we get rewarded for, know, from the time we're in very early school all the way through the end of school, we get rewarded for having answers. And then we end up in the workplace and we find ourselves in collaborative spaces. And so I think there's this belief that, you know, someone who's calling the meeting, they will have a little bit of this internal story that if I come with only questions and no solutions, then what value am I adding? Like that's, how am I useful to this organization? I've actually had people say to me, why would this organization hire me to come in and ask other people questions? Brian Milner (07:28) Wow. Marsha Acker (07:29) And so I think that's really, I love giving voice to that because I do think that there's a narrative that sits in our organizations that I, and a little bit of a fear. Like if I come to a meeting and I'm asking people to collaborate or I'm truly asking them open ended questions and I want to hear what they have to say and we're going to listen to, you know, I talk a lot about wanting to create this collective intelligence. And I think it takes a while to access that in a group of people. that it requires us to be able to suspend this idea that we're not adding value if we're asking questions and to reframe our value as helping to tap into a collective. And you can certainly have a point of view or a perspective, but if you're really wanting to tap into that intelligence, then I think it requires something different of us if we're the meeting host or the meeting leader. I think the other thing that will happen too is depending on who's in charge, like senior architects or somebody senior in the team can also get caught in that trap. Like, well, I'm supposed to come with answers. And I think we can come with ideas. But if we're really wanting to collaborate, and then this gets to your point about why are we gathering? Because sometimes I think there will be places where somebody has already made the decision and they're not asking for input on the decision. Brian Milner (08:42) Yeah. Marsha Acker (08:50) but they're wanting to share the decision that's been made and enroll people in the decision that's been made and invite them into collaborating on actually how that's gonna get implemented. But we're not opening this conversation up for what's been decided about architecture, what's been decided about what's going into a release. So I think this clarity and intentionality like you talk about around purpose, why am I here? What do you want from me? It's huge. And I think it's really tied to also some of our thinking about how are we adding value. Brian Milner (09:23) Yeah. The comment about, know, people not feeling like they're adding value if they're just asking questions that, kind of, maybe it's just for my recent experience with coaching and everything, but to me that, that just, it's so contrary, you know, to, to my way of thinking now, I guess I would say in that, you know, when I've been a part of discussion, when I've been part of a meeting, that I've looking back, that I feel like has gone really well. Marsha Acker (09:26) . Mm-hmm. Brian Milner (09:48) Uh, or, or a person that I feel like has really contributed to the meeting. Oftentimes it, it is that person who is asking questions that get us to think in a different way to get us to consider from a different perspective. So, you know, that that's why it feels a little strange to think about it. I agree with you. I agree that that's, you know, the attitude of some people or that's the way they see, you know, how I contribute to a meeting, but it just feels like it's such the opposite of that. That might be the most valuable thing we could do is to get people to see things from a different perspective or consider maybe things they haven't considered about this issue. Marsha Acker (10:25) Yeah, I think it's one of the first mindset shifts in a transition from being a contributor to maybe managing or leading, whether it's you're just leading a team or whether you're leading a whole organization. I think this idea of where does value come from and what's my role in the value creation, it's a shift, I think, for us. I love when people can get to a place of thinking about creating containers in organizations where people get to be their best. And then it does, your thinking does shift from, what's the piece of content that I can contribute to? What's the question that would really unlock different perspectives? And I think the other piece about that is what's the question that would elicit a... I talk about it being opposed, but you know, a contrarian perspective or point of view, because I think that's the other thing that can keep us in these circular conversations is when what we're really thinking doesn't get said. So if I don't feel like I can tell you in the room what I'm really thinking, I'll tell everybody else offline. Brian Milner (11:34) Right. The meeting after the meeting, right? Yeah. Yeah. And that, course, gets to the heart of psychological safety and kind of those dynamics within a team. We started this off talking about kind of this feeling of getting stuck. And so I want to kind of come back to that a little bit and say, I want to ask you, what are some of the causes of that? Why do we find ourselves trapped in these loops? Marsha Acker (11:36) Yes. You Mm. Brian Milner (11:59) that just, know, whatever we decide doesn't actually do anything or we find ourselves right back in the same place. Why do these, what's causing this? Marsha Acker (12:08) Yeah, well, let's play around with a bit of a framework to help us think about what's happening in the conversation. Yeah. So there is a theory of structural dynamics. It comes from work of David Cantor. And what it allows us to do is sort of think about being able to code the conversation that we're happening. And by code, I mean it helps us focus not on the topic. So whatever the topic might be. It doesn't matter. It helps us focus on how we're engaging in that conversation more of the how. And so there are four actions. Everything that we say could actually be coded into one of four actions, which I think is really kind of fascinating. So you just made a move by taking us back and pointing to the topic about stuck conversations, right? So what keeps us stuck? And that's a move because you're pointing in a direction. So moves kind of set direction in the conversation. I could make a new move and say, you know, let's talk about, yeah, where we might meet at a conference sometime, Brian. But that's a totally different topic. So moves set direction in a conversation. The second action is a follow, which gets behind and supports. So I followed your move by saying, yes, that's great. Let's do that. Here's, and then. Brian Milner (13:12) Right. Yeah. Marsha Acker (13:26) And then a bit of a new move from me, let me introduce a language for thinking about that. So you made a move, I followed, and then brought in another move. So now we're starting to, by being able to name actions, we're starting to get a sense of patterns. So there's two more actions, the action of a pose. So a pose offers like really clear pushback. It says, no, hang on, stop. Let's not go off the bridge or. I really disagree with this piece about what you're saying. So it offers a clear pushback or constraint to what's been said. And then the fourth action is a bystand. And a bystand is a morally neutral comment that names what's happening in the conversation. So I could bystand on myself in a conversation and say, you know, I'm really feeling engaged by the dialogue, or I might say I'm really confused. or if we're noticing a pattern, somebody might say, I notice we're getting stuck. So a bystand is a way for people to name what's happening or bridge competing ideas. But the other thing, the benefit of the bystand is that sometimes it also slows down the conversation. So to your question about what gets us stuck, it's really helpful if we can separate. what we're talking about and start to briefly look at how we're talking because what gets us stuck in conversations is when one or more of those actions is missing over the course of time. So we need all four of them to be voiced. One of the biggest problems in our stuck conversations is that a pose goes offline. Not in every team. There will be teams for whom a pose is stronger. But in my experience in American business, for sure, a pose is often the thing that is missing or it goes offline. So the way it will play out, there's a couple of different patterns. One will be what we call serial moving. And those are teams. Like a meeting with serial moving will have lots of fast pace. So somebody says this. then we're talking about this topic, now we're talking about this. And it will, like, you'll have a feeling like we accomplished a lot, but then you walk out at the end of the session and you go. So we talked about, exactly, we talked about this, this and this, and I don't know what we decided. Brian Milner (15:52) What just happened, right? Marsha Acker (15:58) So people that leave those kinds of meetings, they'll have this sort of false sense of, yeah, we got somewhere when we really didn't, we didn't close things out. So serial moving can be a pattern that can keep us stuck because we don't close things. There can be another pattern where there's a lot of move and follow. We call it courteous compliance. Another word for it would just, I forget the other label that we can give to it, but there's the sense that somebody makes a move and everybody else just says, sure, fine. So it's lacking the energy of the dynamics that you would get if the other actions were active and being voiced. And then there's a pattern where we might have too much bystand. So in a team that starts to complain about why did we use this tool or, know, I'm noticing nobody's using Slack or I'm noticing, you know, when we, when something gets posted in Slack, nobody acknowledges it. So if you find yourself in a meeting where, people are sharing a lot of context or perspective, maybe we can, I call it a hall of mirrors. Like we've got lots of perspective, but what's needed is for somebody to really make a move and say, all right, so given that now, what do we want to do about it? So what's really fascinating about those, we can also get locked in a move and a pose, a really strong advocacy or argument. And what's needed in that kind of argument is we need more follow and bystand. But what I find fascinating, so a pattern that I see play out over and over again will be one of two, the serial moving or the courteous compliance. So we've got a lot of moves or we've got move and follow. Brian Milner (17:25) Yeah. Marsha Acker (17:45) And if I'm someone in the meeting that either doesn't feel like my voice is welcomed or that it would be a career limiting move to oppose you, what I'll do is start to use one of the other actions in place of my oppose. So if it's not okay for me to push back and say, Brian, I don't want to talk about that, or I disagree, I think we're going off track, then what I might start doing is just making new moves. Brian Milner (18:02) Hmm. Marsha Acker (18:15) So rather than say to you, hey, Brian, I don't want to do that, you'll be talking about something, and now I'm introducing another topic. Hey, can we talk about where we're going for lunch next week? Or can we talk about the meaning behind that word over there that we were using last week? we don't do it intentionally. It comes for really good reason. Brian Milner (18:36) Right. Marsha Acker (18:39) We will all have our own reasons about why we do or don't do that. But I think some of the greatest work to do in teams is to talk about those four actions, to normalize them, and to invite them. Brian Milner (18:52) I love this. what kind of fascinated me, caught my attention the most about what you were saying is when I saw these, and kind of reading up here and reading through your work prior to our discussion, those four modes, when I read it, the first time it seemed to make sense, move, follow, oppose, bystand. But when I saw bystand, it really did seem, my first initial gut response was, yeah. That makes sense. There are bystanders that are happening in meetings that just do nothing. They just kind of sit back and they're not going to be, you know, they're not going to get in the way of the flow of something. But the way you described it is really fascinating because it's not a passive thing. It is an active participation. Marsha Acker (19:35) Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Actually, if somebody is, well, I love that you're naming that because I get asked that question all the time. So again, American business trends. So if you step into the mind of someone who believes that I'm really only adding value if I'm bringing ideas and the way we would code that would be often you're making moves. So people will tend to value. making moves and opposes because a lot of times that's what the culture values. If you're in an organization that says, bring me problems, bring me solutions, you will find a cultural pattern in there of people showing up and making moves and opposes throughout their whole meeting. It'll be a stuck pattern. It'll be overused actions. But if we think about, so bystand could be questions, asking powerful questions. what's that mean to us falls along the line of bringing inquiry into the conversation. And so it gives us a way to balance advocacy and inquiry. But bystand is, bystand and follow are active. If somebody was not saying anything in the conversation, we wouldn't know, we wouldn't be able to code them because they're not speaking. And those four relate to speech acts. So, We have to speak in order for it to be coded as something. But those people who are sitting back often have some of the best bystands. Like if you were to tap that person on the shoulder and say, hey, I would love to know what you see right now in the conversation, they'd probably be able to tell you. Brian Milner (20:57) Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I love this. And, you know, one of the things we teach in our advanced Scrum Masterclass is having people kind of understand how to deal with conflict in their teams and stuff. And we talk about the Thomas Killman kind of five responses to conflict. And I'm seeing a lot of overlap here in these modes too of, some of these things sound like a certain response to conflict in certain ways as well. But before we run out of time, I want to... Marsha Acker (21:30) Mm. Yeah. Brian Milner (21:43) I want to make sure that we get to, if we're in this situation, what are some steps, what are some things we can do to break that chain and not just have the same conversation again next week. Marsha Acker (21:48) Yeah. Yeah. So I would love for people to just think about using those four actions, especially if you work with a team on a fairly frequent basis, right? You will likely, even as I describe those, you will likely start to be able to identify what's the pattern that might be showing up. So I think the first step is can you identify or create a hypothesis for yourself about what might our structural pattern be? So do I hear like really clear poses? You know, do we make a lot of moves? So if you can find the actions that are predominant in your conversation, that's really the first step. And then the second step, there are a couple of different things to counteract each of them. So if move is really strong and it's coming from certain people, designing your facilitated session or even inviting participants to other participants to be the ones to make the move. So inviting others to speak first is one way to do it. limiting the number of moves that people can make. So sometimes if I'm working with a team that has that pattern, I'll give them some kind of, I'll give them a poker chip or I'll give them a card that says move on it. And I will limit everybody to one move per meeting. So structurally, I'm asking people to start to constrain their own moves. And then asking them to then step into, know, if somebody makes a move, staying with it long enough. as, so as a facilitator, you might say, if you noticed that you've got multiple moves on the table, you might just say, Hey, we've got four topics. This, this, this, and this, which is the one that we want to dive into first. So that's another way of just prompting a group to follow a move that they've made. And I think if you're noticing, you don't have a pose. You. chances are that is not going to come naturally. So I think you've really got to design questions that surface it. asking for what are the risks or who sees this differently. A lot of times if I'm leading a session, I will ask people, where did I get it wrong or what do I have wrong? Brian Milner (23:47) Yeah. Marsha Acker (24:12) What am I missing? What might I not be seen? So those are all ways for me to prompt. And I think if you've got some hierarchy in the room or differentials about that, that's really got to come from the person who's sort of holding some of that positional power maybe. Brian Milner (24:29) Yeah, I love that because there's there's sort of a maybe it's an American culture thing. I don't know. But but I know in the business world I've experienced if you call a meeting if it's your meeting there there's sort of an expectation that you're in control, you know, you know, it feels like there's there's sort of a you're not invited to say something like, what am I missing? Marsha Acker (24:52) Yeah. Yep. Brian Milner (24:53) because that's sort of admitting that you weren't prepared for this meeting. But I agree completely with you, that's not really the case. It's just saying, I can't know everything, so what don't I know about this, I should. Marsha Acker (25:09) Yeah. And it's hard. That can be a hard question. And I often say to people, don't ask the question. Don't elicit a pose if you're not really ready to hear it. It can be hard when somebody says, I think it's a two-ee. I totally disagree with the direction that we're going. Because if I, as the person who's asked the question and now receiving that feedback, If it starts to show on my face or I disconnect from it, what's gonna happen is that gets registered across everybody in that room. And that'll be the last time anybody steps up to answer that kind of question. Brian Milner (25:36) Right. Yeah, I love as well when you were talking about, you know, the actions and maybe having tokens or stuff for people to have actions. think I don't, I'm sure this is maybe part of the intention of this as well, but I love the side effect of that, that yes, I'm limiting people who would be controlling to not, not take control of the entire meeting, but once they've spent theirs, now I'm in a situation where the people who maybe wouldn't be those people that would normally step up. They're the only ones who have that ability left. So you have that side benefit of I'm kind of making space for the quieter voices in this group to have a chance to speak up. And I think that's a really important thing in these kind of meetings too. Marsha Acker (26:35) Yeah, when we find ourselves in stuck patterns, there will be very good reason for, or the Groundhog Day conversation. There will be a pattern to the structure of that conversation that keeps repeating itself. And a lot of times what will be happening is somebody will make a move and very often the person that follows them will be the same person every time. So if Marsha speaks and then Brian follows and that's a pattern that gets set up. every single time. All it does is reinforce me to make more moves because I know you're going to be right behind me. And then over time, we're really unconscious, I think about it, as a structural pattern. But the rest of the team will start to fall back and be like, well, they seem to have it. There's no need. No need. So yes, what we're trying to do is change the behavior by looking at structure and finding ways to invite it. Brian Milner (27:34) That's awesome. This is fascinating. I want to be respectful of your time and everyone's time listening, I could go on for another hour in this conversation. This is just really fascinating stuff for me. And I want to point out to everyone again, if this is fascinating to you, we're going to put all the links to this stuff in our show notes so that you can easily just click on that and find it. But just to call it out again. Marsha Acker (27:41) You Brian Milner (27:55) Marcia has a couple of books out there that are in this topic area that could be really useful to you. One is the art and science of facilitation. And the one that I kind of took a deep dive into is called Build Your Model for Leading Change, which by the way, there's a subtitle of this, a guided workbook to catalyze clarity and confidence and leading yourself and others. And I just, would underline the workbook. Right? Because I think it's true. It is something to kind of work your way through. And it's not just a beach read. Yeah. Yeah. Marsha Acker (28:27) No, it's not. I like to think of it as a Sunday morning, maybe with a cup of coffee and a little bit of quiet space. Brian Milner (28:36) Yeah, love that. I love that picture. Well, Marsha, I can't thank you enough. You know, we've been kind of trading schedules and trying to align this to get Marsha on for a while. And, you know, when that kind of thing happens, for whatever reason, it always seems to be like, when the person comes on, it's like, wow, that was worth it. I'm really, really glad we went through that because this was a great conversation. So thanks so much. Thanks so much for sharing your research and wisdom here on this. Marsha Acker (28:56) I appreciate it. Brian Milner (29:02) and for coming on the show. Marsha Acker (29:04) Thank you for having me. It was great.

Brian Milner shares innovative ways to revamp team retrospectives, transforming them from mundane checks to dynamic discussions. He emphasizes the power of creativity and structure, suggesting diverse formats to keep engagement high. Discover techniques like the five whys to uncover deep insights and tackle root issues effectively. The conversation also introduces exciting themes that resonate with team members, ensuring every retrospective is impactful and geared towards real improvements.

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 podcast@mountaingoatsoftware.com 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 podcast@mountaingoatsoftware.com 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 podcast@mountaingoatsoftware.com 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 podcast@mountaingoatsoftware.com 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.

Andreas Schliep, a Certified Scrum Trainer and executive partner at DasScrumTeam AG, shares insights on the shifting landscape of Agile coaching. He discusses the critical differences between Scrum Masters and Agile Coaches, emphasizing integrity and resilience as key qualities. The conversation addresses the challenges of navigating a post-COVID world with an influx of unqualified coaches, the importance of foundational training, and the need for ongoing mentorship. Schliep also reflects on embracing unique strengths and developing a personal coaching style.

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 podcast@mountaingoatsoftware.com 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.

Marcus Lagré, a seasoned author and consultant in software development, shares vital insights on workplace stress, addressing its complexities beyond just long hours. He discusses how pressure, complexity, and security interact to influence team performance. Lagré emphasizes the significance of psychological safety and open communication in reducing burnout, while also highlighting the detrimental effects of management stress on team dynamics. His research-backed approach offers leaders practical strategies for fostering an environment where teams can thrive under pressure.