For the 3rd and last retrospective of this series, I wanted to make the team aware of the notion of experimentation so dear to Agility.
Since people had not really been trained, the idea was to be able to give them a foretaste of what we are trying to do to solve complex problems (in the sense Cynefin) by the structuring of experimentation.
Good reading ! 🙂
Retrospective 3: Structuring experiments
Preparation
- Experimentation structuring templates in A3 format so that it can be seen by everyone in the room and in several copies
- Carton
- markers
Animation
(7′) Introduction and Overall Iteration Score
As I did in the previous retrospective, the idea is to introduce the framework of the session and start by surveying the general satisfaction following the iteration. (see previous review)
(7′) Review of previous actions
A short sequence has been added in order to be able to check the actions previously mentioned and see if they were able to achieve the expected results. Indeed, if the team has the impression that we always issue a lot of actions and that nothing is ever done, it's lost!
The idea here is simply to make the exercise as fluid as possible by proposing a simple mechanism:
- We state the subject / the action that was to be implemented
- We agree on its status:
- OK : does and gives the expected result
- KO : not done or does not give the expected result
- MORE : done but not yet giving the expected result, worth pursuing
- MODIFY : done or not but worth modifying for better results
- We move on to the next action.
Without generating too many discussions, this allows us to be able to review the various actions, to be able to decide on the follow-up concerning them and to move forward in the current session.
| Note: At the same time, it's a way to make the team aware of a usable and applicable mechanic for the experiments that will follow. |
(7′) Acknowledgments
In view of the composition of the team and the last somewhat difficult periods, it seemed important to me to solicit a little "tenderness" in the interactions.
| Note: To give some context, the team is made up of around thirty people spread over 2 service companies which, more or less, are separated into skills silos (Business Analysts and Developers). It has not always been easy in the exchanges even if things are going better and better. |
However, I knew that it was again a gamble in the sense that people are not necessarily used to this exercise.
However, right in my boots, I asked everyone to express at least one thank you to someone in the room for what he/she had been able to do for him/her during this iteration.
To do this, we did the following:
- Writing thanks on Post-it (one thank you, one Post-it)
- Inscription of his name in a corner of the Post-it so that this thank you is not anonymous
- Then, hand-to-hand delivery of his Post-it to his recipient without giving him more details
Each one recovering a certain number of Post-its, I asked them not to read them right away and to keep them for later, like a gift to open at home, in the intimacy. Well ok, the second reason was mainly to be able to move forward in our agenda! 😛
When the participants went to give their Post-its to their recipients, we could see smiles, looks of surprise, light interactions between people who rub shoulders but who do not always take the time to say thank you with intention.
I remember a person who challenged me saying:
But I already do! I always thank the person at the time!
I replied that it was already very good and encouraged him to continue.
But the exercise here is not the same: it's asking yourself for a few minutes to make an act of gratitude, with intention, to a person. It's not only giving him a gift with this positive feedback, but it's also realizing yourself that you're not alone despite the difficulties you may encounter.
(15′) Lever for improvement
For this section, I invited everyone to think of a game-changing lever for improvement in the next iteration if it came true.
We use the 1-2-4-All mechanic again in order to be able to bring out some main ideas from the group.
(10′) Structuring of experimentation
So that these ideas do not remain superficial, we will try to structure them in the form of experiments.
To do this, I invite each group to follow the following format:
We believe that <hypothèse>
To check it we <action>
We will be satisfied when <critères de succès>
The main idea is to make the lever for improvement identified earlier as concrete as possible. The test of passing through the experimental structure can be quite difficult, especially in the part success criteria which involves an element of measurement.
| Note: One team did not succeed in writing its idea in this format and at the same time realized that its action was not concrete enough to obtain the expected results! |
It was important to greatly facilitate the discussions, whether to help in the far from obvious exercise, but also to focus the participants on the writing of the experiment to prevent the debates from taking up all the space.
(7′) Group sharing
Each group can then present its experiment in a few minutes, which can be challenged by the other teams for clarification, precision or reformulation.
The session is then closed.
Conclusion
For this last retrospective of the series, I wanted to make the team aware of the process of structuring experimentation that I particularly like. It may seem quite heavy at first sight, but it is when you understand its intention that it becomes all the more powerful.
In my opinion, the basic idea is quite similar to the User Story format: ask the right questions to focus our attention on the right things.
Making it as concrete as possible is not easy and that is why structuring experimentation is a good way to do it, even if it means abandoning actions that would not pass this test!
To conclude this series of articles on some larger scale, time-limited retrospective formats, I would say again that what matters is not the format you are going to use but rather the intention you have.
Observe, listen and define this intention which will carry the structure of your workshop
and by building for your team, you will be unlikely to go wrong 🙂
