Hi Paul,

Thanks for joining the conversation.

I agree the question of *sustainable* change is often overlooked. It would indeed be interesting to see what had happened (in each case study) since the change initiative had “relaxed” into BAU. One aspect of Agile options that has long interested me is how long such an adoption lasts in the face of a wider organisation that has not changed its mindset. I generally see a half-life of some 9 months.

– Bob

As always with chemistry however, the only way to be sure is to run an experiment and observe the results, make some changes and then run it again.

Same with knowledge work – understand the system, make changes, observe the impact.

I’ve read the first case study in the book mentioned, and noted that the author had since left the organisation. I would be interested to see if the successful changes that were made have remained in place, and have been built upon. i.e. have the system and organisation truly been changed by the intervention, or were there unexpected outcomes that have impacted the whole?

Paul

Hi Mark,

My thanks for your contribution to the conversation.

The case studies in the book do a great job or articulating the sea-change in e.g. management and staff attitudes to change that a whole-organisation perspective brings about, even when that sea-change is limited to the folks in a small area within a large organisation.

– Bob

Hi John,

My thanks for your contribution to the conversation.

You raise a very fair point, and one my most recent edit has attempted to (partly, and indirectly) address.

I’m thinking it’s a matter of context and perspective. The Vanguard case studies illustrate vividly how the folks making their (local) changes thought they had improved matters “enormously”, especially from their own quality-of-life-at-work (autonomy, mastery,purpose -> motivation) point of view. (Never to be sniffed-at, mind you). The more objectively-reported benefits (costs, service levels, customer satisfaction, etc. were (relatively) more modest, I thought.

Also, the case studies in the book highlight the value of taking an organisation-wide perspective on changing things, even if the actual changes are limited to one group, unit, or department. This blog post is (not least) about the risks of improving things locally *without* such an organisation-wide sensitivity. I commend the book to you as a means to illustrate the difference this shift can make to otherwise purely “local” interventions.

– Bob

Are the practices and techniques used in Agile software development not the effort of “ordinary folks” in “ordinary organisations” working within their own “limited scope and reach”? Can you explain this one further?

PS: I know this is a very early draft 🙂