Great presentation! I like the question for "signs of improvements" from different perspectives. Will try this out, also the "silent art" is new to me and I will look into it.
22 дні тому
I LOVE the "signs of improvement". I can recommend looking into Solution-Focused Coaching. For instance the Scaling Question, or Miracle Question :). You can find videos on my channel about this as well :)
It was a useful method. It was interesting for me that you had at least a reason behind each practice. Thanks for sharing this video. I usually use a board that I call the Retro Board. I ask my teammates to input whatever pops up in their minds, and they want to discuss it in the retrospective. They do this during the sprint. This way, issues won't be forgotten. In the retrospective, we cluster and discuss issues to reach root causes.
3 місяці тому+2
Yea. That continues possibility to give input is a good idea. I also tell the team that the retrospective is the slowest way of making improvements, and they are highly encouraged to create their own experiments throughout the sprint.
Hey Carsten, I'm very intrigued by the Driver approach. It seems to focus on outcomes/target states rather than the actual steps. I'll definitely give it a try! I'm also curious about making the previous topics part of the voting. How does that happen? Do you put them next to the retro wheel? And if it gets voted, do you do another round of signs of improvement, or do you assign or reconfirm a driver? "My Default Retro" (1-4-2-5-7-8 😉) is based on the Tensions concept mentioned in the Loop Approach. I go around the (virtual) table at least once, allowing everybody to share and discuss one topic. No voting required. The downside might be that it's less structured or clear than, e.g., the retro wheel.
Місяць тому+1
Hi :). Thanks for taking the time to write. On the "Driver": I found that we would often create sub-optimal steps that didn't really solve the right things. Then we started to try and focus more on the outcomes we would like to achieve and then empower the 'driver' to figure out what steps they thought would deliver those outcomes :). After the intial writing of items on the board, we cluster them (affinity mapping) and then we do a vote between the different clusters to help figure out where there is the most appetite / energy. Then we look at the top voted cluster and try to figure out what signs would we like to see. I like the idea of going around the table, I have, honestly, never tried it like that, but it would be quite fun to try out :).
Great presentation! I like the question for "signs of improvements" from different perspectives. Will try this out, also the "silent art" is new to me and I will look into it.
I LOVE the "signs of improvement". I can recommend looking into Solution-Focused Coaching. For instance the Scaling Question, or Miracle Question :). You can find videos on my channel about this as well :)
It was a useful method. It was interesting for me that you had at least a reason behind each practice. Thanks for sharing this video.
I usually use a board that I call the Retro Board. I ask my teammates to input whatever pops up in their minds, and they want to discuss it in the retrospective. They do this during the sprint. This way, issues won't be forgotten. In the retrospective, we cluster and discuss issues to reach root causes.
Yea. That continues possibility to give input is a good idea. I also tell the team that the retrospective is the slowest way of making improvements, and they are highly encouraged to create their own experiments throughout the sprint.
Yea, that would be great, too.
Hey Carsten, I'm very intrigued by the Driver approach. It seems to focus on outcomes/target states rather than the actual steps. I'll definitely give it a try!
I'm also curious about making the previous topics part of the voting. How does that happen? Do you put them next to the retro wheel? And if it gets voted, do you do another round of signs of improvement, or do you assign or reconfirm a driver?
"My Default Retro" (1-4-2-5-7-8 😉) is based on the Tensions concept mentioned in the Loop Approach. I go around the (virtual) table at least once, allowing everybody to share and discuss one topic. No voting required. The downside might be that it's less structured or clear than, e.g., the retro wheel.
Hi :). Thanks for taking the time to write.
On the "Driver": I found that we would often create sub-optimal steps that didn't really solve the right things. Then we started to try and focus more on the outcomes we would like to achieve and then empower the 'driver' to figure out what steps they thought would deliver those outcomes :).
After the intial writing of items on the board, we cluster them (affinity mapping) and then we do a vote between the different clusters to help figure out where there is the most appetite / energy. Then we look at the top voted cluster and try to figure out what signs would we like to see.
I like the idea of going around the table, I have, honestly, never tried it like that, but it would be quite fun to try out :).
What does drwaing with poistits on a whiteboard look like? (in an online setting) Can you post an example?
I’m sorry I can’t share an example. But it’s often chaotic at first, then order slowly emerges.
I can recommend to just try it out :-).