Diversity & Inclusion

Agile Coaching Ethics - Front AND Center

Agile Coaching Ethics - Front AND Center

An agile coach, who I’d never met before, reached out to me the other day to have a conversation. She was from India, working in Europe, and had a woeful tale that she shared with me…

It seems as if she had two similar experiences as part of different agile coaching teams. In each case, a lead agile coach (who was male, white, and experienced) misused their authority and positional power when collaborating with her and other female coaches on their teams.

Apparently, those coaches/leaders were…

  • Authoritarian to the point of abusing their positional authority;

  • Intimidating, overpowering, and dismissive to women;

  • And, when confronted with their behavior, they ignored all feedback AND made things worse.

Because of the corporate culture around her, the poor coach felt that there was no place to go for help. So, she simply tolerated it until she found a way to leave the job.

As I said, this repeated itself one more time at another organization.

White Privilege and Authenticity in the Coaching Relationship

White Privilege and Authenticity in the Coaching Relationship

I was recently asked about how privilege shows up in the coaching relationship. Although the topic of privilege has been discussed in various capacities, I have not yet seen or read enough people tackling the issue of White Privilege. Let me one up that, I have not yet seen WHITE PEOPLE tackle this issue.

As a white, cisgender female, who provides coaching, I have a lot of privilege. The number one area that I have the most privilege in is my Whiteness.

With that said, I thought it would be helpful to provide some of my thoughts and suggestions on how to address it in both the role of being Coached as well as Coaching others.

Let’s look at it from Three main areas – self-awareness, ask/address, and learn & growth.

Diversity, Inclusion, AND Equity

Diversity, Inclusion, AND Equity

Luke Hohmann presented the following scenario the other day on LinkedIn

If you’re wondering how you think about salary and fair pay, consider the following scenario I gave to my kids at dinner a few nights ago.

A white man and a black woman apply for the same job. They are equally qualified. During the interview process, the you ask the candidates for their salary requirements. The white man provides a number that matches the salary target established by your company. The black woman provides a number that is lower. If you hire the black woman, do you pay her what she requested or the established salary target?

It was fascinating to listen to the debate that ensued. One argument is that the company should maximize profits, so paying the black woman what she requested would be fair. A counter argument is that quite often minorities don’t know what they’re worth, so they often request salaries that are below market rates, and the company should pay the target salary.

Personally, I don’t feel that this is a hard choice. Leaders who have ‘power’ over such things as compensation should use their privilege to compensate people fairly.

I fully agree with Luke’s last point. There needs to be fairness and equity in compensation and there is really no excuse for shying away from it.

Diversity & Inclusion – A Financial Decision?

I tossed whether to respond to this post or not because I know Perry Riggs and know how incredibly thoughtful and well-intentioned he is. But I kept coming back to wanting to respond, so here I am…

Perry shared this great post entitled—The Financial Imperative of Diversity & Inclusion.

It’s well written and makes a very good point. However, it inspired me to make another point. A “Yes, and…” to Perry’s, if you will.

Why don’t we simply consider Diversity & Inclusion to be—

  • A moral imperative?

  • The right and proper thing to do?

  • Long overdue?

  • A societal obligation?

  • Just plain, normal?

Regardless of the financial implications…

That’s how I see it.

Stay agile my friends,

Bob.

Lost Art of INVITING Speakers

You’ve all seen them. A conference puts out a generic Call for Speakers or Call for Papers with a link to a website. Then perhaps sends a few email reminders and posts about the upcoming deadline. The expectation is that everyone—

  • Is aware of the website;

  • Has a clear idea to share;

  • ·Understands how to write a clear and compelling submission;

  • Has the incentive, courage, and time to do it;

  • And has the patience to wait for (most of the time) a polite decline letter that provides no

Then the deadline expires, the database is analyzed, and a program emerges.  

But often these same conference committees complain about the lack of diversity in their speakers. Or complain about the “same old voices” submitting. Or just complain.

Another Time

I remember a time, in 2010, when John Fodeh was the program chair of the EuroSTAR Conference. That year it was being held in Copenhagen, Denmark. If you’re not aware of it, EuroSTAR is a software testing centric conference. At the time, I was lightly aware of it, but I would not have thought of submitting a talk.

John reached out and invited me to do a keynote. Something that I had not done before. And he invited me to deliver a few half-day workshops as well.

He connected to me via my Software Endgames book that I’d published in 2004. While I was speaking at testing conferences, it was a “stretch” for John to reach out to me. One that surprised, frightened, and delighted me, all at the same time.

At the time, I’m not sure I appreciated the effort he put forth to reach out to me and work with me on crafting my talks at the conference. He helped me refine my topics, themes, and ideas. And he boosted my confidence along the way. In a way, he was a shepherd for me. Gently guiding me into his vision for the overall conference themes. And he was very generous with his time.

Back to the Future

I believe today’s conference organizers need to look back as a way of moving forward and perhaps follow John’s example.

The traditional Call for Submissions is not inclusive enough. It doesn’t invest sufficient effort in thinking broadly about possible invitations. It doesn’t invite new voices nor reach out to new communities. And it certainly does not mentor or shepherd them forward.

I know, I know, but it’s EASY. It would be so hard to personalize the craft of pulling a program together by actually mining for new voices and stretching out to be more inclusive.

But you know what. That’s too bad. If we want more—

  • Diversity

  • Inclusion

  • New voices

  • Novel ideas

  • Fresh approaches

  • Interesting takes

  • Contrarian points of view

  • Creative formats

  • did I say Diversity?

Then passive solicitation of presentations for your program isn’t good enough. It’s too impersonal. And, quite frankly, it’s a lazy approach.

Conference organizers around the world I have a call to action for you.

If you want more ideas, more vibrancy, more inclusion, more energy, and more excitement, then reach out and do more invitation…and more shepherding.

I think you’ll be amazed at what emerges.

And, John, thank you for extending my invitation. I’m not sure I ever truly thanked you for your incredibly generous offer and your gift of time.

Stay agile my friends,

Bob.

We need more women in agile coaching!

This post is directly related to my post yesterday about The Privilege of my Agile Coaching.

At the end of 2020, many things are running around my brain. Among them are—

  • Diversity and Inclusion

  • Women in Agile

  • State of Agile Coaching

As I was sitting with my third cup of coffee the other morning, I became curious. (not an uncommon thing ;-)

More specifically, curious about the number of women who are Scrum Alliance CEC’s (Certified Enterprise Coaches and CTC’s (Certified Team Coaches). So, I went to the Scrum Alliance website and I counted them. 

I found that—

  • Of 125 total CEC’s, 17 were women (14%)

  • Of 174 total CTC’s, 28 were women (16%)

Keep in mind that it’s quite common for CEC’s to also have the CTC. So, there is some overlap in the numbers.

With that being said, are you surprised by the numbers? I was!  

It’s not clear to me what a “good number” would be. But these seem off in some way. I was expecting (hoping for) them to be higher. I’ve collaborated with such talented women in the agile community over the years, that it just seemed to me as if ~50% or more of the coaches should be women.

And since this is a snapshot, and I don’t have access to historical data, I don’t know if these are trending better or worse over time. I certainly hope better. 

I also wondered if I applied any other diversity lenses to the coaching community what might those percentages be? Would they be equally disappointing?

The Real Point

But the real point in my writing this is to focus on what can we (me, every CTC, CEC, the Scrum Alliance board, and every member of the Scrum Alliance) do to actively increase the diversity in our coaching ranks?

I’d really like this post to generate some energy, ideas, and momentum in this space. So, do you have any of those? And what can you personally do to make a difference?

That’s something I’m deeply thinking about as I enter 2021. Look for me to take more targeted action in this space in 2021…

Stay agile my coaching friends,

Bob.