I keep seeing too much micromanagement in organizations. That’s where managers decide for the people they lead and serve, not with the people they lead and serve. Micromanagement creates several problems: People stop learning how to solve problems because the manager steps in to tell them what to do. That leads to much lower throughput, […]
A senior leader, Jim, emailed me to clarify how to track a project’s progress. He’s a sales guy by training and is now leading a technology-based company. He’s confused. When he asks about progress, he feels as if everyone takes one step forward and two steps back, just as in the Project Kisses of Death
I’ve seen a number of posts recently saying that micromanagement isn’t as bad as we might think it is. Instead, micromanagement might actually help the person who’s the subject of that micromanagement. Sorry, no. Well, not sorry at all. Still No. Heck, NO. NO to all micromanagement. If any manager has micromanaged you, you know
For years, managers have been trying to find ways to make software product development faster and easier. As an industry, we’ve tried tons of things. Here are just the one I’ve experienced in the 70s, 80s, 90s: Structured Analysis and Design. (That was the precursor to Big Design Up Front.) The SEI’s Capability Maturity Model
If you took an agile workshop sometime in the past 15 years, you probably played the “ball game.” That’s where people emulate a Scrum approach, complete with asking the team to do “more.” As described in the link above, it can be a terrific simulation. There are many reasons to use simulations when trying to
In Effective Agility Requires Cultural Changes: Part 1, I said that real agile approaches require cultural change to focus on flow efficiency, where we focus on watching the work, not the people. Too few organizations can do that. But teams can change how they work—in any approach. Here are three suggestions to emulate flow efficiency
I see many teams and team members who say, “Agile stinks. It’s a way to force me to work too fast and not finish anything.” When I ask people what’s happening, they say: We’re doing an agile death march because someone else already told us what we have to do and the date it’s due.
In How Centralization Decisions Create Friction, Increase Cycle Time, and Cost Money, Part 1, I discussed how removing support staff for departments and managers created longer cycle times. (And sometimes, increased friction so much that people could not easily do their jobs.) Removing those support staff was one indication the companies fell into the Economies
In the first post, How Centralization Decisions Create Friction, Increase Cycle Time, and Cost Money, Part 1, I explained how centralizing even relatively small decisions to centralize has high costs. Why do organizations centralize? To supposedly capitalize on “economies of scale.” That’s the problem of understanding the cost of work—but not the value of that
Some company is buying your company (or vice versa). Why? They claim it’s “Economies of scale,” and the combined organization will save money by centralizing “overhead” and flattening management. You know who that “overhead” is: the people who support the business, such as finance and HR. And, the managers. Worse, the new management asks managers