Agile2016

Abstract:
For years, we've heard "agile is for collocated teams. Don't do agile if you can't all be together. Without close daily interactions, agile cannot work.” Or, can it? With changes in technology and broader agile adoption, we are seeing organizations of dispersed teams where agile not only works, but thrives. But does it work the same way as when everyone is together? Can we truly be agile and be spread over time zones and locations?
Here are some of the challenges to explore: - What are the limitations and downsides of distributed Agile, and what tools and ways of working can address those? What are the advantages? How can we set things up to maximize the advantages and minimize the limitations?

• Does a distributed agile approach encourage non-optimal structures...or can it help create new effective organizations ?
• Are we asking professionals to adapt too quickly with new collaborative behaviors AND remote dynamics … or does learning the former overcome the latter?
• How are cultural and language barriers impacted by both face-to-face work (e.g., offensive body language) or remote work (e.g., removing human touch). Or can one kind of work help avoid the challenges of the other?
• Can working asynchronously and remote actually help some type of work and certain types of workers? Is this a new area for the introverts to thrive? What compromises are they not seeing, and what evolutions are we not seeing?

Help us discover how distributed agile is an obstacle to overcome and a new way of working. Join us in this Audacious Salon.
Learning Outcomes:

• N/A

Abstract:
Scaling Agile to work in large organizations is a hot topic. Some coaches and consultants offer frameworks (SAFe, LeSS, Holocracy) but others don't believe such frameworks can work. Other companies publish their own custom approach (Spotify, Menlo, Zappos) but it appears that people often copy these without thinking. Apparently, silver bullets, copy/paste solutions and shu-level practices are easy to sell but don't enable real transformation. However, there is some evidence of "Teal" or "Management 3.0" organizations reporting some mild successes.
Considering the fast-changing environments that many companies are faced with, is it worth addressing the complex problem of Agile at Scale with such simple or complicated solutions? Are some companies successful because or despite of the solutions that they copied from the market? What problem are we trying to solve by "scaling agile"? What is really different when we work with 50,000 people instead of just five? And which things in our context determine whether proposed solutions have actual value for us?
Bring your own real-world experience; what you've tried, what's worked, what's failed, and what you think might be the causes. Engage in spirited debate as we learn together, even continuing to learn and share well beyond this session and even this conference.
Learning Outcomes:

• N/A

Abstract:
Scaling Agile to work in large organizations is a hot topic. Some coaches and consultants offer frameworks (SAFe, LeSS, Holocracy) but others don't believe such frameworks can work. Other companies publish their own custom approach (Spotify, Menlo, Zappos) but it appears that people often copy these without thinking. Apparently, silver bullets, copy/paste solutions and shu-level practices are easy to sell but don't enable real transformation. However, there is some evidence of "Teal" or "Management 3.0" organizations reporting some mild successes.
Considering the fast-changing environments that many companies are faced with, is it worth addressing the complex problem of Agile at Scale with such simple or complicated solutions? Are some companies successful because or despite of the solutions that they copied from the market? What problem are we trying to solve by "scaling agile"? What is really different when we work with 50,000 people instead of just five? And which things in our context determine whether proposed solutions have actual value for us?
Bring your own real-world experience; what you've tried, what's worked, what's failed, and what you think might be the causes. Engage in spirited debate as we learn together, even continuing to learn and share well beyond this session and even this conference.
Learning Outcomes:

• N/A

Abstract:
Until recently, common wisdom held that humans stopped developing by their mid 20s. Whatever they were then is what they were going to be for the rest of their lives. In our own experiences as Agilists, we see the folly in this as we witness adults of all ages change to embrace agile as a way of thriving in a complex and confounding world. Our experience is supported by researchers who tell us that humans can develop throughout their lives. Instead of outward development, though, it's inner development; specifically one's mental complexity. They also tell us that although people can develop, there is no guarantee it will happen. Plenty of people stop.
At the same time, Agile has crossed the chasm and we see organizations of all sizes doing Agile -- kind of. Even the "doing" Agile part is not so healthy everywhere, never mind the "being" Agile part. The reality is just not as great as we Agilists imagined it would be. Is there a link between the two? Perhaps Agile requires a certain level of cognitive development to do well. If so, it's possible that we Agilists are bringing our way of working to corporate environments that are not developed to the necessary level. When we do this, are we agents of evolution? Specifically placed to aid the next unavoidable step in the unfolding of human development? Or, are we well-meaning zealots doing more harm than good? These are some of the questions we will consider as we look at our calling as Agilists and the moral responsibility that comes with it.
Learning Outcomes:

• N/A

Abstract:
For years, we've heard "agile is for collocated teams. Don't do agile if you can't all be together. Without close daily interactions, agile cannot work.” Or, can it? With changes in technology and broader agile adoption, we are seeing organizations of dispersed teams where agile not only works, but thrives. But does it work the same way as when everyone is together? Can we truly be agile and be spread over time zones and locations?
Here are some of the challenges to explore: - What are the limitations and downsides of distributed Agile, and what tools and ways of working can address those? What are the advantages? How can we set things up to maximize the advantages and minimize the limitations?

• Does a distributed agile approach encourage non-optimal structures...or can it help create new effective organizations ?
• Are we asking professionals to adapt too quickly with new collaborative behaviors AND remote dynamics … or does learning the former overcome the latter?
• How are cultural and language barriers impacted by both face-to-face work (e.g., offensive body language) or remote work (e.g., removing human touch). Or can one kind of work help avoid the challenges of the other?
• Can working asynchronously and remote actually help some type of work and certain types of workers? Is this a new area for the introverts to thrive? What compromises are they not seeing, and what evolutions are we not seeing? Help us discover how distributed agile is an obstacle to overcome and a new way of working. Join us in this Audacious Salon.

Learning Outcomes:

• N/A

Abstract:
If the first decade of agile development was about building products the right way, it might be said the last five years have been focused on building the right product. Creating innovative products is still a challenging and elusive pursuit. We have years of experience helping teams adopt design and discovery practices like prototypes, user interviews, personas, story mapping, sketching, user journeys, and release slicing. Still, there are untapped approaches for unlocking innovation in product discovery.
We've found value building personas using persona characteristics rather than stereotypical or archetypal users. Personas can be created starting with well known celebrities or character types, which could lead to new ideas and perspectives for innovation.
We've also explored writing stories based on a model for storytelling taught by Robert McKee (mckeestory.com), a well-known screenwriting teacher to help teams move beyond simple narrative structures to come up with better product ideas.
Bring your own ideas for additional ways of approaching product discovery. They can be experimental, partially-formed, and theoretical. We’ll experiment with these alternative approaches to product discovery. We'll form questions for exploration, even continuing to explore these new ideas in small groups well beyond the end of the conference.
Learning Outcomes:

• N/A

Attachments:

• UnlockingInnovation.pdf

Abstract:
If the first decade of agile development was about building products the right way, it might be said the last five years have been focused on building the right product. Creating innovative products is still a challenging and elusive pursuit. We have years of experience helping teams adopt design and discovery practices like prototypes, user interviews, personas, story mapping, sketching, user journeys, and release slicing. Still, there are untapped approaches for unlocking innovation in product discovery.
We've found value building personas using persona characteristics rather than stereotypical or archetypal users. Personas can be created starting with well known celebrities or character types, which could lead to new ideas and perspectives for innovation.
We've also explored writing stories based on a model for storytelling taught by Robert McKee (mckeestory.com), a well-known screenwriting teacher to help teams move beyond simple narrative structures to come up with better product ideas.
Bring your own ideas for additional ways of approaching product discovery. They can be experimental, partially-formed, and theoretical. We’ll experiment with these alternative approaches to product discovery. We'll form questions for exploration, even continuing to explore these new ideas in small groups well beyond the end of the conference.
Learning Outcomes:

• N/A

Attachments:

• UnlockingInnovation.pdf

Abstract:
The famous manifesto says we should
"Build projects around motivated individuals.
Give them the environment and support they need,
and trust them to get the job done."
Sometimes, these people are referred to as a self-organized team.
Self-organizing, as a term drawn from science, means some pretty clear things in the world of nature. But we don’t have mathematical models of how self-organizing works in teams. Is it a metaphor? What actually happens when a team self-organizes? What do we do that either encourages or discourages it?
And what do you do when the team hasn't self-organized in a way you like? Does self-organizing guarantee success? What do you do to help a team self-organize into something productive rather than, say, a dysfunctional family?
This session is a place for us to explore these and other questions, together. Let’s see if we can come up with some more concrete and practical ways to understand the idea of self-organized teams.
Learning Outcomes:

• N/A

Abstract:
Special relativity tells us that when information takes time to travel, there is no universal forward march of time. Every system today has significant, unpredictable information delay. Distributed systems theory gives us ways of imposing a global ordering -- but what if we didn't? What if we said, "Hmm, we sold two of this item today. We only have one in stock. Let's say that the customer who paid for expedited shipping came first." Perhaps the clock is a crutch and we can climb farther without it.
With event sourcing and CQRS (Command Query Responsibility Segregation pattern), with languages like Bloom, the inklings of these systems exist. But at a framework level, they can only treat all events as equal. What if our systems played historian, and said: each customer's experience with the UI must remain true. Each report someone has viewed must remain true. All internal events -- let's do what we want with those! Write our own story, optimized for business purposes instead of aligned to a clock that is already fictional. This session explores the possible usefulness of such systems, if they existed. Come prepared to explore beyond what makes sense, and seek out what might be possible.
Learning Outcomes:

• N/A

Abstract:
Special relativity tells us that when information takes time to travel, there is no universal forward march of time. Every system today has significant, unpredictable information delay. Distributed systems theory gives us ways of imposing a global ordering -- but what if we didn't? What if we said, "Hmm, we sold two of this item today. We only have one in stock. Let's say that the customer who paid for expedited shipping came first." Perhaps the clock is a crutch and we can climb farther without it.
With event sourcing and CQRS (Command Query Responsibility Segregation pattern), with languages like Bloom, the inklings of these systems exist. But at a framework level, they can only treat all events as equal. What if our systems played historian, and said: each customer's experience with the UI must remain true. Each report someone has viewed must remain true. All internal events -- let's do what we want with those! Write our own story, optimized for business purposes instead of aligned to a clock that is already fictional. This session explores the possible usefulness of such systems, if they existed. Come prepared to explore beyond what makes sense, and seek out what might be possible.
Learning Outcomes:

• N/A

Abstract:
Until recently, common wisdom held that humans stopped developing by their mid 20s. Whatever they were then is what they were going to be for the rest of their lives. In our own experiences as Agilists, we see the folly in this as we witness adults of all ages change to embrace agile as a way of thriving in a complex and confounding world. Our experience is supported by researchers who tell us that humans can develop throughout their lives. Instead of outward development, though, it's inner development; specifically one's mental complexity. They also tell us that although people can develop, there is no guarantee it will happen. Plenty of people stop.
At the same time, Agile has crossed the chasm and we see organizations of all sizes doing Agile -- kind of. Even the "doing" Agile part is not so healthy everywhere, never mind the "being" Agile part. The reality is just not as great as we Agilists imagined it would be. Is there a link between the two? Perhaps Agile requires a certain level of cognitive development to do well. If so, it's possible that we Agilists are bringing our way of working to corporate environments that are not developed to the necessary level. When we do this, are we agents of evolution? Specifically placed to aid the next unavoidable step in the unfolding of human development? Or, are we well-meaning zealots doing more harm than good? These are some of the questions we will consider as we look at our calling as Agilists and the moral responsibility that comes with it.
Learning Outcomes:

• N/A

Abstract:
The famous manifesto says we should
"Build projects around motivated individuals.
Give them the environment and support they need,
and trust them to get the job done."
Sometimes, these people are referred to as a self-organized team.
Self-organizing, as a term drawn from science, means some pretty clear things in the world of nature. But we don’t have mathematical models of how self-organizing works in teams. Is it a metaphor? What actually happens when a team self-organizes? What do we do that either encourages or discourages it?
And what do you do when the team hasn't self-organized in a way you like? Does self-organizing guarantee success? What do you do to help a team self-organize into something productive rather than, say, a dysfunctional family?
This session is a place for us to explore these and other questions, together. Let’s see if we can come up with some more concrete and practical ways to understand the idea of self-organized teams.
Learning Outcomes:

• N/A

Abstract:
(Before we even get into it: Heads up! This isn't a talk or a lab, this is a facilitated full-scale particpatory session. The attendees will be bringing the juice-for-change and the value.)
Virtually all agile practitioners begin by either reading about agility or talking about it with a mentor. In those heady moments the clarity and simplicity of the agile concept seems like a dream come true. But after a certain amount of time, what comes true is something different. Parts of it are the dream, and other parts, parts we never suspected, are the reality. In this structured conversation, we'll explore the things we know about agility that we were not taught, but could only learn in the field.
The sparking question: What do you know about agility from your direct usage of it that you didn't learn when you were studying it?
We want to know what you learned only in practice, and when and how you learned it. This is not a presentation, it's a high-participation multi-logue. Come prepared to listen and to talk!
Learning Outcomes:

• N/A

Abstract:
(Before we even get into it: Heads up! This isn't a talk or a lab, this is a facilitated full-scale particpatory session. The attendees will be bringing the juice-for-change and the value.)
Virtually all agile practitioners begin by either reading about agility or talking about it with a mentor. In those heady moments the clarity and simplicity of the agile concept seems like a dream come true. But after a certain amount of time, what comes true is something different. Parts of it are the dream, and other parts, parts we never suspected, are the reality. In this structured conversation, we'll explore the things we know about agility that we were not taught, but could only learn in the field.
The sparking question: What do you know about agility from your direct usage of it that you didn't learn when you were studying it?
We want to know what you learned only in practice, and when and how you learned it. This is not a presentation, it's a high-participation multi-logue. Come prepared to listen and to talk!
Learning Outcomes:

• N/A