Agile Mentors Podcast

Retrospectives are supposed to help teams improve, but for many teams they slowly become rushed, repetitive, or skipped altogether. In this episode, Brian Milner and Cort Sharp unpack why retrospectives lose their value and what Scrum Masters and leaders can do to make them useful again.   Overview When a team stops engaging in retrospectives, it is usually a symptom of something deeper. Sometimes the format has become stale. Sometimes the team no longer feels safe being honest. And sometimes the biggest issue is that retrospectives create plenty of discussion but very little meaningful change. In this conversation, Brian and Cort explore the most common reasons retrospectives begin to fail and how teams can rebuild trust in the process. They discuss the importance of psychological safety, why teams should focus on fewer actions instead of trying to fix everything at once, and how Scrum Masters can better tailor retrospectives to the personalities and working styles of their teams. They also share practical ideas for making retrospectives more engaging, more actionable, and more valuable over time.   References and resources mentioned in the show: Cort Sharp Amy Edmonson, Psychological Safety #139: The Retrospective Reset with Cort Sharp #141: Cooking Up a Killer Retrospective with Brian Milner The Empirical Retrospective Approach by Mike Cohn 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 a Certified Scrum Trainer®, Certified Scrum Professional®, Certified ScrumMaster®, and Certified Scrum Product Owner®, and host of the Agile Mentors Podcast 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.

A lot of organizations say they've “gone Agile,” but still struggle with missed deadlines, unclear priorities, and teams that feel busy without delivering better outcomes. In this episode, Scott Dunn joins Brian Milner to unpack why Agile ROI is so often misunderstood and what leaders should actually be measuring instead.    Overview What does a successful Agile transformation actually look like? Too often, organizations adopt Scrum or Agile practices because everyone else is doing it, without first defining the business outcomes they hope to achieve. The result is predictable: teams follow the motions of Agile while leadership struggles to see measurable value. In this conversation, Brian Milner and Scott Dunn explore why ROI conversations around Agile frequently go off track and how leaders can reconnect Agile practices to meaningful business goals like faster delivery, improved customer satisfaction, stronger collaboration, and better adaptability. They discuss the hidden cost of operationalizing Agile too early, why coaching and leadership alignment still matter, and how the rise of AI makes strong Agile fundamentals more important, not less.   References and resources mentioned in the show: Scott Dunn #104: Mastering Product Ownership with Mike Cohn #132: Can Nice Guys Finish First? with Scott Dunn Do the Proven Benefits of Agile Training Justify the Costs? by Mike Cohn 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 a Certified Scrum Trainer®, Certified Scrum Professional®, Certified ScrumMaster®, and Certified Scrum Product Owner®, and host of the Agile Mentors Podcast training at Mountain Goat Software. He's passionate about making a difference in people's day-to-day work, influenced by his own experience of transitioning to Scrum and seeing improvements in work/life balance, honesty, respect, and the quality of work. Scott Dunn is a Certified Enterprise Coach and Scrum Trainer with over 20 years of experience coaching and training companies like NASA, EMC/Dell Technologies, Yahoo!, Technicolor, and eBay to transition to an agile approach using Scrum.

Many leaders assume Agile breaks down in highly regulated environments. John Holmes has spent years proving the opposite inside aerospace, defense, and space programs where the cost of failure is extremely high.   Overview   In this episode, Brian Milner talks with Scrum Inc. Fellow John Holmes about what it actually takes to apply Scrum in complex defense and aerospace organizations. From military programs to space systems, John explains why Agile is often less about moving faster and more about creating visibility, improving communication, and reducing the risk of major surprises late in delivery.   John also shares practical lessons from coaching teams inside highly disciplined environments where command-and-control leadership has traditionally dominated. The conversation explores how Agile can strengthen discipline rather than weaken it, why trust and training matter more than process compliance, and how small operational changes can create meaningful improvements in delivery, alignment, and team effectiveness.   References and resources mentioned in the show:   John Holmes #107: Transforming Organizational Mindsets with Bernie Maloney #108: Adaptive Organizations with Ken Rickard There Is No End State When Transitioning to Agile by Mike Cohn 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 a Certified Scrum Trainer®, Certified Scrum Professional®, Certified ScrumMaster®, and Certified Scrum Product Owner®, and host of the Agile Mentors Podcast 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. John Holmes is a Scrum Inc. Fellow who has spent decades helping aerospace, defense, and government organizations apply Agile and Scrum in some of the world's most complex environments. From launching Scrum for Space at Lockheed Martin to training thousands of leaders and teams since 2005, John brings a practical, field-tested perspective on what it really takes to make Agile work where the stakes are high.

AI can help product owners move faster, but faster is not always better. In this episode, Lance Dacy and Brian Milner explore where AI genuinely improves product work and where teams still need strong judgment, clear priorities, and real customer understanding.   Overview   As development teams adopt AI tools at a rapid pace, product owners are under pressure to keep up. Brian and Lance discuss how AI is already changing backlog refinement, product discovery, stakeholder communication, and day-to-day product work. They also explore why many teams are still using AI too narrowly and missing larger opportunities to improve decision-making and collaboration.   The conversation stays grounded in practical application rather than hype. Lance shares where AI can save product owners meaningful time, where human judgment still matters most, and why teams need to be careful about treating AI-generated output as automatically correct. If your team is trying to understand how AI fits into modern product leadership, this episode offers a realistic starting point.   References and resources mentioned in the show:   Lance Dacy #117: How AI and Automation Are Redefining Success for Developers with Lance Dacy #164: Why Innovation Efforts Fall Flat with Tendayi Viki AI Doesn't Eliminate Agile Teams — It Increases the Need for Great Ones by Mike Cohn 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 a Certified Scrum Trainer®, Certified Scrum Professional®, Certified ScrumMaster®, and Certified Scrum Product Owner®, and host of the Agile Mentors Podcast 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. Lance Dacy is a Certified Scrum Trainer®, Certified Scrum Professional®, Certified ScrumMaster®, and Certified Scrum Product Owner®. Lance brings a great personality and servant's heart to his workshops. He loves seeing people walk away with tangible and practical things they can do with their teams straight away.

In a world changing faster than most teams can keep up with, standing still may be the biggest risk of all. Brian Milner sits down with Stavros Stavru to explore why experimentation is no longer optional and how teams can build a culture that adapts before disruption forces it to.   Overview Many organizations say they value experimentation, but few create the conditions that make real experimentation possible. Too often, teams either stay trapped in familiar patterns or mistake random change for meaningful learning. In this episode, Brian Milner talks with Stavros Stavru, author of Never Stop Experimenting, about what experimentation actually looks like in practice. Stavros shares how rapid advances in AI and constant disruption are forcing teams to rethink how they learn, adapt, and improve. Together, they discuss the difference between experimentation and “experimentation theater,” why small experiments matter, and how leaders can model the kind of curiosity and adaptability they want their teams to develop. Stavros also shares practical examples from his book, including simple ways teams can test assumptions, gather more honest feedback, and create stronger learning loops in their day-to-day work.   References and resources mentioned in the show: Stavros Stavru Never Stop Experimenting by Stavros Stavru, Ph.D. #56: The Power of Experimentation #118: The Secrets to Agile Success with Mike Cohn When Do Agile Teams Make Time for Innovation? By Mike Cohn 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 a Certified Scrum Trainer®, Certified Scrum Professional®, Certified ScrumMaster®, and Certified Scrum Product Owner®, and host of the Agile Mentors Podcast 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. Stavros Stavru is an organizational transformation researcher and Agile practitioner whose work focuses on helping teams create lasting alignment instead of temporary improvement. After two decades working with thousands of professionals across 500+ organizations, he founded AhaPlay to turn strategy and behavioral science into measurable team alignment without relying on facilitators.

Too many teams try to “do Agile” by adding layers of process before they understand the problem they're trying to solve. In this episode, Brian Milner and Cort Sharp discuss how to start Agile simply, avoid unnecessary complexity, and build practices that actually fit your team.   Overview When organizations first adopt Agile, they often make the same mistake: they start with frameworks, terminology, and process layers instead of focusing on visibility, feedback, and learning. The result is a system that feels heavy before it ever becomes useful. In this episode, Brian Milner and Cort Sharp explore a more practical approach to getting started with Agile. They discuss why teams should focus on foundational concepts like transparency, short feedback loops, and clear priorities before worrying about scaling frameworks or advanced practices. Brian and Cort also share the common “drag factors” that slow Agile adoption down, including process overload, coordination complexity, and measuring the wrong outcomes. If your team is trying to become more Agile without creating more bureaucracy, this episode offers a practical starting point.   References and resources mentioned in the show:   Cort Sharp Introducing An Agile Process to an Organization by Mike Cohn + Doris Ford Relationship between Definition of Done and Conditions of Satisfaction by Mike Cohn Why Agile Teams Put So Much Emphasis on Being Done Each Iteration by Mike Cohn 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 a Certified Scrum Trainer®, Certified Scrum Professional®, Certified ScrumMaster®, and Certified Scrum Product Owner®, and host of the Agile Mentors Podcast 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.

Velocity can help a team plan, but it creates problems when leaders use it to judge performance. In this episode, Brian Milner and Scott Dunn explain why that shift happens so often and what leaders should pay attention to instead.   Overview Velocity is one of the most misunderstood metrics in Agile. Used well, it helps a team forecast and make planning decisions. Used poorly, it becomes a productivity score that encourages inflated estimates, unhealthy comparisons, and a focus on output rather than value. In this episode, Brian and Scott discuss why leaders often reach for velocity, why it gives them the wrong signal, and how teams can reconnect measurement to outcomes, learning, and business impact. They also explore how AI is making this issue more urgent by increasing delivery speed while putting even more pressure on leaders to ask whether teams are building the right things.   References and resources mentioned in the show: Scott Dunn #35: Metrics with Lance Dacy Rethink the Refinement Session: Less Time, Better Outcomes by Mike Cohn The Cost of Change Curve Is Outdated by Mike Cohn 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 a Certified Scrum Trainer®, Certified Scrum Professional®, Certified ScrumMaster®, and Certified Scrum Product Owner®, and host of the Agile Mentors Podcast training at Mountain Goat Software. He's passionate about making a difference in people's day-to-day work, influenced by his own experience of transitioning to Scrum and seeing improvements in work/life balance, honesty, respect, and the quality of work.  Scott Dunn is a Certified Enterprise Coach and Scrum Trainer with over 20 years of experience coaching and training companies like NASA, EMC/Dell Technologies, Yahoo!, Technicolor, and eBay to transition to an agile approach using Scrum. 

Many agile struggles don't start with the team. They start with leadership decisions that seem reasonable but create friction, confusion, or misalignment over time. In this episode, Mike Cohn outlines the patterns that most often hold organizations back and what leaders can do differently.   Overview In this episode, Brian Milner and Mike Cohn examine the leadership decisions that most often derail agile efforts. Rather than focusing on team-level practices, the conversation centers on how leadership behavior shapes outcomes across the organization. Mike highlights several recurring issues: treating agile as a process change instead of a mindset shift, scaling before understanding what works, limiting product owner authority, and prioritizing speed over focus. He also addresses how well-intentioned leadership actions can unintentionally slow teams down or create dependency. The discussion emphasizes that agile is not something leaders delegate. It requires changes in how leaders make decisions, set boundaries, and engage with teams. When those changes do not happen, teams may follow the motions of agile without seeing meaningful improvement. If your organization is “doing agile” but not seeing the expected results, this episode offers a practical way to assess where leadership decisions may be contributing to the problem—and where to adjust first.   References and resources mentioned in the show: Mike Cohn #118: The Secrets to Agile Success with Mike Cohn #143: What Still Makes Teams Work (and Win) with Jim York Why Teams Matter More Than Ever for Innovation by Mike Cohn How To Fail With Agile: Twenty Tips to Help You Avoid Success by Mike Cohn + Clinton Keith 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 a Certified Scrum Trainer®, Certified Scrum Professional®, Certified ScrumMaster®, and Certified Scrum Product Owner®, and host of the Agile Mentors Podcast 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.  Mike Cohn, CEO of Mountain Goat Software, is a passionate advocate for agile methodologies. Co-founder of Agile Alliance and Scrum Alliance, he thrives on helping companies succeed with Agile and witnessing its transformative impact on individuals' careers. Mike resides in Northern Idaho with his family, two Havanese dogs, and an impressive hot sauce collection.

AI isn't just speeding up coding. It's starting to change how teams work, what they build, and even who needs to be involved. In this episode, Brian and Hunter separate real impact from hype and explore what's already shifting inside teams.   Overview AI tools are improving fast, but what does that actually mean for teams doing the work? In this episode, Brian Milner sits down with Hunter Hillegas, CTO of Mountain Goat Software, to explore how AI is being used today inside real software teams. They dig into where these tools are genuinely accelerating work, from coding agents and automated testing to analyzing large data sets and reducing friction in everyday tasks. They also unpack the growing shift from writing code to reviewing it, and what that means for developers and team dynamics. At the same time, they address the gap between hype and reality. Where does AI perform well, and where does it still fall short? What happens when adoption is pushed top-down without clarity? And how might AI start to reshape roles, collaboration, and expectations across a team? This is a practical, honest look at what's changing right now, where to start if you're new to these tools, and how to think about AI as part of your team without losing sight of how real teams actually work.   References and resources mentioned in the show:   Hunter Hillegas Mountaingoat Software's AI Toolkit #82: The Intersection of AI and Agile with Emilia Breton #169: Building Practical AI for Agile Teams with Hunter Hillegas #175: When AI Makes Agile Teams Worse with Hunter Hillegas AI Doesn't Eliminate Agile Teams — It Increases the Need for Great Ones by Mike Cohn How to Use AI for Product Discovery and Writing Better User Stories by Mike Cohn 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 a Certified Scrum Trainer®, Certified Scrum Professional®, Certified ScrumMaster®, and Certified Scrum Product Owner®, and host of the Agile Mentors Podcast 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.  Hunter Hillegas is the Chief Technology Officer at Mountain Goat Software. With over 20 years of experience in software development, product ownership, and team leadership, he leads the creation of tools like the AI Toolkit and Team Home to support effective, engaging learning experiences. Hunter lives in Santa Barbara, California, with his wife and their dog Enzo.

Most teams say they want to improve. Few actually build the habits that make it happen. In this episode, Brian and Lance break down what separates teams that learn from teams that stall—and what leaders do that quietly gets in the way.   Overview What does it really take to become a learning team? In this episode, Brian Milner and Lance Dacy walk through five habits that show up in teams that continuously improve—and the leadership behaviors that either support or shut them down. From psychological safety and truth-telling to short learning cycles and focusing on the right problems, they unpack what actually drives improvement inside real organizations. Along the way, they challenge common assumptions about silence, metrics, and “heroic” problem-solving, and offer practical ways leaders can shift their approach starting immediately. If your team feels stuck, busy but not improving, or hesitant to speak up, this conversation gets to the root of why—and what to do about it.   References and resources mentioned in the show:   Lance Dacy Blog: Why Teams Matter More Than Ever for Innovation by Mike Cohn #143: What Still Makes Teams Work (and Win) with Jim York #171: Why Agile Teams Succeed—or Don't with Colin Fisher 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 a Certified Scrum Trainer®, Certified Scrum Professional®, Certified ScrumMaster®, and Certified Scrum Product Owner®, and host of the Agile Mentors Podcast 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.  Lance Dacy is a Certified Scrum Trainer®, Certified Scrum Professional®, Certified ScrumMaster®, and Certified Scrum Product Owner®. Lance brings a great personality and servant's heart to his workshops. He loves seeing people walk away with tangible and practical things they can do with their teams straight away.

Many product teams are busy, but not necessarily effective. Brian Milner talks with product consultant Jason Knight about why so many organizations struggle with prioritization, customer insight, and measuring success—and what it takes to build a product organization that actually delivers value.   Overview What does it really mean to transform a product organization? Brian Milner sits down with product consultant and One Knight in Product host Jason Knight to explore the gap between how product management is described in books and how it actually works inside most companies. They discuss the reality many teams face: massive backlogs full of competing priorities, pressure from stakeholders, and organizations that say they are customer-focused but rarely talk to customers. Jason shares practical perspectives on prioritization, strategy, and why good product teams must learn to say no—even to good ideas. The conversation also dives into customer discovery, the barriers that keep teams from speaking directly with users, and how organizations should think about measuring success beyond simply “building the feature.” If your organization is trying to move beyond feature factories and build a stronger product practice, this episode offers a grounded look at where to start.   References and resources mentioned in the show: Jason Knight One Knight in Product Podcast Blog: What Does a Product Owner Do, When, and Why? Blog: How to Ensure You're Working on the Most Important Items Each Iteration by Mike Cohn #124: How to Avoid Common Product Team Pitfalls with David Pereira #154: The Underpowered PO with Barnaby Golden 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 a Certified Scrum Trainer®, Certified Scrum Professional®, Certified ScrumMaster®, and Certified Scrum Product Owner®, and host of the Agile Mentors Podcast 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.  Jason Knight is a product consultant, coach, and host of the One Knight in Product podcast who helps scaling B2B companies move beyond feature factories and build product teams that deliver real business impact. He works with organizations to connect strategy to execution through fractional product leadership, workshops, and coaching that bring clarity, alignment, and measurable results.  

AI can make teams faster. But it can also quietly make them worse. In this episode, Brian Milner and Hunter Hillegas dig into the risks no one wants to talk about—from eroding developer judgment to weakening team communication—and what healthy teams should do about it.   Overview AI tools are powerful. They can generate code, draft tests, and accelerate delivery in ways that felt impossible just a few years ago. But speed is not the same as effectiveness. In this episode, Brian sits down with Mountain Goat Software CTO Hunter Hillegas to explore where AI may actually be hurting Agile teams. They discuss the risk of losing junior developer growth paths, the illusion of productivity through inflated metrics, the danger of outsourcing judgment, and how AI can quietly create communication silos inside Scrum teams. This is not an anti-AI conversation. It is a practical one. You will hear what guardrails healthy teams should consider, why accountability still belongs to humans, and how to use AI as a tool without letting it reshape your culture in ways you did not intend. If your team is leaning into AI, this episode will help you do it with your eyes open.   References and resources mentioned in the show: Hunter Hillegas Blog: AI Doesn't Eliminate Agile Teams — It Increases the Need for Great Ones by Mike Cohn #169: Building Practical AI for Agile Teams with Hunter Hillegas #82: The Intersection of AI and Agile with Emilia Breton #151: What AI Is Really Delivering (and What It's Not) with Evan Leybourn & Christopher Morales Mountain Goat Software 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 a Certified Scrum Trainer®, Certified Scrum Professional®, Certified ScrumMaster®, and Certified Scrum Product Owner®, and host of the Agile Mentors Podcast 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.  Hunter Hillegas is the Chief Technology Officer at Mountain Goat Software. With over 20 years of experience in software development, product ownership, and team leadership, he leads the creation of tools like the AI Toolkit and Team Home to support effective, engaging learning experiences. Hunter lives in Santa Barbara, California, with his wife and their dog Enzo.

Estimating can bring out strong reactions, and for good reason. Mike Cohn and Brian Milner unpack why it gets misused, what “estimate responsibly” really means, and how to use planning to make better decisions without turning numbers into weapons. Overview In this episode, Brian sits down with Mike Cohn to talk about estimating and planning in a way that teams can actually live with. They explore why estimates became such a hot button topic, what the “no estimates” movement is reacting to, and how Mike's thinking has evolved over time. You will hear practical guidance on story points versus time, why teams should estimate only when it helps someone make a decision, and how to keep estimates from damaging trust. They also cover where flow metrics help, where they fall short, and how teams build credibility with leadership through responsible planning. References and resources mentioned in the show: Mike Cohn Estimating & Planning in Agile - A 2026 Field Guide Accurate Agile Planning Course Blog: Estimating and Planning in Agile: Why They Still Matter in 2026 by Mike Cohn Blog: Getting Better Estimates Is Easier Than You Think by Mike Cohn Blog: What Are Agile Story Points? By Mike Cohn 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 a Certified Scrum Trainer®, Certified Scrum Professional®, Certified ScrumMaster®, and Certified Scrum Product Owner®, and host of the Agile Mentors Podcast 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. Mike Cohn, CEO of Mountain Goat Software, is a passionate advocate for agile methodologies. Co-founder of Agile Alliance and Scrum Alliance, he thrives on helping companies succeed with Agile and witnessing its transformative impact on individuals' careers. Mike resides in Northern Idaho with his family, two Havanese dogs, and an impressive hot sauce collection.

Hiring for Scrum roles is harder than it looks. Making the wrong call can derail an Agile transformation before it even starts. In this episode, Brian and Cort unpack what to actually look for in Scrum Masters, Product Owners, and Developers—beyond the job title and shiny certifications.

Most agile transformations start with energy, and then stall out when things get complex. In this episode, Mike Cohn returns with a practical framework to help teams and leaders spot what’s missing, build lasting momentum, and navigate change with more clarity and intention.

Most teams aren’t broken because of individual incompetence. They’re struggling because the group itself isn’t set up to thrive. In this episode, author and researcher Colin Fisher joins Brian to reframe how we think about team performance, conflict, and psychological safety through the lens of real science, real practice, and a little jazz.

What can Agile leaders learn from the Marines? In this episode, Tanner Wortham joins Brian to share how principles of military leadership—like building authority into the trenches, experimenting under pressure, and prioritizing shared mission over ego—map surprisingly well to modern Agile teams.

It’s not just about cool tools. Hunter Hillegas (CTO at Mountain Goat Software) joins Brian to unpack what it’s really like to build with AI—from hallucinations and context management to dev workflows, testing strategies, and where the humans still matter most.

It’s not a full episode this week—but it might be the one your heart needs. Brian Milner shares what he’s truly grateful for this year (spoiler: it’s not a new tool or framework), reflects on the human side of agility, and invites you to join him in a quick pause before the final sprint of 2025.

Consultant and collaboration expert Evan Unger joins Brian to share practical tactics for leading more engaging, effective meetings that actually get results (and don’t drain everyone’s will to live).

AI is already changing how we work—and how we work together. In this episode, Dr. Michael Housman joins Brian Milner to explore how AI is reshaping team collaboration, decision-making, and the very structure of Agile teams.

If AI is speeding up how fast we can ship, what’s slowing teams down now? Brian and returning guest Cort Sharp dig into the emerging friction between AI-assisted development and the still-slow art of product decision-making.

Tendayi Viki joins Brian to unpack the difference between doing innovation and delivering value, with practical takeaways for product folks, innovation teams, and anyone who wants to stop spinning their wheels.

Five years post-COVID, are we any closer to knowing what kind of work environment actually works best? Brian and Lance dig into the real drivers behind return-to-office mandates, remote productivity myths, and why "context beats location" every time.

What happens when your brain loves puzzles… but struggles with where to start? Paige Watson shares how ADHD shapes his work as a developer—and how practices like TDD, mob programming, and discovery trees help him stay focused, move forward, and actually enjoy the ride.

AI might write your code, but can you trust it to do it well? Clare Sudbery says: not without a safety net. In this episode, she explains how test-driven development is evolving in the age of AI, and why developers need to slow down, not speed up.

What separates a solid Scrum Master from a great one? In this episode, Brian Milner sits down with veteran Scrum Master Brian Campbell to talk about the balance between being empathetic, staying grounded, and knowing when it’s time to move on.

“Too many meetings” is one of the most common complaints in Scrum teams, but is it really the meetings, or what’s (not) happening in them? In this episode, Brian and Lance Dacy dig into the events of Scrum to uncover what works, what doesn’t, and how to make each one actually add value.

Is your team dreading retrospectives, or skipping them altogether? Mike Cohn joins Brian Milner to unpack what’s really going wrong (and how to fix it) so retros don’t just take up time… they actually make your team better.

Scrum isn’t new, but the questions teams are asking about it are evolving. In this episode, Brian and Cort Sharp compare notes on what they're hearing in class, in the community, and behind the scenes.

Shared services teams often wonder: Does product ownership still apply here—or are we the exception to the rule? In this episode, Brian and Kert Peterson explore how Scrum principles hold up when value isn’t always customer-facing and demand never stops.

Even the most capable professionals can struggle in interviews. In this episode, Brian and job interview coach Tali Shlafer break down why, and what to do instead. Overview In this episode of the Agile Mentors Podcast, Brian welcomes interview coach Tali Shlafer for a practical, clear-eyed conversation about how to approach job interviews as a skill, not a personality trait. Tali shares why being great at your job doesn’t automatically translate to interview success, especially in collaborative fields like product development, Agile coaching, and project management. She outlines a straightforward way to prepare for interviews by identifying the real challenges behind a role and building stories that speak directly to them, without sounding rehearsed or robotic. From reframing “bragging” as problem-solving to handling tough questions with clarity and self-awareness, this episode is full of grounded advice for professionals navigating their next move. References and resources mentioned in the show: Tali Shlafer Free Job Interview Tip Vault Tali's LinkedIn Tali's Instagram #93: The Rise of Human Skills and Agile Acumen with Evan Leybourn #111: Adapting to the Future of Work with Heather McGowan Blog: Entry-Level Scrum Masters: Seven Tips on How to Get Your First Scrum Master Job by Mike Cohn AI Prompt Pack for Product Owners & Scrum Masters 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 a Certified Scrum Trainer®, Certified Scrum Professional®, Certified ScrumMaster®, and Certified Scrum Product Owner®, and host of the Agile Mentors Podcast 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. Tali Shlafer is a certified interview coach who helps high performers turn nerves into clarity and confidence so they can land roles they’re truly excited about. Her practical frameworks—rooted in psychology, communication, and performance—ditch the gimmicks and empower candidates to show up as their best, most authentic selves. Auto-generated Transcript: Brian Milner (00:00) Welcome in everyone. We're back for another episode of the Agile Mentors Podcast. I'm with you as always, Brian Milner. And today I have Miss Tali Schläufer with us. Welcome in Tali. Tali Shlafer (00:11) Thanks, Brian. I'm excited to be here. Brian Milner (00:13) Very excited to have Tali with us. She is a job interview coach so you can kind of See the direction we're going in here one of her tagline is that she she helps you know professionals get offers they're really excited about and She's got some really interesting insights here because I know in today's world in today's environment There is a lot of shifting going on. There's a lot of transitioning between different places of work. And that interview is always kind of the forgotten portion of it, right? You get past all the other stuff, you get to the point where you're in the interview. So Tali, from your perspective, I know you see and help a lot of people with that portion of it. What are some of the biggest mistakes that people make that you see routinely as you help people prepare for their interviews? Tali Shlafer (01:01) Yeah, absolutely. I think one of the things that you just mentioned where, you know, people really struggling with the interview piece, you do all this work in your job search to update your resume, update your LinkedIn network, all this stuff, and then you get to the interview and it's like, okay, we're close. It's actually the interview is actually a completely different stage than anything else. And one mistake that I often see people making is just the mindset around interviews. A lot of people think, if I'm great at my job, I'll just interview really well. Like I'm a top performer. I'm good to go. But interviewing is actually a skill that's completely separate from anything else we do in the workplace. It requires you to be able to articulate what you've done in the workplace and the results and the impact that you brought in a way that most of us don't have to do in our day-to-day jobs. And you have to do it better than everybody else. So just because you are a top performer doesn't necessarily mean that that translates into your ability. to talk about yourself and talk about your career, especially in a way that resonates with the specific job culture and the specific job that you're applying for. So I think that's kind of the top mistake that I would just from a mindset level, is seeing interviews as something that you're naturally good at rather than as a skill that you can really develop and build in order to set yourself up for success. Brian Milner (02:12) Yeah. Yeah, that's a great point because, know, just because, as you said, just because I'm a top performer in something that I do, have a huge skill set or knowledge area that I'm really good at, doesn't mean that I'm necessarily good at an interview process because it is kind of a whole set of other communication skills that you have to have in that kind of environment. I know when I've talked to people about it sometimes, they feel sort of this, I don't know, dichotomy a little bit back and forth about... I know I'm supposed to plug myself here. I know I'm supposed to kind of brag a little bit, but I also don't want to sound cocky. I don't want to sound, you know, I don't know, just brash or anything. How do you help people or what do you advise people about in that area? Tali Shlafer (03:06) Yeah, and I think this is really common for people who are top performers and people who are very team oriented and collaboration oriented. It's really difficult for those folks to go, hey, I did all this stuff by myself and to kind of put themselves in that spotlight. So it's a very common challenge. It's also very common for folks who are really good at their job and have been doing this for a long time to actually be able to articulate. what that secret sauce is, like why they're actually good at their job, which is part of the challenge. Remind me the question that you just asked. Brian Milner (03:38) No, I'm just, in talking about kind of like how people prepare for these kind of things, the way they communicate this stuff, sometimes it's kind of more this worry about am I being a little too overbearing or brash in how I'm bragging about myself? Will I come off seeming cocky? or overconfident, how do they walk that fine line? Tali Shlafer (04:03) Yeah, I think this is a really big mindset piece where a lot of people who are those top performers and are very collaborative in nature are afraid to talk about themselves and be in the spotlight and kind of take credit where, especially in something like in the agile world or project management, product management, it's a very collaborative space. people are afraid to like, people are afraid to say, here's what I did. And Part of the mindset shift that I really encourage clients and job seekers to have is rather than to see it as, hey, the interview is all about you and the spotlight's on you and you're a used car salesman trying to promo yourself and it feels really icky so we don't want to do it. We end up not doing it at all. Think of it rather as you're trying to help this employer solve a problem. You're on the same side of the table with them. You're essentially a consultant for them. Their problem is... Hey, I've got this role. I have this challenge in my company. I have this opportunity. I have this thing that I need help with and I need to find who's going to be able to help me do that. And so you're essentially being an advisor for them and sharing here's how my previous experiences and what I've done in the past might be able to help you with your challenges. So it's really, it's really a partnership type of conversation where you're exploring, well, what are you struggling with? and how, let me share ways that I think I might be able to help. I think having that mindset is a lot more helpful for people who are more collaborative in nature. I think there's also a part of it that is getting really clear on how your work has actually delivered results. Being really confident, a lot of folks who are more collaborative in nature, which is a lot of people that I work with. tend to really get stuck in the we. So they say, we deliver this, we manage this, we strategize in this way. And then the interviewer ends up losing the thread of, well, what did this person sitting across from me do? What did they lead? What did they manage versus what did they do collaboratively? so getting really clear and even getting some language around how to talk about your contributions with respect to the team. So saying, I led this strategy session or I facilitated the collaboration of this, or I made the suggestion to people who then made a decision. Those kind of nuanced pieces of communication can help us feel more comfortable with actually owning our story in a way that doesn't feel gross. Brian Milner (06:39) Yeah, I think you make a great point there about the partnership aspect of it because having been on both sides of the table there, I know when I was hiring people as a software manager of some kind, the thought is always when the person comes in, you want to hire them. When they've reached that stage, when you finally bring them in, you're excited about the people that you decided to bring in and you're pulling for them. You want them to actually be successful. So I think it's important to keep that in mind too, that they want you to be successful. They want that role filled or they wouldn't have put out the job wreck and all the other things. If you, so let's just kind of talk through on a practical level. If you, you've done the work, you've put out the resume, you've got the call, maybe you've even gone through, well, I guess we should talk about that as well. Kind of the difference between a virtual or phone interview and an in-person interview. Is there a difference in level of prep or in how you, you know. tricks to being more successful if it's virtual versus in person. Tali Shlafer (07:50) I think the preparation itself should be the same. At the end of the day, your preparation should be about what are the challenges that this company, that this organization is facing and how does this role help solve those challenges? What are the skills? What are the top five skills that I need to demonstrate? Hard and soft skills. And in order to show them that I can be the top performer for this role and what are stories that I can share for each one of those skills. to prove that, I have what it takes, I can actually walk the walk as well. I've gotten results in this area before. So the prep work itself in the days leading up to the interview should be more or less the same. I would say the difference between a virtual interview versus an in-person interview is just people's comfort level. I think a lot of people are really comfortable in in-person interviews because it feels like you're actually talking to a human, right? You have a full-size person sitting across from the table from you. So it's a lot more comfortable. And I think even though through COVID, we had a lot more virtual conversations, there's still a very performative feeling element to it when it comes to virtual interviews. So one of my top tips for virtual interviews is please turn off your self view. So if you're in the Zoom call and if you're in a meeting, because it makes people so nervous and self-conscious. So when you get on that Zoom call, that Teams call, whatever platform you're using, make sure you're in the frame, right? Make sure that your lighting is good, all that stuff, and then turn off that camera so that you're not just watching yourself and being super self-conscious the entire time. Because think about it, in what other context in your life, when you're having a conversation with someone, do you have a mirror that you're looking at? Brian Milner (09:36) Right, right, I mean, if you're in their interview room, unless there's a mirror all the way around, you're not really getting that view. And even if you did, you probably wouldn't watch yourself in the mirror the entire time. So yeah, that's a great tip. And I think you're absolutely right. It can lead to being very, very self-conscious then. I think it's, I want to go back a little bit to the prep because I think your tip there is a really important thing is to try to understand the challenges, understand what it is they're looking for. And it just struck me as you were saying that it seems very similar to, in my kind of line of work, I do a lot of consulting work with people. And when I have a client that's a prospective client, it's almost the same thing. where you have to research a little bit about the company ahead of time. If you're doing kind of a sales call prior to the engagement, it's very similar. And I just thought about that. There is an overlap there between that and job interviews because you are selling yourself. You are selling your services to that company. Tali Shlafer (10:36) And a lot of people, here's another mistake that a lot of people, a lot of well-meaning people make is as part of their prep work, going online and finding a bunch of questions that they can then prepare for. So it's a very, I kind of call it whack-a-mole where, hey, let me try to figure out all the possible questions I might get asked and write out answers for those. Brian Milner (10:51) Ha ha. Tali Shlafer (10:59) That might get some people results. And if it's getting you results, that's great. But what I really encourage people to do is really reverse engineer your talking points from the job description, from what you know, even, you know, once you've had the conversation with the recruiter, you know, a little bit more about the position than maybe is even listed on the job description. So compile everything that you know about this opportunity and figure out, okay, what are the most important things for me to be able to articulate rather than just guessing at. random questions that the internet says you might get asked. Brian Milner (11:32) Yeah, that's a great point. I know we all want to get past that and get to the job, but I think there's also an element there of, let's say you do memorize these questions and they just happen to ask you the exact questions you had prepared for. If you don't really have that knowledge, then you're not going to really do well in that job even if you get it. So it's almost a blessing to not get that job, you know, if you didn't know that information, because they're going to be counting on you to do that. And you're not going to be a you're not going to do your job well then. Yeah. Tali Shlafer (12:06) Yeah, and the memorizing piece that you just mentioned is really, really easy for people to fall into the trap of trying to memorize their answers, especially with chat GPT and AI. Everybody's thinking, well, let's use these AI tools to help us come up with interview answers. so we plug in, job seekers will plug in, here's a bunch of questions that I might get. Look at my resume, tell me how can I answer these questions? And it feels safe. It feels like, this very smart robot or technology is gonna say this in a better way than I can. Brian Milner (12:36) you Tali Shlafer (12:40) But it really sets people up for failure most of the time because number one, most people aren't good at memorizing things, right? Most of us don't have to do that as our job. So most of us are really bad at memorizing. Number two, it makes you sound like a robot. It doesn't sound human. You lose the attention of the person who you're talking with. And number three, doesn't when you just memorize answers rather than thinking about it as what are talking points that I can riff off, riff on and kind of reuse and recycle and tell stories with. When you memorize, it puts you in the position of, well, yeah, it's great if they ask you that exact question. And some questions you will get asked, like tell me about yourself, you're going to get 99 % of the time. But for the most part, if you memorize a set of 10 questions and one of those questions gets a slight variation, or they ask a question that's not on there, you end up panicking. You don't know how to think on your feet because you're reliant on your tool. You've used AI or you've used your script as a strategy rather than a tool. Brian Milner (13:42) Yeah, that's a great point. I'm kind of wanting to get your take on this because this is a big thing that I know often comes up in these kinds of interviews is those questions that we all hate to get that you just know, no one ever knows how to answer these things. So I'm just curious how you advise people, you know, the awful question like, you know, give me some of your weaknesses or give me some of the things that you're not good at. How do you advise people to handle those kind of questions when they get asked in interviews? Tali Shlafer (14:14) Yeah, so there are definitely some questions that we tend to hear more often than others, especially when it comes to those recruiter interviews. The tell me about yourself, what are your strengths? What are your weaknesses? Tell me about a time you had to deal with a conflict. Tell me about a time you had to deal with a mistake. Those are pretty common, I would say, in that initial recruiter conversation. It's always an interview in my book. The weakness question I know is one of the that and the tell me about yourself is what really stresses people out. Brian Milner (14:40) Ha Tali Shlafer (14:43) My general advice for the weakness is actually something that I heard Adam Grant, who's an organizational psychology at Wharton share, which is pick something that is real but not disqualifying. So if you're an Agilist, your weakness should probably not be scrum or not be, you know, understanding business requirements. But it could be something like public speaking. Brian Milner (15:00) Ha Tali Shlafer (15:08) Or it could be something like delegating, where, you know, it's something real and it's not... It's something authentic. Authenticity is really, really important, especially nowadays in interviews. But it doesn't stop you from being able to perform well. So what I typically advise is pick a weakness, like Adam Grant says, that's real but not disqualifying. And this is important, and where a lot of people miss out, share what are you doing to actually address it? Because what we want to do, the point of that question isn't tell us what's wrong with you so we can judge you and disqualify you from the job. It's the subcontext of it is do you have self-awareness? Are you somebody who is aware enough and humble enough to know your shortcomings? And are you someone who's proactive about fixing them? and about becoming a better person. So the second part of that answer should be, well, what have you done to try to improve? What are specific steps that you've taken in order to improve? Brian Milner (16:09) Yeah, that's a great response. I know I've heard the traditional, you try to say one of your strengths as, I guess my weakness is I work too hard, like that kind of thing. Which I agree, it's not sincere. If I'm hearing that and I'm interviewing someone, that could disqualify him in my book, because I could think, this person is not going be honest with me. ⁓ Tali Shlafer (16:20) Yeah. or the I'm a perfectionist piece? The most common answer to that question. Brian Milner (16:33) Alright, I'm a perfectionist, right? Yeah, exactly. Well, you hit on the other big one too, the tell me about yourself. How do you advise people to handle that? Do you have a script in mind? you kind of detail out a couple of things? What's important to hit when someone asks you to just tell me about yourself? Tali Shlafer (16:54) Yeah, I'm a big fan of formulas over scripts. So I'll share my formula, but let me share a couple things that derail people. Let's kind of establish what's not helpful. And then we can kind of talk about this formula, which by the way, lots of different career coaches have different formulas. There's not necessarily one that works. It's just pick something and learn to do it really well. A lot of people will go in and start well. I graduated from the University of Washington in 1995, and they give kind of their entire history. And we lose the interviewer right away when we do that. So rather than giving them a chronological history of everything that's happened in your career and asking them, when we do that, we are essentially asking them, hey, here's all this information and data. You make sense of it. You figure out how it's relevant to you. I think it's actually really kind to use a formula to help them understand. Here's everything you need to know about me as it pertains to this role. So taking everything, taking your history and your career through the filter of what is important to demonstrate for this role. So the formula that I teach is sharing a super quick background. Hey, I'm Tali, I've been a project manager for the last 10 years. That's not true, that's not, let me reset that. So I think starting with a very brief. Brian Milner (18:12) You Tali Shlafer (18:16) sentence about yourself, your relevant role, how long you've had experience. Hey, I'm John. I've been project manager for the last 10 years, sharing the three key skills that you need to have in order to succeed at this job. And for each of those three skills, can you list an accomplishment or a metric or a success story? And we're not telling a whole story. We're just giving them here's the highlight reel, here's the headline, and then you'll click into all of those stories later. So quick little background about yourself, three main skills that you've developed that are relevant for this role, and super high level accomplishment to demonstrate those skills. So that's a little bit, that kind of is the first half, and that talks more about your previous experiences. And then in the second half of this answer, we want to pivot it to the future. So the first half is really about the past, it's about yourself. And then in the second half, we want to pivot to the future. what are you looking for in your next role? And hopefully that thing is also in that, that whatever you're looking for in your next role should dovetail really nicely into what they're offering as a company and as, as a, as an organization. What are you looking for specifically in your next role? And why are you so excited about interviewing with this company? And we want to share something really specific that We want to share something specific that feels personal. Where a lot of people go wrong is they'll share something like, I really want growth in my next role. And I'm excited about this team because I know you guys really value innovation. That doesn't really tell us anything. So we want one level of detail lower. So I'm really excited. What I really want in my next role is more leadership opportunities, so opportunities to mentor. And I'm really excited about this particular opportunities because I looked on your website, I looked at your blog posts, I looked at your, you know, CEO's posts that they share on LinkedIn. And I can tell that this is a really important part of your culture is being able to mentor people up into higher positions, right? Getting that specific, and there's not a right answer. I remember when I was interviewing for... out of college, I was interviewing for T-Mobile for an internship. And my answer was, I've talked to a lot of people, I've networked with a lot of people at T-Mobile. And one thing that really strikes me is the fact that a lot of people will leave for local companies like Microsoft, Amazon, and then they come back. There's a lot of people who spend a lot of time here. really does. There's a lot of loyalty and the culture, like I shared things that are specific to the culture and there's not a right answer here. It just needs to be. specific and it needs to be something that when you talk about it you kind of start getting butterflies because that's contagious. Brian Milner (21:07) That's awesome. Well, I want to ask about kind of the other half of the interview or the other portion of the interview as well. They, you know, I often hear people say, you know, you should walk into the interview understanding that it's a two way interview. They're interviewing you, but you're interviewing them as well because you want to know, is this the right place for me? So I can make the right decision about where I'm going to end up. What kind of things do you advise people to ask about or to focus on? What are some things that might expose some hidden things about the organization, warning signs or anything like that that might pop up in an interview to ask about? Tali Shlafer (21:45) That's a really good question. think one thing, it really depends on the opportunity and what you're looking for. So I don't think that there's one magic question that if you ask it, oh, the person's gonna be super impressed. Let me back up. What I really like about what you just said, is the framing of the questions that you ask at the end as a two-way conversation and as a way for you to understand more about the company so you can see if it's a good fit. I think a lot of people, especially in tough job markets, tend to kind of close their eyes and hope they get something and they almost blind themselves to the fact that they need to also do the work to make sure that it's a good fit. Or I see a lot of people who go, well, what can I ask that's impressive? What questions can I ask that's going to really wow them at the end, rather than seeing it as an opportunity to really understand what they offer more? So I would sit down and prioritize what is really important for you in a culture. if getting feedback, if growth is important for you, making sure to ask about, can you tell me about recently on your team, somebody who was promoted or how you helped somebody grow in the company? The best way that we can learn about something is through examples. The best proof that somebody values something is through the examples that they share. So we want to ask, kind of like you hear behavioral questions, you get asked, like, tell me about a time when. You can also use that, figure out what's important for you, and then create. Ask questions specifically about those things. One question that I think can be really helpful to get you to get a sense of what kind of person succeeds on this team and what the team really values is kind of the inverse of that. can you tell me about, can you tell me about what type of person doesn't do well here? Because then if they say, you know, The type of person who doesn't do well here isn't committed to working 60 hours a week. They expect to take their vacations and not be able to unplug. That kind of being able to hear who isn't successful gives you some context around some of their values as well. Brian Milner (24:01) Yeah, that's an excellent question because I agree. Presumably, this is someone you're going to be working with if you get the job. That immediate relationship, think, is going to really be impactful on the expectations, that sort of thing. Yeah, if I'm interviewing and I ask that kind of question, and they do come back and say, yeah, the person who doesn't work 60 hours or anything. Yeah, that's a good sign that maybe this is, I don't know, unless I enjoy working 60 hours a week, that maybe this is not the right cultural fit for me. So that's an excellent question, because I think that would expose some of that behind the scenes stuff, cultural things. ⁓ Tali Shlafer (24:42) And you really want to ask about questions about your dynamic with the manager. So what kind of people succeed under them? Because that's the number one people. I believe I'd have to fact check this, but you always hear that the number one people reason people don't like their jobs or people leave their jobs is because of their boss. So you want to understand you're essentially going on a date with them and you want to understand what is it like to hang out with you for 40 hours a week? Brian Milner (25:05) you Tali Shlafer (25:09) So asking specific questions to really understand what's their working style, what are their expectations, what are their positive experiences, what does feedback look like? Is it a once a year thing? Is it a every time we touch base during our one-on-ones you get feedback? That is really important. The other thing that's important to think about is do you understand the role itself? Like what questions do you have? What gaps in your understanding do you have about the role? Really clarifying to make sure that you know what you're signing up for. Brian Milner (25:40) Yeah, that's a great response as well. I know I remember from back in the day getting told that it's a good kind of question to ask what would success look like? If you really got someone to nail this and you were really happy with the hire and it was perfect, what would be the biggest thing that would contribute to that? And I've always liked that approach as well because it kind of gives you the expectation from the start to know here's what's most important in that manager's mind of what they're looking for. Yeah, just in my memory of interviewing people, would say I've never, I don't think I've ever not hired someone because of a question that they asked at the end, but... I have felt sometimes like when they don't ask questions that they're a little unprepared. Tali Shlafer (26:30) Yeah, and I think it, I think part of the not asking questions, one is being not prepared, not thinking thoroughly about the job. But it's also a little bit of a sense of desperation, like, I've been applying for four months, I don't care, I'm willing to take anything. So I don't have questions, because let me just take any first job that comes available. There's kind of that mindset. And I think it manifests as, I don't have any questions. And I think Brian Milner (26:48) You Tali Shlafer (26:58) People can kind of feel that when you're not critical, when you're not trying to figure out, am I really going to be able to succeed here? People kind of pick up on that and it either looks like desperation or it looks like disengagement and disinterest. We want people not, we don't want to hire the first person off the street who can do the job. We want to hire somebody who's excited to be there and who we know isn't going to leave six months later when they find something better. Brian Milner (27:23) Yeah, that's really good. Well, this has been really enlightening. I think there's a lot of gems in here that I think people can apply. we all find ourselves in that position from time to time of having to interview for things. As I said, even as a consultant, it's an interview when you talk to a potential new client. So I think these are all really great tips for that. We're going to make sure that there's contact information for Tali at the show notes of this so you can get a hold of her. Anything you want to shout out about, any places you want to point people to to get in contact with you? Tali Shlafer (27:56) So for the last few years, I've been posting usually about two short form videos a day to LinkedIn, all the social medias. Over the last couple of years, I've posted over 700 short form videos on social media. I've actually had over a hundred million views on LinkedIn, which is really crazy. Somebody recognized me at the dog park the other day, which was wild. But I created an interview tip-ball that took the best... The most helpful videos the ones that have gone viral received the best feedback gotten people the biggest results in their interviews And I compiled them all in one Interview tip bolt so that's my little thing that I like to share with people You'll see everything in there from how to tell me about yourself To answering why do people ramble and what other mistakes are people making? and also special tips for senior leaders and executives. So that's my little freebie that I like to share out for folks who are interested in the stuff that I'm talking about. Brian Milner (28:56) Awesome, awesome. we will definitely make that available to people in the show notes and links to your socials as well so people can follow you and stay on top of your tips as they come out. So thank you so much for coming on, Tali, and I appreciate you spending some time with us and sharing your knowledge with us. Tali Shlafer (29:13) Thanks so much, Brian. It was a pleasure.

Join Brian and Barnaby Golden as they dig into a surprisingly common roadblock in Agile teams, the underpowered product owner, and how it quietly derails decision-making, flow, and team momentum. Overview In this episode of the Agile Mentors Podcast, Brian welcomes Agile coach and community contributor Barnaby Golden to explore the risks and ripple effects of placing a product owner in the role without the authority to own it. They discuss the stark difference between empowered and underpowered product owners, why availability without authority is a setup for frustration, and how misalignment at the leadership level creates more theater than agility. From trust gaps to political decision-making, Barnaby and Brian unpack the hidden reasons teams get stuck and what it takes to create real, empowered ownership that delivers actual value. References and resources mentioned in the show: Barnaby Golden #104: Mastering Product Ownership with Mike Cohn #3: What Makes a Great Product Owner? With Lance Dacy How to Engage and Help Busy Product Owners by Mike Cohn What Happens When For Product Owners 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. Barnaby Golden is an experienced Scrum Master and Agile Coach with a knack for helping teams truly live Agile, not just adopt it. Lately, he’s been diving into the real-world use of AI—helping organizations, including nonprofits, turn tech hype into practical, high-impact tools with smart governance Auto-generated Transcript: Brian Milner (00:00) Welcome in Agile Mentors, we're back. This is another episode of the Agile Mentors Podcast. I'm here with you as always, Brian Milner, and we have a very special guest with us today. We have Mr. Barnaby Golden with us. Barnaby, welcome in. Barnaby Golden (00:14) Thank you, it's good to be here. Brian Milner (00:16) Very excited to have Barnaby here. Barnaby is an Agile coach, also a Scrum Master. He is known to us because he is part of our Agile Mentors community. And he is an active member there and has weighed in on several issues and helped people and mentored people through things there. So we wanted to share some of the wisdom of the crowd that we have there at Agile Mentors. Just a few select people that have really contributed. and giving us some really good advice there with the podcast audience as well. So you guys can kind of hear what kind of stuff is there on the Agile Mentors discussion forums. But we were talking about topics here with Barnaby about what we were going to talk about and he proposed one that I really found intriguing. It was focusing around the underpowered product owner, the underpowered PO. And I think that's probably a good place for us to start then, Barnaby. Why don't you kind of just explain to everyone what that idea is, what you mean by the underpowered PO. Barnaby Golden (01:12) Sure, of course. So in fact, what I'll do is I'll explain it by giving you the opposite, which is what does a good, effective, powerful product owner look like? And I was working for an organization a few years back, it was a publishing organization. And we had the head of the editorial team was the product owner for a particular Scrum team. Brian Milner (01:16) Okay. Barnaby Golden (01:38) And this head of editorial had a lot of power and influence in the organization. They were pretty much a decision maker in terms of the products that the team was building. And I remember a particular conversation where the team was talking to this product owner and the team said, look, we know you want to get this, this release out this week, but we've got some technical debt. really need to fix it. And I remember the, this guy saying, look, okay. I'm going to let me think about this for a second. Okay. I can make the decision on this, which is, yep, you can have your time. I'll communicate with others within the organization. The release will be delayed. And that was such a powerful moment because in that second, the decision was made. The product owner trusted the team, the team completely trusted the product owner. And it felt slick and efficient and worked really well. Conversely, I've worked in organizations where in some way, surprisingly enough, product owner is seen as quite a junior role. So I've seen the situation where you have a whole hierarchy of product people and the most junior role in the product organization is the product owner. And what happens in that scenario is the product owner is powerless to make a lot of decisions. So they have to push them up the tree. And in that situation, the conversation between the team and the product owner is the team says, yeah, we need to do this thing. And the product owner says, okay, give me some time. Might be a day and I'll get back to you. Hopefully I can get in contact with other people within my hierarchy and the flows broken. What's the team going to do now? They're going to maybe find something alternative to work on. It's very frustrating. And you sometimes get the situation as well where the the underpowered product owner will sympathize with something the team is saying, but will not be able to make a change because they haven't got the authority to do the change. So they'll say, yeah, I agree with you. I know what you're saying. This is a really bad idea what's being suggested, but I have no choice. We have a roadmap. We've got to meet the roadmap. Brian Milner (03:45) Yeah, that's a clear picture. I agree with you that those are two stark contrasts. And what I like about the explanation is you kind of highlight the effectiveness of one versus the ineffectiveness of the other, right? It's just, it's such a dramatic difference when that person is able to make the decisions on the spot. go forward, and the team is just free to move as quickly as possible. Whereas the other one, it's just holdups. It's just delays and obstacles, roadblocks in the team's way. So yeah, a really clear picture there. Just as you were talking about this, I was thinking to myself, well, maybe one of the worthy paths for us to go down here and talking about this. is trying to understand a little bit about the why behind it. ⁓ Because I think there's, just in thinking about it, I think there's maybe several causes for this or several things that might lead to having an underpowered PO. What's been your experience? What kind of things have you seen that might contribute to an underpowered PO? Barnaby Golden (04:36) Hmm. I think the main reason, the biggest driving factor behind it is the feeling that the people with the authority to make decisions do not have time to spend with the team. So you've got your head of product or the real decision makers in the organization. They are saying, I can't spend two, three hours a week with a team. I can't go to a planning meeting. got, you know, I'm a busy person. I've got things on my schedule. So they see the product owner role as a stand-in for themselves with the team. And this stand-in has lots of time to spend with the team, which is good. And that's a powerful thing. But at the same time, if they've not got the authority to make decisions, then maybe that time is not effectively spent. Brian Milner (05:41) Yeah, it's almost as if they just want a warm body there. It's a placeholder. You're here as a placeholder for me because I can't be two places at once. I've heard a couple of things that people will frequently point to that a product owner needs to be successful. And there's sort of this dichotomy of these two things that are part of that. And that's the kind of empowered Barnaby Golden (05:44) Yeah. Brian Milner (06:05) product owner that is empowered to make decisions versus having the availability to actually be present with the team. it's always, it seems like that's a fracture point that sometimes causes this because you have the leaders who, hey, I need to make all the decisions, but I don't have the availability. and the people that they know have the availability, they don't want to empower to make the decisions. So they're kind of setting up their product owners to fail. Barnaby Golden (06:35) I think it's a classic example as well with when you want to be an agile organization, you can't just have pockets of agility. You can't just have a scrum team and say, well, that's where we'll be agile in this scrum team. The entire organization as a whole has to think in the agile mindset. And if you want to be able to adapt to change, then one of the ways you're to have to do that is you're going to have to have the decision makers close to the teams that are implementing the decisions. and so you can't have your, your cake and not eat it. If you see what I mean in terms of, you, you can't pick and choose the aspects of agile that you want. need to, as an organization, adopt the whole thing. Brian Milner (07:17) Yeah, that's always one thing I try to tell people as well is when you're selecting a product owner, when you're trying to decide who's the right person to be the product owner for this team, those are two of the things you have to really consider strongly is does this person have the availability to be here with the team and is this person empowered to make decisions? I've run up against leaders before that don't want to empower someone and Kind of the counterpoint I give them a lot of times is, I don't know, I think maybe in their head they're thinking this is giving someone free reign to make really long-term decisions on their own when that's not really the case. The product owner can be fully empowered, but the decisions that they're making on the spot are just a couple of week decisions. It's not a six month decision. there's gonna be sprint reviews, we're gonna display stuff and get feedback and we can course correct and all those things. So once you can kind of put it in that frame that it's really just a couple of weeks that you're empowering them to make decisions, I've had more success framing it that way. I don't know, what about you? Barnaby Golden (08:23) Yeah, I think that makes a huge amount of sense. The fear is loss of control. So the fear is that by empowering the product owner, they might do something which they would regard as a mistake. And they will often see themselves, because they're in a senior position, they see themselves as being responsible. So if they're responsible and the product owner makes a decision they don't like, perhaps that will reflect poorly on them. So there's a trust issue here. A good product owner is going to be consulting their stakeholders anyway. And I would think the, the senior product leadership team is part of their stakeholders. So you would hope that they were keeping them very, very up to date on their thinking that there would be no great surprises that they wouldn't do something, you know, suddenly switch from one product to a completely different product. They would always be keeping their stakeholders in the loop. And in which case. they would be building up the trust of the people around them and then you would hope that over time that they would become more empowered. Brian Milner (09:23) Yeah. Yeah. I just, I kind of wonder if that's maybe part of it, that the, they have a misunderstanding of kind of how the role works. You know, cause maybe they, maybe they see it as completely independent. This person is just making decisions on their own without consulting anyone. Maybe that's because that's how they do their job. Barnaby Golden (09:35) Yeah. Yeah. Brian Milner (09:49) So they may look at that as, know, this is how I would do it, so why wouldn't this person do it the same way? Well, that's not how it's designed. It's designed to be done in concert. Barnaby Golden (09:59) Yeah, absolutely. Yeah, it's a misunderstanding of the product owner role. And it's also a misunderstanding of why the product owner role came about, which is the reason it was there was to solve the problem of too many chefs, of too many people trying to make decisions. So there's huge value in the role. But the value in the role only comes about if that person can actually take ownership of the product. I mean, the clue's in the name, isn't it? They are the owner of the product, so therefore they can make the critical on the ground decisions, but all the time talking to their stakeholders. So, I mean, as with many things in Scrum, it's about a misunderstanding, a general misunderstanding of what the roles are within the Scrum team. Brian Milner (10:41) Yeah, I think they also have the fear of the wrong decision that somehow that's going to lock them in or this person's not equipped to make the right decisions that they are the knowledge expert for the product. so they should be the one making all the decisions. They have the authority. I have had a couple of cases where I've had to have difficult conversations with leaders to say, well, let's examine the decision. because you're looking at them as making the wrong decision, but is it the wrong decision? You're disconnected from the day-to-day of the team. This person is fully connected to the day-to-day, and they're more likely to have more current knowledge. And it's not always the case that just because you assume it's the wrong decision that it actually is, they may actually be right and you could be wrong. Barnaby Golden (11:30) And funny enough, this brings on to another topic I'm greatly interested in, which is the definition of value. And that is if there is no clear understanding within the organization of value, then decisions become arbitrary. You know, we decide to do X rather than Y in the product. Well, why did you decide to do that? Well, because it was my decision to do that. Yeah, but is there a rationale behind it? Do you have a definition of the value of X and the value of Y? and why you chose one over the other. And I think that's part of the problem as well. The kinds of organizations that don't have empowered product owners also typically don't have a definition of value. Brian Milner (12:08) Yeah, I completely agree. I know I've had conversations in classes where I've talked to people about how when you're prioritizing, when you're looking at things in your backlog, and we always say you prioritize according to value. Well, what's the value? What's the value of doing that thing? And so many times, I think there are organizations that can't really identify what it is. Why are we doing this thing? because it sounded cool, because it seemed like the right thing to do, it just felt right? No, we're doing it so that it does something, it creates some outcome for us. And if you can't even really define what that outcome is that you're hoping it achieves, well, isn't that the start of the problem? Barnaby Golden (12:55) And I think part of the root cause of that as well is the tendency for these types of organizations to do long-term planning. So what they'll often do is they'll have a roadmap for the year and they'll say in this roadmap for the year, we will achieve all these things. And then it becomes less about delivering value and more about delivering the roadmap. And I've had conversations with product owners where I've said to them, you do realize what we're doing doesn't make sense. And they say, yeah, of course they do, but I'm not being measured. on sense or the delivery of value, I'm being measured on whether or not I meet the roadmap. And that was what's important to me. You can see how all these elements are tied together within the organization. Brian Milner (13:28) Right. Right? Yeah. No, that's an excellent point. And you're absolutely right. So much of our metrics and some of the things that we judge teams on or performance by is basically just a volume kind of metric. And it's how much stuff is being produced. that's not value. Volume does not equal value. Value can be achieved with much less a lot of the times. And if we're This is why sometimes I'll advise product owners in classes to say, look, start up your sprint review. Maybe go back and look at some things that you've done recently and show the metric that you're using for that thing to see if it's successful. Because if the team's done something in the past three or four sprints and it's actually moved the value needle some way, it's increased customer satisfaction. added new members to our site, whatever the thing is, right? If you can show that kind of business value to it, my experience is that people stop focusing as much on volume, because that's volumes of means to the end, which is the value. Barnaby Golden (14:40) Yeah. Yeah, absolutely. And the other thing I've noticed as well in these types of organizations is that the value they're focused on is the incremental, is not the incremental delivery. It's usually a new feature or something like that competing. And what you often find is that the teams are not end value creators. They're often parts of... the creation of value. rather than the whole creation of value, there may be a component of it. And because of that, people will say, well, there's no direct link between you and value creation in the organization. And I find that is very problematic. And it really flies against the rationale of Scrum, which is that you want within each sprint, you want to deliver some incremental value. And if you can't measure it, if you can't... clearly define what that value is. And as you were saying, if the product owner can't stand in the sprint review and say, well, this is the value we've delivered. How does the team keep motivated? How do they keep passionate about what they're doing? Brian Milner (15:50) Yeah. Yeah. I think part of that is just trying to put yourselves in the shoes of your customers and try to look about what they would find as being really valuable. I don't know about you. know, well, I'm sure this applies to you as well. But we all are consumers of different software products, whether that's a business software product or even games or other things that we would use. And when they come out with new releases of those things, they come out with release notes. Now, when they come out with the release notes, are you looking at the release notes and going, wow, I'm satisfied. There's a ton of things that's in this release. Or are you looking through the individual items and going, well, I don't care about that. I don't care about that. I don't care about this. That thing, oh yeah, that's important to me. Right? That's what we do. And that's a clear picture of value over volume. Barnaby Golden (16:49) Yeah, I mean, I think the thing that gets in the way here is a lot of it is the pride of the management team. So they often have strong self belief. They believe they make, they believe by definition, the decisions they're making are powerful decisions. So, I, it's also, think one of the reasons why a lot of organizations don't aren't data driven. You would hope they would. produce a feature and then measure whether or not that feature was a success. But that's not as common as it should be. There's very rarely business metrics tracked against deliveries. I mean, I'm generalizing here. There are many organizations do this very well. But I found there's quite a few organizations that don't really do that. And it leads to a disconnect with the customers. I mean, I can think of an example that we're... an organization I was working at where they worked on a feature delivery for six months that was on the roadmap and they got it done and they shipped it. And I think the expected users were tens of thousands and they got 16 users for this feature. And at that point there wasn't even a post-mortem. They didn't even look back and say, well, what are the lessons learned here? It was like, that's shame. Let's move on to the next item on the roadmap and hope that works instead. And it's very frustrating, especially because the feel of a good Scrum team is the connection with the customers and the feeling that you can see the passion in the engineers and in the team's eyes because they're delivering things that people want and they feel connected to it. And it means they work better and they work more effectively. Brian Milner (18:22) Yeah, there's no worse feeling than building something no one uses. I used to joke with the team, it's kind of like that old joke about if a tree falls in the woods and no one's around us, makes, if we build software that nobody uses, did we build it? It's not going to be used for anything. So it didn't serve any purpose. Barnaby Golden (18:31) You Yeah. Yeah, the way I like to think of it is that an organization should not view people's time spent in the job as important. What they should view is the value that that person has delivered as important. So sometimes people will say, know, yeah, okay, we delivered a feature that nobody really used, but you you did your job, you came in for eight hours a day during that time. And that's hard for people, I think, because they feel like this is my life. I'm investing time and energy into this. Yeah, the money is important, of course. I'm doing it as a career. But at the same time, I also want to feel reward. I want to feel like I'm achieving something. And I think with that element, you get so much better performance from the team if they feel that. Brian Milner (19:26) I agree. There's another thing I was thinking of here too, when we were talking about underpowered POs. Another cause I think that maybe you've encountered or seen as well, but screwy things that people do with kind of personnel. Like for example, having multiple product owners for a team, that leads to underpowered product owner or the opposite even putting a product owner on too many teams. That's going lead to underpowered POs as well. What's been your experience with that? Have you seen that? Okay. Barnaby Golden (19:54) I have one extreme example where there was an engineering team and the organization was an international organization. And politically within the organization, it was unacceptable to have one backlog. They had to have a backlog for the UK, a backlog for the US, a backlog for Australia, backlog for other areas of the world. And the team then had to... prioritize them kind of in this wild order. So they would say, right, we'll take number one from UK, number one from US. And so there was no coherence to what they were building at all. It was really just about satisfying people within the organization. And it kind of brings you back to that key point about why do we have product owners? Because product owners, they narrow down all the ambiguity, they narrow down all the possibilities to the thing that's most effective for the team to do next. Brian Milner (20:47) Yeah, I like your example because it highlights kind of what I think about those scenarios a lot of times is that they're theater. They're an act. They're not really serving the purpose, but they're making someone or helping someone to feel a sense of security about something that really they shouldn't feel. It's not there, but it has the appearance of it. It has the stage set. Barnaby Golden (20:55) Hmm. Yeah. Brian Milner (21:11) of something that looks secure, you know? Barnaby Golden (21:13) Yeah. mean, whenever somebody mentioned that to me, the first thing I always think about is the length of the backlog. I've worked in organizations where they could not achieve the backlog in 10 years if the team kept at it. And yet people within the organization say, yeah, I'm not worried. My feature request is on the backlog. And I'm thinking, yeah, but we're adding 10 new items a week and we're only completing eight. So in fact, you're moving further down the backlog. You're not actually getting closer to. being done. And it's, it's, it's a disconnect to gain. And this is what it's all about. Good agility, good scrum is when there's a strong connection. And if you start having that, that just doing things for appearances sake, then you lose that connection. Brian Milner (21:55) Yeah, and it really is kind of that fundamental flaw that we try to address throughout Scrum of transparency. When you do those kind of theater-ish things to give the appearance of something, it's the opposite of being transparent. You're trying to make it more difficult to see the reality. Yeah, it's on the backlog, so you have this false sense of security. It's on the backlog. It's never gonna get done, but... that's not transparent that it's never going to get done because it's on the backlog. Yeah, mean, part of that I put on the product owner a little bit, but that could also be that the organization demands it. Like your example with it having different backlogs across different geographies, does it serve a purpose? Well, maybe the purpose is to make someone feel better. That, hey, my thing's number one on our list, but... Barnaby Golden (22:39) Yeah. Brian Milner (22:43) That doesn't mean it's number one, that's the next thing that's going get done. It's theater. Barnaby Golden (22:47) And it was done exactly for that reason. I mean, it was done because they didn't want to alienate the heads of the individual countries. So they wanted to make them feel like they were going to get something even though they weren't going to get it. Which is really frustrating. Brian Milner (22:59) I've seen that as well with the multiple product owners. When there's a team that has multiple product owners, a lot of times that's a theater kind of thing as well, because there's a, I don't know if there's a fear that someone's gonna feel undervalued if they're not called the product owner. But it just seems like, yeah, we want all these voices to be involved with it, which again, maybe it's a misunderstanding of the product owner role. That's okay, you can have multiple voices involved, but you gotta define who's the decision maker. And if a team doesn't know that, that's gonna cause a whole host of problems. Barnaby Golden (23:34) Absolutely. I mean, I've been in scenarios where you would have multiple product owners. The team has been instructed by a product owner to go in a direction and then midway through a sprint, the other product owner will come along and say, yeah, that's not really what I had in mind for this sprint. Can you please switch onto this other thing? And as a, you know, I was a scrum master at the time and what I ended up doing in my sprint report was I would say, and the team lost 20 to 30 % of their capacity in switching. between what one product owner wanted and what the other product owner wanted. And that at least got a reaction because people said, well, OK, maybe that's not a good thing if we're losing output from the team. But it's a failure of the organization to make value judgments and make genuine decisions. Instead, it becomes political decisions. Brian Milner (24:19) Yeah. Well, I'll give you my trick for when I've encountered it as a consultant a couple of times, I usually just ask one question and it'll clear it up. I'll just go to them and whoever the leader is that's insisting that there's multiple product owners on the team, I'll just go and say, all right, what happens when, let's say it's two, what happens when those two people disagree? And usually the immediate thing I hear back is, oh, no, no, no, they get along. They usually understand. Barnaby Golden (24:45) You Brian Milner (24:47) And I always just counteract it really quickly and say, yeah, but what happens when they don't? What happens when the day comes when one of the product owners wants something that's number one and the other one wants an entirely different thing as the number one priority, who makes the call? And usually they'll point to one of them and say, push comes to shove that one. right. I mean, at that point, I just say, well, you just told me that's your product owner, right? Barnaby Golden (25:08) got a little bit more authority so they make the decision here. Brian Milner (25:15) That's the product on the other person's a stakeholder, which is fine. There's nothing devaluing about someone who's a stakeholder. They can work all day every day with that product owner. Barnaby Golden (25:24) Yeah, absolutely. I think that people feel if they're not in the product owner role, then they will just be another stakeholder and maybe they won't have as loud a voice. But what's so frustrating about the situation is when you see it done well, when you see it done effectively with a really good empowered product owner, a very motivated team, it's such a powerful thing. And I mean, it's why I stayed in Agile for so long is because I know how good it can be and It's very frustrating and I guess I have sympathy for organizations because maybe if they've never seen it done well, it's difficult for them to understand how just how effective it is. Brian Milner (26:00) Yeah, I agree. Well, this has been a great discussion. I really like this topic. It's great to focus on product owners a little bit. And hopefully, maybe there is a leader out there or somebody listening who heard some of these things and thought, you know what? Maybe it is time to give our product owner a little more power. We talk about testing things all the time, inspecting and adapting as we go. Well, leaders, try that. Barnaby Golden (26:25) Yeah, maybe just try it as an experiment. You know, if you're concerned, give it a go. Brian Milner (26:27) Yeah. Yeah. Give it a shot and see what happens. You may like it, and you may decide this is the best way to go. So yeah, I think that's a great suggestion. Well, Barnaby, this has been great. I really appreciate you making time for this. thanks for not only being on the show, but for the contributions you made in the Agile Mentors community as well. Barnaby Golden (26:47) Well thanks a lot Brian, I really enjoyed that, it was a great conversation.

Join Brian and Scott Dunn as they unpack what “buy-in” actually means and what it takes to move from surface-level support to genuine commitment in this episode of the Agile Mentors Podcast. Overview In this episode of the Agile Mentors Podcast, Brian is joined once again by Scott Dunn to tackle a listener-chosen topic: how to get real buy-in for Agile initiatives, especially when shifting from a non-Scrum environment. They explore why buy-in isn’t about enthusiastic cheerleading or deep Agile knowledge, but about leaders and teams aligning on desired outcomes. From the cost of performative support to the emotional side of change, Brian and Scott share practical strategies for securing support at all levels of the organization. Along the way, they dive into influence tactics, the importance of shared purpose, and how co-creation—not compliance—drives lasting change. Whether you're guiding a large transformation or simply trying to influence up, this episode will help you rethink how to earn trust, build alignment, and inspire meaningful momentum. References and resources mentioned in the show: Scott Dunn Elements of Agile Assessment 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. Scott Dunn is a Certified Enterprise Coach and Scrum Trainer with over 20 years of experience coaching and training companies like NASA, EMC/Dell Technologies, Yahoo!, Technicolor, and eBay to transition to an agile approach using Scrum. Auto-generated Transcript: Brian Milner (00:01) Welcome in Agile Mentors. We're back for another episode of the Agile Mentors podcast. I'm with you as always, Brian Milner. And I also have with me today someone that you probably know pretty well because he took over this podcast for about a month there. Mr. Scott Dunn is with us. Welcome in, Scott. Scott Dunn (00:19) Hey, thanks Brian. Yes, that podcast takeover was a lot of fun. So thank you for that opportunity. That was a hoot. Had a great time. Brian Milner (00:25) Absolutely. Well, I don't think I publicly thanked you for that. just ⁓ a public thanks. Scott Dunn (00:28) No, you didn't. No, not even an email. Not even a Slack message. Brian Milner (00:33) Well, very public thanks to you for doing that. Those episodes were great. I enjoyed them and it was fun to be a listener. It was fun to listen to it and just kind of hear the conversations and be a fly on the wall for those. So thanks again for doing that. Scott Dunn (00:47) Yeah. Yeah. It's a real treat. Brian Milner (00:48) We're having Scott on we kind of ran an experiment on this one because we were Scott was teaching a class for mountain goat and We thought maybe we'll just see what the class thinks so we pulled the class to see what topic do you want us to talk about and We thought we'd just go with the winner the winner that came out of that class was how to get buy-in How do you get buy-in in a? move from a non-scrum place to a Scrum kind of way of working. How do you get buy-in in the organization and buy-in from others? So when I was thinking about this as a topic, I think the first thing that popped in my head Scott about this was What do we mean by buy-in? So what does that mean to you? Scott Dunn (01:33) Right. So sometimes what I'm hearing is people saying like, buy in, you know, they, I would hear a common complaint, like they don't get it. They don't understand. don't, for me, buy in isn't that they need to understand agile or scrum and these types of things and how it works. Buy in is they get, they give their support kind of regardless. So my favorite example of that is walking into, this is a multi vendor effort we're doing on a Salesforce implementation. And we'd asked for the VP of the whole thing to come down and say some words before we had our first retrospective. You can imagine it's going to be kind of heated with different vendors trying to make each other look bad or whatever. And he'd said, yes. So we're coming down into this, you know, big high stakes meeting. And I just remember him saying, you know, I'm so excited to be doing this for you all. It's great. And he kind of falls in and looks at me says, what am I doing again? Cause he didn't, he didn't know, he didn't know what a retrospective was. He just knew he was asked to come and do something around that. And to me, Brian, Brian Milner (02:21) Ha Scott Dunn (02:28) That's fine. He's showing up. He's letting everyone know this way of working is important. It's important to me. It's important to success. And he probably couldn't tell you any of the meetings or artifacts or anything in scrum, right? But that's still what we need. Brian Milner (02:39) So. Yeah, I think that's a good way to think about it because I think a lot of people sometimes think of buy-in, like everyone's clapping and waving scrum flags around and all that stuff. And I don't think that's really buy-in. I think it's just the willingness to honestly try it, to give it a shot and be open about what would work and what doesn't work. The opposite of that is the resistance, know, of just being resistant to it and saying, I'm gonna put up hurdles and walls in the way of this being successful. That's, think, what needs to be avoided. Scott Dunn (03:18) Right, right. think that some of what was helped is to give them the, for me, the mindset of their buy-in isn't about doing things right. They're not saying, we're really wanted. We really want a new process. We were getting asked to come in because they're not getting the results they want. So buy-in for me from their perspective is how to help get the results that they're looking for. And they'll support us to get those results. So I don't talk to them about some of the aspects of an empirical process or any of that. I sort of say, you in order to get things faster or in order to improve quality, right? And that's how they get behind that. I think sometimes people are preaching some of the process part, even if they could understand that's not really what they're about. But I think they even struggle to understand what we're talking about. So yeah, it's hard for them to get behind and support us when they're not tracking. They simply know there's a pain point we're having. Can we talk about that and how to get what we need and what do you need from me to get that? Great. But I think we We can do ourselves a favor by helping point to the same target, make sure we're aligned with the same target they want. And maybe they'll give us more support if they feel like, yeah, you're tracking with me. I want to come in talk about, you know, more collaboration. Like we already have enough meetings. That's what, that's what I heard. Right. But I'll come and talk about faster time to market. Well, yeah, now they're interested in talking about what they need to do, you know, that I'm asking them to get behind that. I think that's fair. Brian Milner (04:28) Right. Yeah, I think there's also an element there, because I know we're both kind of fans of and users of kind of the path to agility framework from our friend David Hawks. And I love the part of that that's trying to establish the motivation, the purpose from the outset to try to say, What's the thing we hope to get out of this? And I think that's really crucial in getting buy-in that you can't just tell people, hey, we're gonna be a Scrum organization now. Why? Because I tell you that's what we're gonna do, because we're gonna check off the box and say that we're now Scrum. That's not motivating to anyone. if I can say, no, we're gonna... go through this change because here's the end result. Here's what we're trying to get to. Here's what we think will be better. If I can lay that out, then I've got a purpose behind it. And now I have motivation to go forward with this difficult change and learning what's expected of me and all that stuff. But if that's not done, I feel like that's a crucial misstep in that. Scott Dunn (05:44) Yeah, I wanted to add to that, that that point about the clarity of the goals is really something that has sticking power. And we had a client, I came and was working with him this year that he had remembered from the last year as the CTO. He's remembering from last year that we had done that same exercise or what are the goals that leadership has. And he remembered it was quality and customer satisfaction. That had been over a year since we had done that, but that not only stuck with him, but we came back to the group and kind of had a fun poll. Like, everyone remember? They remembered. And so every time we're having a decision we're trying to make about should it be this way or that way on the process, the different, were doing the race, the matrix work, et cetera, people kept coming back to, well, is that going to help us in terms of quality? Is that going to help us in terms of customer staff? We're not going into the nuts and bolts of Scrum or these other approaches. It's simply what's the business goal. will that help us hit the goal? And when the leader hears you using their language that they get, like that's my goal, they're feeling like, okay, whatever you need to do, sounds like you understand what I'm after, right? It's really powerful. But I like that you mentioned that, because when we go through that exercise, always super clear, we don't get confused. Times when we lead with, especially on the executives trying to lead with explaining Scrum, you can tell sometimes they're not really tracking or they're following along, okay, so what's the point? Brian Milner (06:59) Yeah. Scott Dunn (06:59) Yeah, you start off with what's their goals. They're like, great, this is exactly what I want to talk about. And then, Hey, you're not doing the things you need to do to hit those goals. Oh, okay. What are they? I mean, I remember one time a couple of years back, literally when the coach was presenting the results of that assessment towards their goals, they cut them off in the middle of his presentation. Just says, well, why, why is it, you why is that red? Why are we not hitting the goal? What do need to do? And they just started solving the problem right then he couldn't even finish his presentation. Talk about getting support. And he had been there six years saying, Brian Milner (07:23) Wow. Scott Dunn (07:27) Scott, they're not gonna buy into doing this transformation team and the scrum work. He couldn't even finish, I think, a couple of slides and they gave him everything he wanted, right? Powerful, powerful. Brian Milner (07:36) Yeah. Yeah. I think that's a good point. I also think one of the reasons that there's, you know, and that kind of parallels it. One of the reasons there's a lack of buy-in in general is that it's sort of targeted to just one area. You know, like this is a team thing. The teams are going to get trained, but the leaders have no idea really what's going on. They're kind of separated off from this. And I think that's a big part of the problem as well is you get buy-in when they see the leaders have bought in. So are the leaders bought in? Are the leaders on board with this? If they're not, then the rest of the group isn't going to be bought in either. Scott Dunn (08:18) People are smart. They're watching which way the wind's blowing. to be honest, Brian, I'd love to hear your thoughts. I tell people, I don't even care if they genuinely believe in that or not. If they're getting behind it because that's the way the politics are going, hey, they're getting out of the way. We're getting things done. Fine by me. Right. So partly when we're getting that by now, so make sure leaders, are you communicating this clearly? Because some of your people are either not on board or they're kind of waiting to see, this a fad or is this going to blow over? I need you to really communicate that clearly, et cetera, to see if people are get on board with that or not. Or, and on the other side, if I feel like some of these folks are not on board and I do feel like I have leadership support, I need to escalate that pretty quickly and make sure you understand, know, because they might get mad at you or me for talking about scrum and changing things. I'm like, I didn't knock down the door and come in myself. I was asked to come in here by someone who has authority. So maybe you need to clarify that with them, whether we're doing this or not. But don't get mad at me. Brian Milner (09:04) Right. Scott Dunn (09:11) So I will check them on that and clarify with the leadership to say, let's make sure your people are in alignment as well. If we do have that buy-in for sure. Brian Milner (09:20) Yeah. I saw another kind of quote about this that really got my brain working a little bit. Cause it was talking about the cost of fake buy-in and it was, it was kind of saying, you know, performative buy-in might actually, you know, it was asking the question, is performative buy-in worse than just outright resistance? And I don't know. Let me ask you that. What do you think? Do you think performative buy-in is worse than just someone who's resistant? Scott Dunn (09:28) Interesting. Yeah. As someone that just gave an example of performative buy-in. So if you would ask me a week ago, I might have gave a different answer, but someone was talking about this is a wildly different aspect of this, but you did ask me to join. So you get what you get. ⁓ They're talking about the difference of discrimination in the US versus South Africa. And they said, what's the difference? And they said in South Africa, it was blatant. no, you're a person of color. You cannot buy property here. That's how it is. Here, it's more like Brian Milner (09:59) You Scott Dunn (10:14) Yeah, we're looking at your loan application and I don't know if you can buy in this way. So it's subtle. And this person actually said, I'll take the outright blatant discrimination of South Africa, where at least you know what the issue is versus the subtle one. So maybe to that point with what you're saying, maybe it is better to have outright resistance and then say, well, at least I know who's on board or not. Rather than the person says they're on board, but every time they're in a meeting, they come out meeting and we don't get the decisions made we need. That's funny. Brian Milner (10:39) Yeah. Yeah. When I read this and started to think about it, I kind of had that same conclusion that like when someone's being outright resistant, yeah, it's an obstacle, but it's honest. And, you know, I'd rather have the honesty because they're trying to, they're still acting their way because they have a belief that their way is the right way to do it. And so they're throwing up a resistance because they're honestly resistant to it. Whereas someone who just sort of nods in meetings and claps along and, know, oh yeah, sure, great. But then they're kind of in the quiet, you know, behind the scenes and the hallway conversations. That's insidious. That's something that I can't really deal with. And it's like, you know, let's have the discussion. Let's talk about it. And, you know, if you win, then great. Why not have the courage to just have the conversation and see which idea wins? Scott Dunn (11:39) Right. on that note, think for everyone's sake, Brian, if we could be honest for a moment, not that we haven't been honest in these other podcasts, but in this, in this moment, we're really going to be honest. Would you, would, do you feel at times that our culture, our company cultures actually teach people to do just what you said to not be honest, but then like be like, you know, politically savvy, don't say what you really think, but then you're going to kind of be subversive and undermine that thing. And I've dealt with that so many times, I'll show up to a meeting like, I would have swore we were on board. had that one-on-one and now you're not saying in the meeting that you go on board with that. So people might've gotten coached. It's actually not safe to be honest and have good clear spirited debate because there's a price to pay if they do that. And they maybe 10 years in corporate can kind of teach you don't be honest or they're trying to read the tea leaves about what you think it's going to be. And so, yeah, I definitely would rather take it. Maybe it's part of the mindset of trying to really check, you know, where people are at. If I go back to my early days of coaching, those one-on-ones of having the level of honesty to really know where people are at. That was, think, some of the power. And I think some of that came from genuinely caring about the people, wanting them to succeed, wanting them win, even if it wasn't going to be at this company because of all the change or whatever. I did feel people felt like I really was open and honest with them and transparent and had their back. I would hear some real things about how they really felt because they didn't feel like there was a payback for that. And that allowed me to actually say, well, you know what, if you're really not on board, let's see what we can do as far as another opportunity. Maybe it's a positional switch we can do or whatever that was. Because I mean, this did affect people's jobs in some ways. And I think maybe if I don't have those one-on-ones, they're probably just going to give lip service because they don't know if anyone there really has their back in a turbulent time of change. AI is a great example of that, right? Hey, we want to move forward with AI. Well, what's the impact of my job if we do? But no one's really talking about that, right? It's all positive and all that. So I think people are trying to read that too. But you bring up a good point. I think I would take the direct as long as they feel like they can safely be open and honest. Brian Milner (13:31) Yeah. Yeah, well, even that question, right? What effect is AI gonna have on my job? And the honest answer I think that someone has to give right now is, don't know. I feel like I understand what it is today, but I don't know that that's gonna be the same way tomorrow because this technology changes so fast, so I can't promise anything. But here's what it is today and this is the paradigm we're trying to live in. So I think that there's an honesty component there that you've got a mirror to say, hey, I'm going to be honest with you. You be honest with me about this. And we'll be upfront with each other as we make our way through this. yeah, so yeah, think that kind of being honest and taking that approach, I think, is the right way to go. I also think that being kind of a reverting back before you get into things like, here's what a Scrum Master is, here's what a product owner is. You've got to start with the basics and mindset kind of culture things. You have to start with transparency, inspection, adaptation. That's really the way to go. And if we buy into those sorts of things initially, then we can start to say, well, here's a practice that supports that. Now you understand why we're doing this practice because it does this thing. Without it, it's just sort of one of those things of do as I tell you, you know, and that doesn't get buy-in. We've got to see the why behind it. Scott Dunn (14:48) Yes. Yeah, I think so. That's a great point. I was just making a note because sometimes we come in about agile. Some of the folks when I'm sharing this, it's maybe is new to them that I try to really present it. I want what you want. So even down to the words and then I kind of map back to that. So for example, if if we have quality problems now, I might believe in say an agile practice like mob programming, but I don't want to bring up like, hey, we should try mobbing. because it's cool or because you know, whatever, they don't care about that. But oh, they have a quality concern. Hey, boss, I've been thinking about, you know, these quality issues. I got an idea that I think it really could help with quality. But if I was to ask you, Brian, is is Bobby gonna, does Bobby help with quality? Does Bobby help me with, you know, cross training and tearing down knowledge silos and sharing learning? And I think, well, it does a lot of things, I pitch it towards what management wants. So agile as a means to an end. So I want what you want. And if I can't get that clarity that I want what you want, I need to be listening more because if I feel like I come to them talking, I've seen from my own experience, I come talking about better collaboration. That's not what's on their mind. I'm literally losing credit with them because they're like, why are you bringing this up? Like this isn't even our concern right now. Right. So I'm losing trust. I'm losing political capital. So I listen intently what their concerns are, the things I think that are important or that can get that. Then I'm going to pitch it. I'm going to pitch it in that language even like, you know, that what these are the things that would help on. I want what you want. Brian Milner (16:00) Yeah. Scott Dunn (16:18) the sport, I'll even research stuff to find out. So maybe I gave an example recently, when I was a manager for a web development, team that they wanted bigger monitors, of course, and I couldn't get approval for the bigger monitors. so I went and researched, I knew that always we had pressure to deliver more. I researched until I found somewhere someone had to study the show that larger monitors help productivity. And then I brought that to him and like, Hey, I'm looking for ways to improve the team productivity. I think I found something. What is it Scott? Brian Milner (16:30) Mm-hmm. Scott Dunn (16:46) Well, larger monitors, you can tell us, Smollick, really? You've been asking for this for months. I said, no, there's a study that proves it. Now he approved it right then. But partly I wonder, Brian, is I was also giving him air cover for when he gets flack from the other departments. Why does Scott's team get the special monitors? Well, it improves productivity. And right. He's got a reason now. Otherwise, it looks like maybe he's just playing favorites or something else. Right. We're all watching costs. So I will do the research to say, hey, I want what you want. I'll go and I'll go and dig it up. Brian Milner (17:04) Yeah. Scott Dunn (17:13) Someone somewhere must've said it's gonna help. So I'll bring that to them. It ⁓ worked. Brian Milner (17:17) Yeah. Yeah, I think you're right. you're giving him the why behind it. You're telling him, hey, here's something that's in. It's the old outcome argument that the outcome from having larger monitors is this, that we have this productivity. I know you want greater productivity, so here's a means to do that. And I think that's kind of the way that this, you in a nutshell, what we're trying to say here is, you know, I can't go into a company, your boss comes into your company tomorrow and says, hey everyone, we're switching to pens that write in green ink, because we're a green ink company. We just, we want to be known as the green ink company from now on, because it's better. So everyone, make sure you switch to green ink. I mean, they do it. But there's a difference between compliance and real commitment. ⁓ And that's the difference, I think, is, all right, you wanted to switch to green ink, but why? What's the point behind it? I'll do it, but I'll be committed to it if you tell me, well, studies show that when people read in green ink. I mean, that kind of thing can make an impact. But otherwise, it's like you're Scott Dunn (18:08) Yes. ⁓ Absolutely. Brian Milner (18:31) It's almost like an insult to the intelligence of someone, you know, to say, we're going to do this crazy new thing called a standup, you know, or daily scrum or whatever. And well, why are we doing that? I don't know. Cause right. That they tell us that's what we're supposed to do. Well, we have to stand up for a meeting. Why are we standing up? Why aren't we just sitting down? It's more comfortable. I don't know, but that's what you do in a daily scrum is you stand up. Right. I mean, it's, it's, it's that kind of a thing that I think. Scott Dunn (18:34) yeah. Yeah. I don't know. Brian Milner (18:58) if you don't lay the groundwork of here's why, then they're gonna just react with the way that you would switch to green ink. ⁓ Scott Dunn (19:05) I love that example. love that. And we've all been there, right? When someone says, why would we do this? I'm like, I actually don't know. It's a terrible feeling. I don't know. We go through all this effort to do just that. And you mentioned that compliance, compliance will never have their heart and soul and energy into this. So think that that's a big deal for them as well. When leaders are, we had something happen where it's a large financial institution and their data engineering group. Brian Milner (19:11) You're right. Yeah. Scott Dunn (19:33) You're like, yeah, AI is not really, you know, for us, not important to us. Which is interesting, right? Then the next week, like that, the head of that group, their boss's boss says, we need to be using, AI. Well, guess who makes it announced at the very next week. We need to get going with AI, So some of this is like, look, if they're pushing those things, we also want to make sure that they're in a position to look good for their bosses, those types of things. Right? So one, you know, giving them air cover, but two, listen to the winds of those things. If we make them successful, I mean, this is old school, right? Make your boss look good. My goodness. If they feel like that's happening, then you're going to get a lot more support. And this is a good example of a radical change for a whole data engineering team, just because the boss's boss says so. So now we're going to do it. I think looking for even those opportunities and following through on what that might be bringing them ideas that make them look good and generating that as well. I love the green ink one. just now it makes me want to be that we're the green ink company. You're we're going to be known for this. Brian Milner (20:23) Yeah. Scott Dunn (20:29) ⁓ But why? Brian Milner (20:30) Yeah. I think it's also kind of important that you acknowledge that there is an emotional impact here. And this gets into kind of the idea of the whole Satir model of change and that kind of thing. And so I think maybe part of the equation of getting buy-in is really comprehending and understanding that you're not going to get buy-in right away. ⁓ Scott Dunn (20:56) Hmm. Brian Milner (20:57) you know, there's going to be chaos and resistance. There's going to be a point where people are going to be resistant to it. And if you do the rest of it well, then that they'll turn that corner. But what makes them turn that corner is, is that they're connected to the purpose behind it. And so if you're, if you're going to try to implement this, if you're to try to do a change, and just expect it's gonna be, know, hunky dory from day one, you're fooling yourself. Humans don't take to change well. It's got an emotional aspect to it. I love the way David Hawks used to always say this. You know, I knew how to be a hero the old way, and I have no idea how to be a hero in this new thing. So I don't feel comfortable with this change because I don't know how to win. Scott Dunn (21:41) So true. Brian Milner (21:47) And I think that is a really accurate reflection of that emotional kind of impact of it. Everyone wants to do their job well and be seen as a smart person at work and everything else. And I knew how to do that before, but now I don't know how. And so I'm afraid I'm gonna look bad. Scott Dunn (22:02) Right? And I think that lack of awareness or knowledge is some of the things that we're asking them to do. Like you said, uncomfortable or new doesn't feel good. And we kind of think that, oh, if I don't feel good, this must be bad. It's just uncomfortable. But I think I love what you're saying. We can map it out and say, by the way, it's going to look like this as we go through that. And that hero part, a lot of our management, like 90 % of the management is going to be in that, you what we call expert or achiever. Like they're the smartest ones in the room, or they're ones that coordinate everything and they know who to talk to. you're trying to introduce something to someone who thinks they already know all the things. So how we're presenting that to them, including the fact that they're human too, right? They're gonna feel some things and maybe uncomfortable. It wouldn't hurt to explain a bit more, even if they're not gonna necessarily admit it, but like, hey, it's gonna feel different. The people might push back on this. So even when you're first beginning that, it reminded me of how I just knew I'd need to ask my boss like five times. Look, lots of people are asking him for stuff. They're partly just going by the simplest way of Who keeps coming to my office the most? And maybe on time five, like, wow, Scott, this sounds like a problem. Well, yeah, I've been here five times. Because they're kind of waiting, like, is it really a problem or do you just come in once or twice? So repeating that and then maybe framing it to say, and doing the change looks like this and that, giving them information so they don't have to admit that they don't know if they're priding themselves on knowing all the things. I really think that's a great addition to that. The Satir change model, knowing that it's going to get uncomfortable. I've seen execs jettison this just because people are bothered or upset or they're uncomfortable. So therefore this must be a bad idea. So I think we can do ourselves a favor by explaining a little bit like it's going to look like this moving forward as far as their support. Some people may not like it and here's why, but here's how I would answer those people. Like you're literally feeding them the responses. And I'll also do the get behind the expert and say, well, this is, this is what Harvard business review says, or this is what this expert says. You might be surprised because Again, back to them being experts, if you ask them what they think they know about Agile, I might have mentioned before, they score themselves on average about 8.5 out of 10. But their people would score them about 4.5 out of 10, right? It was what I've seen when I did the study, the surveys. So they think they know, so they're not gonna admit they don't know, but go ahead and give them the information they wish. If you know they don't know, I like what you're saying, kind of shrink the chain so they can understand, it's gonna look like this and feel like this. People might ask this way. But here's how I'd respond to them. know, remember this is where, you know, 90 % of the companies are doing X, Y, and Z. So they have backing. They can answer to the people. We kind of set them up for success. Otherwise that satiric change curve is going to hit them. They won't have answers. That feels really awkward. This must be a bad idea. And they're going to undo what you just asked for. Right. I've seen that happen. You just got approval and then a week or two later it got put on hold or undone. Brian Milner (24:44) Yeah, no, I agree. one of the areas, one of the other kind of things that I found in thinking about this in advance was a quote that was from the five dysfunctions of a team book that we all talk about quite a bit. But there's a quote from that that says, people don't weigh in, they won't buy in. And I love that. And I thought, you know, that really is a good point that there, it's not about Scott Dunn (25:00) Woo! Brian Milner (25:08) people need to feel like they're co-creating with you. And to do that, you need to be able to listen to them. If they don't feel like they have a voice, mean, put yourself in their shoes. If you felt like there was a big change happening and you had no say in it, that would feel pretty oppressive. But if they felt like they're building the change with you, then I think then that's what kind of can turn people around and say, no, I have a say in this, I'm a part of this. and I get to shape a little bit about what this is going to look like. They're going to shape it a lot. I mean, that's part of just the Azure way of working is that, hey, we're going to individualize this for this company, for this team. It has to fit here. And the more we can help people see, no, you're a co-creator in this. You're not just being told, but you're going to shape this with us. Scott Dunn (25:54) Right? Even with the leadership, I mean, it's easy. think everyone listening would agree. If you look at the common leaders, that's, even the, let's say director level and above personality types, right? For, for disc, it's going to be a high D for a strange pattern would be like command, um, computing values framework. They're going to be blue, get results, make it happen. But we need it to be, we need to be their decision for some of these folks. So when I would come to one of my bosses and say, I think we should do X every time he'd say like, yeah, let me think about. I'll get back to you. I kept thinking like, I don't understand because these are my people. I thought you trusted me. I realized, it has to be his decision. So part of what you're saying is invite him into the solution. So then I'd say, hey, we've got three options, good, better, best. What do you think we should do? Or I'd say, hey, I've done all the research, option A looks great, option B looks terrible. What do you think we should do? I mean, I try to simplify it. I tried to make it obvious, but I couldn't tell him I need to do X or we need this from you. It needed to be his input and to decide. Brian Milner (26:44) Right. Scott Dunn (26:51) once I framed it that way, he agreed every single time. I simply frame it, put it right in front of him so it's kind of an obvious decision, but I had to let him have that voice to decide. I'm really glad you brought that up. That one literally went from zero to 100 % if I changed my approach of how I had addressed it to let him be the one to decide and weigh in on that. Or even pitch it as a sales. Hey, I think it'd be great to move forward. What would that look like to you? Well, now he's talking about moving that change forward. without even realizing it, because you said to move forward, what would we need to do? And now he is co-creating, but it's already a yes, right? But by default, a little bit of sales, a little bit of sales effort there. Brian Milner (27:24) Yeah. Yeah, no, that's a, that's a good example. And that's a good example, I think for like the scrum masters listening and other people out here that are, feel like, you know, I'm not the leader in the organization. I'm not way up here and I can't, you know, have my decisions trickle down to other people, but, you know, kind of the, influencing up kind of mentality there. Yeah. It might sound like a little bit of a trick, but you know, if you can help. the boss co-create with you, right? Here's the problem. I've done some research. Here's some solutions. How would this look for you? Or what do you think of these options? Which one do you think sounds best? If I'm a boss and someone comes to me and says that I've researched this, here's the solutions that are possible. Which one do you think sounds best? That's really a service to me because you've just done a lot of work for me and I know that I'm doing my job by making the decision, but you've presented it and now I don't have to do anything but make the call. Yeah. Scott Dunn (28:24) Yeah, yeah. Simplify the decision-making or frame the decision-making is, think we might actually be kind of, I don't want to say teasing. I just hear some feedback from people at times like, leadership's was like, bright, shiny squirrel, right? And they get frustrated. But in some ways I'm thinking, well, at least someone in the org is decisive. I'll take that. But we can help them leverage that decisive trait they have. Brian Milner (28:43) Yeah. Scott Dunn (28:48) But for the good, instead of these random crazy things, you know, when the leader's like, I love Agile, I can change my mind all the time. We can, we can, we can guide them to better decision-making too. I love the influence both up and down what you're saying the Scrum Master can do. I think we miss, that we all have that ability to try to influence decision-making and shape some of this. Maybe there's more agency than we realized, I think for some of these folks, Scrum Masters, product owners, cetera, that you might be surprised. Like run an experiment, try some of these things out that we're talking about and see for yourself. I mean, all these personality types are different and your orgs are different. I totally understand that. Do something, inspect and adapt and see what you get. might, cause once you strike gold, you're like, you know, you're set on getting influence and buy-in from folks. It's really powerful network. Cause we don't need to give you a title or change the org chart in order to have results happen with you involved if you're that kind of a person. And I think you can really write your ticket in your career if you're able to do that soft skill of influence and buy-in up and down. It's great. Brian Milner (29:43) Yeah, yeah, that's awesome. Well, I hope that for at least the people that were in your class, this is is hit it right on the nail on the head for what it is they were they were thinking this would be about. But I think this is good. I think this is a good conversation and it's important, I think at all levels, because there's you know, this this affects us whether we're doing a massive transformation in an organization or Scott Dunn (29:51) Yeah. Brian Milner (30:06) We're just trying to influence up a tiny bit, you know, the food chain. Scott Dunn (30:10) Yeah, absolutely. Yeah, I hope that for the folks who were in that class, you better let us know if that was it. If anyone else is interested in other things, absolutely. We love hearing what your what those topics would be and bring on the right people. I will say that Brian, you brought in so many different voices. It's really, really great. So again, influence us. You can practice what we're talking about by putting those ideas up there. Other folks that we'd love to hear, because I love the the slated speakers you brought in. Brian's been really awesome. Thanks for this opportunity. Brian Milner (30:34) Thank you. Yeah, absolutely. Thanks for coming on again, Scott.

Join Brian and Mike Cohn as they unpack the five essential pillars that take Agile from “just the motions” to meaningful, measurable impact. Plus, get a behind-the-scenes look at their revamped course built for real team transformation. Overview In this episode of the Agile Mentors Podcast, Brian is joined by longtime collaborator and Agile thought leader Mike Cohn for a deep dive into what really makes Agile stick. They explore the five foundational pillars—mindset, practices, roles, teamwork, and support beyond the team—and share stories of what happens when teams get them wrong (like obsessing over story point math or demoing a copyright update in a sprint review). Along the way, they introduce the newly available Working on a Scrum Team public course and explain why it’s designed for entire teams, not just isolated roles. Whether you're new to Agile or knee-deep in transformation, this episode will help you rethink how to build an Agile approach that actually works. References and resources mentioned in the show: Mike Cohn #80: From Struggling to Success: Reviving Agile Teams with Mike Cohn Scrum Team Roles and Responsibilities Working on a Scrum Team Course Mountain Goat Software Certified Scrum and Agile Training Schedule Subscribe to the Agile Mentors Podcast Want to get involved? This show is designed for you, and we’d love your input. Enjoyed what you heard today? Please leave a rating and a review. It really helps, and we read every single one. Got an Agile subject you’d like us to discuss or a question that needs an answer? Share your thoughts with us at 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. Mike Cohn, CEO of Mountain Goat Software, is a passionate advocate for agile methodologies. Co-founder of Agile Alliance and Scrum Alliance, he thrives on helping companies succeed with Agile and witnessing its transformative impact on individuals' careers. Mike resides in Northern Idaho with his family, two Havanese dogs, and an impressive hot sauce collection. Auto-generated Transcript: Brian Milner (00:00) Welcome in, Agile Mentors. We're back for another episode of the Agile Mentors podcast. Thanks for joining us. I'm with you, as always, Brian Milner. And today, I have the one and only Mike Cohn back with us. Welcome in, Mike. Mike (00:12) Thanks, Brian. Good to be here. Brian Milner (00:14) Always happy to have Mike on the show and really appreciate Mike making time to come on. Wanted to have Mike on because there's some things Mike's been talking about recently that are really interesting and people have been asking a little bit about this and I thought maybe it'd be just a good opportunity to talk through some of the stuff that Mike's been writing about. I know you spent, Mike, a lot of time helping teams to not just do Agile but to really get solid results from it. to see impact from it. And I know the topic you've been talking about recently is sort of these five pillars of supporting real agile improvements, the mindset, practices, roles, teamwork, and support beyond the team. So I thought maybe we could just dig in and drive through those and maybe learn a little bit about those as we go. Obviously also to talk a little bit about the exciting new course that's being launched here, the working on a Scrum team course, because I know that was originally just for private classes, right? And now it's being open to the public. Mike (01:23) Yeah, we've done working on a Scrum team as a private class for probably 20 plus years. It's been kind of our main offering to private clients. But we're hearing from a lot of people that they have one team and they can't really get a private class approved with the budget and such. So what we're doing is going ahead and making that course available as a public course. So two people from your company, five people from another company all in the same class the way we've done our certified courses for decades. And so we're going to start offering this as a public course. And the exciting thing there is that it's really meant to be a team-based class, where things like Scrum Master training, great class, but it's really meant for the Scrum Master, right? And working on a Scrum team is really designed, and you and I helped you and I design this course together, but it's designed to be something that is a whole team training, right? So good for anybody on a team. Brian Milner (02:16) Yeah, yeah, it's been really great teaching those in the private classes and I'm excited to think about the public being able to come in and take that now. Let's talk a little bit about these pillars and, I think people are gonna be really intrigued by the concept here. The first one is mindset, I think, and just wanna start there and say, what does it actually mean to... think Agile and what is the found, why is that kind of the foundation for successful transformations? Mike (02:43) Remember the kind of the early days of agile and there was a lot of conversation about could you be agile without understanding the principles, right? If you just did the practices, were you agile? Other people were saying, no, you have to start with the principles, right? And so do you start with principles? Do you start with practices? And I remember these early debates and they often devolved into a discussion of the karate kid movie, right? Remember that one, right? And, you know, can you just wax on? Brian Milner (03:12) Ha Mike (03:12) for long enough, just do the practices. And then all of a sudden, your karate instructor or your agile coach is, OK, you're agile. And it's like, wait, all I know how to do is wax a car, right? And so there were these discussions about practices versus principles. And I was kind of always on the side where you better understand the principles to do this. Just knowing the practices, waxing on all day, is kind of just going through the motions. And so you have to understand the principles. And the idea that I wanted was that if a team truly understood all of the principles underneath Agile, I don't just mean just the manifesto, but all the principles that are there from Lean, from Kanban, from everything, that if you really understood those, you'd kind of invent the practices, right? You do those and you go eventually to go, hey, we should probably meet every day. Or hey, if we tested first, that might be a really good thing. Brian Milner (03:57) Yeah. Mike (04:05) So you'd invent the practices if you really had that type of agile mindset. And so for me, when we're working with organizations to get them truly agile, and I don't mean like more agile than less agile, but agile in a way that's going to stick, you got to change mindsets, right? You've got to do more than just the wax on. So people have to get the mindset. Brian Milner (04:27) Yeah, I love that. I know that I've experienced some things in the course of working with people that's it's sort of like you, if you're not on the same page with the principles, then you start to talk through the practices and you run up against a problem. And really what you find out the core of it was, well, we weren't aligned on really the principle behind this. So why would I want the practices then, right? ⁓ Mike (04:49) Yeah. Well, that's where you also end up then with a lot of team debates about things, right? Because you're arguing about the practice. if you'll say you and I are arguing about the benefit of some practice, if we agree on the principle, we might just have different views on it. But deep down, we'll probably agree on some practice, or we might find an alternative one. But if you don't agree on the principles, you end up with a lot more of these kind of annoying. mean, team debates are great. I mean, I love. Brian Milner (04:54) Yeah. Mike (05:12) you know, having a team debate, arguing stuff like that, but not about pointless things, right? And not without some sort of foundation. They just kind of get in the way. It's just frustrating for everybody. Brian Milner (05:21) Yeah. Well, I'm kind of curious, what kind of signs or signals do you think teams should look out for to kind of clue in and let them know that what might actually be going on here is more of a mindset issue? Mike (05:36) think sometimes it's when you hear the appeal to authority, right? Somebody says, you know, well, we got to do it this way because the scrum guide says, right? Or the one that annoys me is we have to do it this way because Mike Cohn says, ⁓ you know, that was like, no, I, somewhere else also said, think, right? Don't just, you know, don't just, you know, blindly do story points or something. Cause I say they're a good thing. I want you to think too. Brian Milner (05:50) You You Mike (06:01) And so I think that kind of appeal to authority when teams are debating things. It's where we also see teams who think they're agile because they do a set of practices. We use a particular agile tool, so we must be agile. We do daily meetings. We must be agile. And those are not the things that make you agile. Those are artifacts of being agile. If you're agile, you're going to meet a lot. You're not going meet a lot, but you're going to talk a lot. Um, and so those are the artifacts of behaving in an agile way. And so I want to understand why we're doing those things. So I look for those kind of appeals to authority. Um, you know, emphasis on that type of stuff in an argument talking about how this is the right way saying there's only one right way to do something. Brian Milner (06:49) Yeah, yeah, that's great. How does working on the Scrum team deal with this? How does that address it? Mike (06:55) Well, one of the things we do, it was actually one of my favorite exercises. We do this exercise at the start of the class where we ask people to kind of map out how the organization talks about certain adsel principles and then how does the organization behave. And so for example, if a company says, people are our greatest asset, and then they treat people like dirt, we've got this kind of problem between what we say and what we do. And so I like to kind of map this out. And so we do this with the principles in the Agile Manifesto. And once we map those out and we start to see things that we say we value, but we don't behave that way, really helps us understand if we've really embraced that mindset. Or are we just doing things because an Agile coach told us to, or a boss told us to, or we did it that way in our prior company. Those are all bad reasons to do something. Brian Milner (07:48) Y eah. So this is great. So I agree. The mindset's really foundational. And there is this symbiotic relationship between mindset and practices, which came first and which comes first, as we talked about. I know a lot of teams get stuck doing Agile, though, in really only name only. So when we talk about practices, what makes the difference between going through the motions? Mike (08:00) Mm-hmm. Brian Milner (08:11) and actually doing things that work. Mike (08:13) Well, practices is kind of our second pillar, right? You have to have the mindset, right? But you also have to have the practices that come from having that mindset. so, again, I try to think of that team on a desert island, right? And they're isolated from the world. They've never talked to anybody, but they have an agile mindset. What practices are they going to invent, right? And I think those are kind of the core practices. We see a lot of problems with as an example, teams that misunderstand sprint planning. And I know when I first started teaching about sprint planning, I'd have a slide up there to have a picture of a sprint backlog. And the sprint backlog listed tasks like code this, design this, test this. And then there were estimates next to code this. It's going to take four hours testing. It's going to take three. And so we were able see all these numbers and think the point of a sprint planning was these numbers. And Even in the early days of this, I was always saying, no, it's not about those numbers. It's about deciding what product backlog items you can pick. if taking a, I don't even want to call it an estimate, but taking a wild guess about, it probably can take four hours to code. If that helps you decide how many backlog items you can commit to, great, put those numbers up there. But it was never about the numbers. And it's one of the most common problems that I see with teams in sprint planning is they get obsessed with How many hours did we bring in? How many points did we bring in? And I remember one team I worked with where we did sprint planning. Having those estimates were helpful for them on their sprint back. They were helping. And we finished the meeting. And we're using Google Sheets in a meeting to do this. We've got a row with the estimates in there. And as we start to wind down the meeting, I deleted that column that they'd spent so much time talking about. They're all kind of pissed off at me. Why'd you delete that? We spent all this time talking about it. I said, because we got the benefit, right? You got the benefit of those numbers. The benefit isn't a week from now remembering that you said five hours, because it's going to take what it takes. The benefit was the discussion that it led to of can we take more or are we already full? So I see teams get obsessed with that. This is one example, but that's one of the problems with sprint planning as a practice. Brian Milner (10:25) Yeah. Yeah. I think you're absolutely right. And that's one of the things I know I've talked about with people going through the course is sort of understanding the purpose behind the things. Just going back to, know, harkening back to what you said about, don't just do it because someone told you, you know, understand why the purpose behind it. And, know, otherwise we, I'm sure we've all had that experience before where someone just tells you to do something and says, you know, why? Cause I told you so, you know, that, that doesn't, that's not very convincing. Mike (10:52) Thanks, Mom. Brian Milner (10:53) Right, right, thanks mom. Yeah, not very convincing, but it's much more convincing when they can tell you, well, no, you do this because this is what we're trying to do. And I think you're right, that makes all the difference there. ⁓ Mike (11:05) It just, don't know anybody that responds well to being told what to do, right? My instant reaction is no, right? mean, you it could be, you know, a really, you it could be a really good thing. Eat more vegetables, you spend more time outside. No, right? Don't tell me what to do. So. Brian Milner (11:09) Right. Right. Yeah. It's almost like our default response is no until you convince me. Are there other common practices? We talked about sprint planning. Are there other kind of practices you see teams struggle with? Mike (11:28) Yeah, yeah, for a lot of people. think a huge one is product backlog refinement. I don't know what a better word would be than refinement. refinement is about making the backlog better. It's not about making it perfect. And I see teams that get stuck on backlog refinement and feel like they have to resolve every open issue, that everything has to be tiny and answered and buttoned up before we can start a sprint. And that's not the case. For me, the goal in refinement is to make sure things are small enough and sufficiently well understood. I don't want to bring in a backlog that's bigger than my velocity. If our velocity is 25, I don't want bring in a 50-point story. how about the problems of a 50-point story anyway? But I don't want to bring in some massive epic like that into a sprint. And so refinement is about making it small, making sure it's sufficiently well understood. Sufficiently well understood, not perfectly. And so Brian Milner (12:18) Yeah. Mike (12:28) The problem is these teams, and I know you've seen this, but teams who get in there, want to resolve every open issue. It's like, no, we can resolve that during the sprint. If we think about the goal and planning to make sure we know what to bring into the sprint, not too much, not too little, we're fine just enough that you're at that point. Is the button blue or red? Who cares? If it's a log in story, we're going to lock people out after some number of failed attempts. Who cares how many? Figure that out during the sprint. If it's five or three or eight, who cares? Figure that out later. So I think refinements won. Another big one would be reviews, ⁓ where sometimes teams demo too much in a sprint review. And they feel like they have to justify their existence, show everything you did during the sprint. And the most egregious example of that was this was a handful of years ago. But I literally remember a team showing Brian Milner (12:58) Yeah. Yeah. Mike (13:18) how they had updated the copyright notice on the footer of the web page, know, copyright, you know, whatever year our company, right? And it's like, my God, you didn't need to show that to stakeholders, right? We all either know there's a copyright notice on the bottom of the web page or we've seen one before. I don't need you to bring it up and scroll down to it. Now only took 15 seconds of the meeting, but that was 15 seconds of people's lives. They were never going to get back. you know, show stuff that you need feedback on, right? If you'd... Brian Milner (13:41) Right. Mike (13:45) You fixed a bug and you fixed it only way it could be fixed. Mention it perhaps, but you don't need to show it, right? Brian Milner (13:51) Yeah, yeah, know teams I've been on often it's just it's suffice it to have a list sometimes and just say here's a list of things if you want to know more about these come talk to us but we're move on to the stuff you care about. Mike (14:02) Yeah, I always have like a will show, will not show list. you know, I often, if I'm writing the meetup present, that'll put that up on Zoom or, you know, show it on a screen if we're in person. And often somebody wants to see something that's on the will not show list. Or they just want me to describe what bug was that again? What was that? You know, and I'll explain it really quickly. But if nobody wants to see it, don't bother showing it. So. Brian Milner (14:26) Yeah, I know we talk about these scrum practices quite a bit in the working on the scrum team class, but if someone signed up to take this class, what can they expect to hear or what can they expect to learn about these practices in the course? Mike (14:39) Well, I think one of the things that you and I did together in creating the newest version of the course was to look at what do you actually need to practice doing, and it's feasible to practice doing in a classroom setting, versus what should you just kind of talk through. And not everything needs to be practiced to get the hang of it, right? Everybody in the world has taken something big and split it up into smaller things before, right? I need to make. spaghetti dinner tonight. What do need to buy? Right? OK. Well, that's that's that's test decomposition by noodles, by sauce, by tomatoes. Let's make it from scratch. Right. By some garlic. Right. So everybody in the world has done decomposition. We've broken a big thing into small things. And I remember, you know, iterating over I'm still on sprint planning, I guess. But I remember iterating over exercises in sprint planning and in courses over the decades by now. And I would have one where you're planning a party for your kid, break it down into tasks. It's like, nobody learns anything from this. And so that's one where I'd rather say, OK, this problem occurs in sprint planning. How could you solve it? Other things like, let's say, splitting user stories or splitting job stories, that's a skill worth practicing together, getting feedback on. And so those type of things we try to practice in the course. other things we just talk about. mean, I'm curious on your thoughts on that. What do you think about some things being worth practicing, some things worth being better talked about? Brian Milner (16:01) Yeah, I agree. I agree fully. it's, it's, you know, there's some things, it's kind of like what you said before, there's some things that's not worth spending the time on, and it's better to just have a discussion and move on. Mike (16:13) Yeah. Yeah. I guess that's one of the things we always talked about. We always talked about return on investment of the exercise. What's the return on the exercise? And if you're going to have a one hour exercise, cool. One hour exercise. But it better have a pretty healthy return because that's a lot of time in class. And so what's the return on exercise? Is this worth a practice? Is it worth just a discussion? And if we can discuss two hard problems and give people advice on two common problems, they're probably going to face. Brian Milner (16:21) Yeah. Mike (16:41) Might be better than spending 20 minutes practicing something that they've probably done before. Brian Milner (16:45) Yeah, I completely agree. Let's move to the third pillar then, because I know this is a big one, just thinking and talking about the roles. And just as far as communication issues are concerned, even outside of Scrum, I know that's part of the big problem with teams and organizations just not being clearly defined about who does what and who's responsible for each thing. So those misunderstandings are really common failure points. ⁓ Mike (17:09) Mm-hmm. Brian Milner (17:10) How do you see teams getting that wrong and how's that derailing a Scrum team? Mike (17:15) Well, think we see it all the time on Scrum teams between Scrum Master and Product Owner and even the development team, right? Who does what? I was responding to some comments on LinkedIn this morning on some post I'd made last week and somebody had some comments. And it had to do with whether the Scrum Master or Product Owner does something. And it was interesting because in the comments on that post, I... I don't remember which one it was, but I shared a certain perspective. I feel pretty strongly that I have it right. I mean, I this is how we do it. But there were other people saying the opposite, right? And so, you know, these are people that are probably fairly experienced with Scrum, if they're following me on LinkedIn and feel comfortable commenting on a post, probably feel comfortable with it. And so there's a lot of confusion about what role does what thing. And I don't think this is something where the Scrum guy is going to have the answers for you. I think it's, I mean, you can look at the Scrum guy, oh, this. Here's my starting point answer, but we always want to play to people's strengths, right? And if you've got a scrum master who's got a lot of skill in one area, maybe they shift a little work from the PO to themselves, right? With the PO's permission, right? And the opposite, right? Between maybe PO and team. So it's fine to have default starting positions on who does what, but you always want to play to people's strengths. So I think PO scrum master, I think we see it with project managers and scrum masters, roll confusion on those type of roles as well. Brian Milner (18:38) Yeah, completely agree. A lot of those roles that are not named Scrum team roles and how they interact with the team, that's often a source of confusion as well. What are maybe some signs or symptoms that teams might be having confusion or problems in this area that maybe they don't even recognize or realize they're having an issue with roles? Mike (18:59) Any sort of conflicts, right? You know, you and I arguing over which one of us should do something. The other one would be kind of the opposite, which would be like a dropped ball. I was watching some YouTube video. I love baseball. I was watching some YouTube video the other day of like missed catches or something like that. And some team hit a baseball way up in the air and it was landing near three players, right? Three players are all looking at it. Brian Milner (19:12) You Mike (19:23) One guy waves the other two off, he's going to catch the ball and he must have been blinded by the sun because he's like six feet from the ball when it lands on the ground, right? And, you know, if we have a responsibility to catch the ball, run this meeting, right, right the backlog, the kids dropped, right? And so I think either arguing over who does something, two of us trying to do the same thing or neither of us doing it. I don't mean trying to get out of the work, right? All three players have been happy to catch the ball, but I think you've got it. You think I've got it, right? Those type of things are pretty good signs. think getting clarity around these roles can really optimize how a team works. And I think a really key thing here is that it changes over time. So I'll go back to my example of maybe the Scrubmaster has some skills that can help the product owner early on. Because maybe the product owner is new to the company. The product owner doesn't know the product as well. So they might rely on the Scrubmaster for guidance on things. Well, a year from now, we might shift responsibilities a little bit because now the PO is the expert on all things related to the product. So it's not like we want to establish clarity on roles one time and leave it forever. It's going to change. We get a new tester on the team, things might change. Product owner moves. It's going to change again. So we need to realize these responsibilities are dynamic. Brian Milner (20:39) Yeah, that's a great point. Your point about baseball just made me think about how, when you watch any youth sport in the world, when you go watch your kids play a sport, what's the one thing you always hear people scream from the sideline? Talk to each other. Call the ball. Well, that too. That too. Ump your blind. Those kinds of things. Well, let's talk a little bit about Mike (20:52) I thought you were going say, put my kid in. Brian Milner (21:00) I know this course addresses the roles and how would you say this course really helps address that issue of role confusion? Mike (21:07) think a big part of it is that we designed it to be for everybody on the team, right? Suppose you send a scrum master to a class, and it's a great class. Scrum master is going to back to the certain set of impressions about their role. Product owner goes to an equally good class about the product. They might have different impressions. Even if they took the course from the same instructor, they're hearing it a little differently. They're hearing it through their filters, right? And so when they're in a course together, there's more opportunities to clarify their understanding about those things, especially in the classes designed as we did with this one to bring out some of those differences. So I think the course helps with that. we've also designed it to mention the rules we haven't talked about, like managers and things like that. Brian Milner (21:53) Yeah, yeah, I think those are so important. And there's a lot of great discussions that come out when we have those topics. ⁓ Let's talk about the fourth pillar then, teamwork, because this, I think, builds really well on what we just talked about. And the idea that there's actually, Scrum is a team sport. ⁓ So beyond just normal human personality conflict type issues, what do you see that gets in the way of teams actually Mike (21:58) Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Brian Milner (22:18) working as a team. Mike (22:19) think ego is probably one, right? I can do everything better, just leave me alone. There's an old book that says basically, beware of a lone developer in a room, right? You know, it was referring to the developer who wants to close their door and say, I'll it done in a month, trust me, right? And one of the companies I worked with, and this one's going back like 15 years ago, but it was a really good story. Brian Milner (22:36) Yeah. Mike (22:43) is they would literally grab one unit of work. Each person on the team would grab a unit of work and take anywhere from three to 12 months to do the thing. So they were big things, but the person would do everything on it. They'd coded, tested everything. And the organization was putting out very little because of this. When they moved to Scrum in the first year, by their estimate, they said they delivered 540 % more work. over five times the amount of new features delivered. And that was through the collaboration, through the short iterations, those type of things. But it was about getting people to collaborate more. So I think there's huge opportunities to do that. One of the problems I see is when we don't overlap work. If we think about that organization I just described, you grab your thing, you're done in six months. I grab mine, I'm done in seven months. If we'd work together on those things, what's not make us any faster? No faster. But you and I could have worked on your one thing and been done in three months. OK, we're delivering value in three months, right? And so one of the things I look for a lot is how much teams are overlapping work, right? And if we're not overlapping work, there's huge opportunities to improve at that. I'll a little example of this. One of my favorite restaurants is, I don't know, barely call it a restaurant. It's a fast food deli. It's called Jimmy John's. Have you been to Jimmy John's, Yeah. Yeah, there's one near my house where I can go there and the wine will be out the door. Right. And you know, normally you see a wine out the door and it's like, crap, I'm going somewhere else. Right. These guys are so fast. They're so fast. When I get to the front, I place my order. I play this little game of can I fill up my cup? You know, I get an iced tea and they give me an empty cup and can I go fill up ice and put the tea in before they hand me my sandwich? And it's about 50-50. Right. It doesn't take long to fill up your iced tea. But the way they do that is the overlap work. As soon as I order my Italian club sandwich, somebody's already got the bread open, somebody's got a slab of meat they're ready to drop on there, somebody else has their hands over the vegetables and they're dropping the vegetables on there, and then a fourth person wraps it up. And so like four or five people touch my sandwich. Hopefully their hands are clean, but four or five people touch my sandwich as opposed to like most delis where I go and it's like you watch one person plod along making the sandwich, right? Overlap work is huge. Brian Milner (25:07) Yeah. Yeah, this episode sponsored by, no, just kidding. Use code Mike Cohn when you go to, no, just kidding. Yeah, I agree. And yeah, yeah, I'm familiar with Jimmy John's. Probably too familiar. ⁓ Yes, yeah, no, that's, I think that's part of their shtick is that they're, you know, they're known for being fast. So yeah. Mike (25:10) You Is yours just as fast? Yeah. Yeah. They call it Freaky Fast. They actually have a competition. I've seen YouTube videos of this where they get like the best teams at various restaurants race, right? And so they have like the Jimmy John sandwich making Olympics or something, but it's a skill. Brian Milner (25:36) wow, wow, yeah. You should pair that up with the hot dog eating challenge in some way and see if we could have a team sport going there. ⁓ Mike (25:48) Well, that's a good point because think about the hot dog eating. That's one guy, right? That's Joey Chesnett shoving hot dogs down. The Jimmy Johns is a team. They get the best crew at a restaurant and it's a team, right? How fast can the team go? Not how fast can one guy make a sandwich, right? Brian Milner (25:51) Yeah. Yeah, yeah. That's awesome. So what are some tips? What are some ways that you can really unite a team, especially those new teams? Because that's the fascination point for me is, how do you take this group of humans that really don't know each other and haven't worked together in the past and unite them together and have them gel as a team? How do you do that? Mike (26:21) I'll give you a couple. One, I think having really crisp sprint goals helps. So we all know exactly what we're trying to get done in the sprint. We don't lose sight of that because sometimes in the middle of a sprint, you lose sight of it. And you get myopic and you just focus on a list of tasks. And I'm going to say that it's probably similar to the team doing sprint planning and just getting them assessed with the numbers. It's not about the numbers. It's not about the tasks. It's about the backlog items that lead to some goal. So crisp sprint goals help. That's a hard phrase. Crisp Sprinkles helps. The other one I'd say is having a shared vision about where you're headed over a little bit longer term. Probably the biggest change to the Scrum Guide ever that I've liked is the inclusion of a product goal. And that was something I'd been talking about forever. mean, literally since I started doing Scrum was that sprinkles are great, but they're pretty short, right? You want to have something bigger. Brian Milner (26:52) It is. Mike (27:14) And so I like having product goals that are a few months out there. And one of the things I like doing for product goals is have teams do something like write a press release that describes their goal or create a vision in some way, write a review that you want to see come out on the App Store, Play Store, and a magazine. And one of my clients made software and they were reviewed by a major magazine and they were given an editor's choice runner up award. And they actually estimated that being runners up for that was probably worth about $10 million. First place, first time was worth about $10 million a year to them. And so they decided to get serious about this and they wrote a review. Their scrum master, she was actually combo scrum master product owner, Erin. She had the team write a review and she said, let's go earn this review. And I literally remember the email I got from her three months later. It was because it was Halloween night. I just like, you know, brought in the candy from outdoors. We're done trick or treating. And I checked my email. I a three word email from her from Erin. said we did it. And the magazine had let her know, hey, we're reviewing you. be out on, you know, like Tuesday's edition. And the review had quotes in there that were from their vision review, right? The things that they had wanted to achieve. Brian Milner (28:22) Ha ha. Mike (28:35) And that team had just really jelled around that and just became so much more productive and collaborated so much better because of that shared vision. Brian Milner (28:43) Yeah, that's amazing. getting back to the course then, I know in the course we're trying to kind of some of those collaboration muscles. What are some of the ways that the course helps to build that? Mike (28:56) think one of the key things that we're doing, and I'm excited about this, is that we're, you know, we of course use Zoom breakout rooms, right? You you go talk about this, we'll see you in eight minutes or something like that. And for this course, we're doing something where a group of three or more, when they register, can have a private breakout room. And this to me is exciting because people get the benefit of having a private breakout room. They can have sensitive discussions if they want. They can talk very specifically about. you know, what do we do about our jerk product owner? mean, whatever it is, right? You know, they can talk about their specific issues, yet have the context of a broader class. Because I think in one of the benefits of any public class is hearing how other teams are doing things. And sometimes that's because you get a good advice, you know, how did you solve that problem? We have that problem. Other times, it's just feeling that you're not alone in the world. they've got that problem too, right? And they don't have any solution for me, but I know I'm not alone in the world with this. And so I like these private breakout rooms for three or more. I think it's a novel thing we're doing with this class. And it's with the intent of combining the best of both worlds of private and public training for this. I'd the other thing is probably consistency, having everybody on the team hear the same message, having those discussions with an experienced instructor like you or me in the room to provide guidance when they have questions. know, go back to the role clarity, right? You know, they can talk about it and they're there. Then they're back in the main room with you or me and we can kind of answer questions. So I think that consistency will be huge as well. Brian Milner (30:25) Yeah, yeah, I love that idea of the private private breakout rooms that that's that's gonna be huge for a lot of people I know. ⁓ Mike (30:31) I'm excited to try it with this. This will be the first classes we do that for. I'm excited about it. Brian Milner (30:36) Yeah, yeah. Well, let's bring it home then and talk about the fifth pillar because the fifth pillar is really interesting as well. It talks about support beyond the team and teams can only do so much. Every team struggles when they're not supported well. And there's lots of studies that show leadership support is one of the biggest hurdles or obstacles to the adoption. Mike (30:46) Mm-hmm. Brian Milner (30:59) What does that support look like from outside the team and how can a team influence that? Mike (31:06) Yeah, if you're trying to be agile and your HR group has quarterly reviews of personnel that are all based on individual performance and has nothing to do about teamwork in there, it's going to be hard to focus on collaboration. So we have to kind of fix these issues. I think what we have to do here is to have team members educate those outside the organization. And we have information that we share about, you here's how to talk to a boss that's maybe mandating deadlines, things like that. And so we try to coach people through having some of those challenging conversations. And one of things I want teams to do is kind of become an example of what good agile looks like. And if you have a team that's excelling with agile and they're doing it from a kind of principles first, that mindset first approach. You're going to see other groups look at that and let's say the marketing group. They're going to look at that go, hey, that's an interesting way to work. I wonder how we could do that, right? And it's going look different for a marketing group than a tech team. the mindset is going to be the same. Principles will still be the same. And so when we get teams to do really well with this, other parts of the organization start to get interested. And then they stop being as much in our way. Brian Milner (32:20) Yeah. I know one of the most important aspects here and that we talk about is, is that you don't need to, to wait, right? If you're the team level, you don't have to just sit around and wait for the organization to make changes. you, you have opportunities to make changes as well. So how does that happen? How's the team change, you know, bring about those changes that, improve the agile process, the results. Mike (32:42) I think that's by being the example so that people see it. I think it's by having those conversations. You know, one of the things that we'll get is, you know, it's so common is the product owner that wants to change their mind all the time. I was reading something, I guess this is in our Agile mentors community, I think is where it was, but it was about the, you know, the product owner who said his favorite thing about Agile is that he can reprioritize every week. ⁓ And it's like, you can, you know. Brian Milner (33:05) Hmm. Yeah Mike (33:10) I'm not sure it's good. And I think about that, a team gets momentum, right? And you're working on a certain feature. Next sprint, it would be nice to work in that same area of this system, right? Your head's there. Just kind of keep going a little bit. And I've often described this as like, let's say you're working on three backlog items that are in a certain area of this system. Let's make it concrete. Let's say it's the spell checker in Microsoft Office, right? And you do three backlog items related to the spell checker this sprint. Next sprint, maybe your top priority is not more spell checker stuff, but maybe items, I don't know, 25, 26, and 27 on the backlog are still in the spell checker. You know what? It might be better to do those. There are probably two or three sprints away. Let's bring them into this sprint. Just get them done while my head's into spell checking. And so getting product owners or stakeholders to stop doing that, one of the ways that I like to talk about doing that is using an example of ordering a meal at a restaurant. I can order, let's say, the chicken entree. And then as the waiter is taking the orders around the table, I change from chicken, no, bring me the fish. Not a big deal. The waiter is going to cross off chicken and write down fish. If the waiter goes away, brings me back my salad, and I change my mind then, I say, hey, bring me the fish. Might not be a big deal. It's going to be a big deal if I've already taken three bites of the chicken. right? Or if he brings me the chicken. So yeah, we can change our mind, but there's a cost, right? And we want to educate stakeholders about that cost. They don't overdo it. Brian Milner (34:31) Yeah. Yeah. Well, speaking of the leaders and the organization, managers, leaders, do you think this course is appropriate for managers and leaders to attend as well? you feel like they might need to in order to really have this be an impact? Mike (34:55) Yeah, that's a good question. Is it appropriate? Yeah, I think it's appropriate. When we do this privately, we've had plenty of leaders and managers attend. I think it's great. I don't think that's required because they're not on the Scrum team. You said the name of the course is working on a Scrum team. And so they're not on the Scrum team. They benefit by knowing more how their Scrum team works. But I think what we found is that having just a key subset of people who hear the same message work through the training together, and then go back to the organization. That's enough to bring the passion, conviction, and skills that we want. So we don't truly need leaders. They're great. I would never talk a leader out of going, but I wouldn't. If I were a team and I could take the class this month or with my leader next month, I would just get the class done, right? And educate the leader afterwards. Brian Milner (35:41) Yeah. Yeah, yeah, I think that's a good plan. All right, well then we've made our way through the five pillars and for people who have come this far with us and are at this point, if they're listening and they're recognizing some of these problems we've been talking about, what would you recommend to them as next steps here? Mike (35:49) if Well, take a look at our website. If you go to mountaingoatsoftware.com. And then I think there's a courses link on the top. You can go up there and find the link to this course. It's an exciting one that we're doing. I've literally been teaching this, I think the first time I taught a class called Working on a Scrum Team was 2003 or 2004. it's a time tested course. You and I kind of redesigned it a couple of months ago to make it appropriate for public. or little better just in general and more appropriate for public. But it's a time-tested course that's now designed to be available for public settings instead of, you know, have to have 25 people or something. Brian Milner (36:36) Yeah, yeah, that's really exciting. I can't wait to see kind of how people are in, you know, react and interact in the course to some of these concepts and ideas. And we'll, we'll of course link to all these things that we've talked about in our show notes and make it easy for everyone to find the course listing and, and, you know, where the dates and everything that we're going to offer them. So make sure to check that out. Mike, thanks so much for coming on. This has been really enlightening and I appreciate you making time for it. Mike (37:01) Of course, thanks for having me, Brian. Always a pleasure.

We’re taking our own advice and hitting pause to recharge this July. While we’re off the mic, revisit past episodes packed with timeless insights and conversations you may have missed. Overview This week, we're pressing pause to model the sustainable pace we teach. Brian shares a quick update about our summer break, what’s ahead in August, and how you can make the most of the podcast archive while we’re away. Whether you’re poolside or simply stepping back from the daily sprint, we hope you’ll join us in creating a little breathing room and we can’t wait to be back with a fresh season soon. References and resources mentioned in the show: Subscribe & Listen to Previous Episodes of 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. Auto-generated Transcript: Brian Milner (00:00) Hey there Agile Mentors, this is Brian Milner and I'm just gonna take a moment of your time today because we're actually going to be practicing what we teach here at Agile Mentors and we're gonna be working at a sustainable pace. So for us that means we're gonna take a few weeks off. It's summer and I know many of you are going to be taking time off with your families and we're gonna be doing the same thing. So we won't be around for the next month. We're gonna be out of here for July, but already have some plans for when we come back in August. So stay tuned when we come back in August, we've got a new season of shows that will begin there in August that I think you'll really enjoy. While we're off, might I suggest you go back through our archive. Look at some of the previous podcast episodes we've done. There's quite a few now. And maybe you've missed some of the episodes from the past. Go back and find some of our great guests that we've had over the years when we've been doing this. I think you'll find some really great guests and some really interesting topics. So fill your diet of Agile Mentors with that while we're at taking a little bit of a break here at Agile Mentors. I hope you're having a great summer and we look forward to seeing all of you back here in August. Take care.

Is AI underdelivering? Or are we asking the wrong questions? This episode breaks down what actually leads to business ROI with AI (and no, it’s not more automation). Overview What if AI isn’t the silver bullet—yet—but the bottleneck is human, not technical? In this episode, Brian Milner chats with Evan Leybourn and Christopher Morales of the Business Agility Institute about their latest research on how organizations are really using AI, what’s working (and what’s wildly overhyped), and why your success might hinge more on your culture than your code. References and resources mentioned in the show: Evan Leybourn Christopher Morales Business Agility Institute From Constraints to Capabilities Report Delphi Method #93: The Rise of Human Skills and Agile Acumen with Evan Leybourn #82: The Intersection of AI and Agile with Emilia Breton #117: How AI and Automation Are Redefining Success for Developers with Lance Dacy AI Practice Prompts For Scrum Masters 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. Evan Leybourn is the co-founder of the Business Agility Institute and author of Directing the Agile Organization and #noprojects; a culture of continuous value. Evan champions the advancement of agile, innovative, and dynamic companies poised to succeed in fluctuating markets through rigorous research and advocacy. Christopher Morales is a seasoned digital strategist and agile leader with over 20 years of experience guiding organizations like ESPN, IBM, and the Business Agility Institute. As founder of Electrick Media, he helps U.S. and European businesses harness AI to make smarter, more sustainable decisions in a rapidly changing world. Auto-generated Transcript: Brian Milner (00:00) Welcome in Agile Mentors. We are back for another episode of the Agile Mentors podcast. We've kind been a little bit off and on recently, but I'm back, I'm here, I'm ready to go, and we've got a really good episode for you today. I've got two, two guests with me. I know that's not a normal thing that we do here, but we got two guests. First, we have Mr. Evan Layborn with us, who's back. Welcome back, Evan. Evan Leybourn (00:23) Good morning from Melbourne, Australia. Brian Milner (00:26) And Christopher Morales is joining us for the first time. Christopher worked with Evan on a project and we're going to talk about that in just a second, but Christopher, welcome in. Christopher Morales (00:35) Yeah, good evening. Nice to be here. It's very late here in Germany. So this is an international attendance. Brian Milner (00:42) Yeah, we were talking about this just as we started. I think we have pretty much all times of day represented here on this call because we've got morning here from Evan. We've got late evening here for Christopher and I'm kind of late afternoon. So we're covered. All our bases are covered here. But we wanted to have these two on. They both work for a company called the Business Agility Institute. And if you have been with us for a while, you probably remember Evan's episode that we had on last year when we kind of talked about one of the studies that they had done. Well, they put out a new one that I kind of saw Evan posting about. And I thought, wow, that sounds really, really interesting. I really want to have them on to talk about this. It's called From Constraints to Capabilities, AI as a Force Multiplier. The great thing about the Business Agility Institute is they get into the data. They do the research, they put in the hard work, and it's not just speculation. It's not just, that's one guy's bloated opinion, and do they know what they're talking about or not? So that's what I really, really appreciate about the things that come out of the Business Agility Institute is they're factual, they're data-based. So that's what I wanna start with, I guess, is... What was the genesis of this? What did you guys, how did you land on this as a topic and how did you narrow it down to this as a topic? Where did this start? Evan Leybourn (02:07) Well, quite simply, it started from almost a hypothesis around so much of the conversation around AI. And let's face it, there is a lot of conversation around artificial intelligence and specifically generative, predictive and agentic AI. Focuses on the technology. And yet when we talk to organizations, a lot of them don't seem to be seeing a positive return on investment, a positive ROI. And we needed to understand why, why these benefits of like three times products or operational efficiency product throughput, three times value creation, Why weren't companies seeing this? That's really what we were trying to understand. Why? Brian Milner (03:01) Yeah, that's a great basis for this because I think you're right. There's sort of this, I would imagine there's lots of people out there who are kind of going through their business lives and hearing all these incredible claims that people are making in the media about how this is gonna replace everyone. And now it's, yeah, we can, I mean, you said 3X, I've heard like, 10 or anywhere from 10 to 100X, the capabilities of teams and that they can now do all these amazing things. And if I'm just going through my business career, I'm looking at that from the outside going, is this fact or is this fantasy? this just a bluster or is this really, really happening? So I really appreciate this as a topic. A little bit of insider baseball here for everybody. You guys talk about in this report that you use a specific method here, the Delphi method. for data geeks here, or if you're just kind of curious, would you mind describing a little bit about what that means? Evan Leybourn (04:00) Chris, do you want to take that one? Christopher Morales (04:01) Yeah, well, so the idea behind using the Delphi method was actually inspired by my sister. She had done a periodic review that utilized this method. And essentially what it is is we utilize rounds of inquiry with an expert panel to refine the research, the feedback that we're getting. And so we collected an initial set of data. reviewed that data, tried to analyze it to come up with a consensus, and then repositioned our findings back to the experts to find out where they stood based on what they gave us. And really trying to get all of the experts to come to an agreement in specific areas. In the areas that we found gray space, for instance, or let's say, data was spread out, right? Those were really the areas where we're really trying to force these experts to get off of the fence and really make an assessment. And it was proved extremely helpful, I think, in this research because what I find in the AI space is that there is plenty of gray. And we really wanted to get to some stronger degree of black and white. I'm not going to say these findings are black and white, but I will say that in order to guide people, you need to give them degrees of confidence. And I feel like that's what we wanted to do with this. Brian Milner (05:31) Well, that's the great thing about research though, Is it can give you information, but there's always the story. And it's really kind of finding that story that really is the crux of it. So we open this saying, fact or fiction. So just hit us up with a couple of the, maybe some of the surprising findings or some of the key things. For the people you talk to. Christopher Morales (05:38) Mm-hmm. Brian Milner (05:53) Were they seeing these amazing kind of, you know, 100 X of their capabilities or what was the reality of what people reported to you? Evan Leybourn (06:01) In a few cases, yes. Maybe not 100x, but 8x, 10x was definitely being shown. But the big aha, and I won't say it was a surprise, was really in a lot of organizations, the teams that were using AI were seeing Brian Milner (06:03) Okay. Evan Leybourn (06:23) absolutely massive improvements. People talk about going from months to minutes in terms of trying to create things. And so there's your 100X. But when we look at it at a business level and the business ROI, when we look at the idea to customer from concept to cash, when we look at the overall business flow, very few of those organizations saw those benefits escape from the little AI inner circle. And so that 10x or the 100x improvement fizzles into nothingness in some cases. negligible improvement in the whole organization. Some organizations absolutely saw those benefits throughout the entire system. And those were organizations who had created a flow, who created organizational systems that could work at the speed of AI, especially some of the younger AI native organizations, if you want to think of them that way. But no, most organizations those 10x, 100x kind of goals were unachievable for the business. And so when I was saying 3x, by the way, what we sort of tended to find is those organizations, mature organizations with mature AI programs and systems. we're generally seeing between a 1.2 to 1.4x improvement to about a 2.8 to about a 3.2x improvement. So that's like a 20 % to a 300 % improvement if you want to think of it this way. Brian Milner (08:15) Wow. Well, that's nothing to sneeze at. That's still really, really impressive. Christopher Morales (08:19) yeah, it'll make a significant difference. I think for me the interesting thing about the findings is that there's two areas that I think will pose a really interesting question for people who read the report, and that is this idea of being very intentional about identifying your goal, right? I don't know how many organizations are really meaningfully identifying what their expected outcome is. And I think the other thing, which we didn't really talk about much in the report, but I think plays a role in the conversation that's kind of bubbling to the surface here today, has to do with the human element inside of the organization. And while all of the organizations that we spoke to said that the human was a very important element and prioritized, There was a challenge in identifying specific initiatives that were being put in place to account for the disruption that the technology might have on the staff or the employees. And that wasn't surprising. That was kind of expected. But I think it's interesting that, you know, eight months after we released this report, I would argue that that's still the case. Brian Milner (09:36) Mm-hmm. Yeah. Yeah, that's fascinating because you're right. It's, it's, that's not the story you always hear, because you, you are hearing kind of more of taking the human out of the loop and making it more of just this straight automation kind of project. I want to ask really a question here though, Evan, said you made the distinction about it being more mature, groups, more mature organizations. I'm just curious, is that translate to, is there anything that translates there into the size of the organization as well? Did you find that more larger organizations had a different outcome than smaller, more nimble startup kind of organizations? Evan Leybourn (10:14) So age more than size. Younger organizations tended to be more, well, mean, they tended to be more agile. There's more business agility and through that greater benefits out of AI. These things are very tightly tied together. If you can't do... Brian Milner (10:18) Hmm, okay. Evan Leybourn (10:38) Agile or if you don't have agility as an organization, you're not going to do AI particularly well. And a piece of that goes to what you were just talking about in terms and you use the word automation, which is a beautiful, beautiful trigger word for me here because the reality is that the organizations that utilized AI, specifically generative or agentic AI, to automate their workforce rarely saw a high, like a strong return on investment. It basically comes down to generative predictive AI, generative and agentic AI tends not to be a good automation tool. It's non-deterministic. You pull a lever, you get one result. You pull the same lever tomorrow, you will get a different result. There are better tools for automation, cheaper tools for automation. And so we're not saying automation is bad. We're just saying that it's not the technology for it. The organizations that used it to augment their workforce were the ones that were seeing significant benefits. And now there are caveats and consequences to this because it does change the role of the human, the human in the loop, the human in the organization. But fundamentally, organizations that were automating or using AI for automation were applying an industrial era mindset and mentality to an information era opportunity. And they weren't seeing the benefits, not at a business level, not long term. And in some cases, did more harm than good. Brian Milner (12:28) That's really deep insight. That's really amazing to hear that. I'm interested as well. You found some places that were seeing bigger gains than others that were seeing bigger payoffs. Did you find patterns in what some of the hurdles were or some of the kind of obstacles that were preventing some of these that weren't seeing the payoffs from really taking full advantage of this technology? Christopher Morales (12:52) Yeah, absolutely. mean, we identified some significant constraints that, interestingly enough, when we talk about this, we obviously do workshops. So we were just at the XP conference doing a workshop. And when we talk about this, we identify the fact that our position is that the challenges to AI are a human problem, not a technology problem. And the findings reflect that because of the constraints that we found. only one of the major constraints was associated with technology and that was data primarily. The constraints that we identified had to do with normal operations within a business. So long budgeting cycles or the ability to make a decision at a fast rate of speed, for instance. These are all human centric challenges that independent of AI, If you're trying to run an efficient organization, you're trying to run an agile organization, right? Able to take advantage of opportunities. These are all things that are going to come into play. and, you know, as we like to say, like AI is only going to amplify that, right? So if AI can show you 20 more times, like the opportunities available to you is your organization going to be able to pivot? Do you have a funding model that can provide the necessary support for a given initiative? Or is the way things that run within the organization essentially giving you AI that provides you information that you can't move? Brian Milner (14:31) That's a great, yeah, yeah. Evan Leybourn (14:31) And think of it this way, if you're expecting AI to give you a three times improvement to product delivery, can your leaders make decisions three times faster? Can you get market feedback three times faster? And for most organizations, the answer is no. Brian Milner (14:51) Yeah. Yeah, that's a great phrase in there that Chris was talking about, like the AI will just amplify things. I think that's a great observation. And I think you're right. this is kind of, you know, there's been a thing I've talked about some recently in class. there's a... I'll give you my theory. You tell me if your data supports this theory or not. I'm just curious. You know, we've been teaching for a long time in Scrum classes that, you know, there's been studies, there's been research that shows that when you look at the totality of the features that are being completed in software development, there's really a large percentage of them that are rarely or never used, right? They're not finding favor with the audience. The audience is not using those capabilities. And so my theory, and this is what I want you guys, I'm curious what your thought is. If AI is amplifying the capability of development to produce faster, then my theory is that's going to only expand the number of things that we produce that aren't used because the focus has been sort of historically on that it's a It's a developer productivity issue that if we could just expand developer productivity, the business would be more successful when those other former studies are saying, wait a minute, that may not be it. We need to focus more on what customers really want. And if we knew what they really wanted, well, then, yeah, then productivity comes into play. But That's the human element again, right? We have to understand the customer. have to know. So I'm just curious again, maybe I'm out on a limb here or maybe that doesn't line up, how does that line up with what you found? Evan Leybourn (16:41) So the report's called From Constraints to Capabilities. And Chris, we spoke about the constraints. So maybe let's talk about the capabilities for a second. for the listeners who are unfamiliar with the Business Agility Institute, the model that we use for the majority of our research is the domains of business agility, which is a behavioral and capability Brian Milner (16:45) Ha ha. Yes. Evan Leybourn (17:04) Now, in that model, there are 84 behaviors that we model against organizations. But in this context, more importantly, were the 18 business capabilities. And so what we found was that the organizations that were actually seeing an improvement weren't the ones with the capabilities around throughput. So one of the capabilities deliver value sooner. That wasn't strongly tied. So the ability to deliver value sooner wasn't strongly tied to seeing a benefit from AI. But the ability to prioritize or prioritize, prioritize, prioritize, something so important we said it three times, was one of the most strongly needed capabilities. It correlates where organizations that were better at prioritization, at being able to decide which feature or area, what thing to do was the next most important thing. If you're got AI building seven or eight prototypes in the same time you used to be able to create one, great, you now have seven or eight options. Not that seven or eight are going to go to market. but you're going to decide, you've got more optionality. So it's not that you're be delivering more faster, though in some cases that is obviously the case, but you've got more to choose from so that if you make the right decision, you will see those business benefits. But the capability that had the strongest, absolute strongest relationship to seeing a benefit from artificial intelligence was the ability to cultivate a learning organization. That's not education, that's around learning, experimentation, trying things, testing things, being willing as an organization to say, well, that didn't work, let's try something else. And those learning organizations were the ones that were almost universally more successful at seeing a business benefit from their AI initiatives than anybody else. So yeah, just because you can develop features faster, it means nothing if it's not the right features that the customers want. And that comes from learning and prioritization and there are other capabilities unleashing. workflow creatively and funding work dynamically, for example, that came out strongly. But I just really wanted to highlight those two because that's the connection that you're looking for. Christopher Morales (19:43) Yeah. And if you think about your question ties directly into something that we heard at the conference we were just at, likening to technical debt. So we're actually starting to see the increase in technical debt because of the influence that AI and software development is having in the creation of code and so on and so forth. And so... I think that what you're saying is spot on in terms of your theory. And I think that this speaks to what I believe we should really kind of amplify, right? AI is going to amplify certain things that aren't positive. I think leadership, think businesses need to start amplifying a conversation around... Are we approaching this the right way? What are the ultimate outcomes that we may see? And can we take that on? So if our developers are increasing the amount of technical debt that we have because we've integrated AI or adopted AI, what are we doing about that? What is the new workflow? What does the human in the loop do on account of this new factor? that we need to take into place because ultimately things like that make their way to the bottom line. And we know that's what CEOs care about. Brian Milner (21:02) Yeah, wow, this is awesome. I just want to clarify with sort of the learning organization ability, just want to make sure I'm clear. What we're saying here is that it's organizations that already have that kind of cultural mindset, right? That the background of a learning organization that see a bigger gain from this, or are we saying that AI can makes the biggest influence of impacting how learning an organization is. Evan Leybourn (21:34) The first, ⁓ the arrow of causation is that learning organizations amplify or improve or are more likely to see a benefit from AI. It's not a bad, and I should say we're not looking at how effectively you can Brian Milner (21:35) Okay. Evan Leybourn (21:57) deploy an AI initiative. It's about a we looked at AI as a black box. Let's assume or as in the cut through the Delphi method, the companies that we were speaking to had been doing these for years. These were mature established organizations. And the so it wasn't looking at how effectively you could deploy AI. But rather You've got AI, it's integrated. Are you seeing a business benefit from it? And those organizations that were learning organizations were more likely to be seeing a benefit, much, much more likely to be seeing a benefit. Brian Milner (22:40) Yeah. There's one phrase that kind of jumped out at me that I thought maybe one or both of you could kind of address here a little bit. I love the phrase, kind of the metaphor that you used in there about shifting from a creator to composer. And I'm just wondering if you can kind of flesh that out a little bit for us. Help us understand what that looks like to move from a creator to composer. Christopher Morales (23:01) Yeah, I'll start, but I think Evan will touch on it as well, because I do think it's a fascinating position, is how I'll phrase that. So when we think about creator to composer, we're talking about a fundamental shift on how a human is utilized within an organization. So if we eliminate AI from the equation, The human, your employees are acting as creators at some level, at some degree. Okay, so I have a media background, so I'm doing a lot of marketing. And I think that this is appropriate to use as an analogy, because I think a lot of marketers are utilizing AI right now. So independent of AI, that marketer is required to take into consideration all of these different factors about the business, create copy, let's say. create a campaign, do all of this real like hands on thoughts and levels. Now you bring AI into the equation and there are certain elements of these tasks that are being supported, offloaded in some cases. I'm not gonna get into my opinions about what is right and what is wrong here, but what I will say is there is a change in that workflow. And so what is... fundamentally at play here is that that marketer is now working in conjunction with something else. And so it is critically important that that marketer develops the skills to compose with the AI in a sense of, now know how to direct, I know how to steer a conversation, steer a direction. in order to get to a meaningful and hopefully valuable output utilizing the assist of the AI. And Evan, I'll toss over to you because this is the area, just so you know, Brian, this area of the report is the one that this podcast could turn into an hour and a half long podcast. Evan Leybourn (25:08) So I'll try not to make it an hour and a half, but just to build on what Chris said. Brian Milner (25:11) Ha Evan Leybourn (25:12) So this created to compose a shift, it changes the role of the human in the loop. It changes the responsibilities. And there's a quote in the report, AI is an unlimited number of junior staff or junior developers if you're a technologist. And that comes with some deep nuance because we all know that junior staff there is a level of oversight and validation required. So if you're creating through your AI colleague, let's call them that, if you're collaborating with AI, the AI is creating, then every human shifts into that composer mode and moves up the value chain. So your junior most employees, right? start to take on what would be traditionally management responsibilities. Now, this isn't in the report, but this is sort what we found after, right? Was that there were three sort of skill areas that needed to be taught to individuals in order to be effective and successful with AI or to collaborate in an AI augmented workforce. The first one was product literacy. So the ability to define and communicate use cases and user stories, design thinking techniques and concepts, the ability to communicate what good looks like in a way that somebody else understands, this somebody else, of course, being the AI counterpart. And product literacy, again, your senior employees have that, but that's got to Everyone now needs that. The second is the skill of judgment or critical thinking. The ability to, for anyone here who has a background in lean, pulling the and on court. The ability to and the confidence to, which are two separate skills, actually say, no, what AI is doing here is wrong. We're going to do something different. I'm going to say something different. I'm going to suggest. I'm going to override AI. I'm going to pull the hand on cord and stop the production line, even though it's going to cost the organization money. But because if I don't, it's going to be much, much worse. And so that ability to use your judgment and the confidence to use judgment, because let's face it, AI can be very compelling in its sounds accurate. So you've to be able to go, hang on, there's something not right here, and use that judgment. And then the third is around feedback loops, or specifically quality control feedback. Because as a creator, the first round of feedback, the first round of quality control is implicit. It exists inside the heads and the hands of the creator. Like you're writing a document or creating a... a marketing campaign, you go, oh, I'm not happy with this, I'll change that, or maybe not that word. You're a software developer and say, oh, I don't like that line, that's not doing what I wanted, I'm gonna change it. So the first round of feedback, the first round of quality is implicit. But once you become a composer, the first round of feedback is explicit, right? Because you're taking what has already been produced. And so the, what we, What we found post report is that a lot of people do not have the skill or haven't, sorry, have not learnt the skill, how to do that first implicit round of feedback explicitly. And so it gets skipped. so AI outputs get passed through into... later stages of quality control and so forth. And obviously they fail more often. So it's a real issue. So it's those three skilled areas that we would say organizations fundamentally need to invest in, in order to enable their workforce to be augmented, to work with AI effectively. And the organizations that have those skills, the organization with who have individuals with those skills at all levels from the junior most employee are more successful. Now, I'm going to add one thing to this. I'm going to slightly go off topic because it is the one of the most common questions that we get when we teach this topic or we talk about it at conferences. And that is Brian Milner (29:44) Yeah Yeah, please do. Evan Leybourn (29:56) If AI replaces your junior employees and your junior employees go up a level, what's the pathway for the next generation to become the senior employee? And this is where I have to give you the bad news that no one has an answer for that yet. These very mature, very advanced organizations Right? Many of them were trying to figure it out. None of them had an answer. and that's the, and I'll be honest, I personally, and this is just Evan's opinion, believe that this will become or must be a society level problem, or solution to that problem. it will require businesses alongside governments, alongside, education institutions to make some fairly substantive shifts and I don't think anyone knows what they are today. Christopher Morales (30:53) Yeah, and I would only say to that, and again, there's so much I would love to inject here, but I will say that this is an opportunity, and I always stress that, because that is a little sobering when you think about that idea. But I really, really strongly encourage organizations that are evaluating this to, I understand the considerations about efficiency and bottom line benefit. Brian Milner (30:53) Yeah. You Christopher Morales (31:20) towards AI, and I appreciate that wholeheartedly. But I think this is a real opportunity for organizations to take a step back and really think about the growth path for the talent that you have in your organization. Because augmenting your workforce with AI, are studies, Harvard Business Review put out a study that indicated that an augmented employee was more productive and enhanced as if it had been working with a senior staff member and collaborated at a level that was equivalent to working within a team. So there are studies that show real benefit to the employee having an augmented relationship with AI. If an organization can take two steps back, think about that pattern, think about that elevation strategy for your talent. you're going to be doing so much more to keep yourself sustainable in what is arguably the most like, you know, I don't know, I don't even know the word I'm looking for. It's, the most chaotic time I can think of for businesses when it comes to technology adoption. Brian Milner (32:23) You Yeah, I agree. But there's also sort of, I don't know if you guys feel this way as well, but to me, there's sort of like this crackling kind of sense of excitement there as well, sort of like living on the frontier that like there's this unexplored country out here that we don't really know where all these things are going to shift out. But gosh, it's fun thinking that we get to be the ones who kind of do that experimentation and find out and see what's the next step in this evolution? What's the next growth? The patterns that we've used previously may not apply anymore or apply in the same way because so much of the foundation underneath that system has changed. So we got to experiment and find new things. I love the call there, the learning organization, that that being the primary thing that If we have that cultural value, then that's really gonna drive this because we can then say, hey, this isn't working anymore, let's try something else. And that's how we end up at a place where we have new practices and new workflows and things that will support this and augment it rather than hampering it being a constraint, like you said, yeah. Christopher Morales (33:48) Well said. Well said. Brian Milner (33:50) Awesome. Well, this is a fascinating discussion. I really could go on for the next couple of hours with you guys on this. is just my kind of hobby or interest area at the moment as well. So I really appreciate you guys doing the work on this and appreciate you sharing it with us and sharing some of the insights. Hey, and the listeners here, hey, they got a bonus from the report, right? You listed extra things that didn't quite make it in the report. Just make sure you understand that listeners, right? You got extra information here listening to us today. ⁓ So just any last words from you guys? Christopher Morales (34:19) Thank Yeah. Evan Leybourn (34:24) Just for the folk listening, treat AI not as a technical problem, but as a human and a business opportunity, requiring human and business level changes. Don't just focus on how good the technology is, because that's not where the constraints nor where the opportunities truly lie. I would also just like to call out that if anyone listening wants to learn more about any of these topics, the capabilities, the domains of business agility, visit the Business Agility Institute website, check out the domains, download the report. But we've also launched an education portfolio and we'll be running a different education course on each of the capabilities over the next, I think it's every two weeks almost until the end of the year. So please come and join us and let's go deep into these topics together. Christopher Morales (35:21) Yeah, and I would just say, Brian, to all the listeners out there, don't fall into what I think is a common fallacy, which is where we're going is predetermined. It's already set in stone. I think as Agilists, we know the power of flexibility, the ability to pivot, and the ability to utilize data and information to inform what our next move is going to be. And I think this is a classic case of you control the narrative. You control what AI looks like in your organization, in your team, in your workflow, and you have the ability to carve out how it impacts your world. And so I encourage people to look at it that way. Empower your humanity, empower your decision making. The AI is here, it's not going anywhere. So embrace it in the best way possible. Brian Milner (36:22) Yeah, it seems oddly ironic or maybe appropriate to quote from the Terminator movie here, but it sounds like what you're saying is no fate, but what you make. Christopher Morales (36:32) Prophetic, Brian, that's prophetic. Evan Leybourn (36:37) I love it. Brian Milner (36:37) Awesome. Well, thank you guys so much. I really appreciate you guys being on and obviously we're gonna have you back. you know, when you guys come out with new stuff like this, it's just amazing to dive deep into it. So thanks for making the time at all kinds of times of the day and coming on and sharing this with us. Christopher Morales (36:55) You're welcome. Evan Leybourn (36:56) Thank you.

Laura Kendrick and Cort Sharp hijack the mic to share what it’s really like behind the scenes at Mountain Goat. From Zoom bloopers to unexpected team bonding, they unpack how a fully remote team built a thriving, human-centered workplace. Overview In this special takeover episode, Laura Kendrick and Cort Sharp pull back the curtain on what goes into running hundreds of Scrum and Product Owner classes virtually—and why Mountain Goat's remote team still feels so close-knit. With stories of early tech headaches, Slack banter, hilarious costume moments, and the quiet rituals that keep the team connected, they explore how remote work can actually foster strong relationships and top-tier collaboration. If you’ve ever wondered how to make a distributed team work (or just want a peek at some Zoom-era growing pains), this one’s for you. References and resources mentioned in the show: Laura Kendrick Cort Sharp #61: The Complex Factors in The Office Vs. Remote Debate with Scott Dunn #147: The Power of Quiet Influence with Casey Sinnema Run a Daily Scrum Your Team Will Love Subscribe to the Agile Mentors Podcast Join the Agile Mentors Community Want to get involved? This show is designed for you, and we’d love your input. Enjoyed what you heard today? Please leave a rating and a review. It really helps, and we read every single one. Got an Agile subject you’d like us to discuss or a question that needs an answer? Share your thoughts with us at podcast@mountaingoatsoftware.com This episode’s presenters are: 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. Laura Kendrick is the producer of the Agile Mentors Podcast and a seasoned Scrum Master who keeps virtual classes running smoothly. Outside the podcast, she helps clients apply Scrum techniques to their marketing and business strategy, bringing structure and momentum to big, creative ideas. Auto-generated Transcript: Laura Kendrick (00:00) Welcome in Agile Mentors. As you may have noticed, I am not Brian Milner. I am Laura Kendrick, and this is Cort Sharp. And if you have taken a class with us at Mountain Goat in the last five years, there is a good chance that you have met one or actually both of us. Cort Sharp (00:19) I think it's like 90 % chance, 95 % honestly. We've been in so many of these classes. Laura Kendrick (00:26) Definitely, and oftentimes together too with one of us TAing, one of us producing, sometimes one of us teaching court. Cort Sharp (00:33) once in a while, once in a while. Yeah. Laura Kendrick (00:37) So we thought we would come on over here and hijack the podcast to share a little bit about some of the insights that we have gained from doing about a billion, maybe a little exaggeration. Cort Sharp (00:49) Roughly. Roughly. We've done roughly a billion classes with Mountain Goat. Yes. Laura Kendrick (00:56) We have seen a lot in the certifying of Scrum Masters and product owners and advanced product owners and Scrum Masters and all of the evolution of the classes that we have done. We actually hold quite a bit of insight into what is happening in this world. And so we thought we would come in, steal the podcast, and share a little bit of what we have seen, learned, observed, and really just kind of Honestly, some of the laughs and fun that we've had along the way. Cort Sharp (01:25) Also, I think, I don't know, just your intro right there is talking about, hey, we've seen the evolution of these classes. That just got my brain going of like, remember the first class that we did? Way like 2020. I mean, I was in my parents' basement with really terrible internet. It was a struggle. Laura Kendrick (01:40) Yeah. Cort Sharp (01:49) But we were working on like Miro boards or mural. One of the two, forget which, which tool it was, but that was, yeah, that was before team home. And then we got to see the first version of team home. We helped do a little testing with it. And then we've seen it grow all the way into this awesome tool that we have nowadays. And I don't know, just, just to me, I think it's cool to see how we've been iterating and be part of that process of the iteration process, um, to develop these classes and these courses into. Laura Kendrick (01:52) Mm-hmm. Mural. Yep. Mm-hmm. Cort Sharp (02:20) the truly awesomeness that they are today. Personally, I'd rather take a virtual class than an in-person class with Mountain Goat at this point. Laura Kendrick (02:27) It's funny that you say that because I notice actually the iteration of the experience like outside of the tech piece because you know, that's where my brain goes. Here's the difference between court and I. I'm noticing the interactions. But I've noticed, mean how people are interacting a little bit differently in the online space, how even our team interacts, like all of those things has become so much more sophisticated and amazing and Cort Sharp (02:39) Yeah, just a bit. Laura Kendrick (02:54) I mean, honestly, we sometimes talk on our team between like the producing and TA team where like I've referred to it as a perfect game if we don't need anything from the outside team, which occasionally we need a lot of support from the outside team, but we've we've got this down at this point. And it is it's become those first classes. I remember them being super stressful, like, my gosh, the breakout rooms and all the things and just being like, I mean, you couldn't do. Cort Sharp (03:17) Yes. Laura Kendrick (03:21) It was almost like learning how to drive where you felt like if you turned the radio knob up, you might actually turn the whole car. And it was like, so much anxiety. Cort Sharp (03:31) I mean, but we just didn't know Zoom then. Zoom didn't even know itself then, right? What Zoom is, ⁓ for those of you who don't know, we host all of our virtual classes on Zoom. And learning that platform, like I'd used it once maybe for some just, yeah, here's Zoom exists in one of my college classes. That was about it. But yeah, totally. was like, man, what does this button do? Hopefully it doesn't end the meeting and kick everyone out. Laura Kendrick (03:34) Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. That's so true. Yeah, no kidding. But you know what's really interesting too, though, is that it's been over five years now for both of us being part of the Mountain Goat team. And we all work remotely. And other than you and Mike for a little while being right down the road from each other, none of us had any actual interpersonal interaction with each other outside of Zoom email and Slack and the occasional, know, fretted text message of like, are you late? Where are you? Cort Sharp (03:58) Absolutely, yeah, totally. Yeah. Laura Kendrick (04:26) But other than that it like we truly were of and still are a fully remote team and the crazy thing about it is we have at this point once gotten together as a full team in person and it was such an interesting experience being having been fully remote and then being in person and in particular the team that is live on the classes Cort Sharp (04:39) Yep. Yep. Laura Kendrick (04:51) It was a very different interaction because we have this time built into our classes where the team gets on the Zoom call 30 minutes earlier than the students do. And we get this time to just honestly have like water cooler chat and like friend chat or occasionally see Mike get on and you can't hear him, but you can see that he is quite angry at his very elaborate tech system that is not working correctly. Cort Sharp (05:14) you That does happen. Yes, it does. ⁓ Laura Kendrick (05:21) these moments, I feel like they really bonded us together. Because when we got together in person, it was old friends. wasn't even fast friends. It was old friends. And the banter even that goes on in Slack is fun and engaging and not rigid and confining. Cort Sharp (05:31) Yeah. Yes, absolutely. I agree with that. I mean, I'm just thinking back to like the first time because that was the first time I met you in person. aside from being like, wow, she's a lot shorter than I thought she would be. Laura Kendrick (05:47) Mm-hmm. shorter. By the way, court is like 6-4. Cort Sharp (05:55) Yeah, yeah. Not that you're short. But I've just always ever seen like, the profile like the profile picture. That's all that it's really ever been. So I'm like, yeah, you're like, what I would consider normal height, which you totally are. But in my mind, I was like, yeah, it's weird seeing, you know, your legs. That's funny. ⁓ Laura Kendrick (06:14) We digress. Cort Sharp (06:15) But aside from that, was like we've known each other for three, four, four years because we've had that time to get to know each other. We've had that time to talk about just life events, what's going on, where we live, what's happening, what the deal is going on with life. Because we've been very intentional about having that time with that. The 30 minutes before each class were originally very much so used to take care of any tech problems. As the years have gone by, we've for the most part figured out the tech problems. Sometimes, you know, we'll change something out. Laura Kendrick (06:48) Except, hold on, except last week in Lance's class, we were talking about his dog and suddenly it looked as though Lance in his entire room did a cartwheel because the camera just fell. This is not a small camera. Cort Sharp (07:02) It said, nope, I'm out. ⁓ man. Laura Kendrick (07:06) So we still occasionally have the tech problem. Cort Sharp (07:09) Yes we do, yes we do. That's why we still do the 30 vimits. Laura Kendrick (07:14) The crazy thing about that is that when we landed at this in-person meeting, there were members of the team that at that time, and I in particular had never had any interaction with. so like other than the odd email or Slack message, so it was like really knew their name, but didn't really work with them up until that moment. And it was really interesting because at one point, the way that the leadership team had mentioned of like, well, if you need somebody to step in and talk to Mike for you, if you're not comfortable. And I remember looking at court and being like, Mike's the one I'm most comfortable with in this room because of that 30 minutes. I feel like I know Mike. I feel like we have an actual interpersonal relationship where I have no problem speaking up and saying the things that I need to. And that has made like those little water cooler times, those little Cort Sharp (07:54) Yeah. Laura Kendrick (08:06) bantery questions, them asking about my kids or hobbies or whatever. And just knowing those things made a huge difference in our team functioning. The communication across time zones was so much better and easier and safer. Cort Sharp (08:24) Absolutely. We were talking a little bit before we were recording about just people who want pure in-person no matter what. I think at this point, I will always push back on that and say, you might not get that quote unquote collaboration time that's naturally built in, but if you're intentional about it and you provide the space and provide the resources, Laura Kendrick (08:32) Hmm. Cort Sharp (08:50) And also, kind of push people along, have some, I don't know, working agreements or something of, hey, our cameras are on whenever we're talking with each other, unless something like drastic is going on or something's happening, right? Which I think we're going to get into in a little bit, but it's massive. It's crazy. Laura Kendrick (09:03) That's huge. Yeah, I mean, it is. I think we can definitely speak to that in our own experience because we've had, of course, there are moments where people don't have cameras. There are moments where people have bad connections and we'll encourage them in class, like turn off your camera, save your bandwidth. But there are also moments where we are doing private classes for companies. In particular, we've done some with companies that work with like Department of Defense. So there's like real security. issues there and so they don't turn their cameras on. Their cameras are totally disabled on their computers. And it is, I have to say those classes are some of the most like energy draining classes I'm ever present in because I'll be there with the trainer and I feel like I have to give all this emotional feedback because when you are talking to a black screen, that's, it's really hard to just. Cort Sharp (09:47) Hmm. Laura Kendrick (09:58) survive that because you're not getting any feedback from anyone. So you don't know what's happening and you're constantly questioning and the kind of banter in your own mind is like, God, is it landing? Is it not? And you're just not getting any of that physical feedback. So I feel like when I'm on a class with a trainer like that, I feel like I have to be like, that's funny. I'm like, yeah, good point. Cort Sharp (10:19) Yeah, you're kidding. Laura Kendrick (10:21) I'm tired Cort Sharp (10:22) You No, I get that. And I've had some pretty similar experiences too. I might not be as in tune with the emotional side as stated earlier. So I might not help the trainers out nearly as much as I probably should. But I do think cameras on just can make all the difference. And again, situations where it's just not possible. Absolutely understand that. One of our trainers, Lance, he Laura Kendrick (10:39) Mm-hmm. Cort Sharp (10:47) He always likes to throw out the phrase, look, let's approach everything with grace, patience, and mercy. So I like, which I really appreciate, and I like that he throws that out there. But I think that's a good thing to keep in mind of like, know, even though you have the company policy, you have the working agreement, whatever it is that says, look, camera's on all the time, sometimes it's just not possible. Sometimes it just doesn't happen. I recently had to figure out internet in the middle of nowhere, because that's where I live now. Laura Kendrick (10:52) Mm. No. Cort Sharp (11:15) And I was worried for a while that I wouldn't be able to put my camera on. But, you know, if if they came down to that, I know that it would be, hey, you know, it's a it's a unique situation. It's something different. And we're going to do we're going to work the best that we can with it and try to figure out maybe you can turn your camera on for any time you're talking or just any time you have something to say or, you know, if you're agreeing with something, you could briefly turn your camera on to show like, yeah, I'm nodding. I'm agreeing. I'm doing whatever. Right. But Laura Kendrick (11:45) Honestly, I think recently I had a very busy day and we communicate in back channels, of course through email, but also we use Slack as a team. And so I sent a direct message to court about something and I just like, I sent it in a voice? No. And court's response was, didn't know you could do that in Slack. But in those moments, I think there are other ways of doing it too, where you can bring the humanity out, where it's not just words. Cort Sharp (12:01) Yeah. Laura Kendrick (12:09) So often I'm actually thinking about there was one time that you and I were talking about something and I misread it as like, I like kicked something, like some hornet's nest in there. Like you were upset with me, but you were like, no, that was not my intention. And it's an amazing thing that that's only happened once in five years. There was that subtle nuanced miscommunication of I thought I had offended in some way and I hadn't. Cort Sharp (12:18) So. Yeah. Laura Kendrick (12:34) Just keeping that in mind though, in written word, tone is interpreted because probably what happened is I like offended my kid or my partner and was bringing that into the conversation with court. And it had nothing to do with what was actually happening, but adding in those personal things of your face, your voice, those things really do help move that human connection, which enables the teamwork that we've seen at Mountain Go. Cort Sharp (12:42) Yep. Yep. Mm-hmm. Laura Kendrick (13:00) I mean, it's amazing the way this team functions and it is not perfect. There are definitely communications missteps. There are definitely like, oops, forgot to leave that piece out of the information packet. It happens. It happens to everybody, but we're able to recover really quickly or even it's a safe enough space to be able to speak up and say, I think I got left out on this. And it's responded to in a really gracious and amazing way. Cort Sharp (13:26) It absolutely is. I mean, Mountain Goat's been remote for longer than the COVID stuff, the pandemic stuff happened. Laura Kendrick (13:33) Yeah. Well, Lisa's been with them for what, 10 years? I think it was nearly 10 years when we started, maybe 15. And Hunter's around the same. So yeah, they've been spread for a long time. Cort Sharp (13:42) Something like that, Uh-huh. ⁓ I know that they had an office space and that office space changed just in case people wanted to like come in, come to the office. I think at one point, one of them was in Colorado, which is kind of funny because several people live on the West coast. And then it's like, okay, yeah, come on, come on, swing by the... Colorado office on just a random Tuesday. Yeah, fly in, have fun. I don't know. Yeah, why not? I don't know what the deal was or what it was like, but they've been fully remote. And I think with the kind of runway that they've had leading up until the time where everyone had to be fully remote has really benefited Mountain Go in a lot of ways, because a lot of those early, like, how do we work remote? How do we do this? Laura Kendrick (14:09) I'd do that. Yeah, let's do it. Cort Sharp (14:31) kind of was ironed out, but back to your, your point to just like, it's, it's incredible how much support there is. It's incredible how much, how well communication again, it's not perfect, but how well we're able to communicate with each other and how well we're able to just say, yeah, let's, let's hop on a call real quick or here. I think most of us have like personal phone numbers. We, we use that as a very much so last resort type deal. Laura Kendrick (14:57) Yeah. Cort Sharp (14:59) But even then, it's nice to just have those open lines of communication and know that those are always available, but also know that people are kind of in our corner all the time too. And I think you have a pretty good story about this one. Something happened in a class a few years ago. Laura Kendrick (15:09) Mm-hmm. Yeah. Yeah. It was early on we had, it was a non-Mike class. So it was one of the other instructors and there was a student who was just challenging. And in the end, it didn't go well in the moment, to put it, just to kind of like not go into grave detail about it. But Mike wasn't there, right? And so The thing that was interesting though is the first piece of communication that came from Mike, which was before that class even broke, right? Because it was one of those things of like, we have to share. As a team, we can't hide it. We have to share that something happened in class that was less than ideal. And so we did. And the immediate response from Mike was in support of the team. And later on, he did go and review the tape of the, because the classes are recorded, not for this purpose. They're recorded actually so that the students get a recording of the class afterwards and can return to what, you know, all the things that they learned because it's a lot to take in in two days. But in this one instance, it was beneficial in this way because Mike could actually see rather than taking people's words, what happened. And I think the important thing is not even what happened after, but what happened in the moment. that he instantaneously was like, I've got you. Like no matter how this goes, we're a team and I'm gonna support you as well. And that was actually, that was pretty early on for me. And it was in a moment where I didn't know Mike that well yet. And it was actually this very solidifying moment for me that was like, I'm in the right place. Like I am part of this team, not just a minion or an employee. Like they care about all of us. Cort Sharp (16:48) Mm-hmm. Laura Kendrick (16:56) and we're in this together, even if it turns out that we're in some form of trouble, it's still going to be thoughtfully managed and handled rather than just the kind of lashing out that can happen in so many environments. Cort Sharp (17:12) Right. And, and that experience, cause I think we were all included on that email. Like I, I wasn't in the class when it happened, but I do remember getting that email and it just was a clear communication from kind of head honcho Mike, right? A top dog saying, yeah, no, we, we got your back. on, we're on the same team. We're all working towards the same goal. And when I, when I read the email, I was like, wow, that was an eventful class. but. Laura Kendrick (17:26) Mm-hmm. us. Cort Sharp (17:38) My second thought, my second thought was, huh, this very similar to what you were saying of like, wow, this is a great place to be. This is a great company to work for. These are great people to be working with and alongside. ⁓ but also like, I know so many people whose managers, whose higher ups would say, Nope, you're in the wrong. You should have done better. Your toast, blah, blah, blah, blah. Like putting all the blame on you. Absolutely. Yeah. Yeah. Laura Kendrick (17:52) Mm-hmm. Yeah. The knee jerk. Yeah. Yeah. Cort Sharp (18:07) And it just, makes me think all the time of like one really blessed, like very fortunate to be here, very fortunate to work with mountain goat. but also people don't quit jobs. They quit managers. They quit leadership more often than not. And, not that I'm talking about quitting mountain goat, but, neither, neither of us are throwing that out there right now, but just like, Laura Kendrick (18:20) Mmm. Yeah. No, but interestingly in five years, I've not seen anybody quit. I mean, we've had people kind of go down separate paths, but nobody has been throwing their hands up and been like, I'm done. I can't be in this. There have been people who have taken other opportunities that they needed to take for their own businesses. But yeah, nobody's quit. In five years, no one has quit, which speaks volumes to the culture that is created in an environment where Cort Sharp (18:37) Mm-hmm. Laura Kendrick (18:57) And I also want to be clear that that response from Mike also, it wasn't disparaging to the other party either. It was simply a, like, it just let us know that I see you and this, you were in a hard moment in the moment and you had to react like a human being and you as a team, I've got your back and this is, you know, great. And to be fair to that was like in the heat of COVID. Cort Sharp (19:24) Yes, yeah It was yeah Laura Kendrick (19:27) good times. But there's also been a lot of fun that's happened in class too, which is, I think that makes a big difference. Like where we are, I don't want to say allowed because I don't think that's right, but like part of the culture is to have fun. Like Mike is a pretty funny guy. Brian's a pretty funny guy. Like honestly, the whole team is quite humorous and it's, we're allowed to like make these really fun things and Cort Sharp (19:48) Yes. Laura Kendrick (19:52) in response to like when we see them in class, like, we foster those two and it becomes this really fun working environment, not only for us, for our students. You brought up one that I had totally forgotten about with the costume. That was good. Cort Sharp (20:06) ⁓ yeah, I, I, yeah, I'll, I'll get into the costume thing, but I think the word you're looking for instead of allowed is enabled. Like we're, we're enabled to have fun. We're encouraged. Absolutely. Yeah. A hundred percent. If you ever hung out with Mike or, or taking a class with him, you've probably heard some funny stories. Laura Kendrick (20:13) Yeah, Encouraged, in fact. And my gosh, the one class too where Mike was asked how long they'd have access to like the videos and stuff. my gosh, Mike ended the class and it was a super engaged Chipper class. Everyone was laughing and Mike brought it down. Cause he did his usual thing where he talked about, what does he say? You have access as long as the internet exists and I'm alive. And then he went into great detail. great detailed speculation about what will happen once he's not alive. It went on for like five minutes. Cort Sharp (20:58) Yeah, where where he's like, yeah, you know, my kids will probably be like, what's this? What's this old website that dad's still hosting? Guess we'll we'll close that up 10 years down the line or whatever. Laura Kendrick (21:09) Dumbfounded. It was so good. But anyhow. Cort Sharp (21:13) man. But there was, I don't even remember why this happened in the class. don't think it was around like Halloween time or something. think the person, actually, I think the person does this to go to like local children's hospitals or local hospitals and just visit. But I get on and I'm normally the PM producer. So I normally hop on in the afternoon. And I took over from Laura and Laura Kendrick (21:22) No, it wasn't. think so. Cort Sharp (21:39) Laura was like, yeah, you know, pretty normal class. This happens, whatever. We're good. And I hop on and people start turning their cameras on. And then all of a sudden there's this dude in a Captain America costume. Like what? He's got the mask. He's got the, the, the uniform. He's got the shield and everything. And I was like, what is happening? What is going on? Come to find out he was telling his story. Laura Kendrick (21:50) Like full on math. Cort Sharp (22:04) Yeah, I do this. This is cool. And Mike was like, that'd be awesome to see. He went out, put it on and took the rest of the classes Captain America. So we have certified Captain America. Laura Kendrick (22:12) Awesome. We've had, there was the guy who was put on like a crazy hat for the first session and then came back for session two with a different crazy hat. And then other people started wearing crazy hats. And by the end of it, like by the final session, almost the entire class was sitting there with some like their kids stuff on their heads. it was. Cort Sharp (22:34) You Laura Kendrick (22:36) But was this one, like it stands out of the billion classes we've done. It stands out in our minds as these really fun moments. I remember the class where it was a private class, so it was for a company or team. And there were, it took me until the very end to, it was early on, so it took me until the very end to get up the gumption. There were five mics in the class. And finally I was like, I'm just gonna put them all in the same room and see if anybody notices. Cort Sharp (22:36) People just... Yes. Didn't they notice like right away, they all came back and they're like, team Mike is back in action or something, right? Laura Kendrick (23:04) I don't think they said anything, but they did. The instructor went into the room and like, yeah, they noticed. Good. My passive aggressive humor worked. Cort Sharp (23:10) Hehehehehe It's fun. It's all good. But it's also like going back to us being able to do this before I figured out kind of my background situation, I would always put up virtual backgrounds and I would just change your background every time and see if people noticed. And it wasn't, it was a lot of Disney. Yes. Laura Kendrick (23:23) Mm-hmm. Disney. That's the thing though. That also, that kind of stuff built a little bit of a relationship as well. like it was, court was always going to have something for Disney. I had one that I would, when I finally found the one I liked, I kept that one for a long time. And Mike would occasionally, when I wasn't in a class, he would send me a screenshot of somebody via email and be like, somebody's in your house with you. Cause they would have the same background. Cort Sharp (23:52) Yeah! Laura Kendrick (23:56) those little tiny things make the relationships and make the team function and make us giggle. So I'd be like out with my kids and see an email and be like, oh no, Mike, what does he need? And then click in and be like, you know, actually more often than not, it would probably be like, am I missing class? See, I'd be like, oh, that's funny. But you know, it builds that relationship. And I think it's why this remote working has worked so well for us. And I'm totally with you where I, when people are Cort Sharp (24:13) You Yeah. Laura Kendrick (24:26) railing against it because of my experience. like, you're crazy. This is great. Cort Sharp (24:31) Exactly. I'm like, how can you not want to just chill out, hang out in your home, chat with some people, get some work done, and like, you're good. Who despises that? Who doesn't like that? don't know. It's, Exactly, yeah. But I do think it does, it comes down to being intentional with it. We were talking about that 30 minutes before that used to be primarily tech troubleshooting. Laura Kendrick (24:47) I know, you get to do things on your own time too. Cort Sharp (25:01) but has since kind of evolved into, okay, so everything, like, I don't know about you, but the vast majority of time, unless a camera's fallen, the vast majority of time, it's, all right, does everything look good? Yeah? Cool. Sure does. Whoever I'm working with, awesome. So, what'd you do this weekend? how was this? ⁓ sorry, sorry that the Avs lost to the Dallas Stars. Yeah, I'm sorry too. Stuff like that, right? Where it's just, Laura Kendrick (25:19) Yeah. It's water cooler talk. Cort Sharp (25:29) It's fun, but we're very intentional with having that time to do that. And I think if you're not intentional in setting up that time, whether if you're working remote hybrid, you're not going to get it. And it's not just going to naturally happen because it is so much more difficult to produce. it's impossible for it to just kind of naturally pop up without taking away from some other intentional time. so I think in, in this this world that we're living in where there is the option to work remotely and there is this really big push to go back in person. I'm saying stick with remote, take your 15, 15 minute daily standup, and turn it into, you know, say, Hey, I'll be on 10, 15 minutes early. If anyone wants to come hang out, come chat. And make it worth it. Make it a valuable time because that is the time to connect and that is the time to say, yeah, cool. How are the kids? How was your weekend? Did you grill up some good hot dogs during this last weekend? What'd you do? Like, what was going on? ⁓ Build up that stuff. Laura Kendrick (26:23) Yeah. We also have Slack channels too, that are like that. Like there's a Slack channel for our team that's just movies, books and TV shows. That people, it'll get active at certain times and it'll be totally dead for a while and nobody's cultivating it. It's simply that somebody will pop in like, I just watched this and it's great. And they've set up also like the automatic bots, cause Mike's a big fan of James Bond. So like if somebody mentions James Bond, the Slack bot will say something quippy and it- Cort Sharp (26:39) Yeah. ⁓ Laura Kendrick (26:58) But it adds that little, like, little bit of humor, little bit of humanness to even though, like, the people that we have time to interact with like that is the team that's in class. So I don't, I mean, it wasn't until we were in person that I met our CTO. He was kind of an enigma, you know? Cort Sharp (27:10) Yeah. Mm-hmm. He was just in the background. Things just magically showed up digitally. Laura Kendrick (27:23) It was in my email and my Slack sometimes, but it creates that thing of like, now I know things about Hunter. Yes, of course it was because we were in person. I heard lots of stories and all that fun stuff. But also I know about like some of his like TV watching stuff. I know occasionally like what his wife likes to watch because sometimes he'll like pepper in something that, she dragged me into this and not my cup of tea. But it's those little bitty things that you start to learn about the people. Cort Sharp (27:39) Mm-hmm. Laura Kendrick (27:50) that makes them human and gives that space. And I also, think it's important to have it be a little bit of white space. so often we talk about cultivating the conversation and like, can you have icebreakers and get people engaged? And yes, those things are so important, but when it's with a team, you need to do those things, but you also need to create the empty space where maybe you have that daily standup or that... weekly meeting or monthly meeting, whatever that is for your team. And maybe at the end of it, it's just leaving the call going and allowing people to just talk. I mean, we did that as a producer team that we would have a meeting as producers that would be very structured and then kind of the official meeting would end. And there would be times where as a team we'd be on that Zoom. I'm like, thank goodness nobody needs this channel. Cause like we'd be in there for like two and a half hours. Cort Sharp (28:26) Yeah. Yeah. Laura Kendrick (28:42) just talking. And of course, it wasn't, you know, it wasn't billing time. It wasn't, you know, it was just us being friends and hearing each other and sometimes ranting and complaining and doing the things of like, this part was hard and like, yeah, well, people need the space to do that and feel seen and heard. And the only place they're going to get that is in the white space. Cort Sharp (29:01) Yep. Exactly. Yep. And where my head went when you were talking about the white space, I love where you just went to because that's absolutely very true. But where my mind went was the newest kind of Slack channel that that's been set up, which is the artificial intelligence. Yeah. Where we just we just it's cool because I'm interested in AI. I think everyone's interested in AI right now. Things are things are going in all sorts of wild directions with it. There's there's all sorts of possibilities that we can do with it. Laura Kendrick (29:17) ⁓ Yeah, that one's Yeah. Cort Sharp (29:32) And Hunter just threw out, who wants in? If you want in, cool, I'll get you in. If not, and you're not interested in AI, let me know when you are, because it'll be at some point, I was going to say. It's just another full group one. Yeah, we just. Laura Kendrick (29:39) Yeah. Pretty sure the whole team's in there. But it is fun. Like Hunter and Mike do deep dives and Brian too. And I'm like, wow, I just get to swim in that pool. It's really Cort Sharp (29:50) Yes. Yeah, yeah. You just kind of get a glean from what's posted in there and say, oh yeah, I am really interested in the automation side of AI. I want to do, I think I threw in there one time, like this whole GitHub repository that has just from zero to hero AI, here's a two week crash course. And I've been working my way through that. It's taken a lot longer than two weeks for me. I've been working my way through that. And it's opened my eyes to say, okay, now this awesome thing, think Mike just threw in there something about someone using it at Disney, I think it was, and how they were using it at Disney to propose, here's a cool way that we can use AI to help our proposals go faster or help our marketing campaigns go faster or whatever it is. And just learning and seeing and... Laura Kendrick (30:38) Yeah. Cort Sharp (30:44) growing together as a team as well and having that space of, yeah, you know, here's what here, here are these articles that I'm reading. Here's the ones that stuck out to me. And to have that space, I think also is, is really interesting to me too, not just because I like learning, but it's also like, I feel like, okay, I can talk with Mike about AI. I can talk with Hunter about AI. I can talk with whoever about it. And we're all relatively on the same page because we're all relatively getting the same information. Laura Kendrick (31:14) Yeah, yeah. I feel like having the Slack channel has been really helpful and all the white space and even honestly the in-person event, there was white space built into that too. There was definitely a lot of structured meetings because of course when you are bringing everyone in from all over the country and actually the world, have a team member who is in the UK too. Cort Sharp (31:26) yeah. Laura Kendrick (31:37) flying a great distance and being in a space together, it's got to be structured. You have to make that worth the time and effort and investment. But also there were dinners, there were shows that happened, there was fun built into it, and there were options of not just like, I'm forcing you to go to this, but like, here's a choice. Would you like to do this or that? And those things have made a huge difference in breeding the like belongingness. Cort Sharp (31:55) Mm-hmm. Laura Kendrick (32:05) and the feeling like we are actually a team. And even though there are definitely times where the frustrations arise, of course, I mean, who doesn't have frustrations, but it's a space where they can be vocalized, they can be talked through, and it's all due to that togetherness that we have, that connectedness that has been built through, honestly, Cort Sharp (32:05) Yeah. Mm-hmm. Laura Kendrick (32:30) just being in these like casual fun spaces is where that comes from in my opinion. Cort Sharp (32:36) Yeah, I agree with that. Just having the space to talk about whatever. But I think it's all rooted in communication, right? So in various methods of communicating and various ways of communicating too, where it's not just exclusively Slack, email, written text, we have that space there. But we do still run into some communication problems, right? There's... Laura Kendrick (32:41) Yeah. For sure, for sure. Cort Sharp (32:58) there's all sorts of communication problems that we're gonna run into because especially we are text-based heavy, but we're not exclusively text-based. But I think you were talking about a story where Mike was late one time or Mike's late story about communication and what was going on with that. Laura Kendrick (33:12) he tells it in class. He tells a story in class with that. It's one of his examples that he will pull into fairly frequently with an experience with a team where somebody was always late to the daily standup and they realized that it had to do with the fact that they had to drop their kid off at school. And so it was that simple communication shift of asking instead of assuming, asking which... They've put into practice too, like I recall early on hearing like, do you prefer to be communicated with? And like we've had these conversations that court and I have a tendency to be more slack people. But Brian has stated that for him, like when he's teaching slack is like his emergency line. And so like knowing that I'm not going to send him something through slack unless I desperately need him to see it when I can land it in his email versus Lisa and Laura are much more Cort Sharp (33:43) yeah. Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Laura Kendrick (34:04) they're going to be in the email. Like that's just where they live and they are less likely to be in Slack. So it's just knowing those things have also helped us build the right kind of streams of communication. I'm pretty sure Hunter is everywhere all at once. Like he's omnipresent. You can get him anywhere. I know it. I'm in New York and he's in California. I'm pretty sure if I whispered his name, he's hearing it right now. Cort Sharp (34:06) Right. my gosh. He's the enigma. He's the enigma everywhere. I was gonna say, I'm surprised he hasn't popped into this. We've said his name three times. It's, he just knows everything and he's always got everything coming through and no matter what you need, he's any message away. Slack, email, could be carry your pigeon. I don't know, something like that, right? Laura Kendrick (34:43) Yeah, his next Halloween costume needs to be Beetlejuice, so I'm sending that to him. my goodness. But I think at the end of the day, the practices that have been put into place that you may have felt in our classes too, have helped really grow this team into what it is. There's a lot of strength here. There's a lot of fun here, but there's a lot of hard work here too. And a lot of, there have been hard moments where we've all just kind of put our heads down together and moved through the hard moments as a team with a lot of support and a lot of. Cort Sharp (35:12) Mm-hmm. Laura Kendrick (35:15) Just trying to be in it and be like kind of move things where it needs to go. I don't know what the right word is as a team. It's redundant. Cort Sharp (35:22) I think it. Yeah. But I think that that does show in our classes a lot, right? You and I have both taken a class outside of the mountain goat sphere, ⁓ and I'm not I'm not dogging on anyone. I'm not trying to talk down on anyone. But I got out of that class. I was like, man, we are light years ahead of that. Laura Kendrick (35:30) Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Cort Sharp (35:49) that kind of interaction and that kind of experience. was the information that I got out of that class was awesome, superb. It was great. But just the amount of energy and effort and time that has been invested into these Mountain Goat courses, it's far and away just, it shows. And it shows how much of a level up it is to take a class with Mountain Goat. And I do think partly, you know, I'm boosting my own ego here. But I do think partly it is because we are surrounded with some awesome people and we have some awesome people working together and awesome support on every call, every class that you take with us, right? You don't have to, like the instructor can focus on just instructing. And we, more often than not, we are typically in charge of everything else. Make sure that any tech problems, any issues, anything that's going on, right? Yeah. Laura Kendrick (36:32) Yeah. Yeah. I remember the early days. Like you just brought up a memory that apparently I had stored in the trauma bank. I remember the early days though being, because I would often, because I'm on the East Coast, court is in mountain times. So, often I would be the early person just because it's easier for me. was mid morning for me. we would start class and it would be just, especially honestly when like people were figuring out Zoom and all this stuff, it was... stressful. Like they were just, it was just question, question, question, problem, problem, problem. And we would get to the first breakout and I would send everyone away and the instructor would be like, that was great. And I'm like, was, you know, just totally frazzled. But the point was, is no one else felt that. And it was, I was in my Slack and working with the team, working with Hunter, things fixed, working with Lisa, making sure the person was in the right place. Cort Sharp (37:20) Yeah, glad. Mm-hmm. Laura Kendrick (37:33) and doing all these things. And though that has died down because we've all gotten very good at our job and the systems in place are amazing at this point, it still is like, that's the whole point. We worked as a team so that the instructor could deliver an amazing class and be present with his students. And we could be here or her, because we do have hers too, I should say. They're students. And we were here taking care of the things that needed to be taken care of, which was, yeah. Cort Sharp (37:54) Yes. Laura Kendrick (38:00) Though I had forgotten about that. Thanks for that. Cort Sharp (38:02) Yeah, sure. Yeah, it's gotten easy, right? ⁓ Laura Kendrick (38:04) Yeah, it does. But that's at the end of the day, that's how a good team is. I think that we can kind of end it with this thing of Mike has created this environment and it definitely comes from him. Like it's is rooted in the founder for us because we're a small team, small but mighty. But he it's rooted in his like engine of creativity, efficiency, and just love of innovation. And that has kind of Cort Sharp (38:18) Mm-hmm. Laura Kendrick (38:34) folding that in with seeing all the people as humans, and with flaws and different talents and all those things and human interaction is messy and folding all of that in has actually been what has bred these amazing class experiences for our students and also this rewarding and fantastic team experience for the people behind the scenes as well. And I think the lesson Cort Sharp (38:39) Yes. Yep. Laura Kendrick (38:59) comes from that, that if we can fold those things in together and make space for humans to be humans and also have this amazing expectation of creativity and innovation, then it's all going to happen. Cort Sharp (39:06) Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Yeah, absolutely. I 100 % agree with that. I mean, it does come down to Mike and Mike is a fantastic leader. It's awesome. I also want to raise Mike, but. Laura Kendrick (39:28) Nice. Not passive aggressive at all. On that note. Cort Sharp (39:29) Yeah, you know. No. I'm just joking, right? We're able to have fun. We're able to joke around. But it does come down to leadership, right? And I think that's true on any team. And we have just we've been so fortunate to be able to experience it firsthand and go through this awesome transformation from being in person to fully remote, even in the class teaching stuff. And it's been really, really fun. really, really enjoyable. I, you know, you don't love every day. There are jobs, right? It's a job. But I'm not gonna lie. I'm not gonna lie. It has been fun. It has been enjoyable. But I don't look back on it and be like, wow, these last five years were just all terrible. No, it's we've had great leadership. We've had great interactions with with everyone. And I think Laura Kendrick (40:05) You should have just left it at really, really fun and enjoyable. Mic drop, goodbye. Cort Sharp (40:28) It's just come down to the people that we're working with and the people that we're engaging with consistently. And our leadership, Mike, has fostered an environment very, very well that is around fun, around communication, around enabling us to grow, to learn, to try new things, to move forward. And I really feel bad for companies who don't have that kind of leadership. that's, it's a tough spot to be in, but, I'm really, we're really blessed and really fortunate to, to be able to work here. And I hope this, this little peek behind the curtain, kind of encourages you to you, the listener, guess, whoever, whoever's out there to take a, take a little step back and say, okay, what, what am I doing as a leader within my sphere of influence to help my team be a little more human and embrace the humanity side of stuff? Not just pushing for more, we need more, more productivity, more AI, more everything, right? Yeah. Use AI, make it a tool, but just remember you're, building stuff for, for people. You're working with people all the time. And I think that's something that Mike has never forgotten and never will forget and never will let fall to the wayside that we're all people and we're all here working with each other. Laura Kendrick (41:43) Yeah. Couldn't agree more. Well, on that amazing note, thank you, Cort, for joining me in this hijacking of the podcast, the Agile Mentors podcast. And we're going to turn it back over to Brian, who's going to walk you right on out. Cort Sharp (41:54) Happy to.

What does it really mean to have a bias toward action and how do you build that into your culture without skipping strategy? Boris Gloger joins Brian Milner for a deep dive on experimentation, leadership, and the difference between tactical work and true strategic thinking. Overview In this conversation, Brian welcomes longtime Scrum pioneer, consultant, and author Boris Gloger to explore the tension between planning and doing in Agile environments. Boris shares how a bias toward action isn’t about skipping steps—it’s about shortening the cycle between idea and feedback, especially when knowledge gaps or fear of mistakes create inertia. They unpack why experimentation is often misunderstood, what leaders get wrong about failure, and how AI, organizational habits, and strategy-as-practice are reshaping the future of Agile work. References and resources mentioned in the show: Boris Gloger LinkedIn Leaders Guide to Agile eBook 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. Boris Gloger is a pioneering agile strategist and Germany’s first Certified Scrum Trainer, known for shaping how organizations across Europe approach transformation, strategy, and sustainable leadership. As founder of borisgloger consulting, he helps teams and executives navigate complexity—blending modern management, ethical innovation, and even AI—to make agility actually work in the real world. Auto-generated Transcript: Brian Milner (00:00) Welcome in Agile Mentors. We're back for another episode of the Agile Mentors Podcast. I'm with you as always, Brian Milner. And today I have the one, the only Mr. Boris Glogger with us. Welcome in Boris. Boris Gloger (00:11) Yeah, thank you, Eurobrein, for having me on your show. Brian Milner (00:14) Very excited to have Boris here. For those of you who haven't crossed paths with Boris, Boris has been involved in the Scrum movement, I would say, since the very, very earliest days. He's a CST, he's a coach, he's an author, he's a keynote speaker. He had a book early called The Agile Fixed Price. He runs his own consultancy in Europe. And he has a new book that's been, that's going to be coming out soon called strategy as practice. And that's one of the reasons we wanted to have Boris on is because there's kind of this topic area that's been percolating that I've heard people talk about quite often. And I see some confused looks when the, when the topic comes up, you hear this term about having a bias toward action. And, we just wanted to kind of dive into that a little bit about what that means to have a bias toward action. and really how we can apply that to what we do in our day-to-day lives. So let's start there, Boris. When you hear that term, having a bias toward action, what does that mean to you? Boris Gloger (01:12) The fun thing is I was always in tune with the idea because people said my basic mantra at the beginning of doing agile was doing as a way of thinking. So the basic idea of agile for me was always experimentation, trying things out, breaking rules, not for the sake of breaking rules, but making to create a new kind of order. the basic idea is like we had with test-driven development at the beginning of all these agile approaches and we said, yeah, we need to test first and then we have the end in our mind, but we don't know exactly how to achieve that. So there is this kind of bias towards action. That's absolutely true. On the other hand, what I've always found fascinating was that even the classical project management methodologies said, Yeah, you have to have a plan, but the second step is to revise that plan. And that was always this, do we plan planning and reality together? And actually for me at the beginning, 35 years ago, was exactly that kind of really cool blend of being able to have a great vision and people like Mike and all these guys, they had always said, we need to have that kind of a vision, we need to know. Yeah, if the product owner was exactly that idea, you have to have that vision, but you really need to get the nitty-gritty details of, so to say, of doing this stuff. Brian Milner (02:40) Yeah, that's awesome. And the thing that kind of always pops to my head when I think about this is, we hear this term bias toward action and there's sort of this balance, I think a little bit between planning and action, right? I mean, you wanna plan, you wanna plan well, but you don't wanna over plan. You don't wanna waste too much time trying to come up with a perfect plan. You wanna... you want to do things, but you also don't want to be, you don't want to rush into things. So how do people find that balance between not just, you know, going off, you know, like we say in the U S half cocked a little bit, you know, like just not, not really not ready to really do the thing that you're going to do. Cause you didn't really invest the time upfront, but on the other hand, not spending so much time that you're trying to get the perfect plan before you do anything. Boris Gloger (03:28) You know, the problem, for me, the issue was solved by when I figured out that the teams typically struggle not to achieve, for instance, the sprint goal or the end or whatever they wanted to accomplish when they have not the right know-how. So it's a knowledge problem. So for instance, I don't know if this is still the case, but sometimes developers say, need to... to immerse myself with that I need to figure that out. I need to get the new framework before I can do something about estimates or something. So whenever you hear that, that you know that person that just tries to give you an estimate or the team that would like to come into a sprint goal or whatever it is, they are not really knowing what topic is about. It's a knowledge gap. And then people tend to go into that analysis paralysis problem. They don't know exactly what they need to do. So therefore they need to investigate. But by doing investigation, you start making that big elephant in the corner, larger and larger and larger and larger because you go that ishikara diagram, you have too many options. It's like playing chess with all options at hand and not have enough experience. What kind of gambit you would like to do. So everything's possible and by, because you have not enough experience, you say everything's possible, that creates too much of a planning hassle. And Agile, is the funny thing is, made us very transparent by just saying, okay, let's spend maybe two weeks. And then we figured out two weeks is too much. So let's do a spike, then we call it a spike. The basic idea was always to have a very short time frame, timeline where we try to bring our know-how to a specific problem, try to solve it as fast as possible. And the funny thing was actually was, as if I I confess myself that I don't know everything, or anything, sorry, that I don't know anything, then I could say, I give me a very short timeline, I could say I spend an hour. And today we have chat, CVT and perplexity and all that stuff. And then we could say, okay, let's spend an hour observation, but then we need to come up with a better idea of what we are talking about. So we can shorten the time cycle. So whenever I experienced teams or even organizations, when they start getting that planning in place, we have a knowledge problem. And a typical that is, is, or the classical mindset always says, okay, then we need to plan more. We need to make that upfront work. For instance, we need to have backlogs and we need to know all these features, even if we don't know what kind of features our client really would like to have. And the actual software problem is saying, okay, let's get out with something that we can deliver. And then we get feedback. And if we understand that our kind of the amount of time we spend is as cheap as possible. So like we use the tools that we have. We used to know how that we have. We try to create something that we can achieve with what we can do already, then we can improve on that. And then we can figure out, we don't know exactly what we might need to have to do more research or ask another consultant or bring in friends from another team to help us with that. Brian Milner (06:46) It's, sounds like the there's a, there's a real, kind of focus then from, from what I'm hearing from you, like a real focus on experimentation and, you know, that, that phrase we hear a lot failing fast, that kind of thing. So how, do you cultivate that? How do you, how do you get the organization to buy in and your team to buy into that idea of. Let's experiment, let's fail fast. And, and, we'll learn more from, from doing that than just, you know, endlessly planning. Boris Gloger (07:12) I think the URCHAR community made a huge mistake of embracing this failure culture all the time. We always tell we need to call from failure because we are all ingrained in a culture in the Western society at least, where we learned through school our parents that making failures is not acceptable. Brian Milner (07:18) Ha ha. Boris Gloger (07:32) And I came across Amy Atkinson and she did a great book to make clear we need to talk about failures and mistakes in a very different kind of way. We need to understand that there are at least three kinds of mistakes that are possible. One is the basic mistake, like a spelling error or you have a context problem in a specific program that you write or you... You break something because you don't know exactly how strong your material is. That is basic mistake. You should know that. That's trainable. The other is the kind of error that you create because the problem you try to solve has too many variables. So that's a complicated problem. You can't foresee all aspects that might happen in future. So typical an airplane is crashing. So you have covered everything you know so far. But then there's some specific problem that nobody could foresee. That's a failure. But it's not something that you can foresee. You can't prevent that. You try to prevent as best as possible. And that's even not an accepted mistake because sometimes people die and you really would like to go against it. So that's the second kind of mistakes you don't like to have. We really like to get out of the system. And then there's a third way kind of mistakes. And that is exactly what we need to have. We need to embrace that experimentation and even experimentation. mean, I started physics in school and in university and an experimental physicists. He's not running an experiment like I just throw a ball around and then I figure out what happens. An experiment is a best guess. You have a theory behind it. You believe that what you deliver or that you try to find out is the best you try to do. The Wright brothers missed their first airplane. I mean, they didn't throw their airplane in the balloon. Then it gets destroyed. They tried whatever they believed is possible. But then you need to understand as a team, as an organization, we have never done this before, so it might get broken. We might learn. For instance, we had once a project where we worked with chemists 10 years ago to splice DNA. So we wanted to understand how DNA is written down in the DNA sequence analyzer. And I needed to understand that we had 90 scientists who created these chemicals to be able to that you can use that in that synthesizer to understand how our DNA is mapped out. And we first need to understand one sprint might get results that 99 of our experience will fail. But again, management said we need to be successful. Yeah, but what is the success in science? I mean, that you know this route of action is not working, right? And that is the kind of failure that we would like to have. And I believe our Agile community need to tell that much more to our clients. It's not like, we need to express failure. No, we don't need to embrace failure. We don't want to have mistakes and we don't want to have complicated issues that might lead to the destroying of our products. need on the other hand, the culture, the experimentation to figure out something that nobody knows so far is acceptable, it's necessary. And then, edge our processes help us again by saying, okay, we can shorten the frame, we can shorten the time frame so that we can create very small, tiny experiments so that in case we are mistaken, Not a big deal. That was the basic idea. Brian Milner (11:04) That's a great point. That's really a great point because you're right. It's not failure in general, right? There are certain kinds of failures that we definitely want to avoid, but there's failure as far as I run an experiment. at that point, that's where we start to enter into this dialogue of it's not really a failure at that point. If you run an experiment and it doesn't turn out the way you expected, it's just an experiment that didn't turn out the way you expected. Boris Gloger (11:30) Basically, every feature we create in software or even in hardware, we have never done it before. So the client or our customers can't use it so far because it's not there. So now we ship it to the client and then he or she might not really use it the way that we believe it is. Is it broken? it a mistake? It was not a mistake. It was an experiment and now we need to adapt on it. And if we can create a system, that was all that was agile, I think was a bot. On very first start, if we can create a system that gives us feedback early. then that guessing can't be so much deviation or say in a different way, our investment in time and material and costs and money and is shortened as much as possible. So we have very small investments. Brian Milner (12:13) Yeah, that's awesome. I'm kind of curious too, because, you know, we, we, we've talked a little bit at the beginning about how, you know, this is part of this bias towards action as part of this entrepreneurial kind of mindset. And I'm curious in your, experience and your consultants experience that you've worked with big companies and small companies, have you noticed a difference in sort of that bias toward action? Uh, you know, that, that kind of. is represented in a different way in a big company versus a more small startup company. Boris Gloger (12:48) The funny thing is I don't believe it's a problem of large corporations or small, tiny little startups, even if we would say that tiny little startups are more in tune in making experiments. It's really a kind of what is my mindset, and the mindset is a strange word, but what is my basic habit about how to embrace new things. What is the way I perceive the world? Every entrepreneur who tries to create it or say it different way, even entrepreneurs nowadays need to create business plans. The basic ideas I can show to investors, everything is already mapped out. I have already clients. I have a proven business model. That is completely crazy because If it were a proof business model, someone else would have already done it, right? So obviously you need to come up with the idea that a kind of entrepreneur mindset is a little bit like I try to create something that is much more interesting to phrase it this way. by creating something, it's like art. You can't, can't... Plan art, I mean, it's impossible. I mean, you might have an idea and you might maybe someone who's writing texts or novels might create a huge outline. But on the other hand, within that outline, he needs to be creative again. And someone will say, I just start by getting continuous feedback. It's always the same. You need to create something to be able to observe it. that was for me, for me, that was the epiphany or the idea 25 years ago was, I don't know what your background is, but I wasn't a business analyst. Business analysts always wanted to write documents that the developer can really implement, right? And then we figured out you can't write down what you need to implement. There's no way of writing requirements in the way that someone else can build it. That's impossible. And even philosophers figure that out 100 years ago is written, Shanti said, you can't tell people what is the case. It's impossible. So, but what you can do, you can create something and you can have it in your review. And then you can start discussing about what you just created. And then you create a new result based on your observations and the next investment that you put in that. And then you create the next version of your product, your feature, your service, et cetera. Brian Milner (15:12) Hmm. Boris Gloger (15:25) And when we came back to the entrepreneur mindset and starting companies, Greaves created exactly that. He said, okay, let's use scrum to come up with as much possibilities for experimentation. And then we will see if it works. Then we can go on at that. And large corporations typically, They have on the one hand side, have too much money. And by having too much money, you would like to get an investment and they have a different problem. Typically large corporations typically needs to, they have already a specific margin with their current running products. And if you come up with a new business feature product, you might not get that as that amount of of revenue or profitability at the beginning. And therefore, can't, corporations have the problem that they have already running business and they are not seeing that they need to spend much, much more money on these opportunities. And maybe over time, that opportunity to make money and that's their problem. So this is the issue. It's not about entrepreneurial mindsets, it's about that. problem that you are not willing to spend that much money as long as you make much more money, it's the same amount of time on your current business. It happens even to myself, We are running a consulting company in Germany and Austria, and Austria is much smaller than Germany's tenth of the size. And if you spend one hour of sales in Austria, you don't make that much money in Austria than you make in Germany. this investment of one hour. Where should you focus? You will always focus on Germany, of course. means obvious. Brian Milner (17:08) Yeah. Yeah. Boris Gloger (17:10) Does it make sense? Maybe I'm running so. Brian Milner (17:14) No, that makes sense. That makes sense entirely. And so I'm kind of curious in this conversation about action and having a bias toward action then, what do you think are some of the, in your experience in working with companies, what have you seen as sort of the common obstacles or barriers, whether that be psychological or. organizational, what do you find as the most common barriers that are preventing people from having that bias toward action? Boris Gloger (17:44) the they are they are afraid of the of that of tapping into the new room endeavor. So that was always my blind spot because I'm an entrepreneur. I love to do new things. I just try things out. If I've either reading a book, and there's a cool idea, I try to what can happen. But we are not And most organizations are not built that way that they're really willing to, when most people are not good in just trying things out. And most people would really like to see how it's done. And most people are not good in... in that have not the imagination what might be possible. That's the we always know that product adoption curve, that the early adopters, the fast followers, the early minority, the late minority. And these inventors or early adopters, they are the ones who can imagine there might be a brighter future if I try that out. And the other ones are the ones who need to see that it is successful. And so whenever you try implementing Scrum or design thinking or mob programming or I don't whatever it is, you will always have people who say it's not possible because I don't have, haven't seen it before. And I sometimes I compare that with how to how kids are learning. Some kids are learning because they see how what is happening. They just mirroring what they see. And some kids are start to invent the same image in imagination. And but both that we are all of us are able to do both. It's not like I'm an imaginary guy who's inventing all the time and I don't, people, maybe there's a preference and the organizations have the same preference. But typically that's the problem that I see in organizations is based on our society and our socialization, on our business behaviors and maybe the pressure of large corporations and all that peer pressure is Brian Milner (19:34) Yeah. Yeah. Boris Gloger (19:54) The willingness to give people the room to try something out is the problem. Well, not the problem, it's the hinders us of being more innovative in organizations. Brian Milner (19:59) Yeah. Yeah. Well, that brings to mind a good question then too, because this experimentation mindset is very, very much a cultural kind of aspect of an organization, which speaks to leadership. And I'm kind of curious from your perspective, if you're a leader, what kind of things can you do as a leader to encourage, foster, of really nurture? that experimentation mindset in your organization. Boris Gloger (20:34) Let's have a very simple example. Everybody of us now maybe have played with chat, CPT, Suno, perplexity and so on. So that's the school AI technology around the corner. And what happens now in organizations is exactly what happens 30 years ago when the internet came here. You have leadership or managers who say, that's a technology, I give it to the teams, they can figure out whatever that is. And the funny thing is, if you have a technology that will change the way we behave, so it's a social technology, a kind of shift, then I need to change my behavior, I need to change the way I do I'm doing things. Yeah, everybody of us has now an iPhone or an Android or whatever it is, but but we are using our mobiles in a completely different way than 30 years ago. And to lead us and manage us, we need to train ourselves first before we can help our teams to change. So the problem is that Again, a lot of Agilist talks about we need, first we need to change the culture of organizations to be able to do Agile and so on and so on. That's complete nonsense. But what we really need to is we need to have managers, team leads, it with team leads, to help them to do the things themselves because Agile, even in the beginning, now it's technology change, now it's AI, is something that changes the way we do our stuff. It's kind of habit. And we need to help them to seize themselves. Maybe they can only seize themselves by doing that stuff. And that goes back to my belief that leadership needs to know much more about the content of their teams and the way these teams can perform their tasks and the technology that is around to be able to thrive in organizations. Brian Milner (22:40) Yeah. Yeah. I love this discussion and I love that you brought up, you know, AI and how that's affecting things here as well. how do you think that's having a, do you think that's making it easier, harder? How do you think AI is, is kind of influencing this bias toward action mentality? Boris Gloger (22:59) Yeah, it depends on if you are able to play. mean, because the funny thing is, it's a new kind of technology. really knows what all these tools can do by themselves. And it's new again. It's not like I have done AI for the next last 10 years and I know exactly what's possible. So we need to play. So you need to log in to adjust it. Yesterday, I tried something on Zulu. I created the company song in 10 seconds. I went to ChatGVT, I said I need a song, I need lyrics for a company song. These are the three words I would like to have, future, Beurus Kluger, and it needs to be that kind of mood. ChatGVT created the song for my lyrics, then they put the lyrics into the... And they created a prompt with ChatGVT and then put that prompt in my lyrics into Sono and Sono created that song within 10 seconds. I mean, it's not get the Grammy. Okay. It's not the Grammy. But it was, I mean, it's, it's, it's okay. Yeah. It's a nice party song. And now, and just playing around. And that is what I would like to see in organizations, that we start to play around with these kind of technologies and involve everybody. But most people, the very discussions that I had in the last couple of weeks or months was about these tools shall do the job exactly the same way as it is done today. So it's like... I create that kind of report. Now I give that to Chet Chibati and Chet Chibati shall create that same report again. That is nonsense. It's like doing photography in the old days, black and white. And now I want to have photography exactly done the same way with my digital camera. And what happened was we used the digital cameras changed completely the way we create photography and art. changed completely, right? And that is the same thing we need to do with ChatGV team. And we need to understand that we don't know exactly how to use it. And then we can enlarge and optimize on one hand the way we are working, for instance, creating 20 different versions for different social media over text or something like that, or 20 new pictures. But if I would like to express myself, so, and... and talk about my own behavior or my own team dynamic and what is the innovation in ourselves, then we need to do ourselves. And we can use, that is the other observation that we made. The funny thing that goes back to the knowledge issue, the funny thing is that teams typically say, I don't know if it's in the US, but at least in my experience, that we still have the problem within teams. that people believe this is my know-how and that is your know-how and I'm a specialist in X or Y set. So they can't talk to each other. But if you use maybe chat GPT and all these tools now, they can bridge these know-how gaps using these tools. And suddenly they can talk to each other much faster. So they get more productive. It's crazy. It's not like I'm now a fool with a tool. I can be a fool and the tool might help me to overcome my knowledge gaps. Brian Milner (26:20) Now this is awesome. I know that your book that's coming out, Strategy is Practice, talks about a lot of these things. Tell us a little bit about this book and kind of what the focus is. Boris Gloger (26:30) the basic idea when I started doing working on the on strategies, we be in the the actual community, we talk about strategy as what is a new idea of being OKR. So OKR equals strategy, and that is not true. And I came up with this basic idea, what is the basic problem of of strategic thinking and we are back to the in most organizations, we still believe strategy is the planning part and then we have an implementation part. And years ago, I came across a very basic, completely different idea that said every action is strategy. Very simple example. You have the strategy in a company that you have a high price policy. Everything you do is high price. But then you are maybe in a situation where you really need money, effort, revenue issues, liquidation, liquidation problems. Then you might reduce your price. And that moment, your strategy is gone. just your obviously and you have now a new strategy. So your actions and your strategies always in line. So it's not the tactic for the strategy, but tactic is strategy. And now we are back to Azure. So now we can say, okay, we need kind of a long-term idea. And now we can use for creating the vision. For instance, you list the V2MOM framework for creating your vision. But now I need to have a possibility to communicate my strategic ideas. And in the Azure community, we know how to do this. We have plannings and we have dailies and we have reviews and retrospectives. So now I can use all these tools. I can use from the bookshelf of Azure tools. I can use maybe OKRs to create a continuous cycle of innovation or communication so that I get that everybody knows now what is the right strategy. And I can feed back with the reviews to management. that the strategy approach might not work that way that they believed it's possible experimentation. And then and I added two more ideas from future insight or strategic foresight, some other people call it. So the basic idea is, how can I still think about the future in an not in the way of that I have a crystal ball. But I could say, how can I influence the future, but I can only influence the future if I have an idea what might be in future. It's like a scenario. Now you can create actions, power these kind of scenarios that you like, or what you need to prevent a specific scenario if you don't like that. And we need a third tool, that was borrowed from ABCD risk planning, was the basic idea, how can I get my very clear a very simple tool to get the tactics or the real environmental changes like suddenly my estimates might not be correct anymore or my suggestions or beliefs about the future might not get true in the future. So I need kind of a system to feed back reality in my strategy. it's a little bit like reviewing all the time the environment. And if you put all that together, then you get a very nice frame how to use strategy on a daily practice. It's not like I do strategy and then have a five-year plan. No, you have to do continuously strategy. And I hope that this will help leaders to do strategy. I mean, because most leaders don't do strategy. They do tactic kind of work. and they don't spend They don't spend enough time in the trenches. to enrich their strategies and their thinking and their vision. because they detach strategy and implementation all the time. That's the basic idea. Brian Milner (30:30) That's awesome. That sounds fascinating. And I can't wait to read that. That sounds like it's going to be a really good book. So we'll make sure that we have links in our show notes to that if anyone wants to find out more information about that or learn more from Boris on this topic. Boris, can't thank you enough for making time for coming on. This has been a fascinating discussion. Thank you for coming on the show. Boris Gloger (30:40) Yeah. Yeah, thank you very much for having me on your show and appreciate that your time and your effort here. Make a deal for the, it's very supporting for the agile community. Thank you for that. Brian Milner (30:57) Absolutely. Yeah, yeah, thank you.

Can you lead meaningful change without burning people out—or yourself? Sherri Robbins thinks so, and she’s sharing how she’s done it in high-stakes, high-complexity environments (with her sanity intact). Overview In this episode, Sherri Robbins joins Scott Dunn to talk about what it actually takes to lead large-scale change across teams, departments, and vendors without losing sight of your values—or your people. From agile leadership lessons and real-world mistakes to personality-aware management and learning how (and when) to let teams fail forward, this conversation goes far beyond frameworks. If you’ve ever tried to implement something new and wondered why it didn’t stick, this one’s for you. References and resources mentioned in the show: Sherri Robbins Switch: How to Change Things When Change Is Hard by Chip Heath & Dan Heath Start With Why by Simon Sinek Five Lessons For Agile 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: Scott Dunn is a Certified Enterprise Coach and Scrum Trainer with over 20 years of experience coaching and training companies like NASA, EMC/Dell Technologies, Yahoo!, Technicolor, and eBay to transition to an agile approach using Scrum. Sherri Robbins is a 20+ year veteran in the medical device industry, blending strategic execution with deep regulatory and quality systems expertise to lead enterprise-wide transformations. She’s a thought leader in Agile implementation, known for aligning cross-functional teams, building psychological safety, and driving change that actually sticks.

How do you lead change when you’re not the boss? Casey Sinnema shares what it takes to build trust, influence outcomes, and make Monday feel a little less dreadful. Overview What happens when you give a self-proclaimed utility player the freedom to poke holes in broken systems and lead cross-functional change without official authority? In this episode, Scott chats with Casey Sinema about navigating ambiguity, building trust without a title, and leading impactful change through curiosity, clarity, and a deep understanding of what people actually need. References and resources mentioned in the show: Casey Sinnema Wolf Pack by Abby Wombach The Let Them Theory by Mel Robbins Micromanagement Log Subscribe to the Agile Mentors Podcast Join the Agile Mentors Community Want to get involved? This show is designed for you, and we’d love your input. Enjoyed what you heard today? Please leave a rating and a review. It really helps, and we read every single one. Got an Agile subject you’d like us to discuss or a question that needs an answer? Share your thoughts with us at podcast@mountaingoatsoftware.com This episode’s presenters are: Scott Dunn is a Certified Enterprise Coach and Scrum Trainer with over 20 years of experience coaching and training companies like NASA, EMC/Dell Technologies, Yahoo!, Technicolor, and eBay to transition to an agile approach using Scrum. Casey Sinnema is a self-described utility player who’s built a career by asking great questions, poking holes in broken systems, and leading meaningful change across teams—without ever needing the official title to do it. With a background in accounting and a talent for cross-functional problem solving, she brings curiosity, empathy, and real-world savvy to every challenge she tackles. Auto-generated Transcript: Scott Dunn (00:01) Well, welcome everyone to another episode of the Agile Mentors Podcast. I am your takeover, not your normal host, of Brian Miller, who's done a smash up job over a hundred plus episodes if you haven't checked those out. But part of the podcast takeover was not only a fresh voice, but also perspective and a lot of what I typically focus on for the people who know me. On leadership and culture and leading change. And I thought of no one better that I'd rather talk to about some of this. Casey Sinnema and I'll give you a little bit of introduction about who she is, what she does. Maybe also I think it'd be fascinating Casey on how you yourself in the role that you have. I think it's kind of a cool role, at least on paper. You can flesh that out a little bit more but I'll hand off to you. Tell us a little about yourself. Casey (00:46) Yeah, hey, thanks for having me. Yeah, so I currently am most often referred to as a utility player. And I'm still trying to figure out my elevator speech for how I talk about what I do because my role, my title is manager, which doesn't say much, right? And I actually don't do a function, but the easiest way to talk about it is I'm a project manager of sorts. I'm involved in a wide variety of projects from a varying level of involvement, from leading the project to leading the change to being a key stakeholder to just being the voice to leaders or executives or that type of thing. So yeah, I am a little bit of everything. And I got here on accident. I have... Scott Dunn (01:32) I was... Casey (01:34) You know, way back in the day when I was, you know, doing the like, what am I going to do for the rest of my life? I'm like, I just want a marketable skill. So I have a business degree and I went into accounting and I quickly became the troubleshooter. So I would go into a company, troubleshoot, fix the process, fix something broken, and then find myself in another company doing the same thing. And, so throughout my career, I've just sort of built this unique set of skills that allow me to poke holes in processes. and help companies fix them and then kind of find the next thing. So that's just kind of how I wound up here. I've been at my current company for almost a decade, which is going to be a record for me. And, but I'm still doing the same thing. I'm moving around the company and finding new places to, you know, rock the boat a little bit. Scott Dunn (02:20) Cool. Very cool. Yeah. It does sound like you have a number of things on your place to where that makes kind of expand on that a little bit and where you comfortably share those stories as we go through some of this because there's a lot, there's a lot more underneath based on what Casey shared before. And I love it that you found yourself like a happy accident and I guess have enough challenges and learning and growth there as long as they move you around that you're, you know, you need to be working on that are meaningful. things to be working on. Casey (02:51) Yeah, absolutely. That's the biggest thing, right? Is to like find work that you find valuable and that has an impact on the people around you, which is, know, squarely aligned with my values. Scott Dunn (03:01) Well, you touched on one thing that I know a number of other people could relate to and I could too as well as the kind of troubleshoots process can just easily see that things aren't working at a larger view. Some of that. maybe add on a little bit. What is it like about your role? For those who are kind of thinking they're in quasi space, they can hear you talk about that role and like, hey, that sounds like me too. What are the points of that different projects, different things you're involved with that that's what really lights you up? Casey (03:27) Yeah, I, it's so interesting because a lot of us find that the things that we're good at are the things that, you know, give us energy and that motivate us, right? I happen to be uniquely skilled at poking holes in things, including in my own life. So it works in my personal life as well. I could just sort of see things from different perspectives and find the gaps. And so it just sort of on accident. I think what's interesting is Scott Dunn (03:43) You Hmm. Casey (03:53) throughout my career and throughout my life, the biggest challenge has been to hone that skill for good, right? To lead with kindness and to manage my expectations along with the expectations of the world around me and troubleshoot the things or poke holes in things that need holes poked in instead of like everything. You know what mean? Scott Dunn (04:15) I love that. Two things that I want to, I guess, add on a little bit more there. One, you mentioned something and the other thing is I think you might just put out there like, same thing from different perspectives. I imagine for the people, we've all been around folks who just they only think their way. And you're just kind of reflecting on that. But Keith, it sounds like you can go into a meeting and you can hear three different state views and you can genuinely understand from their perspective why that's important to them or why that's a problem to them, right? If I'm hearing you. Casey (04:42) Yeah, absolutely. That's really key in all of the different types of projects that I've played a part in, right? Like hearing things from different people's perspectives and really understanding what they're looking to get, what they need and what's in it for them and being able to connect those things across stakeholders. Scott Dunn (04:59) Yeah, that's powerful. Yeah, but looking for commonality, alignment, et cetera. I do think there's a specialness, and we've talked about it a bit, like in the facilitation class, that looking for those folks having common and generating alignment is a unique gift that we just don't see a lot in corporate people kind of lobby for what they want. And actually, it's, it would be an afterthought to think about other people's perspectives and yet who draws different areas of the company together who are to get some new about the door or whatever like that. So you're kind of touching on that, which I think is really powerful. Is there anything that you see as like a go-to mindset that you bring in those situations or go to like tools that you're kind of using, whether that's things you're doing in writing down or in mural or even just how where your head is at when you walk into some of those meetings where you feel they have different perspectives and on the same page, you're supposed to walk out of that session on the same page. Casey (05:51) Yeah, the first one is to sort of leave my ego at the door, right? What I think is the right thing can't come in the door with me, right? Like I, of course I'm influencing, right? Where I feel like it matters. But it's not, I'm probably not the decision maker and the people that are not on the same page, when they need to get aligned, they need to be able to get there on their own. So what I think is the right way, I got to leave it at the door. So that's my number one thing. Scott Dunn (05:57) heheheheh. Casey (06:18) And then the next thing I do is just really stay curious, ask lots of questions, actively listen, model that active listening behavior so that everybody else is also actively listening. That's a big thing. And really just sort of helping people find a common language, I think, is really important. So I do a lot of restating what I'm hearing so that other people can maybe hear it from a different set of words and connect it. Scott Dunn (06:29) Hahaha Casey (06:42) more readily to the way that they're thinking about the topic. Scott Dunn (06:45) Yeah, you say these as if they're like, I mean those are short little pithy statements, but boy, powerful. I think it reflects an attitude beginning with what he said as the ego is like, we might know a whole lot, we gotta leave that at the door. Just at work, awesome. Here and you say something, I'm making notes like this would be good in life too, right? In personal life and relationships, stay curious, active. Don't assume that the way you see it is reality, right? So, I think that's super. The other thing you mentioned though was about Go ahead. Casey (07:17) I will say I'm better at it at my job than in my personal life because, Scott Dunn (07:23) Of course, I think, yeah, for everyone listening, they're like, me too. Why can't I do this? I can tell some stories. So the other one, though, you should just poke holes as if like, it's this little thing we're doing. But there might be something inside. I think I might be able to relate that is driving perhaps towards this isn't running as well as it could, or this isn't running. I think we know that, or this could be better. Something inside you that that you feel is churning, that you're seeing holes no matter what that is, if it's a small process, large process, a team, multiple teams. Tell me a little bit more about what does that mean to you when you say poke holes in things? What's running through your mind? Casey (08:01) Yeah, it's complex, right? Because sometimes it's really easy. This is broken. you know, right? Or there's a bottleneck, something that's really like you can, it's data driven, you can see in the data where something is not working well, that those are the easy ones, right? And you can just start asking sort of the five whys or the finding the root cause of what's happening there. Scott Dunn (08:06) Those are the easy ones, yes. Casey (08:26) But in the case where there's friction or there appears to be barriers or there's just this. any kind of challenge or even when there's not a challenge, quite frankly, I have this unique ability to like listen across people and across like data and technology. That's a weird thing to say is listen across technology, but I sort of just find where things are misconnected or disconnected and start to ask questions there. And so I can find something that maybe isn't working as well as it should without anybody else noticing which. Scott Dunn (08:35) Yeah. Casey (08:59) I've learned I need to be careful with. Scott Dunn (09:01) That's great. So at least the next question was any hard lessons, anything so you could do a redo on that one that you could pass on so someone else doesn't have to learn the hard way from Casey's experience. Casey (09:11) Ha yeah. Everything I learned, I learned the hard way. So if you feel like that's what you're doing, you're not alone. Yeah, the thing that I have learned probably the most often, and I will learn it several more times in my career, I'm sure, is when I think I have found something, go make sure it's true before you start to really socialize it. So like, I'm going to go ask the question of the expert. Scott Dunn (09:20) Ha Whoa. Casey (09:42) before I bring it up because maybe I'm not seeing it from all of the right angles or maybe I don't understand exactly what it's doing or quite frankly maybe I'm missing some context. And so really talking and building relationships with people who are experts on the topic or in the field is really kind of where I start. Scott Dunn (10:00) was great, great period. the number of times we miss out on relationships, especially in that one, really key. Casey (10:00) And. Yeah. Scott Dunn (10:08) I think I'd add to that though. sometimes I'll phrase it as rather wait to be sure than lose capital because if I go out saying things that aren't true. So sometimes we'll jump in on the outing side and they'll be like, why haven't you gotten yet? And I'll be clear, like, I'd rather wait and be sure than hurry and be wrong. And then we got to that mess before we get back to the work we're supposed to be doing. And sometimes it's a while to pick that up, depending on who got affected by We'll put out there sometimes innocuously, we thought, well, here's the numbers results. And someone's like, that's actually not correct. But now everyone knows we have now we have a PR problem, something like that. So I'm not alone in that. I've been there. That's a tough one. But also on the coin, though, what would you point to as wins if you look back like that's talking about? That's why this is important. That's what you feel good about. Casey (10:54) Yes, absolutely. Yeah, I think from a win perspective, the, a really good example, I'm going to go way back in the day. I had a, a chance to work, in a motorcycle dealership and we had huge, was, you know, weird economic times, right? And so there's weird financial things happening in this, you know, motorcycle dealership company and, and, everybody's just trying to stay afloat and You find the like the friction between either the mechanic shop and the, the sales shop. And when you find those and you can solve those problems and make the experience smooth for the, for the client, right. For the customer and make that like walk in the door experience consistent and smooth. This in this case was just people, right? It wasn't even technology. wasn't really a process. It was just people. And the biggest wins are when like. the people start to notice. And then what happens is everybody's life gets better and everybody has more fun doing whatever it is that they're doing. And it just changes the vibe. Scott Dunn (12:08) I love that. I love that. I do believe very much like the work that we could be doing here. People enjoy their work more people enjoy coming to work. doesn't have to be a place that people don't want to be in or watching the class. I love you touching on that's great. Casey (12:21) Yeah, there's a balance there, right? Like, because they call it work for a reason. It's a job. We don't love everything that we do all of the time. But, you know, are we doing the things that we can do to make life good for ourselves and for others? Scott Dunn (12:33) Yes, so nice segue because what I feel like I've learned later in my career, we'll just phrase it that way, that the importance of self-care, taking care of ourselves so that we have the energy and attitude to keep doing work that we're doing, especially if you're a leading changer, in some ways you're a change artist trying to bring that about, change agent, it can be taxing. So are there things along the way that are either You just know a good way that you take care of yourself could be learning, could be space, could be the road you carry, or that you actually do to protect yourself and that work-life balance emotionally, mentally. you aren't kind of aware of, what does it look like to do good self-care and help make sure you're taking care of yourself to deliver good value in the workplace. Share what that means to you and maybe some of the things that you do. Casey (13:21) Yeah, it's so important, right? Like I am also not in the early stages of my career and still learning how to take care of myself and protect myself and, you know, build good boundaries, right? I, yes, yes. So I have good personal routines, right? Like I do yoga, I meditate. I'm a big fan of podcasts and. Scott Dunn (13:31) Hahaha Right. Boundaries is a good word, yes. Casey (13:46) I'm a learner, so I'm always learning. Maybe there's a boundary there too, like how much can you self-improve before it becomes, I don't know, toxic? But when it comes to boundaries, really it's, I start with the relationships, right? Like at work, making sure that my expectations are clear and that of my leadership chain is clear no matter what job I'm in. Scott Dunn (13:47) Hmm. you Casey (14:11) and setting boundaries that are clearly expressed so that I can protect myself and my personal life and that balance, and I can deliver the way that I'm expected to deliver. And that just makes life easier for me. Scott Dunn (14:23) Super, super, super, super. I'm thinking there's a lot of people. I it's a ways back. We cover accommodative and assertive, you know, as far as power styles and the cowl. And what's been fascinating for all these years, most people are all on the accommodative side. When I hear you say something like, hey, the expectations clear or use the word bad, that sounds like someone who has a balance of, no, I'm there for people, but I don't overextend myself to where I no good. Casey (14:23) Thank Scott Dunn (14:50) I burned something like that. So I think that's really great for everyone to hear. It hurt to define the relationship with make sure your expectations are clear for me. And then sometimes, you know, there's someone else that could take that on or might play this role, etc. But sometimes we're so helpful that we overload ourselves and actually don't do good job. We do, you know, average job on a lot of things instead of a job on a few and they could have found maybe someone else. think that's awesome. You said podcasts, there other ways, is that your way of learning? there other things that you, as far as what, for the learning side? Casey (15:26) Yeah, so books are my go-to. I'm somebody who does a lot of highlighting and note taking and flagging in books, because I'm always going back to them. And I love to learn things that are sort of outside of my lane, if you will. It's kind of how I got involved in Agile. I have a business degree in finance, and Agile doesn't really play into that until it does, right? And so I started to like, I'm curious about that, or I'm curious about Six Sigma or those types of things. And so I just sort of go find them and take the nuggets that apply directly to me and put the other ones on the shelf for like when it does apply to me, if you know what I mean. Um, so I just, I'm a learner, so I'm always looking to, to, to learn new things. I'll be frank, podcasts for me, I'm not learning things. I'm entertaining myself. Scott Dunn (16:20) I try, I try to really be focused to get, I like listening, but yeah, the actually applying is not as much. I'm definitely same about I'm a higher. Someone said the difference in studying is the pin. So I'm always like, unless I'm marking it up, am I really digging into this book or, or Kendall? So I'm to hear I'm not alone on that one. So I want to shift a little bit because some of what we've done is leading change. think the conversation we had were around. Casey (16:38) Absolutely. Scott Dunn (16:45) So moving around from just you to the broader culture, how would you describe what a great culture like or feels like? Maybe some of us haven't even been in a great company so they don't know. They can't picture, imagine what that could be like. And you've been to a number of places with different roles. What's good culture, great culture look like in your opinion? Casey (17:06) Yeah, I think that it's gotta be a cliche out there. I'm pretty sure I've seen it on a meme, but good culture is defined by how you feel on Sunday night, right? Like if you're not dreading going into work on Monday, right? Like you probably are in a culture that's a good fit for you because I think culture doesn't have a one size fits all perspective. Like big companies, small companies, different types of work, different groups of people. sort of lend themselves to different kinds of culture. I've been in companies where the culture is great for me and everybody else is miserable. And companies where the culture is great for everybody else and I'm just not a good fit. So I think that in general, good culture is... I talk about it in this like self-awareness perspective. If the culture itself is a little bit self-aware, then it is what they say it is. So if you say your culture is one thing and everybody agrees, including the culture, including the behaviors of what's expected in the environment, if all of those things are aligned, the culture is probably good, even if there are people who aren't good fits for it. I don't know if that answers your question. That's my perspective. Scott Dunn (18:03) Hehehehe That's great. Oh, it's it's better. That one's a good wrap up now. Like that really to me, it's a bit of a mic drop because it's so good. It's simple. But you're right. How you feel on Sunday night? A ton about what's happening with you and the job you have and what's happening around you. Absolutely. And that different like sometimes it is just a fit because a lot of people can be excited about it, but you're bothered by it or might rub you wrong. And I know we've gone through the values in the class as well. I've been at companies where we're absolutely about get stuff done and that's fine. But it's kind of a burnout. I love the very collaborative, but sometimes I'm like, man, I want to get stuff done. I'm getting frustrated that we're like, we really connect and talk a lot. I don't see stuff happening. So you're right. Obviously, you know, some people are sensitive to that. And that last piece about like the behavior. it should be considered. And I do sometimes see like leadership will say something or there'll be things on the walls. But you look around like, yeah, I don't actually think anyone's actually behaving that way. It's like an aspirational vibe about what they want to be, but they're not really doing it. So I think all those lenses are giving are right. And they're simple. Someone can look around and just see what you're saying. And then you make their own calculations of that. Some of the good. Some of that's a bit too. Casey (19:26) Yeah, absolutely. Absolutely. Scott Dunn (19:32) In the sense like either either change it for the better or You know what I mean? Like I don't want to be the person that's been there seven like this place is terrible What are you doing? What why have you been here 17 years hating it? I don't Casey (19:32) you Yeah, it's really important that we're honest with ourselves as much as our companies are honest with us, right? Like, what do I need from my job? What do I need from my career? And am I at a place that can support that? Scott Dunn (19:45) Good. Yes. Yeah, and and i'll serious in this case. I think there is some point where people I hear them And i'll just straight up. I don't think leadership has any intention to changing in the way you're describing Right. So in the end like so what would you like to do? And it's not even like it's a bad thing really. It's just like that's like It's a bit when you said that part some people are so passionate they forget like Yeah, and you're wrong like you could be wanting this coming to change in a way. It's not who they are or what they're about or you're Found by 80 people who are actually quite good with the way things The fact that you're so passionate doesn't mean you're right. It might just mean this is not a good fit. So don't stay here trying to change everything, which probably wouldn't work anyways if that's, you know, they're comfortable with what are. It's almost like in self-preservation, just say, I just need to exercise my agency and there's not a good guy. What's that song? There Ain't No Good Guy, There Ain't No Bad Guy. It's me and you and we just disagree. You move on to another and they'll be happier somewhere else is what I would think. So I think that's a good perspective. People can get past space about, you know, and agile and all that and then rail against something that's an immovable in some organizations. Casey (21:08) Yeah, being aware of the things that you can control, the things that you can't control, is really the crux of your own sanity, if you will. Scott Dunn (21:16) Yeah, it's a good way of saying it, Yeah, and you can control a lot of that. You can influence it. can influence it. Let me follow up on that because clearly, in my opinion, seems like you've that about bringing about change when you don't necessarily have authority. You can't dictate to some of these folks. What do you think is a key aspect of being successful around influence or people who... I get asked this all the time, how do we influence, how do we manage up, et cetera. What would you prefer as your thoughts on that about influencing others? Casey (21:50) Yeah, I actually listened to a podcast recently about leading without influence. one of the key comments, I guess I am also learning through podcasts, I guess. But one of the comments in the podcast was there are people who lead with a hammer, people who lead with influence. And I kind of love that because I haven't been a people leader in more than a decade. Scott Dunn (21:55) There you go. So they are some good. Casey (22:13) which means I don't have any authority, right? I lead all of my influence. All of my leadership is through influence. And the way that I approach that is I start with. It's a, it's a gooey word, but empathy, understanding the people that I'm talking to and working with and understanding what they need and what their challenges are, and then meeting them where they are. Right. The easiest way to gain influence with. Most people, is to build trust and to build trust, need to build relationships. And so I would say 90 % of my influence comes first from relationships. And probably the other 10 % comes from my ability to stand up and say, I was wrong when I did something wrong or when my perspective was incorrect and when I behaved outside my values, like just owning it up when I'm like, Scott Dunn (22:59) Wow. Casey (23:04) Yeah, I was having a bad day. I apologize. There's a lot of trust that comes from that kind of vulnerability. Scott Dunn (23:11) Yeah, which is not easy to do not easy to do But I've been in meetings where I like I know it like I don't play this year But I like things so in some ways people look at influence about how we phrase things or how we present but you're just saying like look happy build a real relationship Have some humility if you're willing to say we're wrong. So people know you'll also that when you're wrong or made of your core element of strength or something like that. think that's a real nice, everyone, if you think about that, that's not out of any of us to say, you know what, I'm going to try to be more honest and authentic and have some empathy and try to listen. Casey (23:45) Absolutely. It also helps to be able to connect the dots across different people and what they need and the strategy of whatever project you're working on so that you can connect the change to something that is it like what's in it for me, right? So what's in it for the people that you're talking to and being able to connect those things. So it's not just relationships and empathy, right? That's the soft stuff. It's that ability to really critically think about what it is you're driving change for. Scott Dunn (24:08) Mm-hmm. Casey (24:12) and connecting it to how each of these different stakeholders can benefit. Scott Dunn (24:18) Yeah, the part about connecting the dots and this is one thing if I'm ever in a meeting and I feel like I'm not getting it I actually will pause into my head. I'm thinking What is this person's concerns? And if I can't if I can't clear that I'd probably need to ask more questions but for any of us in those meetings just kind of go around through those stakeholders the people sitting around the desk or on the zoom and quick like in a sentence or two what what would be important to them? What are they? What's the win or what's the pain? But if you don't feel like you can articulate, then the good thing is you have to see that asking questions around that is never a problem because they're actually share because you're basically asking them about yourself. Tell me what's important to you. And they would like to share that. And it doesn't hurt to double check that. So I love what you're saying about connected dots. It won't be necessary that they're saying what you're listening and watching. I also watch what they react to. So something might jump out that would be outside of their say their role. but it's about people and there's an aspect that they really do care about how their people feel, not just the, this process is important in terms of our strategy and the technology we're using, but it might come out like, well, all their people would be really excited to put their hands on that new technology too. But they're not gonna say that because that sounds like that's a weak reason to be for a project, but you know it's important to them because they lead those people or that person. So I like what you're saying, connect the dots, think about those perspectives, because the empathy is gonna help them to connect in the dots, right? more is emotional than the logic of that stuff. So think that's great. Really, really great. On this, I believe you're remote, correct? Partially? Okay. ⁓ fully. Okay. Let's talk about that small. It hasn't come up in the last five years, but let's talk remote. So from your experience, it's always a big topic to me. I do care about this. I think we deal with a lot, every company, because some people at least that are remote, or certainly partial remote, Casey (25:45) I am. Fully. Scott Dunn (26:05) What's your thoughts on what to be worried about and what to make that successful? you're seeing more and more almost like these two sides of the aisle, maybe some aspect of demanding people come back. And yet you have a whole generation who can't buy a house. So I'm figuring out where's the balance of remote work. So yeah, your thoughts on remote work, how to make it successful scene. Casey (26:27) Yeah, I mean, I have two different ways I could approach this, right? I have the personal thing that what works for me part, right? But as somebody who is often having these conversations with people who are in various buckets of people who are, know, partially remote, fully remote, fully in the office, that kind of a thing, I find that what I think is less relevant every single day. I for sure feel I have a lot of privilege. Scott Dunn (26:33) Mm-hmm. Casey (26:50) being fully remote. Like that's really cool because it's good for me. I'm at a spot in my career where it makes sense. I'm good at building relationships in lots of different kinds of ways, including through, you know, zoom meetings and that type of thing. But I don't think that there's a right answer. I think that the each company and each team and each group of people need to find what works best for them. and make that happen. I see real benefit to being together, especially when you're early in your career or when you're doing something that you need a whiteboard. I mean, I'm pretty good at Mural. I'm pretty good at using the whiteboard in the Zoom meeting, but there's no replacement for standing at a whiteboard with a bunch of stickies and flowing out process. So I just don't... Scott Dunn (27:33) That's so true. You're so right. Casey (27:40) I don't know that there's a right answer. And I think that different size companies have different complexity of making that decision. And it sort of goes back to that comment we were making before. Like, if it isn't a good fit for you, find something that is. You know, I don't know. That's my thought. That's my thought. Scott Dunn (28:00) Yeah, true. Makes sense. For the folks that are managing or leading these remote work, are things that they do to make that go better in their context. Casey (28:12) Absolutely. are ways to, especially if you have hybrid, it even gets more complex, right? All virtual is the easiest way of virtual, right? Because then everybody's always virtual and you're always on Zoom and you're always on Slack and whatever. That's for sure the easiest way to manage teams that are virtual. When you have that hybrid space, you've got that opportunity to be in a conference room or in a huddle group or in the cafeteria. and on Zoom meetings, and it gets kind of funky, right? Because sometimes you can't hear, or you have those water cooler conversations. The key really is to have what I found is a good working agreement, right? Like, what types of communication are we going to have? How are we going to do that? What happens when we had a really great conversation in the break room? How do we communicate that to the rest of the team who wasn't there? And really just sort of build team trust through a good quality executed working agreement. And sometimes that takes a little bit more effort from the leader or even from every individual, right? But that's part of that culture, right? Scott Dunn (29:16) Right. I think the folks you make me think that's personally in a meeting and it's good that I try to get the groups together in these different locations as they're talking. I can't tell. I talking. I don't know these. I don't know them all that well. So I can't I can't tell by voice yet. If these are different groups are working with each other. The thing is, look, that person's kind of off camera or either they're on camera. They're so far back. Is that is their mouth moving? Is there a delay? I can't tell. So that sets the connection. I'm surprised for me as a more of a relator, how much it becomes a problem like nothing beats in person. So at least get that regularly. get in person. There was another client that saying that very same thing. Like they love it when we all get back together. And so they kind of have their cadence of pulling the whole group better. Could be like you're off site, could be all hands could be, but I think those opportunities to keep connection. I do like remote. I do think you have a good point about depending on the maturity of the career. Some people just know like I know I got to take care of these biopsy that they've noticed other XYZ. So they do too. So if they're new in their career, they may not even catch that I should be probably working. what is this at home on the zoom and in their PJs or something like that. I think it's a good point. Look at those and also the work. The fact that you would take that to the team and say, what do you all think is very empowering. You have an open conversation around what they all think and definitely there's a assumptions that people are making about what it should be, et cetera, but they those explicit and they kind of carry that around with them a little. Right. So that's a yeah, really nice nugget on that. That's everyone for sure. So last thing I'm to add a little bit on the back on leading change. So in this case, it could be remote, could be these other projects that we'll try to adapt. I think you'd say this earlier about there's no company that's not going through this crazy time of change right now. When it comes to change, have you seen something that's helpful, especially if it's a more significant change, you gave some good fundamentals around influence and trust and relationship, empathy, et cetera. Are there other aspects on how that change is rolled out or a process change or the groups that are leading the change that you've seen be like more systemically just successful aside that people might change, but the way we handle change is done this way. That you think there's a tip or two out there that would help out. They're trying to kick off, you know, a new way of working. We're trying to refresh remote policies or how they work, Because a lot of people in the middle of change. Have you seen overarching themes about how this lead that you found have been more successful? Casey (31:57) Yeah, think, gosh, it's the hardest thing, right? Like figuring out a way to roll out change across teams is the most challenging thing that I've ever done. And I've been doing it for a long time. And I'm always learning new ways and new ways not to do things and all that jazz, right? I have this little nugget that I got from a mentor. Scott Dunn (32:11) Hahaha, yeah. Casey (32:24) 20 years ago almost, and he's a motorcycle rider. And when you ride a motorcycle, the thing that you do to go on a corner is to turn your head, right? Turn your head to get to where you're going. And the non-motorcycle sort of connection to that is the what's my plan. And so really understanding what the plan is so that you can very clearly articulate what it is you're doing at each phase of the change. If you're prepping people for change, what's the plan? If you're starting to design a project, what's the plan? And just get really clear with where you're going, what the expectations are, what each individual person's role is, and be explicit about it because we're all dealing with a lot of things coming at us all the time. And if you're leading with kindness and you're saying, okay, your part of this is to simply accept the change. That's not condescending, that's empowering. That tells that person that like, this decision has been made, I gotta get myself there, and this person's here to help me get there. And so just being really clear about it, that's the biggest thing for me that I've seen that is successful. It's hard to do though, because that's a lot of people and a lot of Scott Dunn (33:36) Yeah. Well, yes, that's why it makes it so surprising. Number of times a company has to bring in outside help to get the change because it's not a capability or muscle they really have about how to change ourselves. Right. We execute against what we build or do here really well for help. But but that idea of getting outside the box and thinking different how we can improve, like you said, poke holes and so that's why I like it that there's someone When a company sees someone with your skill set and the way that you're wired and leverages it to say like, we kind of informally have this person like really helping things about because it's commonly not a muscle that they really have. Sometimes they have the awareness they don't, but sometimes they don't the long, really large change initiatives that take a long time and either never really get off the ground or never really where they should have gone or before they kind of just either die on the vine or we just call it, you know, just call it good. They don't draw in. It gets a group above everyone trying to lay change on top of folks instead of incorporate everyone into change and then go through it together. Learning together with someone like you that can connect the dots, connect with people, can bring that about. And think in a way it's really powerful and effective. Yeah, I was going to tease you. don't know if you have anything on that. But you mentioned books, you mentioned podcasts. Do have any favorites that you just would throw out? Classic go to book, current read, current podcast. Casey (35:01) My favorite all time book is a book called Wolf Pack by Abby Wambach. She's a soccer player, she's fantastic, and it's a book about leadership. It's like 70 pages long. It has a set of like four rules. And yeah, it's written from a like, you know, girl power, woman empowerment, leadership empowerment kind of thing, but it's universally adaptable to life, to it doesn't matter what your gender might be. what your job might be, Wolfpack. I can't recommend it enough. And then most recently, I read the let them theory and it's life changing. It's not a new topic, right? It's not a new concept. Of course you should control the things that you should stress about the things that you can control and let the things you can't control go, right? There's lots of different places that that comes up, but Mel Robbins just did a great job, like putting it into stories that you could like directly apply it to your life, or at least for me anyway. And I find myself quoting that book to myself pretty regularly. Yeah. Scott Dunn (36:03) That's a good sign. That's a really good sign. I find myself too. That's I literally will go through something. I start to realize like you've mentioned this book or this thing like three times now in the last few weeks. Like, OK, that's obviously significant. You didn't miss a time. you make another really good point. I really say like at the meta level in some ways, when it impacts you personally and you connect to it personally, it's going to be helpful and relevant in the work you do because you're going to be sharing the expression of who you are. And I say that because some people will go like, here's this top leadership book this year. I'm to read this well-known. And sometimes I'll struggle to just like really pick the book. Even if it is good content, I don't connect to it. I'm not sharing with others. It's not part. It doesn't become a home and gets spread. So I love what you're saying. Casey (36:48) completely agree with that. read, I spent a lot of time last year reading a book called Mind Your Mindset. I don't know if you've read that one. But in theory, it's great. But it's so business focused that like I didn't personally relate to it. And so I had to go find some other book that was less business structured to, to like, bolster that topic. All the words were the same. It's just the storyline really, really changes it for me. So telling stories, right, is the most important thing of how we connect. to the world. Scott Dunn (37:20) Yes, yes, yes. And I believe in that. That's how we're just wired. brains are wired. Story really sticks. And you're making me think like, yeah, those books I recommend the most are more not have a lot of stories, even if it's less directly tied to the work I do. Maybe it's not even technology. It's not even maybe it's not even around business, but it's got stories they do and stick and connect. I love that. So I'll check that out. I have not read Will Peck. I think I've seen it, but now that I know it, pages I'm also enticed to on that. I can get through it. Casey (37:52) It's one hour of your time max. Scott Dunn (37:53) us. If I can't do that over breakfast, then what's going on? Awesome. I appreciate that. This has been great. I think there's a lot of nuggets for folks that are listening. I wouldn't be surprised, by the way, that this could get chopped up into part one, part two. I think we like them. But this is great because I think it's a great part one, part two, given how we kind of split the conversations. And I love the personal aspect on that as well. So thank Thank Casey for the time. It's been wonderful. think I really look forward to people's feedback on this and a lot of takeaways, a lot of that can be, they can try out some of these things very next week in terms of how they show up and who they are and what they're about. There's just a whole lot of good pieces of this that I think are readily possible for so many people. So I really, really appreciate that too as well. I'm on automatic sites. love them. The Builder Backs, they can do something right away with that. And you gave them a lot of Thank you for that. Thank you for your time. I know you have a lot on your plate. for us, but you appreciate it. Hope to see you soon. Thanks Casey. Casey (38:54) Yeah, thanks for having me. Thank you. Scott Dunn (38:57) Woo!

What does it look like to lead a 300-person software org inside a 1,000-person company—and still stay focused on people first? Brendan Wovchko shares what he's learned about leadership, agility, and building a culture that actually works. Overview Brendan Wovchko, CTO at Ramsey Solutions, joins Scott Dunn to talk about what it really takes to lead Agile teams inside a large, fast-moving organization. From developing leadership habits to navigating team dynamics and staying grounded in purpose, this conversation is full of thoughtful takeaways for anyone working at the intersection of people, process, and product. References and resources mentioned in the show: Brendan Wovchko Ramsey Solutions #80: From Struggling to Success: Reviving Agile Teams with Mike Cohn #143: What Still Makes Teams Work (and Win) with Jim York What Is a High-Performing Agile Team? by Mike Cohn Four Quick Ways to Gain or Assess Team Consensus by Mike Cohn Elements of Agile Assessment 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: Scott Dunn is a Certified Enterprise Coach and Scrum Trainer with over 20 years of experience coaching and training companies like NASA, EMC/Dell Technologies, Yahoo!, Technicolor, and eBay to transition to an agile approach using Scrum. Brendan Wovchko is the CTO of Ramsey Solutions and a lifelong student of what it takes to build great software, lead great people, and scale both with purpose. With roots in engineering and startups, he brings decades of hands-on experience in product, leadership, and agile culture—plus a knack for turning big ideas into results that matter.

How do you grow a remote-first team from 30 to over 100 while still being voted a "great place to work"? Ginger Boyll says it’s part Agile mindset, part trust, and part Dungeons & Dragons—and we’re not arguing. Overview In this episode of the Agile Mentors Podcast, guest host Scott Dunn sits down with Ginger Boyll, Director of Client Experience at Stable Kernel, for a refreshingly candid conversation about leadership, collaboration, and creating cultures where people thrive, even remotely. From the magic of psychological safety to timesheet woes, CliftonStrengths charts, and the underrated art of letting someone else just do the thing, this episode is a masterclass in how empathy and agility show up far beyond process. References and resources mentioned in the show: Ginger Boyll Stable Kernel The Fearless Organization by Amy Edmonson Range by David Epstein Built to Last by Jim Collins Unreasonable Hospitality by Will Guidara The Tipping Point by Malcolm Gladwell The Coaching Habit by Michael Bungay Stanier Paul Graham’s Maker’s Schedule, Manager’s Schedule 25 Questions That Will Help You Know Your Teammates Better 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: Scott Dunn is a Certified Enterprise Coach and Scrum Trainer with over 20 years of experience coaching and training companies like NASA, EMC/Dell Technologies, Yahoo!, Technicolor, and eBay to transition to an agile approach using Scrum. Ginger Boyll is the Director of Client Experience at Stable Kernel. She is a natural problem-solver with a passion for people, bringing deep experience in Agile delivery, tech strategy, and cross-functional collaboration to every project she touches.

Real Agile forecasting runs on math, not magic. Brian and Lance dive into Monte Carlo methods, DORA metrics, and how AI is shifting the future of project management. All with a human-first approach that builds better teams, not bigger spreadsheets. Overview In this episode of the Agile Mentors Podcast, Brian Milner and Lance Dacy unpack why Agile teams need to rethink how they forecast work—and why math, not magic, is the real secret. From the roots of Taylorism to today's Monte Carlo simulations, they explore how to navigate uncertainty with data-driven tools like DORA metrics, flow metrics, and probability theory, while keeping the heart of Agile leadership focused on trust, transparency, and better decision-making. References and resources mentioned in the show: Lance Dacy Free Chapters of Agile Estimating and Planning by Mike Cohn Join the Agile Mentors Community Mountain Goat Software Certified Scrum and Agile Training Schedule Subscribe to the Agile Mentors Podcast Want to get involved? This show is designed for you, and we’d love your input. Enjoyed what you heard today? Please leave a rating and a review. It really helps, and we read every single one. Got an Agile subject you’d like us to discuss or a question that needs an answer? Share your thoughts with us at 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. Lance Dacy is a Certified Scrum Trainer®, Certified Scrum Professional®, Certified ScrumMaster®, and Certified Scrum Product Owner®. Lance brings a great personality and servant's heart to his workshops. He loves seeing people walk away with tangible and practical things they can do with their teams straight away.

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.

Tired of “What went well?” and “What didn’t”? Brian Milner is here to help you cook up retrospectives that actually get your team thinking, collaborating, and improving. From creative themes to actionable frameworks, this is your behind-the-scenes guide to better retros. Overview Do your retrospectives feel more “check-the-box” than game-changing? Brian Milner shares his full recipe for planning and facilitating retrospectives that actually matter. Whether your team is stuck in repetition, tuning out, or phoning it in, Brian’s step-by-step approach will show you how to bring structure, creativity, and energy back into the room. Brian walks you through the five essential components of a retrospective, including how to match formats to your team’s personality, align activities with Agile's three pillars (transparency, inspection, and adaptation), and spark meaningful change with every session. References and resources mentioned in the show: Stranger Things Retrospective Download Agile Retrospectives by Esther Derby & Diana Larsen Retromat Blog: Overcoming Four Common Problems with Retrospectives by Mike Cohn Blog: Does a Scrum Team Need a Retrospective Every Sprint? By Mike Cohn #139 The Retrospective Reset with Cort Sharp Retrospectives Repair Guide Better Retrospectives Subscribe to the Agile Mentors Podcast Want to get involved? This show is designed for you, and we’d love your input. Enjoyed what you heard today? Please leave a rating and a review. It really helps, and we read every single one. Got an Agile subject you’d like us to discuss or a question that needs an answer? Share your thoughts with us at 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. Auto-generated Transcript: Brian Milner (00:00) Welcome in Agile Mentors. We are back for another episode of the Agile Mentors podcast, like we always do. And I'm with you as always, Brian Milner. Today we have with us, me, just me. Now, before you get frustrated with that or think we're copping out in some way, this is intentional. I wanted to have an episode to myself because and working through all this stuff around retrospectives, I thought that it might be good to take an episode here. And I kind of thought of it sort of like a cooking episode, right? Like if you watch a cooking show, you know, Gordon Ramsay show or something, they'll walk you through how they make something. And it's from start to finish. They show you the ingredients. They show you how everything's put together. And then you see this beautiful dish at the end. Well, I've often compared the way that you can format a retrospective to a little bit like a meal, because a meal has different courses in it. And a retrospective should have these themed areas or repeatable sections of it. And so I thought of it a little bit like making a meal. So I thought I'd just walk you through a little bit step by step. what I'm thinking here and how I would go about doing it. this is, you know, we're cooking up something special here. It's a kind of a recipe here that's, you know, equal parts creative and effective. It's a way to try to keep your retrospectives interesting, but also keep them to be solid and where you can have an actual outcome that comes from this. And you actually make definitive changes here with your team as a result. So there's a couple of retrospective courses that I have coming out where I go into detail about all these things, but I wanted to take an episode where I could walk you through and just have you kind of peer over my shoulder a little bit about how I might do this if I was going to create a retrospective for a team. So first starters, I think we have to understand that there is a menu to follow, right? And I kind of use this menu metaphor because one of the great things about when you go out and you have a meal at a nice restaurant is there's a repeatable pattern to it. You kind of expect that they're gonna bring you a drink first and then maybe you have, if it's a really fancy restaurant, maybe you have appetizers first or hors d'oeuvres even before appetizers, then you maybe have appetizers or not. Then you have a main course and maybe you have a salad even before the main course and then you have a a meal, and then you have some kind of a dessert afterwards, maybe even some kind of a cocktail at the end of the meal or coffee at the end of the meal. But there's sort of a pattern to it. And regardless of what restaurant you go to, you kind of repeat that same pattern. Now, I know that there's times you'll be, this is where the metaphor kind of breaks down a little bit, I get it. You may not have the same pieces every time. And what we're going to be talking about here as a retrospective pattern is that, yes, you should sort of follow the same pattern. You can't really get to, let's say, dessert. You can't just skip and go to dessert, right? You've got to go through this journey of the other sections so that you can end up at dessert and really fully appreciate it, right, and get the most out of it. So that's where this metaphor is a little bit of a, starts to break down a little tiny bit. But. I want to talk about here first why retrospectives matter and why they often go stale. I think they often go stale for a lot of reasons, but one of the chief reasons I've encountered when I work with teams is that the Scrum Master on the team really only has a small amount of formats and styles that they have to work with. They have a small little set in their toolbox. And they may even rotate through a few of them. But at the end of the day, it's kind of a small toolbox. There's only a few tools in there. And if I'm a team, if I'm a member of that team, you can imagine how I might get bored. And I might think this is not really worthwhile if I'm showing up every single time and I'm hearing the same exact questions. What did I do? What do we do well? What do we not do so well? Do I have any roadblocks? If I'm just asked that same thing every time, then I might not feel like this is a very worthwhile thing. Or I might get to the point where I feel like, gosh, I've answered the same question, you know, three sprints in a row. I just, got nothing more for you Scrum Master. I just, I can't dig any deeper. I've given you everything and it just feels like this is the, you know, groundhog day. We're doing the same thing over and over again, but nothing's really changing. So. I think it's important that we be able to switch things up, but it's not change just for change sake. That's why I think that having a structure of some kind can give you that pattern to fall back on that can make it effective, but then also can provide variety, can make it something that changes over time as you do this with your team. Doesn't mean that you can't ever repeat a format that you've used. I don't think that's a bad thing. I just wouldn't want to repeat the same, just handful, small little number of them over and over again. That's going to get repetitive and it's going to make people a little frustrated. The other thing is I think you have to match these to the personality of your team. Your team might be more outgoing or they might be more introverted. You might have people who prefer activities or little more, you know, kind of quiet activities or some that are more verbal, you know, require more discussion. That's really an individual thing for your team. So I think you have to think as you go through this, what's going to work for these people, right? For this set of individuals that I am working with. You know, I always say there's kind of a first commandment for Scrum Masters, know thy team. And I think that's really something that's important for us to grasp onto is we have to know our team. can't coach to the average. Right? We have to coach to the individual, to what we have on our team, because your team is unique. That set of individuals has never come together anywhere else in the world. Right? Those personalities. And what you want is to find out how to make that set of people work well together. Right? How do they work best together? Not how does every other team in the world work best or how does the average team work best? How does your team work best? Right? So with all of this is sort of setting this and saying that there should be a pattern. I do want to give the hat tip here and say that the Esther Derby Dinah Larson book on retrospectives is one I strongly recommend. In fact, pretty much my whole career as a trainer, I have said, when people say if there's one book, if I'm to be a Scrum Master, if there's one book that you would say would be really impactful to me from pretty much day one, I have pointed to that book. It's called Agile Retrospectives, Esther Derby, Dinah Larson. And in that book, they lay out a pattern of kind of five phases that go through it. I'm going to distill it down because to me, it's sort of the three middle ones that are the most important. I will talk about the two on the ends here as well and kind of put that on top of these three. But sometimes I find people find it easier if they just remember what I'm gonna teach you here about the three that are in the middle. So in Scrum Master classes, we will talk often about how there's these three pillars of the Agile process or three pillars of empiricism. Empiricism says that we learn through experience. Well, I always say in class, it's not enough to just do the wrong thing over and over again. I gain a lot of experience by doing the wrong thing over and over, but I don't learn from it. And the three pillars are what's needed to make sure you learn from them. And I'm sure you've heard these before, but if you haven't, transparency, inspection, adaptation. Those are the three. Transparency meaning we're not going to be clouded about how we do the work. We're going to be very transparent, open about it. We're going to try to reveal how we work best as much as possible. Inspection, that we're going to actually take time and pause and try to figure out not just what happened, that would be transparency, right? What's the reality of what just happened? But inspecting says, why did this happen? Right? What's the root cause of it? I don't want to just deal with the symptoms, right? If we just try to cure the symptoms over and over again, we still have the same disease, we still have the same illness, and we're not really getting to the root cause. So inspection says, we're going to take time out to actually get to the root cause. And then adaptation, the last one, is probably the most important step here, because if you figure out what's wrong, but you don't ever do anything about it, well, we're doomed to have the same exact discussion again. So adaptation says, now that you know what the problem is, what are you going to try different? We may not even know exactly what the right thing to do is, but we got to try something. What we know for certain is what we did didn't work. That's the one thing we absolutely can't do again, is exactly what we did. We've got to try something new so that we move on, right? So that we find out more information and get closer to whatever our final solution is. So transparency, inspection, adaptation, those three actually serve as a good guideline or three phases you can think about for your retrospectives. There needs to be a transparency phase where you try to figure out what happened this last sprint. there needs to be an inspection phase where now that we know what happened, we got to ask the question, why did it happen? And we need to get to the root cause of why it happened. Now that we know what that is, then we have to move on to adaptation to say, what are we going to do about it? How are we going to take this knowledge we just gained and actually make a change? So we need activities around all three. And what I'm saying here to you is that can serve as your menu. I can do lots of different activities that would match these three areas. Now, I do, again, want to go back to the Esther Derby, Dinah Larson book, because their five phases adds one on the beginning, one on the end, which I actually do think are very helpful. The first one is kind of opening the retrospective. It's a way of trying to just start to get voices in the room. And this is something I will often do as well. Just a quick, quick exercise to just get people to start talking. And that's one of the ways you can start to get a quieter group to get involved is throw them something really easy to respond to right out of the gate. And then the last one is to close the retrospective. Closing the retrospective is a great way to then try to sum it all up and say, well, here's the takeaways, here's the things we're going to do about it, and we're going to move forward from here. Opening the retrospective to that introduction can also then review what you talked about at the end of the last. retrospective. You can say, here are the things that we decided, and let's talk about what's been done about them before you start to inspect the current retrospective. So given that, right, I know I'm going fast here, but you can rewind and listen back to this if you need to. But if you think about that, that you have these kind of phased approaches, and think of it like a menu, right? There's different courses to my menu. Well, I'm not going to serve the same meal every time. That would be boring. So I got to find out different things I can serve for each course of my retrospective. Now, here's where it gets interesting, right? Because there are lots of tools out there. And there's a website that I often recommend called RetroMAT. RetroMAT is a great site where you can go to, and it has those five phases. You can kind of scroll through different exercises for each of the five phases. they sort of have, you you can kind of mix and match and create your own menu based off of that. And doing that is absolutely free. Now they have paid things there as well. They're not a sponsor. I don't get any kickbacks or anything from them. But they have some paid activities as well as far as having things like Mural and Miro templates that you can use if you want to do that as well. So there's lots of things you can do there to thank them for what they put together. But there are times when Maybe you're trying to fit this to your team specifically, or you've grown tired of the exercises that you're used to, and you want to find some new dynamic to add into your retrospective. So what I'm going to do is kind of walk you through what I would do if I wanted to take some kind of a theme and create a new retrospective that's themed around a certain topic. Now I will say that this theme is gonna go just in one of our sections. So it's not going to go throughout it. I'm not gonna be that creative here with you on it, because I don't think you need to be. I don't think you need to have this, it's not like a theme to party, right? You can just take the theme and use it in one of the sections. So what would I do for something like this? Well, I'd start with, as I said, some way to kind of open the retrospective. And I like to have little quick activities as I said, that just get voices in the room. an example of things I've done in the past. Ask the team a quick question like, if this last sprint were a song title, what song title would you use to describe this last sprint? And people can use whatever kind of music they like, right? It doesn't matter. They can just call it any songs that they're familiar with. Or do movie titles. I've had a lot of fun in the past doing that with teams where I'll say, hey, shout out a movie title that might represent this last sprint. You just want to find something quick that people can shout out like one or two word answers, right? Or a small sentence in the case of a song title or movie title or something like that. But something that they can tie it into, right? And it doesn't have to be anything that makes perfect sense, right? It can be kind of crazy. It can be... You know, if this last sprint were a flavor of Starburst or, you know, an color, what color would it be and why? And just have people, you know, shout out whatever they think the answer would be. They might have to be a little creative with their answers when they do that. But that's okay. You're just giving them an opportunity to have a few voices start to enter the conversation. Don't force anyone, right? Don't force anyone to shout out, but give them an opportunity to. So I'm going to open the retrospective with some kind of fun, quick exercise like that. Probably won't take more than five minutes, okay? Then I want to move into that transparency section. And the way I frame transparency is what actually happened this last sprint? What was the reality of what happened this last sprint? So here's where I'm going to inject a themed kind of approach. And I just, I go through a couple of examples in our courses where I talk about doing this, but I picked a different one here for this podcast episode that I've put together right before this recording to try to walk you through a little bit of how I did this. So I tried to pick something that was a little more relevant to today. I know that this is popular and people are looking forward to the next season, which is about to come out. sometime soon, I know they've been shooting it, but I picked the theme, Stranger Things. And I just thought, what if my team, you know, had, I knew there were some people on my team really into Stranger Things, or what if I just knew they were aware of it, they knew what it was, and I wanted to have a theme built around this. So here's how easy it is to do this. I went to chat GPT, and I asked it to give me some, you know, putting together a retrospective that I want to theme it around stranger things. And give me some major themes from Stranger Things that might align to Some different ways of collecting information around what actually happened this last sprint. And. They gave me a long list of different things. And I read through these and kind of tweaked them, talked back and forth with it a little bit, kind of refined. And I distilled it down to five sort of themes or categories I thought would be fun and would kind of challenge the group to think along different lines of thought. So here's what I came up with with Chat GPT's help. My first category. I called running up that hill. And what I put for the prompt for this one is what felt like an uphill battle this sprint? Now just think about that, right? In traditional sprints, there's lots of things that are just, I'm essentially asking what was the obstacles? What were the hurdles in this sprint? But I'm getting them to think about it in little different way by saying, what was an uphill battle in this sprint? And even that subtle rewording, of that prompt can trigger people's brains to work in a different way and get them to think along different lines. If I just ask over and over again, you know, what was a blocker of this sprint or what blockers do we encounter this sprint? If I use those same words over and over, I get sort of immunized against them and I can't really think about anything new. But just phrasing it that little slightly different way, what felt like an uphill battle this sprint I think can really trigger some new ways of thinking. So that was my first category. The second one that I came up with, big theme here in Stranger Things, was the upside down. And I related it this way to say, what is completely upside down right now? What is the opposite of what it should be right now? Now here, I'm trying to get them to think about things that are not really going well, right? Things that are going the opposite direction that they should, and it's upside down from what should be the normal. Right? And again, we're just thinking along this theme of stranger things and I'm tricking their brains a little bit into thinking along a different line, right? To examine it from a different point of view. My third category that I thought would be fun was I titled Vecna's Curse. And what I prompted here for this one was what haunted the team this sprint or kept coming back up to bite us. And The idea here is to get them to think about things that were maybe decisions we wish we had made differently. These could have been decisions in the past. It didn't have to be a decision from this sprint. But what are those things that we felt kind of like was like Vecna's curse? It was just something that kept rearing its ugly head. And it was just a struggle for us to get around. My fourth one, just to have a little fun. I call the fourth one Surfer Boy Pizza. And what I put as a prompt on this one was, where did we bring the chill? Where did we bring the creative spin to a tough solution during the sprint? So here I'm wanting to celebrate good things, right? And I'm asking that in a funny way. So it brings some humor to it, puts them in a better mood, and also gets them to think along a maybe a little bit of a different line in this area to think, all right, well, what do we get really creative about? What do we have to be really creative about in this sprint? What kind of tough solutions did we really conquer? Did we really nail in this sprint? And I'm just theming around that loose theme of that surfer boy pizza from the last season. And then the last one, I couldn't have categories here without mentioning Hellfire Club. So the last one was Hellfire Club. And the prompt I put for it was, where could we bring more of kind of that Hellfire Club vibe, planning, teamwork, shared adventure, right? Just the fun. Where could we put more of that vibe into our team and to how we operate? Now, this is getting them to think about something that might otherwise be a little bit of a uncomfortable thing to think about, right? Because Now we're getting into interpersonal dynamics. We're getting into how the team actually works and fits together. And that's why I chose this theme, because I wanted it to be just kind of a, even maybe a sneaky back doorway of getting their brains to start to examine, yeah, what would have made this more fun? Or what would have made this, how could we have, I've asked often in retrospectives, what would it take for us to be the team that everyone else wishes they were on? Well, That's what I'm asking here, essentially. So I've got my five themes. And I even then went forward and created and kind of get some images for each one of those, like icons for each one of those things. Just created a board and mural for this and put each of those things up. Had a big block space next to each one where people could put Post-it notes. So what I would do here in the retrospective is I'd introduce this. I'd give them the prompts for each of the section and say, all right, let's take a few minutes. Everyone can add Post-its to any of these sections, but try to think through several of them and put several of them up here on the screen or physical board if we're in the same space. But take a few moments here to think through each category and see if there's anything that you can think of that you would add to each area. So we take, I don't know, five, 10 minutes to do that. normally time that, I just see when it starts to slow down. And there's generally a point there where you can kind of intuitively feel it and feel like, you know, the group's ready to move on. So whenever that time comes, I'll call a halt to it and I'll say, all right, now that we've done this, I want us to try to narrow down what's on the board. So let's give you each three votes. And I do this usually with dot voting or something along that line. where they have three dots they can place on three different sticky notes across all five categories. And what I tell them is find the three that are the most important of all the things here, what are the three that are most important and put your vote on those top three. And by doing this, having the team vote on it, then we surface the most important three out of the entire group, right? It's not to say we ignore the others, but we're going to try, we can't focus on everything in our time that we have. So, whether our top three, and then I start with the first one, right? So right now, all we've done is kind of the introduction of the sprint. We've done a transparency section. Now we move into the inspection. Now there's lots of different things you can do here, but what I put together for this retrospective was taking them through sort of a five whys activity. So I would take that first one, I'd have them examine it and look at it and say, all right, let's ask the question why five times for this one. Why did this happen? whatever they answer, then we say, all right, well, why did that happen then? And we ask why, it doesn't have to technically be five times, but you need to ask it enough to where you get down to something that you can say, yeah, that's definitely the root cause, right? That's what's underneath all this. All that followed it, all that came afterwards was all stuff that came as a result of us making that decision. So once we have our root cause, we can repeat that again for the other two. if we have time, but if we're starting to run out of time, I kind of watch my time box there. And once I realize we need to move into solutioning, then we'll move on into the adaptation portion. In adaptation, we just take each single one, and we kind of repeat this process of getting possible answers across the team. So for the number one issue that you guys identified, here's our root cause. Let's take some post-its here. or let's take some suggestions of what we might possibly do to counteract this in the next sprint. So we get those things that come up. Then we'll talk through each one, and we'll try to build consensus as a team as to the most important step to take. So for each item, I want what's the one most important thing to do. So we'll identify that, again, as time allows, I want to at least do the most important thing. If we have time for more than that, great, we'll get to the second and third. But I think it's so important to just, whatever the biggest, most important thing is, make sure you have an action item for that thing. And here's where I just caution you. It doesn't have to be, hey, we've knocked it out. We've cleared it. We've solved it in the next sprint. It just has to be that we've taken a step towards solving it, right? What's the old phrase, a journey of a thousand miles starts with a single step. Well, the same thing goes for our teams. And this is oftentimes why teams get stuck, is they just feel paralyzed. Hey, there's nothing we can do about this. It's such a huge issue. Well, that's not true. What's the next step you can take? So take the next step. Make sure that the team understands what it is. And make sure we understand who is going to be responsible for that. And do that for as many as you can get through. Then get to the closing the retrospective part of it. Kind of wrap up. Remind them, here's the journey we've taken, here's what we've uncovered, and here's what we're gonna do differently for next time. And now those items, they should go straight into your next sprint backlog, not product backlog, sprint backlog, right? They don't need to be prioritized because the product owner has been with you, they should have been with you in this meeting, it's the entire Scrum team. So the product owner has weighed in as well. This has been a team collective decision. So now those items should go into your sprint backlog, and you should do something about them in this next sprint. That's the whole concept of the Kaizen comes first, right? The good change should happen before we do anything else so we can get the benefit of it over a longer period of time. So that's kind of the idea here. And I wanted to give you that kind of really quick flyby to help you kind of see how to go about doing something like this, right? And I just picked one theme. I just picked Stranger Things because I thought it would be fun to work on. I thought it would be a fun kind of theme. And it might be fun for a team I was working with. But maybe that's not something that aligns to your team. Maybe your team has a bunch of people who are really into cricket. Well, do a cricket-themed one. Maybe you have a team that's around the Academy Awards time. And everyone's talking about, and now people don't do this as much anymore, but. Maybe they're all talking about who's going to Oscars this year or something. Well, do an Oscar-themed one. Or it can be around anything. Do it around award shows in general. It doesn't have to be just Oscars, but do it around any kind of award show. And you can pick up different themes. Again, if you're stuck, ask your favorite large language model and see what it comes up with. It's not all going to be gems that comes from that, but you can pick and choose and refine it, which is exactly what I did with my five themes for this. So I hope you see how easy it is to do that. It doesn't have to be complicated. You don't have to be extremely creative to do this. You can make use of the tools that you have available to you. And as a Scrum Master, you can keep this fresh. You can tailor this to the team that you have. What is your team really into? What's the theme that they would really resonate with? Choose that. Go with that. Create a theme around that and see what they think about it. Afterwards, ask them, hey, did this work all right? Did you like this? I hope that's been useful to you. If you like this and you want to hear more like this, come to our website to mountngoatsoftware.com and check out our courses that we're launching actually this week, Better Retrospectives and the Retrospective Repair Guide. Those are the two that we really want to have you kind of think about. Come to our site, find out more about them. Better Retrospectives is all about just the expert level retrospectives course really gets into the heart of a lot of these issues at a very, very deep level. The retrospectives repair guide is taking the 10 most asked questions that we have about retrospectives at Mountain Goat Software and giving you really deep dives on how to solution those, how to problem solve those top 10 issues. And the great news for you is if you're listening to this in real time, right, when we've launched this, We're launching this as a two-for-one special. We'll not have that special again. So it's $99 that you get both of those courses. You don't have to pick and choose from them. You can give $99. They're prerecorded. You can watch them at your own pace. This is for people who want this knowledge, who want these answers. And I know when I was a Scrum Master starting out, there was a lot of, I followed a kind of the pattern that Mike established with his sprint repair guide. I bought that when I was coming up as a scrum master because I needed answers to some of the questions that he had in that scrum repair guide. Well, take a look at the 10 that we have for our retrospective repair guide. Maybe you'll find one of those things that's really tripping you up and maybe just getting the answer to one of those is going to be worth the money for you. I encourage you to go to our site, check it out. Don't miss this. It's a limited time cart that's opened. It's only going to be open for a week. So if you're listening to this when we launch it, don't delay, don't wait until next week. If you hear this next week, then you're running out of time. So make sure that you take advantage of the time that you have here so that you can get these two courses, two for the price of one here at our launch. Again, we won't do that again. So I hope you found this to be useful. It's just a little taste of the kind of thing that's in those courses for you. And if retrospectives are something that you're struggling with, or if retrospectives are something that you just feel like, man, it really could be more. It really could deliver more for my team. Check out these two courses. I really think they're gonna help a lot of teams out there. That's why we put them together. So that'll wrap it up. I hope you've enjoyed this and we'll talk to you next time. on another episode of the Agile Mentors Podcast.

What do Spotify, Google Meet, and your expense report tool have in common? They could all delight your users—if you design for more than just function. In this episode, Dr. Nesrine Changuel breaks down the emotional motivators that transform average products into unforgettable ones. Overview What separates a good product from a great one? According to Dr. Nesrine Changuel, it's not just meeting functional needs—it's creating emotional delight. In this episode of the Agile Mentors Podcast, Brian Milner sits down with Nesrine, a former product leader at Google, Spotify, and Microsoft, to explore how emotional connection is the secret sauce behind the world’s most beloved products. They dive into Nesrine’s “Delight Framework,” reveal how seemingly mundane tools (like time-tracking software or toothbrush apps!) can create joy, and explain why delight isn’t a nice-to-have—it’s a competitive edge. Whether you're a product owner, product manager, or just want to build better user experiences, this episode will change how you think about your backlog forever. References and resources mentioned in the show: Dr. Nesrine Changuel Product Delight by Dr. Nesrine Changuel Blog: What is a Product? by Mike Cohn #116: Turning Weird User Actions into Big Wins with Gojko Adzic #124: How to Avoid Common Product Team Pitfalls with David Pereira Join the Agile Mentors Community Subscribe to the Agile Mentors Podcast Want to get involved? This show is designed for you, and we’d love your input. Enjoyed what you heard today? Please leave a rating and a review. It really helps, and we read every single one. Got an Agile subject you’d like us to discuss or a question that needs an answer? Share your thoughts with us at 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.