Inconvenient data – Part 2 – The Developers, and their pet Lizards, Monkeys and Humans

Continuing from Part 1...

What to do?

Well, in a word – if you're thinking of kicking off with numbers – "DON'T!"

The truth is that 'Agile Metrics' really are the purest form of Aristotelian Logos (an appeal to logic), but we don't want to begin with logic; we need to start our conversations by using Ethos (ethical appeal to the character) and even some Pathos (emotional appeal for sympathy).

As renowned Neuroscientist, Psychologist, and modern-day Philosopher, Antonio Damasio, drily put it:
"We are not thinking machines that feel; we are feeling machines that think..."
We need to understand where psychology meets anatomy. We need to understand the 'hardware' upon which our mental 'software' is running.

"Conway's Law" meets "The Evolution of the Human Brain"

We may playfully simplify the model of the human brain's evolution as going through three distinct phases:
  1. "The Lizard Brain"
  2. "The Chimp Brain"
  3. "The Human Brain"
OR, at little more scientifically, something that approximates to:

  1. The Brain Stem [evolved circa 500 million years ago] is responsible for involuntary, reflexive actions, and for keeping us breathing whilst we are asleep.
  2. The Amygdala [evolved circa 300 million years ago], responsible for our quick, emotional thinking.
  3. The Prefrontal Cortex [evolved circa 100 million years ago] is responsible for our higher powers and executive function.

And so, in the beginning, there was the feeling...

Human beings make decisions first at the subconscious, emotional level – i.e. we base our judgement upon how a particular option makes us feel – and then, once the decision is made, reach for a logical 'cause-and-effect' explanation and justification afterwards.

So, when an individual's actions are visibly inconsistent with their stated ideals, it's this 2-stage Cognitive process that gives rise to Cognitive Dissonance and the ensuing Mental Gymnastics. But, from the point of persuasion, it's really not the only consideration.

The 2-stage sequence is especially evidenced scientifically by the poor souls who, through brain injury or degenerative disease, lose the mental capacity to feel and express their emotions. With this loss not only goes the ability to empathise with others but also to make a decision. Sufferers can very often discuss the pros and cons of each option laid our before them; they just can't pick one for themselves! So, as Agilists, we have to recognise that when we attempt to persuade others of the benefits of Agile adoptions / transformations, we first need to focus our address to the correct part of the brain!

We need to understand that opponents will be emotionally invested in the status quo, so we need to start with the common ground.

The Father of Western Philosophy can really help here...

"But how do we do that?"

Join me in Part 3, where I'll discuss NLP, Logical Fallacies, and Management.
Location: England, UK

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Little's shopping basket

Image
We've all been there. Waiting. Waiting. Looking at the queue ahead of us. Waiting. Glancing at our watches. Wondering when we're going to get our turn... In the 1960s, Dr. John Little famously provided the Mathematical proof for the following helpful formula (which later became known as Little's Law). L = ⅄W Where, in this instance: L is the average number of customers at the checkout. W is the average time the customer waits. ⅄   is the average rate of new arrivals. Now, crucially, in a stable system - where no customers are created or destroyed on their way through the checkout process(!) - the Departure rate will equal the Arrival rate. Therefore, in a stable system, we can happily equate these to queuing theory terms. Such that: L ≡ average W.I.P. (Work in Process) W ≡ average Cycle time ⅄ ≡ average Throughput E.g. if there are 5 of us queuing at the checkout, 4 people ahead of us, and the cashier is processing on average 1 person every 2 min...
Read more

CFDs – What does "Good" look like?

Image
Is the Cumulative Flow Diagram the most unloved and misunderstood tool in the Lean-Agile Toolbox? Despite its decorative colours and inherent simplicity, I think it might be. I too often see struggling Developers and Agile Coaches not even noticing that the shape of their CFD is visibly describing to them the effects of team and organisational dysfunction. I'm left to conclude that they don't have a mental model of what "Good" might look like. So let me take you on a little tour, a simplified '3-bin' (3-state) version of the ideal CFD, and help you see what I can see... NB: In these two examples, I shall assume it to be a Stable System ; that the Backlog Items are of equally small size; that the capacity and efficiency of the team remains constant; and that there is a steady, FIFO demand for work the team performs. Defining the 3 states: "New" – Items waiting in the Product Backlog. "Active" – Items being worked upon by th...
Read more

Inconvenient Metrics – Part 1 – The 5 Psychological Coping Mechanisms

Image
In a Lean-Agile environment, we're continuously trying to improve the product development and delivery processes, and, to that end, as William Edwards  Deming once famously quipped: "Without data, you're just another person with an opinion." So, one might imagine that most fair-minded people would be only too happy to inform their judgement by means of empirical evidence (especially since Lean-Agile provides us with so much of it!). But, in truth, when sub-par statistics, metrics or KPIs are presented to an uninitiated audience, the resulting levels of ' Cognitive Dissonance ' and ' Mental Gymnastics ' can sometimes be quite surprising! I n my experience - ignoring complete  'non-sequiturs' - t here is usually a retort which takes the form of 1 of  5 Psychological 'Coping Mechanisms': A claim of Inaccuracy A claim of Unrepresentativeness . A claim of External fault . A claim of Irrelevance . Or a claim of Sheer hopelessne...
Read more