Assentire® Innovation Audit 2.0 monitoring Agile Groups and Teams Nov 2016 by Rod Willis

Assentire® Innovation Audit 2.0 For Agile Groups & Teams

The Measurement Tool for Monitoring Group Dynamics

The opportunity to explore how, your Team or Group is perceived on a periodic basis. Questions are structured to explore each individual’s view of the following Internal Group Dynamic (Intra-Group Dynamic) Group Environment Dynamic (Inter-Group Dynamic) Answering the questions take typically less than 10 minutes. When you answer the questions, please keep in mind the group or team you want to explore.

Inspired by C Argyris, D Schön, D Stone, E Deci, R Ryan, D Coghlan, E Schein, Robert Kegan & many more…

By proceeding, you confirm you are doing so voluntarily Paper Option Step 1

Provide this document to all members of the group you wish to work with.

Step 2

At the end of each period, ask each member to score all 26 questions.

Step 3

Take note of the Group Dynamic Score (GDS) where GDS = A–B+80 This can range from Zero to 160

Step 4

Take note of the Environment Dynamic Score (EDS) where EDS = C This can range from Zero to 100

Step 5

Record the GDS & EDS using an anonymized process for each member (you may want to track how these scores change over time) as you gather the results.

Step 6

If you would like support in diagnosing challenging Group Dynamics, make sure the detailed scores (all 26 questions) for all members are kept in a safe place. When you are ready to explore, feel free to contact Rod.Willis@assentire.net and he will explain how you can take the diagnosis further. Online Option

Step 1.

If you would like an easier way of gathering anonymized data, we can provide an online version using the same questions. You will also have access to a Real-Time online report if you take this path. There is a charge for this service, which is based on the scope of your project.

Step 2.

Monitoring & diagnosis for larger quantities of data is much easier using this approach.

Step 3.

If you are using this tool extensively, please make contact with rod.willis@assentire.net as there is also the option of contrasting your results with a national ‘NORM’ group based on The Innovation 2015 version*. Alternatively, you may be interested in creating your own ‘NORM’ group. For more information, please visits Innovationaudit.net

*The Innovation Audit 2015 was used as part of a research project across 9 organisations with a total of 174 participants. A few of the Innovation Audit questions have since been reworded, however the sentiment of each item remains unchanged.

Reflecting on your Learning Dynamic

Exploring the Learning Dynamic – More Agile Mindset Score the following statements in terms of your experience of your Team or Group. How strongly do you agree with the following, where 0 = Not at all and 10 = Strongly Agree Many views: When a group member expresses a different view or position, his or her reasoning is explored in an open and inquiring way, e.g. I wonder why you have that view? Collective: Members of the group are keen to hear the views of others, even those issues that may be seen elsewhere as ‘undiscussable’, such as the ‘Elephant in the room’. I see this all the time. Ask: I commonly hear members of the group testing their own assumptions and inferences as well as those of others Collaborate: It is common that members of the group explore and design different approaches jointly rather than individually Open: Members of the group around here are happy to share relevant information, not keeping it private Trust: There is quite a high level of trust across the group Understand: It is rare to encounter misunderstandings, unproductive conflict and defensiveness in the group Enhanced work-life quality: Over time, I have seen the quality of working life improve A = Sum of above values .

Reflecting on your Control Dynamic

Exploring the Control Dynamic – Less Agile Mindset Score the following statements in terms of your experience of your Team or Group. How strongly do you agree with the following, where 0 = Not at all and 10 = Strongly Agree One view: When a group member expresses a different view or position, their reasoning is not explored or asked for Individual: Members of the group don’t want to hear another’s view in case they find theirs is not the best. I see this reluctance to listen all the time. Tell: I commonly hear members of the group telling others what decision should be made, or which course of action should be taken Manipulate: It is common that members of the group seek to establish a shared narrative with undisclosed methods, for example, saying: Don’t you think it would be a good idea if we outsourced the work? Closed: When a group member is advocating their position, they do not share their reasoning Mistrust: There is quite a high level of mistrust across the group Misunderstand: It is common to see misunderstandings, unproductive conflict and defensiveness in the group Degraded work-life quality: Over time, I have seen the quality of working life decline B = Sum of above values .

Reflecting on your Environment Dynamic

Exploring the Environment Dynamic (The context you are working within) Score the following statements in terms of your experience of your Team or Group. How strongly do you agree with the following, where 0 = Not at all and 10 = Strongly Agree Collaboration: People openly ask questions and are invited to participate in problem-solving Communication: People actively listen and acknowledge perceptions of all group members Choice: Choices are offered within the organisation including clarification of responsibilities Motivation: Coercive controls, such as rewards and comparisons with others, are minimised Feedback: Sincere, positive feedback is provided that is intuitive, factual and non-judgemental Development: Talent is developed and knowledge shared to enhance competency and autonomy Monitoring: Monitoring and support is integrated at all times for all group members Support: There is awareness and control of the amount of Action and Learning required (assimilation demand), holding back where necessary Culture: People actively look for conflict of interests without judgements or blame and negotiate any changes Change: When people in the organization encounter opposition to change, they see this as an opportunity to learn, treating the objections as a form of organizational intelligence. They donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t assume everyone is always resistant to change Overall Environment Dynamic Score (EDS) is equal to C

C = Sum of above values .

Plotting your scores using ‘Snapshot Charts’ Case 1 This Group Dynamic shows a strong tendency towards the upper part of the plot. This would suggest many of the perceived behaviours observed across the group are more likely to enable the group to be agile and learn from what is experienced. This is because the dynamics are more about Learning than Control. You might think of this as a Growth Mind-set. This means the Group is far better positioned to be able to know when & how to respond to a VUCA environment.

Group Dynamic

VUCA = Volatility, Uncertainty, Complexity and Ambiguity. NB: Exploring the Group Dynamic is achieved by bringing the two semi-circles together as shown. The upper half represents the Learning Dynamic and the lower half the Control Dynamic. By shading the scores for all 16 questions, you start to see an image that represents how one individual perceives the group.

Group Environment ge

n Cha

Coll ab

orati on

Fe ed b

r ltu Cu

ac k

Choice

Monitor

Su pp or

s mm Co

This Group Environment shows that all areas are either near or above the mid point (4.0). There is known to be a direct relationship (not necessarily causal) between the Group Environment and the Group Dynamic. This would suggest this group is operating in an environment where Collaboration, Communications, and Motivation are perceived to be very strong and Support and Culture may be areas of possible exposure under times of pressure.

Dev elop

men t

NB: Please review the question directly associated with each label to ensure the definition is more clearly understood. So as we consider Culture, the definition is “People actively look for conflict of interests without judgements or blame and negotiate any changes”

n vatio Moti

Case 2 This Group Dynamic shows a strong tendency towards the lower part of the plot. This would suggest many of the perceived behaviours observed across the group are less likely to enable the group to be agile and learn from what is experienced. This is because the dynamics are more about Control than Learning. You might think of this as a Fixed Mind-set. As a result, it may not be well positioned to know when & how to respond to a VUCA environment.

Group Dynamic

Group Environment nge Cha

Coll ab

orati on

ac k

Choice

Fe e

r ltu Cu

This would suggest this group is operating in an environment where Choice is perceived to be strong. In this situation, individuals may feel they are offered Choices, however it may not feel “safe” to take up these choices due to the high tendency towards controlling within the group.

Monitor

Su p

s mm Co

This Group Environment shows that the majority of the areas are below the mid point (4.0) with the exception of Choice. There is known to be a direct relationship (not necessarily causal) between the Group Environment and the Group Dynamic.

Dev elop

The Group Dynamics are explored by individual or group based exploration and we recommend this is facilitated by someone who is already familiar with Group Dynamics as part of their everyday practice. Source: Assentire® Innovation Audit 2.0 MT for Agile Groups and Teams Nov 2016.docx

men t

n vatio Moti

Identify your Readiness Indicator for Group Collaboration Using the tables below, record your ‘GD Index’ and ‘ED Index’ results and record below each table GDS Sum (A-B) + 80 000 to 007 008 to 023 024 to 039 040 to 055 057 to 071 072 to 087 088 to 103 104 to 119 120 to 135 136 to 151 152 to 160

GD Index 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

GD Index = Look-up GD Index ED Index 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 3 0 4 0 5 0 6 0 7 0 8 0 9 0 10 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 1 10 2 0 2 1 2 2 2 3 2 4 2 5 2 6 2 7 2 8 2 9 2 10

Readiness ID 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32

Look-up GD Index ED Index 3 0 3 1 3 2 3 3 3 4 3 5 3 6 3 7 3 8 3 9 3 10 4 0 4 1 4 2 4 3 4 4 4 5 4 6 4 7 4 8 4 9 4 10 5 0 5 1 5 2 5 3 5 4 5 5 5 6 5 7 5 8 5 9 5 10

EDS C 000 to 004 005 to 014 015 to 024 025 to 034 035 to 044 045 to 054 055 to 064 065 to 074 075 to 084 085 to 094 095 to 100

ED Index 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

ED Index = Readiness ID 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65

Look-up GD Index ED Index 6 0 6 1 6 2 6 3 6 4 6 5 6 6 6 7 6 8 6 9 6 10 7 0 7 1 7 2 7 3 7 4 7 5 7 6 7 7 7 8 7 9 7 10 8 0 8 1 8 2 8 3 8 4 8 5 8 6 8 7 8 8 8 9 8 10

Readiness ID 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98

Look-up GD Index ED Index 9 0 9 1 9 2 9 3 9 4 9 5 9 6 9 7 9 8 9 9 9 10 10 0 10 1 10 2 10 3 10 4 10 5 10 6 10 7 10 8 10 9 10 10

Readiness ID 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120

Instructions Using your recorded 'GD Index' and 'ED Index', lookup the 'Readiness ID' and place a marker on the Readiness Indicator Chart

You can order a range of resources including A1 Posters

https://goo.gl/S28f4W Sample Readiness Indicator Chart (actual Posters will differ)

Reflecting on your Results

Plotting your Readiness Indicator for Group Collaboration

Reflecting on your Results

Alternative ways to use this plot There are two suggested ways of using this plot and many more to discover. Option 1: The pathway to a ‘Self-Organising’ team Capture how each member of the Agile working group perceive the Group Dynamics and Environment Dynamics to better understand the different experiences all members are having. As you consider ‘Level 1’ to ‘Level 5’ banding, the higher the level experienced, the more adaptable and collaborative the group is likely to be. This is a good indicator that the group may be maturing and become a ‘Self-organising team’ or maintaining the behaviours required to sustain a ‘Self-organising team’. For each participant’s perception, a pushpin or sticker is placed on the poster. Option 2: Understanding different perspectives Capture current and subsequent retrospectives. We suggest you use one colour pushpin to represent past retrospectives and another to represent the current. This way you get to see the Group Dynamic and Environment Dynamic over an extended period. You need to decide at what frequency you will gather inputs. We recommend linking to a routine activity within the team, so maybe consider at the end of each sprint. You also need to decide how you wish to gather the data individually or as part of a planning session. The aim is to capture one point per retrospective. Some form of aggregation will be required if you wish to take this approach. Review the example to see how this might look on the following pages.

Reflecting on your Results

Example Readiness Indicator for Group Collaboration

Reflecting on your Results

Free APP available here http://innovationaudit.mobapp.at/