Bruce Eckfeldt 4/23/15 Bruce Eckfeldt 4/23/15

Running effective daily scrum stand-ups

When starting a team coaching assignment, I start with the question, "when this engagement is completed, how will you know we have been successful?" This helps create focus and set direction for the engagement. Early this year, while working with a marketing team, one, somewhat frustrated, woman gave me the answer “if we actually stood up at stand-ups!”

"Really? That's all?", I asked. That was something I was fairly sure I could do. (Just take away the chairs was my first idea.) But she continued.

“No,” she said, “it’s more than that.” She went on to explain that stand-up meetings were taking longer and longer and were now almost an hour. People droned on about details and dove into detailed discussions trying to make decisions and resolve problems. People would speak as long as fifteen minutes. As the meetings became longer, the meeting quickly transformed into a full-on project review meeting.

When I attended my first stand-up the following day, I found out it was even worse than described. As the meeting time was approaching, about a dozen people came into the room and sat down, some at the conference table and some in chairs in the back. Then, everyone began to take out their laptops. I was perplexed, but I was just observing that day so stayed quiet. As the meeting started, seven more remote team members joined via conference call.

The meeting itself consisted of walking through each and every open project story. The members of the team talked about status and discussed open questions. They resolved open issues and decided next steps and action plans there in the meeting. Using their open laptops, people researched issues, looked up emails, and conferred with documents. Those not part of the immediate discussion were emailing, instant messaging, and surfing the web.

I realized then, that things had gone awry with this meeting. And while they were calling it a stand up, it was far from it.

Over the ensuing weeks, I worked with the team to restructure the meeting, along with the reporting and tracking process. We separated out status reporting and working meetings from the stand-ups. It started with some clear meeting objectives, a defined agenda, and a heavy facilitation hand for the first week or two. We got the meeting down to twenty minutes in three weeks. As a result, everyone stayed engaged and focused. And most importantly, everyone actually stood up!

If your stand-ups are lacking, try applying these principles and practices to get your meetings focused and on task.

Pick a time that works for the group

Different team members have different work and personal schedules. Not everyone can make a 8:30 AM meeting time. Find a time which is reasonable to everyone so that people are more likely to attend and be ready. Most teams work well in the morning, but don’t be afraid to try an afternoon stand-up if that makes more sense. Generally, try to make it the same time each day, however I do have teams that meet at different times each day to accommodate flex schedules which have been successful.

Have a clear agenda with set time limits

The agenda needs to be short and focused. I recommend the following to start: what I finished yesterday, what I’m working on today, and where I need help. Some teams add something they learned or key announcements. Each team member goes through that agenda quickly; no discussion, no questions. Follow up on those after the meeting. Generally 1-2 minutes per person is a good heuristic.

Empower the facilitator to keep the meeting on schedule and on topic

The role of the facilitator is to keep the meeting on schedule and on topic. If someone starts getting into details or off the stand-up agenda, they need to politely ask them to move forward and wrap up. I find that people will only get better at stand-ups if they are held to time limits and are cut off if need be. People allowed to drone on have no incentive to get better and bad habits form. The team needs to understand that the facilitator’s job is to keep the meeting on schedule and respect everyone's time. They should treat everyone the same, don’t play favorites or play to power. The entire team needs to support that. I’ve had successful teams that have the same facilitator, others that have rotated between qualified people. Try both.

One person speaks at a time

When it’s someone’s turn to speak, only that person is speaking. No questions, no discussion, no sidebars. If a team allows people to interrupt it will be impossible to enforce time limits. The interrupted person’s time get taken away and it's too easy to then give them more which starts the spiral towards long stand ups. When someone’s done, the facilitator asks if there are any parking lot or follow up items and people can chime in quickly. Once that’s closed, move on to the next person quickly.

Cycle through people, not tasks

This is a common problem that I see: people cycle through tasks and everyone chimes in. The problem is that not every task is active or worth talking about so time is wasted. And then it becomes difficult to get the complete picture of what someone is working on as their information is segmented over several tasks. Keep the focus on the 48 hours window: 24 previous and 24 upcoming. One of the subtle impacts of rigorous stand-ups is that it exposes what people are working and how productive they are. It quickly shows if someone is getting stuck and needs help. Going by task conceals this information. Stand-ups are about checking in with people, not tasks. Go through each team contributor (see note below on Pigs and Chickens) on the team. Not all tasks will be discussed and that’s fine. Wrap up the meeting with any key announcements or upcoming events and then break. After the meeting, anyone on a parking lot item can coordinate with just those people to follow up and discuss.

Make status reporting simply “done” or “not done”

When reporting on status, insist that first thing said is either “done” or “not done”. Don’t let people start with explanations or caveats. “Not done” needs some further explanation of how close and why, but don’t let people start on that until it’s clearly indicated it’s not complete. This enables two things. First, it focuses everyone on results rather than effort. Good teams don’t reward effort, they reward completion of work on time and on budget. Second, it makes it clear to everyone that has a dependency or interest in the task its real status. As Yoda says, “do, or not do, there is no try.”

Use a parking lot to hold items that need more discussion

As each person presents, hold all questions and comments until they are done. At that point, open up the floor to parking lot items. “I want to follow up and hear more about that customer meeting” or “I have some feedback on the logo design,” but no discussing these during the stand-up, make it a follow-up conversation off-line. Make sure to assign someone to track the parking lot items and/or write them on a whiteboard or flip chart as you go; if the parking lot is not being tracked, people won’t trust it and will try to address things as they come up.

Have people prepare for the meeting

Everyone should be responsible for taking five minutes before the stand-up to organize their thoughts and what they are going to say. This keeps them on time when it comes to them and ensure they are communication the maximum amount of information within their slot. It also means that they are listening to what others are saying rather than trying to put together their thoughts as other people are speaking. One team I coached, made everyone hold up their notes before the meeting and anyone that didn’t have notes, wasn’t allowed to go. I liked it because it use consequences rather than having to chide people about coming unprepared.

Pigs speak, chickens listen

Scrum has a parable of the chicken and the pig. A chicken says to a pig, “I have a great idea for a new restaurant, and I’m willing to make you a 50/50 partner?” The pig asks, “sure, what’s the name?” “Bacon and Eggs,” says the chicken. The pig frowns and replies, “I don’t think so, you’re only involved, but I’m committed.” The point is, this meeting is for the people doing the work, not the people watching (executives, other team members, managers, etc.). These people are welcome to attend and listen in so long as their presence doesn’t interfere with the stand-up goal and agenda. They do not speak or ask questions. Only contributing team members participate in the stand-up.

Use video calls over conference calls

I’ve coached several teams that have remote team members. Some just doors away, other on the other side of the globe. If someone can’t be there in person, try to have them on a video call rather than a phone call. For a few reasons. One, it builds a stronger team bond by seeing them and getting to know the person beyond their disembodied voice. Two, video can help communicate body language. Three, it prevents people from engaging in other tasks that take away attention (looking at phones, emails, etc.).

Set clear ground rules

Every team should set a set of ground rules which are enforced by the facilitator. These should be developed by the team and regularly updated. Start them with a brainstorming session and unanimous vote for adoption. Some good basic ones are: phones off, start on time, end on time, have notes written down, one personal speaking at a time, stop when your time is up...and of course, stand up!

The power of stand-up meetings comes is that they re-align everyone and quickly remove roadblocks to ensure everyone is on target and moving forward productively. However, they have to be short and relevant to keep people engaged. Standing up helps remind people of that. If that doesn't work, try one leg.

**********

For more information on Bruce and how he can help you and your company, visit http://www.eckfeldt.com or contact him at bruce@eckfeldt.com.

Bruce Eckfeldt 4/21/15 Bruce Eckfeldt 4/21/15

Are performance reviews really worth it?

I played squash last week with a fellow McGill alumnus. I got my ass kicked since it’s been ten years since I’ve picked up a squash racket and he plays three times a week. Despite that, I’m glad we played. We had a good conversation about the merit of performance reviews and whether or not, in the end, they are really worth it.

His position was that they are a waste of time. He’s held several CEO positions and every time he’s seen them implemented they’ve taken a significant amount of organizational effort and have resulted in limited, if any, meaningful changes in performance. His general conclusion is that performance reviews are too little, too late. In some cases, they actually do more harm than good by delivering the wrong message and setting false expectations about performance evaluation and career longevity.

From his descriptions, I agreed, these were poor performance review systems and I didn’t blame him for having them eighty-sixed. The problem I saw was that they were trying to give feedback on performance rather than evaluating performance. Feedback should given continually. Performance reviews are intended for organizational planning.

Giving feedback once or twice a year is ineffective. Instead, feedback should be delivered on a regular basis, ideally right when the behavior takes place. At a minimum during weekly one-on-ones. If there are issues with inadequate performance, employees should be given timely and appropriate notice, not at annual performance reviews. Annual feedback is not helpful to the employee, it’s also a waste of opportunity for the company.

Performance reviews are not about giving employees feedback. Instead, the main purpose of performance reviews is organizational planning. Traditionally, performance reviews in professionally-managed organizations only went “up” the chain. Feedback to the employees was not part of the process. Upper management used that information to assess current capabilities and potential talent and determine where gaps exist.

Many companies confuse this process. The results are that employees don't get the feedback they need to develop effectively and business don't have clear organizational assessments and talent plans If you’re in an organization who’s using performance reviews focus on giving feedback rather than planning, here are some suggestion for how to improve the process.

Implement a weekly one-on-one meeting program

Weekly one-on-ones between managers and direct reports will provide more regular opportunities for discussion of performance. Managers and give employees more regular feedback on behaviors and results. Employees can get more input on development ideas and coaching on making changes. The weekly one-on-one also offers an opportunity to develop a deeper professional relationship between the employee and manager. As experienced managers will attest, stronger relationships mean more effective teams.

Train staff to give immediate, direct, behavior-based feedback

Giving feedback is a specific skill. Poorly delivered feedback is ineffective at best and can create friction in working relationships and discontent on teams. Good feedback is delivered in a timely fashion, delivered in a matter of fact way, and focus on behaviors that can be observed. By training everyone to give effective feedback on a continuous basis, pressure on performance reviews to delivery feedback is alleviated.

Conduct a talent succession analysis

The pressure on performance reviews to give feedback can often be the result of a lack of focus on organizational planning. A succession analysis looks at all of the key roles in the company and determines who the A, B, and C replacement would be for each role. By doing this, the need for talent and potential development is brought into focus. This focus, in turn, can redirect the performance review back towards organizational development and aware from a feedback system.

Implement quarterly OKRs

Annual planning is, honestly, a thing of the past. Business and markets move too quickly to plan in twelve-month cycles. Quarterly is a much better balance between setting long-term goals and still responding to changing business situations. The Object-Key Results (OKRs) framework provides a simple, yet extremely effective, method for bridging business strategy to actionable tasks and for connecting high-level business objectives to individual development plans. Implementing OKRs removes the burden of goal-setting from the performance review process.

In the end, for companies who have no strategic need for talent planning, annual performance reviews are not that valuable. Instead, focus on more direct and effective feedback during one-on-one meetings and improve planning using OKRs. However, given that business has become a war of talent, conducting performance reviews as part of a talent strategy process has become what distinguishes high-performance organizations.

Bruce Eckfeldt 1/29/15 Bruce Eckfeldt 1/29/15

How great leaders apologize

As leaders, we are faced with tough decisions that impact many people. And let's face it, not everyone is going to be happy with each one of those decisions. In fact, if we’re not stepping on a few toes, we’re probably playing it too safe. Good leaders know how to act decisively, but they also know how to recognize when their actions hurt others, and they actively work to repair damaged relationships. A well-crafted and heart-felt apology is key to mending these wounds.

For a meaningful and effective apology, your goal should be to acknowledge that you hurt someone else and to show contrition. It is not about defending your actions or arguing about why you did them. If you’re not ready to own your decisions and actions, wait until you’re in a better place before attempting to repair the relationship.

Done correctly, an apology will maximize your success and build stronger bonds with the people you trust and rely on. Here are the five simple, but crucial steps to making an apology.

1. Say “I’m Sorry”

Say those exact words. “I’m sorry”. Too many apologies go on and on without actually saying these simple words. This leaves the receiver having to guess. Don’t make them. Tell them right off the bat. Whether you are apologizing in-person or in writing, open with a clear statement that you are sorry. Let them know you are apologizing and that you want to repair the relationship. No defensiveness or explanations needed.

2. Give a Detailed Account

Express what behaviors, choices, and actions (or inactions) were involved. Be specific and be exhaustive. Again, don’t explain why or list excuses, just be clear on what you did. Try saying, for example, “I didn’t invite you to the meeting,” “I made the decision without consulting you,” or “I decided not to give you the lead on the project.” Describe your actions factually and neutrally. If you’re not clear on which actions caused impact, you need to take the time and ask some questions and gather information before you continue.

3. Acknowledge Impact

Now that you’ve detailed your actions, give a detailed account of the impact on the other person. Show that you see and understand the effects your actions. Again, you don’t need to come up with justifications or excuses, just state you are aware that your behavior impacted the other person. Show that you’re not oblivious to its consequences.

Building on the example above, you could say, “I understand that excluding you from the meeting meant that you didn’t have the opportunity to express your concerns about the project, and that the final decision that was made without you affects your team.” You can also state how you think they felt about your decision. Unless you know for a fact how they felt because they have told you, do NOT assume you know what is/was happening in their head. Instead, you could say, for example, “I can imagine that that was frustrating for you and that you felt sidelined.” Be careful here; you want to empathize, not assume. Don’t be condescending.

4. Express Regret

You need to show that you wish that it didn’t play out the way it did. Here’s the trick: you don’t need, or want, to say that you’ll make up for it, or change your decision. The fact is, sometimes things just happen. You can both hold firm on your decision and be sorry for the impact it has caused. As a leader you will make difficult and imperfect decisions. If you are constantly trying to make up for these situations, you’ll always be trying to make amends or doing damage control. Don’t get caught in this trap.

However, if at this point you realize that something did go wrong, or you feel like you need to change or fix something, be very clear about what it is you’re going to do and be sure you are able and likely to do it. Do not make false promises just to make everyone feel better.

5. Ask for Forgiveness

This is the final, and key, step. Ask them directly for their forgiveness. This is the moment of truth for the relationship. Clearly state it as a question to which you expect an answer. Do not say, “I hope you can forgive me”, but rather, “Can you honestly and fully forgive me?” Wait for an answer. You might need 5-10 seconds of uncomfortable silence. If you feel that they are giving you a disingenuous answer, say so. Ask them to really consider what you’ve said and what you’re asking. For example, say, “I’m worried that you haven’t given this enough thought and I want to make sure you’re really ready to forgive me Do you want more time?” Explain that the future of your relationship is important and that you want to be sure that you’ve truly addressed the situation and you're both ready to move forward.

Once you’ve delivered your apology and have asked if they can forgive you, there are three possible outcomes to consider:

Outcome 1. They forgive you

Great! This is the ideal outcome. First, thank them for listening and for truly considering their answer. Tell them that you value their relationship greatly and that you can have open and honest conversations with them.

Outcome 2: They say they can’t forgive you, ever

This might happen, and it’s not an easy situation. Immediately, you need to accept their answer and thank them for their honesty. Acknowledge that this will affect your relationship and that you’d like to talk about how things need to change. If the mood feels tense, you may need to give it a little time. If not, ask them what they suggest your next steps be and what changes they want to see happen given what’s transpired. In this case, you need to renegotiate the working relationship so that each person feels safe and valued. In some cases, this might mean new working agreements or ground rules, in others, it may mean changing roles or switching departments. In extreme cases, it could mean ending the relationship. While this may seem harsh, the sooner these issues are addressed, the better.

Outcome 3: They can’t forgive you now, but they will work on it

Again, thank them for being honest and for carefully considering your apology. If the situation warrants it, ask what you can do to help with that process. If it's heated, back off and come back to the question another time. Your goal at this point is to assist them in forgiving you. It might take a while. And it might get to a point in which you are no longer willing to wait and need to move ahead under the assumption that it won't happen.

The majority of the time, leaders act with good intentions, use reasonable decision making processes, and steer through relationship turbulence successfully. In fact, the best leaders I've worked with have been though many apologies but yet have amazingly dedicated teams. Why? Because their people trust them to do the best they can to make hard calls, and when there is fallout, they know they will be treated with fairness and respect.

* * * * *

Bruce Eckfeldt is an entrepreneur, a former Inc 500 CEO, and member of the New York City Chapter of the Entrepreneurs’ Organization. He is an expert in organizational performance and coaches startups and high-growth companies on leadership and management. You can reach him at bruce@eckfeldt.com or visit his website at http://www.eckfeldt.com.

Bruce Eckfeldt 1/18/15 Bruce Eckfeldt 1/18/15

The right answer won't help if you don't know this first

As an executive and team coach, I spend a lot of time helping people develop solutions to problems. What to do with a problem employee? How to develop the right strategy? When to start a new initiative?

Core to the coaching process is developing plans and execution strategies and then guiding people to take action and implement. However, I’ve found that often times, the most value I add is not in helping find the answer, but helping find the right question.

Albert Einstein famously said, “If I had an hour to solve a problem and my life depended on the solution, I would spend the first 55 minutes determining the proper question to ask.” He knew that before you can find the right answer, you first need to find the right question.

Often, once you find the right question, the answer follows much more naturally. The right question brings about clarity and focus to the issue, which helps to illuminate the path to resolution. More importantly, time and energy spent arriving at the right answer to the wrong question is wasted. The perfect answer to the wrong question is still the wrong answer.

Finding the perfect question, however, can be difficult (which is why I get paid the big bucks). By asking, or thinking, the following to yourself, you can refine your question before you start investing in finding an answer.

Is this the biggest problem you have?

The first thing to consider is that this might not be the biggest problem you have. What are your other problems? What are the impacts of all of your problems? How might you discover what other problems you have? How should you prioritize these problems? Going through these questions will help ensure your focus is on the right issue, or help you to refocus your attention to where your effort will yield a better return.

A great technique at this phase is to conduct a retrospective. This will systematically review the recent past to gather data and generate insights that otherwise might have been forgotten or missed. Get the right people together and dig into the right discussions to unearth these valuable gems.

What is causing this problem?

I’m a big Lean advocate, which uses the great technique of root cause analysis. By tracing a problem back down the causal path, you can find more fundamental issues that are driving the surface level effects. The customer service problem can quickly become a problem of operational standards, quality assurance or even defective raw materials.

Making changes to the call center script will never improve the quality of the core components. I liken it to finding a leak in a house: you might see the water in the basement, but the problem is the flashing in the chimney.

What new problems might surface if I solve this problem?

Another consideration is what will happen if you fix the problem being considering? Will that just cause other, potentially worse problems? Not solving the issue at the core means you’re applying band-aids at best, but worse, you could be introducing even more trouble. In the early days of antibiotics, treatments would stop infections but end up poisoning the patient. Make sure that what you’re considering doesn’t have adverse effects at the higher level.

Are there other ways to phrase this problem?

Lastly, even a rewriting of the problem can lead to a different type of thinking, subsequently leading to different types of solutions. In the best cases, a good writing can turn a problem into a creative solution.

This post originally appeared in Business Insider:http://www.businessinsider.com/the-right-question-comes-before-the-right-answer-2015-6#ixzz3dAGeNDa0

Bruce Eckfeldt 1/10/15 Bruce Eckfeldt 1/10/15

If you want to be a leader, get comfortable with doubt

I’ve been coaching a young, freshly-minted executive who has been selected for a high-potential development program. Recently, we’ve been exploring what it truly means to be a leader. She said to me that she believed that being a leader means always knowing what to do and to “never be in doubt”. Having been a CEO myself and having worked with many executives, I knew that the answer she provided wasn’t quite right. However, rather than challenging her directly, I asked her to validate this belief by speaking to three different executives in her company whom she trusted. Her assignment was to ask them how often they know exactly what to do and if they ever have any doubt.

Two weeks later we met again for our coaching session. She had spoken with three executives as promised and was surprised by what she had learned. Contrary to her assumptions, all three freely admitted that they don’t always know exactly what to do and often experience doubt; in fact, more often than not. Regardless of this, they functioned very well. All were well-respected as exceptional leaders in the company. And all three were perfectly comfortable with the fact that they had doubts much of the time.

When I asked how this changed her thinking, she told me about three key lessons she learned in her conversations which had shifted her beliefs.

Doubt is a natural part of the decision making process

All executives have doubt. In fact, dealing with doubt is a key function of leadership. A decision that has no risk or uncertainty should be made at a low level without getting executives involved. Leadership is not about acting without doubt. Leadership is about intelligently managing doubt so you are free to act boldly and confidently.

Doubt is a guide to seek information and ask questions

Experienced leaders use doubt as an informational divining rod. Their doubt serves as a tool they use to point to areas that need investigating and research. Years of experience and dozens of projects have given them intuition about uncertainty, risks and impact. Doubt illuminates the path to clarity.

Good decision making quantifies the risks with costs of delays

We live in a messy and imperfect world. No big decision comes without uncertainty. Opportunities have a narrow window and competitors are always looking to eat your lunch. Successful executives learn to balance the risk of acting with uncertainty against the opportunity cost of not acting. By continually assessing and quantifying these two forces, the tipping point of decisiveness can be found and action subsequently taken.

As a young executive, my client was still, understandably, acting as a manager, squeezing out every last drop of risk she could find in a situation. As a result of this behavior, she was missing out on good opportunities. To grow, she learned to become comfortable with doubt and to strike the right balance in her decision making process.

To become a leader, embrace your doubt and use it to hone your decision making. Understand that big decisions will involve some level of uncertainty. Focus your energy by being mindful of your doubts. And calibrate your scale for weighing the risk and reward of taking timely action.

This post originally appeared on the Forbes blog:http://www.forbes.com/sites/entrepreneursorganization/2015/06/08/if-you-want-to-be-a-leader-get-comfortable-with-doubt/