2. Confrontation Acceptance Criteria
given:
a gap, broken promise, or bad behavior
when:
I confront the person
then:
problems are resolved
the relationship benefits
note:
to confront means to hold someone accountable,
face to face
4. You work with 4 persons on a project programming gets you better results than
which is behind schedule and over budget. solo programming, and were until today
You were brought in 2 weeks ago by your decided to keep doing it most of the time.
manager as a technical leader, to help with Last week You had a second discussion
the project completion. The quality level with the manager about the very same
of the code is quite low. The requirement subject, without success.
was: “take this legacy system and port it to
Yesterday, your manager had a 1 to 1
this new environment, iso-functional”.
meeting with every one of you. Debriefing
Explanations about what the system is
with the team members today, you learn
expected to do are coming under the form
that he told them as he told you: “stop
of 200 bug reports.
pair programming, or else I will get you off
On day 1, you proposed that all debugging, the team and retrograde you”. Every team
testing and programming be done in pairs. member approves of pair programming,
The team agreed and have been enjoying but is unwilling to take risk with his/her
some (modest) results as of today. position fighting against management.
On day 3, the manager privately asked you
to stop the pair programming stuff, as the
project schedule is already very late. You
tried to convince him that PP was good for
the team, to no avail.
You and the team observed that pair
5. Work on me first: choose what and if
Choose a response group:
“Not my problem”
6. Work on me first: choose what and if
Choose a response group:
“We had it coming. Let’s get
back to work”
7. Work on me first: choose what and if
Choose a response group:
“We have to talk to him”
8. Work on me first: choose what and if
Choose a response group:
“I have to talk to him”
9. Work on me first: choose what and if
Choose a response group:
“Not my problem”
“We had it coming. Let’s get
back to work”
“We have to talk to him”
“I have to talk to him”
What would you do ?
How would you proceed ?
10. Signs that you’re dealing with the
wrong problem
your solution doesn’t get you you want
you’re constantly discussing the same issue
you’re getting increasingly upset
✔ ✔
✔ ✔
✔
✔ ✔
11. Helpful tools to get to the right
confrontation
Content / Pattern / Relationship
Unbundling Consequences and Intentions
Prioritizing
16. Work on me first: master my story
Form groups
One of you: share an
experience of a gap,
broken promise,
bad behaviour
Others: help her state
her story, investigating
with a curious stance
29. Describe the gap: start with safety
people feel unsafe when
you don’t respect them
you don’t care about their goals
maintain mutual respect
establish mutual purpose
32. Confront with safety: make it easy and
motivating to solve the gap
gather again in groups
recall situation #3
brainstorm to find what
would be enabling and
motivating for the
person to solve the problem
33. Making it easy and motivating
don’t use power
expose natural consequences
stay in dialogue
don’t misdiagnose motivation and ability
avoid quick advice
explore the 6 sources of influence
34. The 6 sources of influences
MOTIVATE ENABLE
SELF
WEAKNESSES
OTHERS
STRUCTURES
35. Who are we..
Agile Retroflection of the Day:
https://twitter.com/Retroflection
Agile Calendar:
http://www.hanoulle.be/calendar/
My book Who is agile:
http://www.leanpub.com/whoisagile/
I give Free Life Time support*on anything I do
(* My life not yours )
cthibaut@octo.com
Yves@PairCoaching.net Twitter: @TOF_
Twitter: @YvesHanoulle
www.hanoulle.be
38. History
Version 0.5 Internal text Version
Version 1.0 Internal version with pictures
Version 2.0 XPDays Benelux 2011 1, 2 December 2011
Version 2.1 Mini XPDays Benelux 2012 1, 23 April 2012
Notes de l'éditeur
You work with 4 persons on a project which is behind schedule and over budget. You were brought in 2 weeks ago by your manager as a technical leader, to help with the project completion. The quality level of the code is quite low. The requirement was: “take this legacy system and port it to this new environment, iso-functional”. Explanations about what the system is expected to do are coming under the form of 200 bug reports.On day 1, you proposed that all debugging, testing and programming be done in pairs. The team agreed and have been enjoying some (modest) results as of today. On day 3, the manager privately asked you to stop the pair programming stuff, as the project schedule is already very late. You tried to convince him that PP was good for the team, to no avail. You and the team observed that pair programming gets you better results than solo programming, and were until today decided to keep doing it most of the time. Last week You had a second discussion with the manager about the very same subject, without success.Yesterday, your manager had a 1 to 1 meeting with every one of you. Debriefing with the team members today, you learn that he told them as he told you: “stop pair programming, or else I will get you off the team and retrograde you”. Every team member approves of pair programming, but is unwilling to take risk with his/her position fighting against management.