4 ms·

Being an agile coach isn’t management

whstl 1y ago
Off topic, but: It's interesting how everyone thinks they're "managers" in "agile" teams. Scrum Masters, Product Owners. I've even had Designers and QAs trying to make decisions on behalf of the team.
- MrGilbert 1y ago
  That sounds like a dysfunctional team to me, to be honest.
  - whstl 1y ago
    It is indeed.
- azangru 1y ago
  > It's interesting how everyone thinks they're "managers" in "agile" teams. In scrum in particular, teams are supposed to be "self-organizing and self-managing". Perhaps that's why :-)
  - whstl 1y ago
    Well, yes, but "self-managing team" implies the team manages itself, not that one person picks up the slack. As the sibling poster said, this is a sign of a dysfunctional team.
- jamesfinlayson 1y ago
  > QAs trying to make decisions on behalf of the team Oof, hits close. Suggestion from a QA to implement some feature that is hugely difficult to implement? Business agrees so developers now need to make it happen.
  - whstl 1y ago
    Yep. The crazy one for me was QA not going through business and just marking new feature ideas as "bugs", and then informing business that "there are still lots of bugs to be fixed". Cross-functional teams can be very toxic when there is no decision maker, and someone suddenly decides they don't want to really collaborate.
MrGilbert 1y ago
Leadership and Management are two pair of shoes, I get that.
- dogleash 1y ago
  I don't consider Agile bureaucrat positions leadership either. At best they're clerical support and training. In practice they can become officious ticket minders.
  - MrGilbert 1y ago
    Obviously, I strongly disagree. Hope you will experience better Agile Coaches through your career.
azangru 1y ago
The author of the article writes: > You’re not the player, you’re the coach. Sometimes that means strategy and big-picture thinking. Sometimes it means shielding your team from dumb shit. Sometimes it means buying someone coffee and saying, “You’re not crazy. This is hard.” Guess what good agile coaches or scrum masters are expected to do :-)
- kortilla 1y ago
  Very little of that. Agile coaches don’t deal with under performers, promo packets, retention issues, etc. Agile coaches are also not able to shield the team from dumb shit. They don’t have the power to make priority calls on what the team is doing.
  - MrGilbert 1y ago
    I'd argue it's not my job to "shield the team". It's my job to enable the team to question "dumb shit" and put them in a position where they can discuss these matters constructively with management (or whomever). Also - I "deal" with underperformers because my team needs to deal with them. It all comes back to "what benefits the team". I see that there are a lot of different varieties of agile coaches out there.

Off topic, but: It's interesting how everyone thinks they're "managers" in "agile" teams. Scrum Masters, Product Owners. I've even had Designers and QAs trying to make decisions on behalf of the team.

MrGilbert 1y ago
That sounds like a dysfunctional team to me, to be honest.
- whstl 1y ago
  It is indeed.
azangru 1y ago
> It's interesting how everyone thinks they're "managers" in "agile" teams. In scrum in particular, teams are supposed to be "self-organizing and self-managing". Perhaps that's why :-)
- whstl 1y ago
  Well, yes, but "self-managing team" implies the team manages itself, not that one person picks up the slack. As the sibling poster said, this is a sign of a dysfunctional team.
jamesfinlayson 1y ago
> QAs trying to make decisions on behalf of the team Oof, hits close. Suggestion from a QA to implement some feature that is hugely difficult to implement? Business agrees so developers now need to make it happen.
- whstl 1y ago
  Yep. The crazy one for me was QA not going through business and just marking new feature ideas as "bugs", and then informing business that "there are still lots of bugs to be fixed". Cross-functional teams can be very toxic when there is no decision maker, and someone suddenly decides they don't want to really collaborate.

MrGilbert 1y ago

Leadership and Management are two pair of shoes, I get that.

dogleash 1y ago
I don't consider Agile bureaucrat positions leadership either. At best they're clerical support and training. In practice they can become officious ticket minders.
- MrGilbert 1y ago
  Obviously, I strongly disagree. Hope you will experience better Agile Coaches through your career.

azangru 1y ago

The author of the article writes: > You’re not the player, you’re the coach. Sometimes that means strategy and big-picture thinking. Sometimes it means shielding your team from dumb shit. Sometimes it means buying someone coffee and saying, “You’re not crazy. This is hard.” Guess what good agile coaches or scrum masters are expected to do :-)

kortilla 1y ago
Very little of that. Agile coaches don’t deal with under performers, promo packets, retention issues, etc. Agile coaches are also not able to shield the team from dumb shit. They don’t have the power to make priority calls on what the team is doing.
- MrGilbert 1y ago
  I'd argue it's not my job to "shield the team". It's my job to enable the team to question "dumb shit" and put them in a position where they can discuss these matters constructively with management (or whomever). Also - I "deal" with underperformers because my team needs to deal with them. It all comes back to "what benefits the team". I see that there are a lot of different varieties of agile coaches out there.