Oftentimes, when organizations bring on Agile Coaches, they want to be (or expect to be) taken on a linear path with Agility (AKA point A to point B). However, there is a lot that happens along an Agile transformation journey that interrupts this path of “point A to point B.”
Today’s guest, Quincy — a Director in AgileThought’s Innovate Line of Service — refers to these as “excursions.” In an Agile transformation journey, it is crucial to explore these excursions and understand all of the pieces that you should put into place to ensure their success.
In this conversation, Quincy explains what excursions are, why they are important; the different types of excursions that can occur during an agile journey; the key areas of sustainability, consistency, competency, and maintenance in an excursion; and the important pieces that leadership support and communication play in an excursion’s success.
- What are “excursions?”
- Excursions are detours that happen along an agile transformation journey
- These excursions often involve many different facets
- An excursion could be taking a business outcome (such as “better speed to market”) and getting more specific and nuanced on it
- An excursion is still part of the transformation journey (so you can’t isolate it from the work that the teams are doing)
- Several excursions can occur at the same time
- What are some of the types of excursions that can occur during an agile journey?
- Clarity of desired business outcomes
- Better speed to market
- Introducing a new product
- Introducing a product that you already have into a new market
- Quincy’s advice about excursions:
- Sometimes you may have to bring on a new expert during an excursion that specializes in that specific area and bring them into the journey (in cases like these, it is important to acknowledge your and your team’s knowledge barriers)
- Really consider who should be a part of each particular excursion
- There are many aspects to the Agile transformation and many different types of excursions — it is important to not box things in and know that it is a multifaceted journey
- Advice around the agile approach to excursions:
- Sometimes Scrum might not always be the best fit for your organizations so it is important to have an excursion that serves as an evaluation to figure out which agile approach is best for the team/s (and which approach is best where — because there may be more than one approach [alternatively, agility might not even be the right approach at all])
- Excursions should also be taken to discover which methodologies and frameworks should be used
- Some organizations, when they’re new in their transformation journey, tend to make assumptions rather than take excursions (but it’s crucial as an organization to take excursions because no two companies are alike and one company’s approach may not work for yours)
- Experimentation in and of itself can become an excursion
- Areas of sustainability, consistency, competency, and maintenance in an excursion:
- In aiming towards sustainability, it is important to ask whether or not you have put the pieces of the puzzle in place so that the system can run on its own
- You can’t reach sustainability without consistency
- It’s important to have a consistent definition of “done” (if every team has a different definition, it will be hard to consistently deliver quality)
- Leverage the strengths that are already within the teams and company
- Though the maintenance is part of the journey, it’s more so post-journey and is becoming more and more critical for companies to do
- Maintenance is really critical — Ask yourself: How do you maintain what has now been transformed? How do you maintain the culture that you’ve now built, the consistency that you have put in place, and keep a freshness to the cadences of the workflow?
- If you don’t have a maintenance piece in place, many of your efforts will be derailed
- Your excursions need to have sustainability, consistency, and an understanding of what maintenance is going to look like from the get-go
- The important pieces of leadership support and communication in an excursion:
- Consistency and sustainability need to be supported by leadership
- Leadership has to let everyone know periodically that everything is okay or “Everything will be okay, but these are the things we’re dealing with right now” (Communication is key)
- Active leadership is key in a transformation journey
- As a leader, you can’t negate sharing the bigger picture so that the teams can consistently correlate what they’re doing on a daily basis to the bigger business outcomes
- Quantity does not always equal value (as a leader it is important for you to consistently support your team/s on a regular cadence in an active way)
Mentioned in this Episode:
- Quincy Jordan
- McKinsey’s Three Horizons Model
- The Cynefin Framework
- Agile Coaches’ Corner Ep: “Spotify, Schmotify: Do Your Own Agile Thinking”
- Agile Coaches’ Corner Ep: “Exploring an Experimental Mindset with Adam Ulery”
- The Reengineering Alternative, by William Schneider
Transcript [this transcript is auto-generated and may not be completely accurate in its depiction of the English language or rules of grammar.]
Intro: [00:03] Welcome to the Agile Coaches’ Corner by AgileThought. The podcast for practitioners and leaders seeking advice to refine the way they work and pave the path to better outcomes. Now here’s your host, coach, and agile expert, Dan Neumann.
Dan Neumann: [00:17] Welcome to this episode of the Agile Coaches’ Corner podcast. I’m your host Dan Neumann and today I’m excited to be joined by Quincy Jordan, director in our innovate line of service. Uh, Quincy, you’re a frequent guest. Thanks for joining again.
Quincy Jordan: [00:31] Hey Dan, thanks for having me again, always happy to be on the Agile Coaches’ Corner and always happy to have good discussion, robust discussion with you.
Dan Neumann: [00:39] Well, we’ll, hopefully today’s is robust as advertised. Uh, a lot of times we talk about agile, not as a transformation from one thing, static to another static thing, you know, point A to point B, but we describe it as an agile journey. So, you know, something less, you know, point to point. And you have, um, been talking about excursions along that journey then, and I was hoping to do a deep dive with you today on that topic. So maybe you could introduce that.
Quincy Jordan: [01:19] Sure. So, yeah, as you mentioned, you know, oftentimes people are looking at, you know, Hey, can you come in and in so many words, they really want someone to come in and take them on a linear path. Uh, and take me from point A to point B as you described. Uh, and you know, I mean to some degree there is a point A to point B to some degree. Um, however, there’s a whole lot that happens in between A and B, uh, and that whole lot that happens are, um, along that transformation journey, um, I refer to as excursions, um, along that journey, you know, uh, and those excursions along the journey are, uh, you know, very different facets. They, some things are cyclical, some things look linear, uh, things take, take a certain path. And so on those scourgings, there, there are many excursions within that journey, uh, and definitely happy to talk about, you know, some of those, you know, one of those being, uh, clarity of desired business outcomes, right? So on the surface that typically, you know, might seem like a really easy thing. Okay, well, what are the business outcomes that you want? Sure. But there are market considerations, there are financial considerations there, um, timing, considerations, and so on that transformation journey, you know, someone has to go down that path to, you know, discover those things.
Dan Neumann: [03:06] So Quincy, when you’re talking about business outcomes and then clarity, what comes to mind for me is sometimes our clients say, Hey, we want to, you know, maybe have better speed to market. We want to have a better quality in our products. Um, we need to do something innovative in a certain area. Like, could you then talk about, is what you’re describing, taking a business outcome, like better speed to market, and then getting more specific on that, more nuanced on that through one of these excursions that you’re describing?
Quincy Jordan: [03:38] So yes, it, it could be, uh, it could easily be, you know, better speed to market. It could be, uh, you know, introducing a new product. You know, we, we sometimes talk about the three horizons and so it could be not only speed to market, but it could be horizon to where we’re trying to introduce, uh, a product that we already have into a new market. Um, so that could be the business outcome that we’re looking for. Well, in order to do that, well, that’s not something that’s only about, uh, teams delivering faster and teams meeting for, you know, Scrum events or, um, or, you know, maintaining their, come on board. Like it’s, it’s more than that. It’s bigger than that. And, uh, however, it is still part of that transformation journey though. So you can’t isolate it from the work that the teams are doing, but you also can’t take all the work that the teams are doing and say, well, that’s the totality of the business outcome, you know, that of how we’re going to go towards that business outcome. So there, there are many parts to that. And so when you start saying, well, there are many parts to that in part of the reason that that I think of it in, and call it excursions is because, you know, if you’re on a journey and you’re literally going on various excursions, well, you know, at one point in that excursion, you may have like a primary guide, but they may, they may not be an expert in hang-gliding, but this part of the excursion involves hang-gliding just, as you asked about speed to market. So in that aspect, you may have to reach out to other experts along that journey and pull them into that transformation, uh, journey on that particular part of the excursion.
Dan Neumann: [05:37] Yep. And I think I’ve experienced that in, in myself and trying to be aware of where, where my knowledge boundaries are. So we might be talking about an agile framework or scrum, and it becomes apparent that the team’s current challenges is maybe in doing builds and deploys and executing tests reliably and quickly getting something from checked in code to working in an environment upstream. That’s not Dan Neumann, who’s going to help you with that. But, you know, one of my colleagues here at AgileThought, you know, maybe, maybe it’s, it’s Eric Landes, who’s been a guest on this podcast talking about DevOps, that topics. It might be an opportunity then to say, Hey, it’s not me. It’s that person. And your Scrum experience will be so much better if we can rely on this expertise or bring this facet of extreme programming in or whatever that concept might be. Absolutely. Does that align?
Quincy Jordan: [06:36] It does. It does. And so looking at those, you know, those particular business outcomes and clarifying those things and figuring out who should be part of, uh, that part of the journey, who should be part of that excursion, uh, and, you know, there can be several of those to happen at one time, you know, which is why transformations are so multifaceted, and they’re not, uh, you know, this cookie cutter thing that, you know, unfortunately some organizations have wanted it to be and have also unfortunately found out that they are not, um, that there are not those cookie cutter things. And there are many things that you have to consider, um, from strategy all the way down to tactical, uh, story writing and story pointing.
Dan Neumann: [07:25] Very cool. That makes sense. You know, I think it was just spring break time here a little while ago. And, you know, at one point my wife goes to the beach and I went for a run and we met back for dinner. Like we kind of, and you see that with, with teams too, Hey, you go deal with the DevOps thing. The product owners are going to go deal with vision, et cetera. And we’ll meet back here if metaphorically and, and continue on.
Quincy Jordan: [07:48] Yeah. And the only difference I would say in this case is just that, so yes, that is absolutely true at the team level. Um, but when we start looking at the full transformation, uh, for an agile, then you’re looking at that total ecosystem, you’re looking at organizational transformation, you’re looking at all those different things that become part of the various excursions, you know, that you may have to take.
Dan Neumann: [08:13] Right. So team members are behaving a particular way that could be heavily influenced by HR. That could be absolutely influenced by legal or compliance or some perception of how you need to implement separation of duties. And it’s those other forces then, you know, on the team that, that these excursions need to go out and deal with in order to have the desired business outcomes.
Quincy Jordan: [08:36] Absolutely. And that actually just in, hopefully this, uh, story kind of ties in, but that made me think about a particular client. And hopefully I had not mentioned this before, and it’s not repetitive, but it, if it were, I apologize, but there’s a particular client, uh, some years back and they had such a strong vendor presence within their organization. That, uh, for example, there was one team that had anywhere from five to six or seven vendor representations on one Scrum team. So this meant that one Scrum team had, uh, consultants from different companies, different organizations, all part of this one Scrum team now can that work? Sure. It can work. Um, however, some of the challenges that it caused was they started tracking hours so closely daily that it became disruptive. Now, the reason all of that happened was because they were so heavy on their vendor makeup within their team formations. So, you know, on the surface, one may say, well, what does that have to do with it? Doesn’t have anything to do with it. That’s just how the teams look, but it did to your point about, um, HR impact and organizational design impact that caused, you know, some of those challenges. So when people are going down, this transformation or organizations are going down this transformation journey and they hit this excursion of, well, what does the org design need to look like for the program for these teams? What should that look like? And what is the impact? If we have six different vendor representations on a team, so how are their being, how is their performance being rated? How are they being incentivized? Um, all those different things. And it made it quite frankly, it made it difficult, you know, for them because they weren’t all marching to the same tune, you know, in many cases and they were being incentivized differently. You know, one, one person was being incentivized to, uh, make sure that they had the hours in all the time, as long as they have the hours in and someone else was being incentivized to make sure that they’re producing value and don’t worry about the hours. Um, but they’re all on the same team. So that caused a lot of problems on that aspect of the excursion.
Dan Neumann: [11:05] Definitely makes sense. Let’s, uh, let’s maybe take a pivot to a different type of excursion and potentially even the agile approach, you know, and I think of agile frameworks here, or, you know, general principles and how they’re being applied. But, uh, do you see excursions then in, in kind of how agile is being manifested?
Quincy Jordan: [11:28] I do. So, uh, one of the more, I, some maybe typical things that comes up is support versus development. And oftentimes the initial thought is we’re going to make them all scrum teams, like everyone’s a scrum team. Uh, and, and, and actually let’s back up even further than that. Sometimes scrum may not be the best fit. And so there has to be some evaluation, uh, excursion of an evaluation to say, well, let’s, let’s decide what agile approach is best for us. And then what agile, agile approach is best for us where, because it may not be one approach that’s best within the company and agile itself may not even be the best approach. It depends on the organization, you know? So, um, I know that it, isn’t always the most popular thing to say, but it’s true. Uh, you know, there’s a lot of success around agile approaches, but it’s not the only approach that exists.
Dan Neumann: [12:38] Yeah. We often reference, uh, the Cynefin model where it breaks things down into some domains, simple things where the answer is obvious. The fix is obvious, right. Um, then into complicated where an expert can help you find the right answer then into the complex domain where you only see a cause and effect when you look backwards and then chaos. And for those simple things, agile methods might not be appropriate. Um, I’ve sometimes engaged with companies or groups that do EDI, electronic data interchange over and over and over again, they not quite cookie cutter, but they really know the process. They know the steps, they know how to do it. It doesn’t necessarily benefit from some of the facets of agility that are really good for complex domains. And if you know what you’re doing, and you can estimate it just hammer those widgets out metaphorically.
Quincy Jordan: [13:39] Absolutely. And you know, and if the decision is that, uh, agile is the best approach. Okay, great. We want to take that approach, get that mindset instill within the organization. Right. But now we need to look at, uh, methodologies and frameworks, you know, so what framework is the best one? What, what approaches is, do we want to, uh, go with Kanban for support teams that we want to make sure that we’re going with Scrum? Do we want to go with Scrum and, uh, envelop XP or some XP practices underneath Scrum? Uh, so those decisions need to be made. And I think sometimes on, for some organizations on their transformation journey, they make too many assumptions initially about those things in, in really kind of assume they’re, it’s an easier decision, uh, without really thinking through the impact, uh, of making that decision. And it’s not that it hasn’t been done before. I mean, those things have been done, but no two transformations are like, you know, which is, you know, part of the reason so many companies have gotten in trouble trying to replicate Spotify because Spotify did it. So they want to do the Spotify model and come to realize it does not work for them.
Dan Neumann: [15:06] Sam Falco. And I just a few episodes before this one talked about the Spotify model and some of the hazards of just saying, Hey, this worked there, let’s bring it in here. And when you talk about assumptions, it makes me think back to an episode with Adam Ulery on experimental mindset and experimentation. So instead of assuming, or maybe you start with an assumption, call it a hypothesis, then try to validate it quickly to make sure that it is right or invalidate it so that you can go do something else. That that’s an approach that comes to my mind for handling this.
Quincy Jordan: [15:45] Absolutely. Yeah. I completely agree with that. And, uh, I mean, as you know, I’m big on the experimentation, uh, and even that in and of itself can become one of those excursions, uh, where, so if you’re going to run the experiments, how are you going to run experiments? Who, who will, uh, determine if those experiments are the right experiments? Um, which I am very much in favor of running experiments because it, it makes it easier for people to not only buy into it, but to understand it, and to know that they’re not being committed to something long term, but just enough to figure out, should we commit to this.
Dan Neumann: [16:28] Maybe we can shift over to some areas of sustainability and consistency in as we explore consistency. I think I’ll be curious to maybe try to differentiate that from a coherence. So consistency to me means kind of doing the same thing everywhere and coherence might be doing things differently, but we’re still aligned with the same goals or the same outcomes. So maybe we can talk about how we get sustainability and where appropriate consistency.
Quincy Jordan: [17:10] Uh, sure. And I’ll probably also like to throw in maintenance in that. Just as a little blurp there, so when we’re, when we’re looking at, uh, sustainability, so one of the things with sustainability is, okay, have you enabled, have you empowered? Have you, have you put the pieces of the puzzle in place so that, uh, essentially the system can run, the engine can run it, it can run on his own as long as you give it, what it, what it needs in, what it needs is that empowerment that enablement, uh, you know, the, the ability for decision making to be pushed down as far as possible, uh, those types of things and help the environment, you know, to become sustainable. Now, I don’t think that you can reach sustainability without consistency. Uh, so I think in many cases, the, the consistency somewhat comes first. Uh, but the strategy of sustainability proceeds that, but you don’t necessarily act on that strategy just yet, but you have to build those consistent processes, um, or habits or approaches. So let’s say for example, you have a program, that program has, uh, 15 teams, um, on that program. Well, part of the consistency is that every team has a team working agreement. Like that’s part of the consistency. Now what’s in the team working agreement may or may not vary from team to team likely it will because there are different teams, but there’s some parts that may stay the same. So you may have a larger program where, uh, you may need to normalize story, story points. You know, I’m not necessarily a big fan of that, but I do understand the need for it when it’s a large program. Uh, and in those cases it makes sense to do so now how you normalize those stories, story points can vary. Uh, but you know, I won’t go into great detail about that right now, but, um, but those areas of consistency, you know, with that, how, how do you define a definition of done? So if it’s not across a large program and it’s only within a certain team, then we want to, uh, have our definition of done to be consistent, you know, from this sprint to the next sprint, to the next sprint, we don’t want to jump around into what we’re considering when something is actually done.
Dan Neumann: [19:57] Yeah, no, that makes sense where we would want similar definitions of done, especially in a program where multiple teams are contributing to the same outcome, if one team’s definition of done, because they’re a new team, is it built and we kind of tested it. And another team’s definition of done is it’s built, deployed, automated regression suites, done, you know, much more sophisticated. It’ll be hard for that program to consistently deliver quality.
Quincy Jordan: [20:27] Well, I was just going to add to that really quickly. And that’s where, you know, you start getting into, um, some of the tensions within the program that you can easily avoid, you know, on that excursion, you can easily avoid those things, uh, in that way. Um, by having something like that, definite definition of done being clear in the, definitely.
Dan Neumann: [20:48] From a consistency standpoint, are you also then seeing a place where at the team level we’re asking for teamwork, really not heroes, not individual rewards. You know, you hit your goal. I didn’t hit my goal. We’re trying to get a team to collaborate. And when the reward systems that are in place are inconsistent with that, because they’re setting up rewards for you to act as an individual or meet act as an individual, is that another example of creating more consistency as part of an excursion along this agile journey?
Quincy Jordan: [21:24] So, so I would say yes, but I would say it’s not exclusive to that perspective. And what I mean by that is for some, for some environments, uh, you know, whether I agree with it or not, they’re consistent with creating heroes. Like that’s, that’s what they want and that’s how they want to operate. So, uh, so I may differ with their level with what they want to be consistent with, but yes, that is part of a way of being consistent, uh, on that excursion along, you know, their agile journey.
Dan Neumann: [22:00] The, uh, that reminds me of a book I read some time ago, it’s called the re-engineering alternative. And pre-engineering so euphemism for terminating people and hiring different ones when you want to switch cultures, essentially. And, uh, that authors breaks down organizations into kind of four types there’s cultivation. Um, there’s, um, command command, basically like you would see in the military and a couple other ones, basically you saying, try to leverage the strengths of, um, of the organization to get you new outcomes. So competency is a big one. If you’re in education institutions, for example, really deep knowledge, very extreme competence on certain areas. And so you could leverage that desire for competence in an agile journey and not expect to switch the culture over to one of cultivation where, um, much like a, uh, potentially a family or like a religious institution where you’re saying, Hey, we’re all gonna kind of work together and it’s gonna be happy and we’re gonna kind of bring everybody up together together. It’s like, no, like we hero experts are great. Let’s leverage the hero expert tendency to get the new desired outcome. And so it’s a really kind of a different way of viewing, uh, situations. Yeah.
Quincy Jordan: [23:20] Uh, that’s definitely interesting. I’ll have to look into that as well, cause I’m always interested in how people, how people want to handle the hero complex.
Dan Neumann: [23:30] Yeah, no, definitely not a new book. I think I had to get a second hand because I don’t know if it’s even in print anymore, but it was interesting, a couple more arrows in my quiver. You said you wanted to talk about maintenance in this concept of sustainability and consistency.
Quincy Jordan: [23:45] Yeah. So, um, so I know we’re talking about excursions on the transformation journey and so the maintenance is part of the journey, but it’s somewhat post journey, you know, as well to some degree. And what I think is, is becoming more and more evident, more and more critical, uh, for organizations to do because so many organizations have gone through transformations at this point, um, agile transformation specifically, uh, but oftentimes the part that is not covered as much, uh, is, well, how do you maintain what has now been transformed? So it’s, it’s interesting to me because every facet of everything that we do, there’s some maintenance that we have to do with it. Uh, and we don’t typically think of that as much when it comes to transformation. So what do you do three months after you have quote unquote transformed? Um, what do you do, uh, six months later, you know, what do you do 12 months later? Uh, how do you maintain that? How do you maintain the culture that you’ve now built? How do you maintain the consistency that you have put in place? How do you maintain, uh, the cadences, uh, to where you’re maintaining having cadences, but maybe you figure out ways to keep it from, um, quite frankly, becoming boring to people, um, because that does happen. So that maintenance piece, um, is really important, not just for the maintenance itself, but it’s important for leadership to understand you didn’t just buy a box with a bow on it that has transformation inside. Uh, there’s, there’s some stuff that you’re going to have to do after you opened this box. There’s some things you’re going to have to do Uh, once things have quote unquote transformed, uh, you know, as well. So that maintenance piece is really, really important.
Dan Neumann: [25:52] I think of the exercise equipment that may or may not exist in my house. Well, there’s an elliptical by golly, that thing doesn’t move itself. And I think there’s a sense sometimes where organizations expect to buy the box of transformation that you expect, right. And open it up and it, you know, the dishwasher is going to load itself, right? The teams are going to organize themselves. And, um, it, it does take care in feeding and intentionality to, to keep going. Even once, you know, you’ve gotten to maybe a new status quo.
Quincy Jordan: [26:28] Yeah. And there’s so many outside forces that if you don’t have a maintenance piece in place that, uh, it’s, it’s going to derail, you know, all the, well, not all, but many of the efforts that you know happened. And I know we’re, we’re, we’re talking about the agile space. We’re talking about excursions and the word we’re talking about it in that way. But in my mind, I think of things in such a simplistic way that, that a lot of times, things like this all boil down to okay, just, you know, as a human being, like we require maintenance. So if you know, you like to run, I like to work out like we’re, we’re both kind of, you know, fitness sorta, you know. Um, but you know, I mean, if you get your body to a certain point, number one, it’s not going to stay that way. If you don’t do something to maintain true number two. Well, do you consider the holidays? Do you consider what happens once the summer actually starts? Okay. So yeah, you may have worked from December to April or may to get, you know, your, your beach body, for sure but by the time you get to August, you know, if you haven’t been working out, that, um, you know, at that point, the, the six pack is now a keg. And if you don’t do the maintenance, it is not going to maintain what you’ve worked so hard to do. And so it’s the exact same way in agile transformations. And why on those, one of the excursions, you have to have that sustainability, you have to have that consistency. You have to build in from the beginning. What is maintenance going to look like? And I’ll be happy to come back later and just dig into maintenance all by itself. Cause that’s, there’s a whole lot that we can unpack there.
Dan Neumann: [28:42] Perfect. Well, let’s dip our toes in the waters of leadership support and communication here as we’re kind of near in the back part of our time.
Quincy Jordan: [28:51] Absolutely. So when we’re looking at consistency and we’re looking at, um, sustainability, uh, a good bit of that has to be supported by leadership. And when I say support it, not only do they need to, uh, let’s say if it’s Scrum that’s being used, not only do they need to support teams have to have time for these farm events, they have to pull away for these from events. Um, but there’s cadence involvement, communications, uh, acknowledgement, uh, reaffirming, their cadence, things that need to come from leadership leadership has to let everyone know, uh, quite frankly, similar to parents and children have to let everyone know periodically either everything’s okay or everything will be okay, but right now these are the things we’re dealing with. Uh, so they have to have that communication. They can’t go into, you know, a black box somewhere and just assume that everything that they know everyone else knows and is considering, they don’t know that they don’t know if they don’t communicate it. So it’s not just the communication of it, but it’s communicating it on a regular cadence.
Dan Neumann: [30:14] Right. I, I know I have fallen victim to the trap of, I know I’ve said it. I might’ve said it once. I might’ve said it twice. I know I’ve said it. I know somebody heard it, but it’s just, it, it maybe hasn’t stuck or they didn’t understand it. Or when the time to apply something came up, it just wasn’t front of mind. So they reverted to a previous approach. And that consistency almost to the point where people either can, you know, can say it for you, which would be awesome, or they’re tired of hearing it, which hopefully they’re not, um, becomes important. I was at a place where, um, they kicked off a weekly meeting where somebody was responsible and it rotated for saying, Hey, these are the company values, by the way, a very week, different person was responsible for that activity. So is not just, Oh, they’ve heard it it’s Oh, they’ve actually engaged with it, which I thought was an interesting approach.
Quincy Jordan: [31:16] Absolutely. Yeah. And so, you know, this part of the excursion, uh, you know, I think of not just leadership, but active leadership, uh, and on a transformation journey, you know, it’s, it’s really easy for teams to get into their groove of, you know, they’re working really well. They’re developing, they’re getting things to done, uh, and that’s great and they should, but you, you can’t negate as leaders sharing the bigger picture so that the teams can consistently correlate the work that they’re doing every day to the bigger business outcomes that we talked about at the very beginning of this, in that particular excursion as well. Uh, because if you don’t, oftentimes the habit becomes I’m no longer as, as a developer, as a tester or, you know, as a team member, I’m no longer thinking about the value of what I’m doing. I’m thinking about the quantity of what I’m doing and quantity does not always equal value. So it’s important for, to, uh, only cadence, regular based. Now that cadence doesn’t have to be every week that cadence, depending on the level of the leadership and the level of the communications that cadence may be once a quarter, it may be once every 60 days, you know, it, it really depends on that particular environment and what works best for that environment. But what it absolutely has to be is consistent cadence communications from support in a very active way, that is a definitive part of the excursion of an agile transformation for it to be successful.
Dan Neumann: [33:17] So that’s wonderful. So, uh, thank you for taking time to explore, uh, excursions on a journey. You know, we talked about excursions related to business outcomes, the agile approach taken, uh, sustainability, consistency, and maintenance. Then we talked about constant communication and inactive leadership support, um, any, any closing thoughts on those topics?
Quincy Jordan: [33:39] Um, so I, I guess if I had a closing thought, it would just be that, uh, there are many aspects to the agile transformation. There are many excursions, you know, we talked about five, but there are others there there’s more than this. Uh, and not, not putting it in a box, you know, uh, in, I hate to be cliche, but, you know, keeping things outside of the box, you know, core, core, just not boxing things in, you know, in that way, but know that it is, it is a journey and it is a multifaceted journey. So, you know, we have gone from, it’s not just a destination to, it’s a journey and everyone’s on board now with it’s a journey, but we also now need to get people on board with that journey is not simply, uh, a journey from point A to point B. Uh, but there are various terms in twist and, and circle backs and in loops around and so forth. There are many aspects of that along the journey.
Dan Neumann: [34:49] Very cool. Well, thank you very much, Quincy, for sharing that. And we’ll take a moment to thank you the listeners as well and invite you if you’ve enjoyed the exploration of excursions with Quincy here, uh, hop out and maybe leave us a review or, and, or go ahead and share the podcast with somebody you think might benefit. And thanks again, Quincy.
Outro: [35:16] This has been the Agile Coaches’ Corner podcast brought to you by AgileThought. The views, opinions and information expressed in this podcast are solely those of the hosts and the guests, and do not necessarily represent those of AgileThought. Get the show notes and other helpful tips for this episode and other episodes at agilethought.com/podcast.