Scrum Alliance & Star Trek

Max Keeler tweeted that the new Scrum Alliance director is new to Scrum.  I went over to the Scrum Alliance website and I see they have selected Donna Farmer as the new Managing Director.

Beginning October 1, 2010, Farmer will lead the non-profit organization, working with the staff and Board of Directors to realize the organization’s vision and mission.

Lately, there seems to be some turbulence in the Scrum world, after Tobias Mayer resigned from his SA staff role as creative director and renounced his SA certifications of CSM, CSP, and CST.  He then wrote a scathing blog post on the whole thing.  I've also read an email response to his post by the Scrum Alliance, over at the Agile Scout website. The whole situation was really quite disheartening.

I empathize with Tobias and what he went through.  I empathize with the Scrum community, as it evolves and tries to navigate through constant change.

But, let's go back to what Max tweeted about.  Max sent me a link to the source (if it stops working let me know).  Farmer admits to being new to Scrum.  Even though she is, should it matter?

My analogy is the latest incarnation of Star Trek.  When I heard J.J. Abrams was going to be the Director of the movie, I was shocked.  How could the franchise do this to us!?  Abrams admitted he wasn't even a fan of Star Trek.  This was blasphemous to hear.  How could anyone but a fan direct a Star Trek movie?

Well, though Abrams wasn't a fan, he took the franchise in a new direction and made a pretty damn good movie.  I'm not saying Farmer is going to be a savior for the Scrum Alliance but I want to give her the benefit of the doubt.

I will continue to be optimistic about the future of the Scrum Alliance and the Agile Alliance until someone like Ken Schwaber or Alistair Cockburn publish something that counters the very principles they stand for.

So, before we pass judgment on Donna Farmer, let's all get a extra-large popcorn and see how this plays out.

May the Scrum Alliance live long and prosper.

Graphic from ChipChick.com

PMBOK and detailing leadership

I read an article the other day over at Project Manager Planet. This work by Herman Mehling was titled "Project Manager or Project Leaders - What's in a title?"  It's a simple enough question but can have a complicated answer.  Herman points out that, for some, the titles are virtually synonymous. What can be confusing about the English language, at times, is different words can sometimes have the same meanings. In this instance, that is not the case. These are not synonyms!

Upon reviewing the PMBOK on the word, I found an uncanny absence.   It's really only mentioned a few times in the entire book!

Page 26 Project Managers...this high profile role requires

flexibility, good judgment, strong leadership and negotiation skills, and a solid knowledge of project management practices.

Page 240

Successful projects require strong leadership skills. Leadership is important through all phases of the project life cycle. It is especially important to communicate the vision and inspire the project team to achieve high performance.

Page 417 Appendix G

Leadership involves focusing the efforts of a group of people toward a common goal and enabling them to work as a team. In general terms, leadership is the ability to get things done through others. Respect and trust, rather than fear and submission, are the key elements of effective leadership. Although important throughout all project phases, effective leadership is critical during the beginning phases of the project when the emphasis is on communication vision and motivating and inspiring project participants to achieve high performance....

If it states on page 240 that successful projects require strong leadership skills, why is it not more thoroughly listed in the 4th edition?  If it's critical in the beginning phases, as listed on page 417, why is it not detailed?  Since "expert judgment" is listed as a tool & technique throughout the body of knowledge, I think PMI missed an opportunity to include "acts of leadership".  Perhaps we should start by renaming the 4th PMI process group from Monitoring & Controlling" to maybe include & Inspiring.

Thoughts on the topic?

Image Source: Flickr James @NZ

Nine Destructive Behaviours

Geoff Crane, in the time I've known him, has opened my eyes to the area of project leadership many ignore.  Geoff looks at things from a human perspective.  I know it sounds odd but many of us make objective, quantifiable calculations.  Geoff does as well but he doesn't ignore his gut feelings.  He writes about his knowledge and experiences on his blog Papercut Edge. Geoff recently wrote a series about destructive behaviors (behaviours for my colleagues in Canada) project leaders need to avoid; 9 of them in fact.  As I read each, I found myself nodding my head over and over again.  Yep, he nailed that one.  Yep, he nailed that one as well.

How did he do it!?  How did he describe situations that could have been taken from my biography?  Too bad I didn't have Geoff's book several years ago.  I could have avoided all 9 destructive behaviors.

1. The Sack
2. The Magpie
3. The Deer in Headlights
4. The Hungry Vulture
5. The Premature Solutioner
6. The Terrier
7. The Wanderer
8. The Anticipator
9. The Reluctant Puppet

When he decided to publish the series as an ebook, I was flattered that he asked me to write the forward.  Do yourself a favor.  Read his blog.  Read his ebook.  You'll be glad you did.

Forward from Nine Destructive Behaviors

To be successful as a project leader, you need to know destructive behaviour when you see it. And there is no better tool for this than Geoff's ebook! The Latin saying, ‘praemonitus, praemunitus,’ loosely translates as ‘forewarned is forearmed’. “9 Destructive Behaviours Project Leaders Need to Avoid” is an essential read for any individual wishing to be a successful project leader.

Get a free copy here!

Seven Leadership Styles

Recently, I've been re-analyzing different leadership styles of those in power of my former and current organizations.  I originally covered this subject back in 2008 after reading a book on the subject.  Regardless as to how I apply myself to my subordinates or how superiors react to me, everyone can be aligned with one of seven leadership styles.  Sure, I'll hear debate that there are 6, 4...  I believe this (alphabetically sorted) list covered the basics.

1. Autocratic - To make a decision without input from others.
2. Coaching - To provide instruction to others.
3. Consensus - To problem solve by a group as a whole.
4. Consultative - To invite others to provide ideas.
5. Directing - To give authoritative instructions to.
6. Facilitating - To coordinate or expedite.
7. Supporting - To provide assistance during the process.

I've been in the position where those above me in the org chart were very autocratic.  We've all been there and I'm happy that situation is in my past.  Having a consensus is not always the correct answer either.  When you open the decision to be made by a group, in order to make everyone happy, you commonly just agitate everyone. Sure, leading by committee can work for some companies but I've never seen it work really well for an individual.  Make your own decisions.  I would recommend doing more directing at the beginning of a project.  Do more coaching, facilitating, and supporting later.

Managers are those who need to do things well.  Leaders are those who need to do the right thing.  For the most part, I agree with the list.  But, on the grand scale of things, I think other interpersonal skills are more important.  Both effective decision making skills and being influential come to mind.

So, what do you think?