Agile coaches are an interesting breed. We walk into an organisation agreeing to make (hopefully) deep emotional connections with a group of strangers to support them in building a better working life for themselves and each other. These bonds are probably unidirectional, although one has to hope those we coach care for us to some extent. This raises the question of protecting one’s mental health, as unbalanced and transitory relationships are not the kind we have evolved to create or maintain.
SAFe recommends that an organisation respects Dubar’s number and that an agile coach supports around 50-125 people. I wonder if this is too high, though, as it only allows the coach to have 25 relationships outside the organisation. Not to mention, if a coach did have most of their relationship within an organisation, imagine the psychological impact that would be experienced by a coach when leaving an organisation. Such a state change would be difficult on the coach’s terms and perhaps even traumatic if the coach has been asked to leave with little to no notice by the organisation.
However, asking an organisation to hire one agile coach for every 75 people is not something that most organisations are likely to be willing or able to do. Most of us would recognise that we often don’t have the luxury of working with as few as 125 people. I am not unfamiliar with the body of people an organisation aims me towards, numbering the hundreds and sometimes the thousands. So, if organisations are not respecting the capacity for human relationships that we as coaches have, what disciplines can we employ to protect ourselves from the emotional burden of our role so that we can best support our organisations?
I have three questions I try to keep front of mind, in particular when starting a new engagement. Let’s start with a question we can answer for ourselves without the answer needing permission or agreement from anyone else and gradually expand to how coaches can work as a team. My answers below are only one option, which has been the option persistent in my thoughts this week.
Where are the boundaries between me and the system?
As someone who has now been through the early stages of digital and agile transformations so many times I am surprised by the number, I see dysfunction everywhere. As people talk to me, I notice how and what they’re doing ‘wrong’. (By wrong, I mean in a way that doesn’t align with agile principles; goes against the scrum guide; a function their role shouldn’t be performing; an artefact that they should be producing; and so on.) Instead of having conversations at that moment, I write down the things I notice. In these situations, I would often only have the time to tell them they are ‘wrong’ and in no way support them to learn how to do it better and then practice doing so. I should recognise a boundary. The system has an error, but not a catastrophic one. I could damage my relationship with the individual and the system by merely pointing out the error, which in turn could create a catastrophic error.
What are the benefits of acting upon the system?
This question is about the limitations we face. We can only talk to people to encourage them to go in a certain direction. If they are not ready to go in that direction, it is unlikely that we will be able to do anything to make them. There is a long journey ahead for everyone we are working with. The destination may be the same town, and even if they start from the same village, there are likely to be many different ways of getting from one to the other. Some may have access to trains, while others walk to catch the bus to catch the train. You may be better off fixing the train tracks for those with direct access rather than giving the person walking some roller skates.
Consider the impacts you are likely to make, decide which ones are worth the effort, and then gently release yourself of obligation to those that aren’t. You are one person who does not have all the answers, and that is ok.
How can we maximise the benefits of acting upon the system?
This one needs everyone because to maximise the benefit, we must all coordinate in the same area of the system. Three coaches working in three different departments will not have the same impact as three working in the same department. When we work together, we are greater than the sum of our parts; our efforts have a compounding effect. By tackling as much of one vertical as possible, we can hope to see the greatest benefit. I know this in my heart to be true, and I hope to see it myself someday. Perhaps though, this is the curse of being present during the very early stage of transformation. Perhaps the bigger questions can only be answered further down the road than I usually work.