• help focus on things we can change, or situations to seek/avoid, help focus change efforts
  • Pentagon with Key Drivers of Empiricism represented in HIGH / LOW values related to INDICATORS
  • Why These Dimensions?
    • the dimensions reflect different forces that affect the beliefs and values in an organization
    • capture the essence of challenges that organizations face
    • provide a useful way for gaining insight into attitudes
    • provide a useful way for discussions about what people might be able to do to change those beliefs
    • stimulate a discussion about the challenges face to adopt an agile approach
    • think about what they may need to do in response
    • explain what led them to their conclusions
    • are they happy with where they are today? Is their current approach working?
  • Intended to:
    • bring to the surface assumptions that may be unspoken but important
    • cause people to think about the environment in which they are considering introducing an agile or empirical approach
  • There are no “right answers”, and you should be careful not to steer the group toward a particular answer
  • The model is normally used in a group exercise
      1. divide up into smaller teams of no more than 5 people, potentially along product lines
      • Have each team plot each dimension for the product/team they work on
      • If there are people from different products in the same team, have them plot each product
      1. Draw lines between the dimension scores, using a different color for each product
      1. Interpreting the results:
      • OBJECTIVE: for them to come up with their own action plan of things to try
      • 3.1 stimulate a discussion about the challenges face to adopt an agile approach
      • 3.2 think about what they may need to do in response
      • 3.3. explain what led them to their conclusions
      • 3.4. After everyone has presented, you’ll want to help the group draw some conclusions
      • 3.5. are they happy with where they are today? Is their current approach working?
    • Example of results
      • Low Competitive Threat or Market Growth Potential
      • Highly Competitive Threat or Market Growth Potential
      • Low Solution Uncertainty
      • Low Willingness to Experiment
      • Low Decision Decentralization
  • Key Drivers of Empiricism: different forces that affect the way people think about agility
    • External: reflect the things that often attract organizations to agility
      • Competitive threat
        • degree to which the product is challenged by competitors
        • High Indicators
          • Low market share
          • Many competitive alternatives
          • Low customer lock-in
        • Low Indicators
          • High market share
          • Few competitive alternatives
          • High customer lock-in
      • Market Grow Potential
        • degree to which the product has growth potential in its market, or can significantly grow revenues
        • High Indicators
          • The product is in a market that is rapidly expanding
          • Dominant competitors are weak and losing market share
          • It is possible to increase product revenues by growing absolute numbers of customers or by growing market share
        • Low Indicators
          • The product is in a market that is contracting
          • The product’s market share is shrinking
          • The product is a “cash cow”
    • Internal: reflect the beliefs that often prevent organizations from becoming agile
      • Willingness to experiment
        • the degree to which the organization is comfortable with planning uncertainty
        • High Indicators
          • Forming hypotheses and running experiments to test assumptions when uncertainty increases
          • Planning in small increments, measuring, then inspecting and adapting to revise plans
          • Deviations from plans are regarded as simply new information
        • Low Indicators
          • Increasing plan detail when uncertainty increases
          • Adding more milestones and reviews when uncertainty increases
          • Deviations from plan are regarded as negative outcomes
      • Solution Uncertainty
        • the degree to which the organization believes that they are certain about what the market or customers need
        • High Indicators
          • Running frequent focus groups to assess customer needs and reactions to alternatives
          • Instrumenting applications to obtain actual usage information
          • Running A/B tests to test or validate product ideas
          • Lack of long-term product roadmaps, or having product roadmaps that change over time
        • Low Indicators
          • Planning approach in which change requests are regarded as negative outcomes
          • Little actual customer usage data is available
          • Release plans largely track to product roadmaps
          • Detailed product roadmaps extended several releases into the future
      • Decision Decentralization
        • expresses the degree to which decision-making authority is dispersed in the organization
        • High Indicators
          • Allowing teams to be responsible for a budget they can spend however they see fit to help them deliver on their goals
          • Allowing teams to make hire/fire decisions without seeking manager approval
          • Allowing teams (including Product Owner) to make product decisions
        • Low Indicators
          • All spending decisions must go through a manager with appropriate budgetary authority
          • All hiring and firing decisions are made by a manager
          • All product decisions are made by management