22

This is the sort of things people write books about, so this is just going to touch on a few things at an incredibly superficial level. Autonomy leads to motivation: Research has shown that autonomy is a key intrinsic motivator. Autonomy leads to ownership: By allowing teams to make their own decisions, they feel like the successes and failures of those ...


21

If the team is truly self-organizing, then the members would recognize that they have an issue that needs outside assistance and would, among themselves, find a way to resolve it. One option would be seeking someone else, either inside or outside the organization, who is a subject matter expert who can provide an expert decision. Another option would be to ...


11

In Scrum, "the team" is ultimately deciding how to implement stuff (within constraints that may be given by the organization.) Of course, this depends on the team being able to work together and come to a consensus. If one half insists that code must be written in C while the other half doesn't accept anything but Java you don't have a coherent ...


9

Surely they are more benefits, but two that come to mind: Motivation: Daniel Pink lists autonomy as a key component of the intrinsic motivation of people in his book Drive: The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us. Adaptation becomes more difficult when the people involved are not empowered or self-managing. A Scrum Team is expected to adapt the moment ...


8

This is a source of disconnect between Scrum and many real-world instances. The Scrum answer would be that the Scrum Team is responsible. The Scrum Guide says that Scrum Teams are self-managing, which means that "they internally decide who does what, when, and how". However, Scrum Teams often exist in the broader context of an organization. There ...


7

Helping a team to be more autonomous is one of the most difficult things to do because you achieve it by doing less rather than doing more. As a Scrum Master, I sometimes: Attend a ceremony/meeting and say nothing. There is often some initial confusion but after an awkward silence typically somebody steps up and starts to drive the meeting. Hold back, even ...


7

Self organizing is not an automatic statement about a SCRUM team. You don't get it simply by using SCRUM. The goal is to get to that point, and SCRUM's advocates claim that it helps you get there. The self organizing concept is tempered by a key line from the SCRUM guide Individual Development Team members may have specialized skills and areas of focus, ...


6

Self-organizing teams is a trend in the professional world for some time. An increasing amount of organizations are turning to self-organizing teams to increase ownership, teamwork and collaboration. The typical structure (what many envision when talking about self-organizing) for these teams is the “no leader”-approach. In this approach, teams adopt a ...


6

The chance that a team is evenly split on a decision between (options) and even after discussion becomes deadlocked exists but it is extremely small. There is a higher chance that two people in the team have opposing opinions and adamantly hold to those opinions. In that case, the majority could push their idea through, but that will probably have the same ...


6

TL;DR Nope, nope, nope. Just "no." The question is based on the faulty assumption that you can force change on other people (hint: you can't), and is wishing what seems likely to be poor team composition into the cornfield. Why You're Asking the Wrong Question The Product Owner that I am working with has agreed "to try this self-organising ...


5

From what you are describing, it looks like: You want your team to be (more) self-organizing and proactive in doing the work, and engaging in conversations with you (the PO) when they spot something missing. You want them to be more Agile. Your developers are more accustomed to being told what to do and to receive detailed task for which they don't really ...


5

This question is a bit difficult to answer without knowing your team's dynamics. That said, it's always good to understand and verbalize the goals of each event and to make sure those goals are met throughout the ceremony, even if things are running smoothly. Timeboxes are only there to ensure you don't go over the allotted time. In the event you hit the ...


4

I'm the Scrum Master on a cross-functional team that initially had little to no experience with Agile. I think Barnaby's answer is great and definitely something to strive for. From what I've observed, though, if the team doesn't have a certain level of maturity (Agile-wise), they won't necessarily learn if you leave them to their own devices. If in their ...


3

I think, there are following options: Seek for volunteer -- but there are some decisions with no volunteer, because some people are not interested very much, and others are just busy. Responsible should be person, who is most interested in implementing the decision -- there is always existing one. But problem is: the person can be very busy with his current ...


2

answering your own questions huh? :D In my organisation we let that happen organically as part of the decision process. In order for this to happen we have worked hard on certain conditions: We have a sound understanding of everyone's skills and preferences and do our best to maximise their usage accordingly (we even include this as part of our resource ...


2

TL;DR Your goal of encouraging self-managing collective ownership of the product development process is the right one for encouraging team agility. However, the team as whole appears to lack sufficient experience (and possibly the teaming skills) required to fully embrace agility. The solution is essential to find the X in the implicit X/Y problem. That ...


2

Taking a different approach from Barnaby, what I would suggest is to focus on what is needed from her, rather than what is problematic from her. (Or combine the two approaches.) Go over the Scrum Guide with the entire Team, paying emphasis to the section about roles' responsibilities. Then, if/when she starts asserting her presence into the Team (in a way ...


2

While it does seem like a psychological question and doesn't relate to methodologies, I don't agree it's a dead-end and you can't change how people behave. But first you need to understand the underlying reasons for such behaviour, could be: She doesn't think others will do a good enough job She wants to make things quickly and believes that while others ...


1

"Removing an employee" is strictly a managerial / human-resources matter. The team should not realistically expect to be able to "vote someone off the island." Merely because they want to.


1

As already mentioned, you cannot convince a dominating personality to not be dominating. I'm also not sure she sees the world as you do, which is: One in which she directs and manages the team but also largely takes responsibility for the output and upkeep or alternatively we can work together to build a self-organising team to take ownership and ...


1

Team as a whole The definition of self-organization gets complicated by the many forms self-organization can take, which depend on a lot of factors: on the company, on the project, on the individual team members's strengths and weaknesses, on their skills, and on their willingness to do certain things and not others (like for example taking the lead, be it ...


1

The key will be to have ways to highlight the impact of the Product Owner micro-managing. If you can't demonstrate the impact, there is little to stop them from drifting back to their old ways. For example: "Sally was blocked today as they were waiting on the Product Owner to decide what to do next. If they were able to make that decision themselves or ...


1

"Sometimes ... authority has its privileges." You prefer not to have to use it, but if a "self-directing" team is deadlocked, sometimes you need to reach down, grab the log, pull it out of the stream and throw it up onto the bank.


1

It is part of the Scrum Master's responsibility to remove impediments and the Product Owner's responsibility to optimise the value of the team's work. Clearly they should have a role to play in resolving this kind of problem. Other specialists could be consulted to provide another opinion. Making teams self-organising doesn't guarantee co-operation, it just ...


1

There are also some best practices of self-organizing teams exist. You should teach your team how to work without managers. For example: Ultimate transparency on all information by the project -- if there is one who knows more then anyone else, then team members are not equal what prevents self-organizing. Advice process -- anybody can make any decision, ...


1

To help the team find out consensus and who might want to act on actions I like to use fist-of-five voting. 0 fingers (a fist): No way, terrible choice, I will not go along with it. A way to block consensus. 1 finger: I have serious reservations with this idea, but I vote to move forward, but I’d prefer to resolve the concerns before supporting ...


1

The short version is that you don't. Work that must get done is picked up by someone - or it wasn't important to get done. You mention teal organizations. If you look at the example organizations in the book Reinventing Organizations, people decide the work they want to take on. This is different than volunteering to be assigned. No assignment ever happens, ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible