Sharing Knowledge
and Making Decisions
Together to Reach
Goals and Get Better
Auteur Stephan van Rooden
Sharing Knowledge and Making
Decisions Together to Reach
Goals and Get Better
Introduction
Take a look at these two pictures below:
STEPHAN VAN ROODEN
AGILE CONSULTANT
When asked which one of these two pictures you consider
being a group? Most likely you chose the photo on the left
over the photo on the right. But why? The reason behind this
is you implicitly, accept a definition of the term group close
to the ones adopted by social psychologists.
A group consists of two or more interacting persons, who
share common goals, have a stable relationship, are somehow
interdependent, and perceive that they are in fact part of a
group (Paulus, 1989)
1
Why do people join groups?
People join groups to pursue a common goal or to satisfy a
mutual interest. This allows individuals to achieve things that
would not have been possible alone. Making groups makes
a lot of sense. Consider an organization for example; this is
a perfect example of a collection of individuals focusing on
achieving a mutual goal. However, there are other reasons
why people join groups.
Next to satisfying mutual interests, being part of a group
provides a sense of security. Finding safety in numbers. The
more you are, the better you stand. Why would we have
unions that represent a collection of individuals against the
power of corporations?
Paulus, P.B. (Ed.). (1989). Psychology of group influence (2nd ed.) Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum
Bezoekadres
Postadres
Prowareness
Postbus 2903 2601 CT Delft
2601 CX Delft
Brassersplein 1
With lots of energy, enthusiasm and ambition
Stephan helps organizations, teams and
individuals to further improve software
development.
Biography
I have always thought I was destined to
become a project manager. After being a
Business Intelligence Consultant and project
manager, I started as Scrum Master for several
Web Content Management projects. Since I
wasn’t experienced in this subject, I naturally
acted as a servant leader for the team.
I tried to adopt Scrum the best way I could at
the organizations I worked for, but only after
following a Professional Scrum Master course,
I really understood what Scrum was about and
why these few simple rules were there. This
resulted, not only in a better understanding for
me on the power the Scrum framework has,
but it immediately resulted in better adoption
of Scrum at the company I worked for, resulting
in better software for their customers. Very
soon after, I decided that I would like to help
other organizations and its employees see the
same power the Scrum Framework has to offer
like I did.
Tel: 015 - 2411800
Fax: 015 - 2411821
www.prowareness.nl
www.scrum.nl
2
Groups also serve basic psychological needs. People are
social animals; they have a basic need to interact with
others. As Maslow’s need hierarchy describes, the need for
interaction, there is another need that is fulfilled by being
part of a group. Being part of a group also nurtures selfesteem. Belonging to a successful group boosts self-esteem
of the individual’s that are part of the group.
Difference groups and teams
Before connecting the characteristics of a group to a Scrum
team, let’s clarify the difference between a group and a team.
The difference isn’t really that big. In fact, a team is also a
group but it makes a coordinated effort to reach a goal. This
means that they work more closely together over a long
period of time to accomplish a goal.
This also applies to for a Scrum team who, being selforganizing and cross-functional, work close together in short
iterations towards a goal, commonly referred to as a Sprint
Goal. To optimally function as a team they are typically
working together for a longer period of time.
This whitepaper discusses some of the goals Scrum Teams
share and provides a background from social psychological
research on how to optimally use the potential power of a
Scrum Team.
Goals Scrum Teams try to accomplish by:
Sharing Knowledge and Making Decisions Together to Reach Goals and Get Better.
Sharing Knowledge
One of the main purposes of having groups: Sharing
Knowledge! Knowledge sharing has been around for
centuries. For example, parents transferring knowledge
to their children, or workers exchanging best practices. In
traditional models of education, copying the knowledge and
experience of a fellow classmate was generally considered a
bad thing. However, nowadays in the ‘new economy’, the reuse of a colleague’s knowledge and experience is considered
necessary in order to survive.
Bezoekadres
Postadres
Prowareness
Postbus 2903 2601 CT Delft
2601 CX Delft
Brassersplein 1
Definition and type of Knowledge
Defining knowledge as a“…fluid mixture of experience,
values, contextual information and expert insight that
provides a framework for evaluating and incorporating new
experiences and information.” Davenport & Prusak (1998)
Polanyi divided, already in 1966, knowledge into two types;
tacit knowledge and explicit knowledge. Tacit knowledge is
knowledge in people their minds and is complex to transfer.
It is deeply rooted in people their actions, commitment
and involvement. Explicit knowledge on the other hand is
structured, codified and more easily transferable. Both types
you want to be able to transfer to other people in a group.
However, transferring tacit knowledge requires a more rich
communication method in order to be successful. [link].
Social Exchange theory
Why do people share knowledge? What motivates people to
share what they know? Do they share it because they feel
they must, or perhaps do they share it because it makes them
feel good about themselves? One of the theories explaining
this knowledge sharing behavior is the ‘social-exchange
theory’. In short, this theory states that we only help one
another after weighing the costs and benefits. People try to
maximize their benefits and minimize the costs. This theory
seems to imply that helpful acts are non-altruistic. This does
not mean that people do unselfish acts; satisfaction is a byproduct of this act. However, social norms influence people
in doing more unselfish acts. Motivating people to do so will
result in more sharing of knowledge.
Motivation
Creating a culture that promotes sharing knowledge will
influence the willingness to share knowledge. According to
the social exchange theory, people are not willing to share
their knowledge when they cannot get something out of
it. People need to get motivated to share knowledge. This
is confirmed by studies showing that, when people are
motivated by moral obligation, they are less likely to act
out of self-interest. Self-interest reduces the willingness to
share knowledge when sharing knowledge face-to-face.
People can be motivated intrinsically or extrinsically to share
knowledge. In the study of McLure Wasko & Faraj published
in 2000, people share their knowledge from a sense of
moral duty. This intrinsic motivation of people, who want to
‘give something back to the community’, is perceived to be
more successful than extrinsic motives to share knowledge.
Extrinsic rewarding only gives temporary benefits, but on the
long term is less successful.
Tel: 015 - 2411800
Fax: 015 - 2411821
www.prowareness.nl
www.scrum.nl
3
The ‘crowding out effect’ is the effect that extrinsic
motivators decrease the intrinsic motivation of a person,
resulting in a devaluation of the intrinsic motivations to share
knowledge. Besides this, the other aims; making knowledge
visible and make the role it plays clear, have a huge influence
on interpersonal knowledge sharing.
Common knowledge effect
Based on the previous paragraph, being part of a group
would make sense, because this may increase the intrinsic
motivation to share knowledge. However, this isn’t always
the case! Other studies have shown that it isn’t obvious
people will share their knowledge to others. In fact, when
asked to share knowledge in a group, the basic tendency
for people is to share on that knowledge that is already
known to others in a group. This effect is called the ‘common
knowledge effect’. People will not automatically share
knowledge in a group. This effect is proven to decrease as
time goes by and the group is together for a longer period
of time. So, that is why also in the Scrum Framework it is
stressed that having a stable team for a longer period of time
is absolutely crucial.
There is a cure!
Not only time can help you with overcoming this knowledge
effect. There is a relatively easy way to motivate a group to
actively share knowledge. When facing a problem, if you
indicate to the group there is a solution (regardless of the
fact if you know what it is exactly), but that they have to
figure this out themselves. At that very moment the group
will start sharing knowledge. This makes sense because you
are presenting them a challenge and you present them with
a common goals/interest to find this solution. Basically what
you are trying to achieve is that they get the feeling they have
to beat you to come up with a better solution. So you are
triggering the social exchange theory.
Making Decision Together
Group decision making
There is no better feeling than being part of a group that is
able (or at least feel they are) to solve every problem that
is thrown at them. Our society now is so complex that one
individual can no longer possess all the knowledge; he
cannot oversee the entire picture. The necessity to organize
us in groups has never been higher. Scrum tries to achieve
that as well. Assemble a group of individuals who together
are able to win the game. To solve any problem thrown at
them by the product owner. This also means that we as a
group have to make decisions together as well...and that is
not that easy!
Bezoekadres
Postadres
Prowareness
Postbus 2903 2601 CT Delft
2601 CX Delft
Brassersplein 1
Benefits of decision making in groups
Despite its not easy, there are some major benefits for
teams to make their own decisions. First, the information
and knowledge present in a group is more complete than in
smaller groups. Two heads are better than one!
Second, when a group comes to a decision they tend to
accept the solution more often than when an individual
makes a decision for the group. The last thing is hard,
especially nowadays because the hierarchical structures
in organizations are under pressure. Those lower in the
hierarchy are no longer uneducated individuals but high
skilled and knowledgeable, so they are less willing to blindly
follow their leader (into the abyss). This is why books like
‘Our iceberg is melting’ from John Kotter are so popular. You
have to go through great lengths to convince a group to take
over your point of view. Wouldn’t it be easier to let the group
decide for themselves? Just give them the boundaries and
they will solve the puzzle.
Third, and last, benefit of group decision-making is that it
increases the sense of legitimacy of the group. Making a
decision as a group gives them the confirmation that they are
in fact a group! However, where there are benefits there are
definitely some disadvantages to group decision-making.
Downsides of group decision making
One of the most straight forward and most visible downside
to group decision making is that is takes a lot more time. We
all have been in those endless meetings where discussions go
on and on for…well it feels like hours sometimes. In a Scrum
Team, the Scrum Master plays a huge role in facilitating the
Scrum events (i.e. Sprint Planning) in such a way that they
are as efficient and effective as possible.
Also when making a decision as a group, questions may
arise who is accountable for the outcome of this decision.
Should one person be accountable or is the entire group
accountable. This is a thin line and a solution if different
for almost every situation. You see this happening is sports
very clearly. If a team is winning, the team is celebrated for
this but when results get bad we try to shift the blame to an
individual (usually the coach). In organizations, you see that
when a manager is held accountable he is almost obligated
to take the decisions as well. This has become part of our
DNA so much that we are having trouble letting this go.
And when you start adopting Scrum you immediately get
in trouble. I believe that if a group makes a decision, they
should be accountable as a group as well. Delivering in small
increments limits the impact of decisions made by a group
and therefore makes this discussion less relevant.
Tel: 015 - 2411800
Fax: 015 - 2411821
www.prowareness.nl
www.scrum.nl
4
The biggest disadvantage of group decision-making is that it
nourishes conformism. So people in a group tend to match
their attitudes, beliefs and behavior to group norms. Two
interesting sociological phenomena arise here; groupthink
and groupshift
Groupthink and Groupshift
Groupthink is the phenomena where group pressure leads
to conformism. So any critical, unpopular or minority
interest will not be taken into consideration by a group in
their decision making process. So what can happen in a
Development Team during a sprint planning meeting is the
following: an ops-engineer makes a very good point related
to the monitoring of the item under discussion. However,
since the rest of the team didn’t had any feeling regarding
that topic the comment from the engineer was put aside and
never came up again. Groupthink, a minority interest wasn’t
taken into consideration by the team.
Groupshift is where members of the group exaggerated
their initial toward a more extreme position. So risk averse
individuals will propose an even more risk averse approach
and the opposite happens with risk seeking individuals. This
is caused by the feeling of safety a group provides. As a group
you stand stronger against other external elements then
when you are alone. So teams will tend to take more risks. In
group decision making, this will lead to decisions being made
that are more extreme. So when in a group, individuals are
far more willing to make riskier decisions. Shared risk makes
the individual risks less.
When talking about Sprint Retrospectives there is one
book that cannot be ignored. “Agile Retrospectives. Making
Good Teams Great” by Esther Derby and Diana Larsen.
Their book revolves around a model for running effective
retrospectives that in fact is exactly the same as the nominal
group technique. So we do retrospectives to facilitate group
decision-making and in order to amplify the benefits of this
approach to improve group decision-making and to reach
our goals easier.
Reach Goals
If having a common goal makes you a group and having a
coordinated effort towards these goals makes you a team.
Achieving this goal might be one of the most fulfilling reasons
to be part of a group. However, many organizations and
teams starting adopting Scrum tend to focus on the wrong
goals. It is not how good you follow the rules of Scrum that
makes you successful and is not the goal in itself. Real goals
tend to expect a certain result from a certain effort. Like an
organization wanting to reach a market share of 10%. A great
goal but it is a result of other things the organization does.
Using the Scrum framework is not a goal, it is a mean that
has been proven to help organizations reach goals. In fact,
every Sprint in the Scrum framework has a specific goal; the
Sprint Goal. And to become better at reaching greater goals
there are means to help you become better like the Scrum
event, the Sprint Retrospective aiming to facilitate teams in
getting better.
Why we do retrospectives?
Getting Better
•
•
Cohesion
So how to deal with these two phenomena? There’s a way
to improve the group decision-making process and to limit
the impact of groupthink and groupshift. The ‘nominal group
technique’, where you facilitate group decision making by
doing a couple of things:
•
•
•
Get everybody involved together
Let people think for themselves first about the problem
at hand
Share the thoughts
Discuss on how to solve the problem
Order the ideas and decide
Establishing the stage of being a team making team
decisions, or nowadays in most organizations, being a Scrum
team, comes with some challenges. How to get this team
constantly improving themselves? The Scrum Framework
believes it is that important to continually improve, that
there is even an entire event devoted to this; the Sprint
Retrospective.
Bezoekadres
Postadres
Prowareness
Postbus 2903 2601 CT Delft
2601 CX Delft
Brassersplein 1
How is setting goals related to productivity? Extensive
research has been done on the correlation between goals
and productivity. To be more specific, the alignment
between organizational goals and team goals versus a team’s
productivity. An important factor here is group cohesion.
Cohesion is more or less the glue that keeps a team together.
Each individual in a group has the feeling they are part of
this group. Cohesion is those forces that make sure people
want to stay with this group. There are a couple of factors
that increases cohesion. First, the effort people have to
go through to become a member of the group. A very nice
example is the means someone has to go through to become
part of a fraternity, full of traditions and sometimes even
some questionable activities are required to be performed
by those wanting to become part of this exclusive group.
Becoming a member takes quite some effort and results in
a group membership for life. Second, external threats can
increase the cohesion in a group.
Tel: 015 - 2411800
Fax: 015 - 2411821
www.prowareness.nl
www.scrum.nl
5
Like stated earlier, being part of a group provides a sense of
security against external threats. Third, smaller groups then
to be more cohesive then larger groups.
Productivity
The relationship between goal alignment and cohesion on
productivity can be found on the image below.
So why have Scrum Teams?
In order to reach your organizational goals you need to
have teams that have goals of their own aligned with that
organizational goal. If these teams feel they are empowered
to make decisions as a group they will not only feel more like
a team. They will be more willing to share knowledge and
continuously work together to get better. Using the Scrum
Framework gives your teams a framework enabling them to
get the most out of them.
Obviously productivity increases when group cohesion is
high and the goal of the group is aligned with organizational
goals. More interesting is that a group with a lot of cohesion
but the alignment between their goal and the goal of the
organization is low results in a decrease of productivity.
This is very interesting but also perfectly explainable.
Imagine a team working on a legacy application. They
have been working together for years and now everything
there is to know about this application. They only need a
couple of words to explain to their team members what
needs to be done. But this legacy application is going to be
decommissioned in a couple of months. Image what this
does to the team, cohesion will probably increase (because
of external threat) but their motivation will most likely
decrease. What are we doing this for anyway, what’s the
purpose?
So having a stable team that consider themselves to be a
group and have strong cohesion, with a clear goal that is
aligned with the rest of the organizational goals enables
them to be very productive. However, essential is this case is
that the goals the team pursues are represented by a product
backlog ordered on maximizing value added for customers
(or clients or users).
Bezoekadres
Postadres
Prowareness
Postbus 2903 2601 CT Delft
2601 CX Delft
Brassersplein 1
Tel: 015 - 2411800
Fax: 015 - 2411821
www.prowareness.nl
www.scrum.nl
6