How to get a very dirty whiteboard sparkly clean

When you let the writing on whiteboards stay on for long enough – say, a couple of month –  dry-erase markers stop being “dry-erase” and start being “leave unwipeable shadowy traces behind”. You’re left with an unsightly board, no matter how often you wipe. Water doesn’t help, at least not against dried up German Edding markers.

Even worse are traces of the slim tape that some teams use to create tables on their boards. Its remains are stickier than candy floss and way uglier.

wepos-kunststoffreiniger Fear not, my colleague Frieda has the miracle cure: Clean your whiteboard with “Wepos Kunstoffreiniger” (= Wepos plastics cleaner) and it will become perfectly clean and smoother than a baby’s butt. Way smoother, actually.

That’s also the catch: After wiping your board with the cleaner you have to wipe it with water. Otherwise no sticky note will stick to the board. Try it, it’s quite fascinating. The sticky notes fall right off of the infinitely smooth surface.

If you don’t have tape traces you can also get rid of the old marker markings with a wet microfibre cloth. Again, kudos to Frieda for finding this trick.

The very last resort, for people without any equipment, is ye olde overwriting trick: Retrace the old writing with a whiteboard marker. The solvents in the marker’s color will also work on the old markings and make them wipeable again. It’s works, it’s just tedious.

Do you have any neat tricks for cleaning dried-in markers?

What can you do if retrospectives repeatedly go sideways?

Not all retrospectives go well. When you support a team as a Scrum master, there are all kinds of strange behaviours or team dynamics that can make retrospectives go sideways, time after time. A facilitator can’t always prevent that. At least I can’t. Not always. Got lots better, though. Over the years I’ve picked up several different angles to get retros back on track (what I think is the “track” anyway). Enjoy:

Choose specific activities

When I started out as a Scrum master I thought my only option was to carefully choose activities to nudge people into the direction I thought they needed to go. And for some situations that works well.

The team acts the victim. Others need to change, there’s nothing they can do? Try Outside In, Circles & Soup, If I were you, …

There is a specific “weak” area they don’t like to look at? Communication Lines for (surprise!) flow of information, Quartering for Tickets, Company Map for Power Dynacmics, …

Talk to individuals

Then I started to address individual behaviour in spontaneous 1:1s whenever I could snatch the person alone. For instance: “I’ve got the impression that you often address me during the retrospective (/standup/…). The information is not for me, it’s important for the others. I would love for you to try to look at the others more.”

Other example: “You’re very quiet during the retrospectives. I think you’re perspective is valuable and your view and ideas are missing. We are missing out. I’ve also noticed that you often aside, a bit removed from everyone else. Are you not feeling as part of the team?” In this case the answer was no. If it’s yes, you’ve got a whole other problem to work on.

“Would you humor me and take a seat smack in the middle next time?” In this case it worked. He picked a middle seat and engaged more. (I had addressed the quietness before with other suggestions. I chalk that win up to the seating arrangement \o/)

Set the topic

Then I re-learned from “Agile Retrospectives” that I can set a topic for the entire retrospective. (I usually let participants set the topic, i.e. collect topics and then Lean Coffee their most important ones.) Setting the agenda gives you a lot of power. Wield it wisely.

Style Critique

This one I learned from a great ex-colleague. He facilitated a meeting among team leads. He was the boss of about half of the people in the room. When we thought we were done with the retrospective, he went meta on us and reflected our own behaviour back to us, namely that we talked over each other and didn’t really let each other finish. One possible interpretation of this is lack of respect. AFAIR he then made the express wish for us to be more considerate next time.

On the personal level I was stunned, I was part of the group and had not really noticed our subpar behaviour. On the meta level I was thrilled. I remember thinking “Wait, you can do that? This is great (if sparsely used)”. It was a new tool to address group / team problems.

Formerly I would have just shaken my head in despair that the team has such poor dynamics and tried one of the above approaches, often to no avail.

I would not have dared do that as a new facilitator. Also I wouldn’t have had enough examples of behaviour to compare against and know when it’s worth to go meta critic. Now I sometimes do it after the actual retrospective, for example in this case:

“You’ve off-handedly mentioned that X’s person’s behaviour is detrimental for team Y, yet doing anything about this behaviour is not part of your solution. From my perspective it looks like your action item will work around issues with X. That seemed very strange to me. Worth pointing out.”

It’s just an observation, something to ponder. I won’t press the issue. They can dwell on it. If it’s important it will come up again.

So, there they are. My re-railing tactics. What are yours?

PS: Interested in retrospectives? Sign up to the Retromat newsletter to get related news and tricks!

Improve your Retrospectives with this 1 weird trick: Liftoffs

When health is concerned, preventing issues altogether is often easier than treating them once they’ve manifested. The same can be said for retrospectives:

In retrospectives we often make up for the fact that we didn't have a liftoff

Either Deborah Hartmann Preuss or Steve Holyer said that in a conversation and it rang true. Very few teams get a proper liftoff and they lose weeks and months of productivity to initial friction. In contrast, a proper liftoff sets up a team for success by laying a solid foundation of agreements and shared understandings. Then the team doesn’t have to spend their retrospectives patching up problems that could have been avoided.

What are liftoffs exactly?

You might know them as kickoffs, jump starts, launches or project starts – a meeting at the beginning of a team coming together and / or starting to work on something. I’m going with the name “liftoff” because of the book by the same name written by Diana Larsen and Ainsley Nies.

Book Cover Liftoff

A huge chunk of “Liftoff” describes Agile Chartering as a way to clarify purpose, alignment and context of the team and work. Srinath Ramakrishnan summarises it like this:

“Agile chartering is a lightweight minimum documentation approach to creating initial understandings, agreements and alignment about the work and how it will be accomplished.”

A liftoff is a longer event, lasting from a day up to a week. All the necessary people take part, i.e. the team, the project sponsor and whoever else is needed to provide context and insights. Many liftoffs are also off-site which improves focus.

If you forgo a liftoff you often spend a lot of retrospectives on clarifying things that should have been clarified from the get go. Of course there are activities that can help, such as:

But you try to compensate for a lack of alignment in short stretches of time and typically with crucial people & their knowledge missing. You really wanna do liftoffs, trust me. Your retros will go a lot smoother.

So, what if you missed the start? The project is already underway and you find yourself with a team patching up cracks in the foundations instead of “clicking”? Well, it’s never too late to reboot with a mid-project liftoff to (re)gain footing.

Check out “Liftoff” for details on how to run one :)

PS: Interested in retrospectives? Sign up to the Retromat newsletter to get related news and tricks!

Story Cubes for Retrospectives

Sometimes we have guests over who want to learn more about our Open Friday and see it in action. Lately we’ve been asking for a session in return so that visitors add to our pool of knowledge. These guest sessions are often interesting and sometimes you strike gold: Cynthia Hohlstein and Kevin Plechinger hosted an inspiring session on and with Story Cubes. Because neither of them blogs, I get to share their idea with you: Story Cubes are sets of 9 dice with images on them. The images cover a wide range of motives, such as a speech bubble, a sheep, a star, a hand or a walking stick figure. The idea is that you roll 3 dice and then tell a story that contains the 3 motives you rolled.

3 Story CubesThis can easily be turned into a fun activity for agile retrospectives if players answer a question instead of just telling a story. Cynthia and Kevin already had a couple of ideas:

  • What was last sprint like?
  • How do customers view our product?
  • What’s the state of agility here in our company?
  • What was your carreer path? How did you get here?

We spend the hour-long session answering questions in groups of three. It was very interesting because the cubes prompt you to talk about aspects you wouldn’t normally have touched on – you tell the truth and still have to incorporate the 3 images. Among others, we used the “Customer View” question and it was quite revealing. Story Cubes help with changing perspective and add a fun element.

Thank you Cynthia and Kevin for introducing us to story cubes!

PS: Interested in retrospectives? Sign up to the Retromat newsletter to get related news and tricks!

 

5 more things I learned at Agile on the Beach 2016

From Kat Matfield’s session “User Research in an irrational world”:
1) If at all possible, look at records of what people actually did in the real-world situation, (screen recordings, chat logs, …) instead of putting them into a research situation (in which they will always pay more attention) or asking them to remember (memory is extremely unreliable).

From Gez Smith’s session “Agile Marketing”:
2) Maybe 1 thing goes viral per year. Rest is planted and pushed with fake accounts

From Darci Dutcher’s session “Running killer workshops without killing yourself”:
3) If you use dot-voting and don’t limit the number of votes you get information about the long tail of interests. Not relevant in short retros but maybe for a longer workshop.

4) A retro is a sub-kind of workshop. I never thought of retrospectives in those terms. Nice realization.

From my own session:
5) Putting your cell phone near a mic is a really bad idea (audio feedback)

I also learned about Jeff Patton’s Cups, the sticky note bonus shape and that I’ll try to remind more speakers to repeat the audiences question before answering it.

All in all, a very nice (knowledge) haul :)

 

 

Need an idea for your next agile retrospective? Or 127? Retromat eBook!

Wow, this was a looooong time in the making, but it’s finally here: The Retromat eBook! So, if you’ve ever wanted to front-load your brain with each and every activity in Retromat, check out the Retromat eBook!
Cover Retromat eBook

Find the perfect fitting activity for your team and situation! Never run the same retrospective twice. Unless you have to bring one back due to popular demand :)

While I was at it, I updated and included in a lot of useful information around retrospectives, such as the basics, a default planPhase 0 & increase follow-through on action items and the interview series about remote retrospectives. I hope the result is useful to you :)

PS: If you’re the source or submitter of one of the activities currently in Retromat you get a free copy! Just email me! Ssee green box below for contact details.)

PPS: Interested in retrospectives? Sign up to the Retromat newsletter to get related news and tricks!

Of Baby Elephants and MVPs

As you know, I’m a sucker for a good metaphor be they coconuts or hosting. I’ve got a great new one for you: Baby Elephants! Fantastic, right?

Well, yes, it’s promising. Baby elephants – What’s not to like. But what are they a metaphor for, pray tell?

Cute baby elephant courtesy of Beratung Judith Andresen

Cute baby elephant courtesy of Beratung Judith Andresen

Judith Andresen introduced baby elephants as a metaphor for MVPs at Agile on the Beach 2016. One immediate benefit is that it short circuits endless, mostly fruitless discussions along the lines of “What exactly is an Minimum Viable Product?” “We need  an Minimum Marketable Feature instead!” “No a Minimum Loveable Feature is the way to go!” “No, it has to be a …”

Instead of arguing about different concepts, baby elephants give people concrete images to work with:

  • “I think we’re building a teenager elephant here, not a baby anymore.”
  • “We’ve got too many baby elephants in the stable already. Let’s get those out before acquiring a new one.”
  • “What are young mammoth trees (which the elephant is supposed to move) in our context?”

Judith’s fable includes much more, e.g. the context in which a baby elephant is an excellent MVP. Read the whole fable about nature-oriented forest management with baby elephants here.

Phase 0 – Checking follow-through in retrospectives

You are probably familiar with the 5 phases of a retrospective, as described in Agile Retrospectives by Esther Derby and Diana Larsen. For years now I sometimes have a block before these 5 phases. I call it “Phase 0” and use it to check up on what happened to the action items the team agreed on in the last retrospective.

After all, retrospectives serve a purpose. In the long run, we want to improve and that means trying out things. If all that ever happens is talking and nothing ever changes due to retros, than why do them? Plus, teams quickly learn to resent retros in this case.
Change happens

I got the idea for Phase 0 from a team that was amazing at follow through: Each retro they added all action items and rule changes (we didn’t know about working agreements back then) to a big on-going flip chart. Each item had a “revisit”-date attached to – the date when the team thought they’d be able to judge the effect (usually 2, 4 or 6 weeks). At the beginning of each retro we would go down the list of all open items that had reached the revisit date and inspect them. Did the team do it? Did it work as intended? If yes, rule changes were made permanent and actions crossed off. If not, the items were consciously dropped or changed.

They had continuous improvement down to an art. It was a joy to facilitate their retros. They devoted a huge chunk of time to this process – 20-30 minutes out of 60. That sounds like a lot (it is!) but it worked very well for them. By the time they had analyzed the list, they usually had covered a lot of the things that bugged them.

I’ve never again seen such consistent follow-up. My Phase 0 is very bare bones compared to this: I bring the list of last retro’s agreements and ask what happened with them, boiling it down to 5 minutes.

This accomplishes several things:

  • It lets the team know that someone cares about what happens. (Whenever I remember to, I’ll also ask during the iteration – genuinely curious, not annoyingly!)
  • I can spot problems with follow-up early. And hopefully the team will notice them too

With a mature team, I’ll do this every once in a while. If I think there’s a problematic pattern, I’ll do it more often. I try my damnedest not to be accusing, but if the team consistently does very little of what they agreed to do, that’s indicative of a problem. Phase 0 lets us find this so that we can work on the lack of follow-through.

Curiously enough, I’m not the only one to come up with an extra phase before the 5 phases of lore. At least two other people have developed similar concepts: Marc Löffler and Judith Andresen. I’ve only recently heard about Marc’s ideas. I’m told it’s also something with checking follow-through but I’m relying on hear-say. I’m much more familiar with Judith’s work and her “Intro” is more elaborate than my Phase 0: She does an Intro at the beginning of every retrospective and it consists of the Agenda, restating the Vegas rule & the Prime Directive, and checking follow-through & team rules.

So, there’s at least 3 people who independently arrived at the concept of checking last retro’s agreements at the beginning of the next one. And those are just the Germans! Is anybody else doing this?

PS: Interested in retrospectives? Sign up to the Retromat newsletter to get related news and tricks!

Bonus shape for sticky notes

One of the topics in Darci Dutcher’s session “Running Killer Workshops Without Killing Yourself” at Agile on the Beach was promisingly called ‘Sticky note party tricks’.

“Don’t really use them at a party. Other people do not get excited about sticky notes.”
- Darci Dutcher

Well, I’m the kind of person who does get excited about sticky notes and that’s why I present to you the sticky note bonus shape: Diamonds! (Is “Diamonds are forever” now stuck in your head? You’re welcome! *evil laughter*)

fm_diamond-shape

This is super handy for when you want to color code stickies and don’t have enough different colors. Yeah! I’m excited! Aren’t you? ;)

Credits: Learned it from Darci Dutcher who learned it from Adrian Howard who learned it from Jeff Patton