People Are Not Resources

My manager reviewed the org chart along with the budget. “I need to cut the budget. Which resources can we cut?”

“Well, I don’t think we can cut software licenses,” I was reviewing my copy of the budget. “I don’t understand this overhead item here,” I pointed to a particular line item.

“No,” he said. “I’m talking about people. Which people can we lay off? We need to cut expenses.”

“People aren’t resources! People finish work. If you don’t want us to finish projects, let’s decide which projects not to do. Then we can re-allocate people, if we want. But we don’t start with people. That’s crazy.” I was vehement.

My manager looked at me as if I’d grown three heads. “I’ll start wherever I want,” he said. He looked unhappy.

“What is the target you need to accomplish? Maybe we can ship something earlier, and bring in revenue, instead of laying people off? You know, bring up the top line, not decrease the bottom line?”

Now he looked at me as if I had four heads.

“Just tell me who to cut. We have too many resources.”

When managers think of people as resources, they stop thinking. I’m convinced of this. My manager was under pressure from his management to reduce his budget. In the same way that technical people under pressure to meet a date stop thinking, managers under pressure stop thinking. Anyone under pressure stops thinking. We react. We can’t consider options. That’s because we are so very human.

People are resourceful. But we, the people, are not resources. We are not the same as desks, licenses, infrastructure, and other goods that people need to finish their work.

We need to change the language in our organizations. We need talk about people as people, not resources. And, that is the topic of this month’s management myth: Management Myth 32: I Can Treat People as Interchangeable Resources.

Let’s change the language in our organizations. Let’s stop talking about people as “resources” and start talking about people as people. We might still need layoffs. But, maybe we can handle them with humanity. Maybe we can think of the work strategically.

And, maybe, just maybe, we can think of the real resources in the organization. You know, the ones we buy with the capital equipment budget or expense budget, not operating budget. The desks, the cables, the computers. Those resources. The ones we have to depreciate. Those are resources. Not people.

People become more valuable over time. Show me a desk that does that. Ha!

Go read Management Myth 32: I Can Treat People as Interchangeable Resources.

Posted in management | Tagged , , | 18 Comments

Agile Bootcamp Talk Posted on Slideshare

I posted my slides for my Agile 2014 talk, Agile Projects, Program & Portfolio Management: No Air Quotes Required on Slideshare. It’s a bootcamp talk, so the majority of the talk is making sure that people understand the basics about projects. Walk before you run. That part.

However, you can take projects and “scale” them to programs. I wish people wouldn’t use that terminology. Program management isn’t exactly scaling. Program management is when the strategic endeavor  of the program encompases each of the projects underneath.

If you have questions about the presentation, let me know. Happy to answer questions.

Posted in agile | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

How to Avoid Three Big Estimation Traps Posted

I sent a Pragmatic Manager email last week, How to Avoid Three Big Estimation Traps. If you subscribed, you’d have seen it already. (That was a not-so-subtle hint to subscribe :-)

If you’re not sure of the value of being on yet-another-email list, browse the back issues. You can see I’m consistent. Not about the day I send the Pragmatic Manager email. I can’t make myself be that consistent. I provide you some great content. I tell you where I’m speaking. I let you know where you can read my writing, and how to find more of my work. That’s it.

In any case, take a look at How to Avoid Three Big Estimation Traps. I bet you’ll like it!

Posted in project management | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

How Pairing & Swarming Work & Why They Will Improve Your Products

If you’ve been paying attention to agile at all, you’ve heard these terms: pairing and swarming. But what do they mean? What’s the difference?

When you pair, two people work together to finish a piece of work. Traditionally, two developers paired. The “driver” wrote the piece of work. The other person, the “navigator,” observed the work, providing review, as the work was completed.

I first paired as a developer in 1982 (kicking and screaming). I later paired in the late 1980′s as the tester in several developer-tester pairs. I co-wrote Behind Closed Doors: Secrets of Great Management with Esther Derby as a pair.

There is some data that says that when we pair, the actual coding takes about 15-20% longer. However, because we have built-in code review, there is much less debugging at the end.

When Esther and I wrote the book, we threw out the original two (boring) drafts, and rewrote the entire book in six weeks. We were physically together. I had to learn to stop talking. (She is very funny when she talks about this.) We both had to learn each others’ idiosyncrasies about indentations and deletions when writing. That’s what you do when you pair.

However, this book we wrote and published is nothing like what the original drafts were. Nothing. We did what pairs do: We discussed what we wanted this section to look like. One of us wrote for a few minutes. That person stopped. We changed. The other person wrote. Maybe we discussed as we went, but we paired.

After about five hours, we were done for the day. Done. We had expended all of our mental energy.

That’s pairing. Two developers. One work product. Not limited to code, okay?

Now, let’s talk about swarming.

Swarming is when the entire team says, “Let’s take this story and get it to done, all together.” You can think of swarming as pairing on steroids. Everyone works on the same problem. But how?

Someone will have to write code. Someone will have to write tests. The question is this: in what order and who navigates? What does everyone else do?

When I teach my agile and lean workshop, I ask the participants to select one feature that the team can complete in one hour. Everyone groans. Then they do it.

Some teams do it by having the product owner explain what the feature is in detail. Then the developers pair and the tester(s) write tests, both automated and manual. They all come together at about the 45-minute mark. They see if what they have done works. (It often doesn’t.) Then the team starts to work together, to really swarm. “What if we do this here? How about if this goes there?”

Some teams work together from the beginning. “What is the first thing we can do to add value?” (That is an excellent question.) They might move into smaller pairs, if necessary. Maybe. Maybe they need touchpoints every 15-20 minutes to re-orient themselves to say, “Where are we?” They find that if they ask for feedback from the product owner, that works well.

If you first ask, “What is the first thing we can do to add value and complete this story?” you are probably on the right track.

Why Do Pairing and Swarming Work So Well?

Both pairing and swarming:

  • Build feedback into development of the task at hand. No one works alone. Can the people doing the work still make a mistake? Sure. But it’s less likely. Someone will catch the mistake.
  • Create teamwork. You get to know someone well when you work with them that intensely.
  • Expose the work. You know where you are.
  • Reduce the work in progress. You are less likely to multitask, because you are working with someone else.
  • Encourage you to take no shortcuts, at least in my case. Because someone was watching me, I was on my best professional behavior. (Does this happen to you, too?)

How do Pairing and Swarming Improve Your Products?

The effect of pairing and swarming is what improves your products. The built-in feedback is what creates less debugging downstream. The improved teamwork helps people work together. When you expose the work in progress, you can measure it, see it, have no surprises. With reduced work in progress, you can increase your throughput. You have better chances for craftsmanship.

You don’t have to be agile to try pairing or swarming. You can pair or swarm on any project. I bet you already have, if you’ve been on a “tiger team,” where you need to fix something for a “Very Important Customer” or you have a “Critical Fix” that must ship ASAP. If you had all eyes on one problem, you might have paired or swarmed.

If you are agile, and you are not pairing or swarming, consider adding either or both to your repertoire, now.

Posted in project management | Tagged , , , , | 3 Comments

What is Your Minimum Agile Reading List?

In preparation for my talk, Agile Projects, Programs, and Portfolio Management: No Air Quotes Required, I have created a Minimum Reading List for an Agile Transition. Note the emphasis on minimum.

I could have added many more books to this list. But the problem I see is that people don’t read anything. They think they do agile if they say they do agile.

But saying you do agile doesn’t mean anything if you don’t get to done on small stories and have the ability to change. I hope that if I suggest some small list of potential books, people will read the books, and realize, “I can do this!”

I am probably crazy-optimistic. But that hasn’t stopped me before.

I would like your help. Would you please review my list? Do you have better books? Do you have better suggestions? It’s my list. I might not change my mind. However, if you comment on that page, I would know what you think.

Thank you very much.

 

Posted in agile | Tagged , , , , | 7 Comments

Why Testing in Women Testers Magazine

I have an article in a new online magazine, Women Testers, the July 2014 edition. My article is called “Why Testing?”

When I was a tester or a developer, I asked many questions. As a project manager, program manager or consultant, I still ask many questions. One of those is the Why question. This article examines that question from a number of perspectives.

Go read that article and many others from people such as Alexandra Moreira, Bolette Stubbe Teglbjærg, Smita Mishra, Sara Tabor, Karen N. Johnson, and Mike Lyles.

I bet you’ll enjoy it!

Posted in testing | Tagged , , | 2 Comments

Do Teams Gel or Jell?

In my role as technical editor for agileconnection.com, I have the opportunity to read many terrific articles. I also have the opportunity to review and comment on those articles.

One such comment is what do teams do? Do they “gel” or do they “jell”?

Gel is what you put in hair. When you “gel” things, you create a thick goo, like concrete. Teams are not a thick goo. Teams are flexible and responsive.

Jell is what you want teams to do. You want them firm, but not set in concrete. When teams jell, they might even jiggle a little. They wave. They adapt. They might even do a little dance, zigging here, zapping there.

You want to keep the people in the teams as much as possible, so you flow work through the teams. But you want the people in the teams to reconsider what they do on a regular basis. That’s called retrospecting. People who have their feet in concrete don’t retrospect. They are stuck. People who are flexible and responsive do.

So, think about whether you have a gelled or a jelled team. Maybe I’m being a nitpicker. I probably am. Our words mean something.

If you have an article you’d like to publish, send it to me. You and I will craft it into something great. Whether or not your team jells.

 

Posted in writing | Tagged , , , , , | 6 Comments

Pragmatic Manager Posted: Standup or Handoff

I published a Pragmatic Manager yesterday to my subscribers. Normally, I let them enjoy the pleasure of being “in-the-know” about what I have to say this month for a while before I post the emails to my site.

Read the Pragmatic Manager here: Standup or Handoff.

However, I made a Big Mistake in where I will be speaking this week. I fat-fingered July 10 into July 19. What made it into the newsletter was July 19. Oops. I’m actually a panelist this Thursday, July 10, at Agile New England. The topic: Agile: Massive Success or Empty Buzzword?

My fellow panelists are Ken Schwaber and Linda Cook. We will have no shortage of opinions!

For example, I suspect that Ken and I might disagree on this very issue, of whether you can do agile with a geographically distributed team, and if you can have handoffs or you must do standups.

If you are near the Boston area, this Thursday, July 10, and want to see some sparks fly—or at least engage in lively debate—come to the Agile New England meeting July 10.

If you’re wondering how did this get past my reviewers, my copyeditor, and me? Well, we all make mistakes, don’t we?

Posted in agile | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Do You Encourage People to Bring You Problems?

One of the familiar tensions in management is how you encourage or discourage people from bringing you problems. One of my clients had a favorite saying, “Don’t bring me problems. Bring me solutions.”

I could see the problems that saying caused in the organization. He prevented people from bringing him problems until the problems were enormous. He didn’t realize that his belief that he was helping people solve their own problems was the cause of these huge problems.

How could I help?

I’d only been a consultant for a couple of years. I’d been a manager for several years, and a program manager and project manager for several years before that. I could see the system. This senior manager wasn’t really my client. I was consulting to a project manager, who reported to him, but not him. His belief system was the root cause of many of the problems.

What could I do?

I tried coaching my project manager, about what to say to his boss. That had some effect, but didn’t work well. My client, the project manager, was so dejected going into the conversation that the conversation was dead before it started. I needed to talk to the manager myself.

I thought about this first. I figured I would only get one shot before I was out on my ear. I wasn’t worried about finding more consulting—but I really wanted to help this client. Everyone was suffering.

I asked for a one-on-one with the senior manager. I explained that I wanted to discuss the project, and that the project manager was fine with this meeting. I had 30 minutes.

I knew that Charlie, this senior manager cared about these things: how fast we could release so we could move to the next project and what the customers would see (customer perception). He thought those two things would affect sales and customer retention.

Charlie had put tremendous pressure on the project to cut corners to release faster. But that would change the customer perception of what people saw and how they would use the product. I wanted to change his mind and provide him other options.

“Hey Charlie, this time still good?”

“Yup, come on in. You’re our whiz-bang consultant, right?”

“Yes, you could call me that. My job is to help people think things through and see alternatives. That way they can solve problems on the next project without me.”

“Well, I like that. You’re kind of expensive.”

“Yes, I am. But I’m very good. That’s why you pay me. So, let’s talk about how I’m helping people solve problems.”

“I help people solve problems. I always tell them, ‘Don’t bring me problems. Bring me solutions.’ It works every time.” He actually laughed when he said this.

I waited until he was done laughing. I didn’t smile.

“You’re not smiling.” He started to look puzzled.

“Well, in my experience, when you say things like that, people don’t bring you small problems. They wait until they have no hope of solving the problem at all. Then, they have such a big problem, no one can solve the problem. Have you seen that?”

He narrowed his eyes.

“Let’s talk about what you want for this project. You want a great release in the next eight weeks, right? You want customers who will be reference accounts, right? I can help you with that.”

Now he looked really suspicious.

“Okay, how are you going to pull off this miracle? John, the project manager was in here the other day, crying about how this project was a disaster.”

“Well, the project is in trouble. John and I have been talking about this. We have some plans. We do need more people. We need you to make some decisions. We have some specific actions only you can take. John has specific actions only he can take.

“Charlie, John needs your support. You need to say things like, “I agree that cross-functional teams work. I agree that people need to work on just one thing at a time until they are complete. I agree that support work is separate from project work, and that we won’t ask the teams to do support work until they are done with this project.” Can you do that? Those are specific things that John needs from you. But even those won’t get the project done in time.

“Well, what will get the project done in time?” He practically growled at me.

“We need consider alternatives to the way the project has been working. I’ve suggested alternatives to the teams. They’re afraid of you right now, because they don’t know which solution you will accept.”

“AFRAID? THEY’RE AFRAID OF ME?” He was screaming by this time.

“Charlie, do you realize you’re yelling at me?” I did not tell him to calm down. I knew better than that. I gave him the data.

“Oh, sorry. No. Maybe that’s why people are afraid of me.”

I grinned at him.

“You’re not afraid of me.”

“Not a chance. You and I are too much alike.” I kept smiling. “Would you like to hear some options? I like to use the Rule of Three to generate alternatives. Is it time to bring John in?”

We discussed the options with John. Remember, this is before agile. We discussed timeboxing, short milestones with criteria, inch-pebbles, yellow-sticky scheduling, and decided to go with what is now a design-to-schedule lifecycle for the rest of the project. We also decided to move some people over from support to help with testing for a few weeks.

We didn’t release in eight weeks. It took closer to twelve weeks. But the project was a lot better after that conversation. And, after I helped the project, I gained Charlie as a coaching client, which was tons of fun.

Many managers have rules about their problem solving and how to help or not help their staff. “Don’t bring me a problem. Bring me a solution” is not helpful.

That is the topic of this month’s management myth: Myth 31: I Don’t Have to Make the Difficult Choices.

When you say, “Don’t bring me a problem. Bring me a solution” you say, “I’m not going to make the hard choices. You are.” But you’re the manager. You get paid to make the difficult choices.

Telling people the answer isn’t always right. You might have to coach people. But not making decisions isn’t right either. Exploring options might be the right thing. You have to do what is right for your situation.

Go read Myth 31: I Don’t Have to Make the Difficult Choices.

Posted in management | Tagged , , , , , , | 7 Comments

Abuse of Management Power: Women’s Access to Contraceptives

You might think this is a political post. It is not. This is about management power and women’s health at first. Then, it’s about employee health.

Yesterday, the US Supreme Court decided that a company could withhold contraceptive care from women, based on the company’s owner’s religious beliefs. Hobby Lobby is a privately held corporation.

Women take contraception pills for many reasons. If you have endometriosis, you take them so you can have children in the future. You save your fertility by not bleeding out every month. (There’s more to it than that. That’s the short version.)

If you are subject to ovarian cysts, birth control pills control them, too. If you are subject to the monthly “crazies” and you want to have a little control over your hormones, the pill can do wonders for you.

It’s not about sex. It’s not about pregnancy. It’s about health. It’s about power over your own body.

And, don’t get me started on the myriad reasons for having a D&C. As someone who had a blighted ovum, and had to have a D&C at 13 weeks (yes, 13 weeks), I can tell you that I don’t know anyone who goes in for an abortion who is happy about it.

It was the saddest day of my life.

I had great health care and a supportive spouse. I had grief counseling. I eventually had another child. Because, you see, a blighted ovum is not really a miscarriage. It felt like one to me. But it wasn’t really. Just ask your healthcare provider.

Maybe some women use abortion or the morning-after pill as primary contraception. It’s possible. You don’t have to like other people’s choices. That should be their choice. If you make good contraception free, women don’t have to use abortion or the morning-after pill as a primary contraception choice.

When other people remove a woman’s right to choose how she gets health care for her body, it’s the first step down an evil road. This is not about religious freedom. Yes, it’s couched in those terms now. But this is about management power.

It’s the first step towards management deciding that they can make women a subservient class and what they can do to that subservient class. Right now, that class is women and contraception. What will the next class be?

Will management decide everyone must get genetic counseling before you have a baby? Will they force you to abort a not-perfect baby because they don’t want to pay for the cost of a preemie? Or the cost of a Down Syndrome baby? What about if you have an autistic child?

Men, don’t think you’re immune from this either. What if you indulge in high-risk behavior, such as helicopter skiing? Or, if you gain too much weight? What if you need knee replacements or hip replacements?

What if you have chronic diseases? What happens if you get cancer?

What about when people get old? Will we have euthanasia?

We have health care, including contraception, as the law of the United States. I cannot believe that a non-religious company, i.e, not a church, is being allowed to flaunt that law. This is about management power. This is not about religion.

If they can say, “I don’t wanna” to this, what can they say, “I don’t wanna” to next?

This is the abuse of management power.

This is the first step down a very slippery slope.

Posted in management | Tagged , , , , , | 23 Comments