EDOS 2022 week 47
Agile at scale FTW; Innovation hindered by risk aversion; middle managers in a squeeze; e-government in South Korea + race to the South Pole, lean office, artificial intelligence that writes code
Agile at scale works but is demanding
WHAT? Researchers in Norway (of whom several are part of EDOS) and Germany have conducted an extensive study on agile at scale, with a particular focus on interteam coordination
It’s INTERESTING that:
The study distinguishes between to generations of agility, where the first generation combines waterfall methods with selected agile methods, while the second generation seeks to combine agile practices on its own premises, enriching it with lean methods and scaleable methods.
The second generation uses fewer and “purer” coordination mechanisms, including meetings (status, decisions, discussion fora, reviews/ retrospectives, demos, etc.), collaboration tools, and work environments that encourage transparency and communication.
This leads to five propositions: coordination requires mobilization of a significant range of resources; fixed meetings are esential; products are the right mental model for coordination; significant technical skills are needed to move successfully to the second generation; second generation has better resource usage.
SO WHAT?
This suggests that organizations that are well underway in adopting agile methods are drawn to expand it, both in terms of scale in the organization and depth of practice (abandoning waterfall for good).
However, this requires new competencies and new mental models, in particular to continuously building and improving products, rather than delivering projects
Innovation and risk aversion
WHAT: Study in the US Air Force to better understand what contributes to risk aversion, and how to reduce it.
It’s INTERESTING that:
Innovative behavior is a result of there being space to make risks and mistakes; that learning is encouraged; the team goals are coordinated; that there is good collaboration both internally and externally, and that the teams are autonomous
But then there are factors that inhibit these: established routines get in the way, there is time pressure, innovation is not prioritized, insufficient resources, key staff are unavailable, etc.
Workshop to improve innovation included discussion about the identified factors, but more experimentation is needed
AND SO?
Everybody wants innovaiton, but it’s easy to underestimate what is needed to encourage it; and certainly that innovation depends on less control
Discussions about inhibitors need to involve all management layers - innovation isn’t something to request and direct, leaders also need to change
Middle managers in the squeeze
WHAT? Swedish study about middle managers in the public sector to understand how they handle pressure from “both sides”
It’s INTERESTING that:
Unsurprisingly, middle managers need to move on a continuum between leadership and followership, depending on the situation
Two metaphors appear: “buddies in situations that call for trust and confidence with their colleagues; but when they need to make unpopular decisions, they have to appear as “commandors.”
This calls for “chameleon” capabilities, i.e., that they need to adapt to different situations, often in the course of the same workday. But that goals might be helpful in motivating this.
AND SO?
This means that interactions are about different things, depending on the leadership level. If the goals at different levels are coherent, the tension should have a constructive, not a stressful effect
Lacking coherence suggests may be particularly critical for senior managers, with cascading effects downward and confusing feedback upward.
This also raises issues for the criteria for middle management advancement.
Learning e-government in South Korea
WHAT? An analyse of the historical factors that contributed to South Korea’s success implementing of e-government
It’s INTERESTING that:
The origins of digital innovation in the South Korean public sector lies in a number of reforms from 1987 with the original purpose of improving cost effectiveness, but subsequent events proved that these reforms served as catalysts
But the foundations go back much farther, when the government implemented ambitious (and controversial) measures to stimulate economic development. Democratization efforts during the 80’s changed the role of the state but did not break digital innovation.
The economic crisis in 1997-1998 put new pressure on the development, but with an underlying premise that the trust between state and citizens had to be safeguarded.
AND SO?
The study also refers to South Korean political culture has emphasized forward-looking and evidence-based decision-making, with collaboration between multiple actors. This facilitates the use of advanced collaboration technologies.
While it may not be possible to replicate the South Korean experience, this work provides useful insights in what the components are that could be built elsewhere.
Bonus
Interesting comparison between Amundsen and Scott’s approaches in their race to the South Pole, the point being that Amundsen was driven by the task, Scott accomplishment-oriented.
Systematic review of the research on “lean office”
Description of artificial intelligence (AIDA) that writes programming code.
Next week: Agile meets security; leading digital learning in health; clusters grow up and have impact + how teams estimate, patients benefit from digitalization, longitudinal study on public health apps