Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- why_do_people_overcommit [2025/04/11 07:42] – Add "track data" and sharped up what could be done hans
+++ why_do_people_overcommit [2025/04/11 09:35] (current) – [What Factors Contribute to Teams Over Committing?] hans
@@ Line 35: / Line 35: @@
   * Management talks, but does not walk, Agile: For example, there is a conversation on over-committing, but no real action. Message to Team “situation normal: just keep saying yes.” Or management says “Thank-you Brent for taking this on.” Message to Team “we will continue to reward heroes.”
+  * Management implies: More insidious, because it is harder to see, is when management say things that they intend to be received as "do what is realistically possible" but it comes across to the Team as "we want you to do this, no matter what". Phrases like "we challenge the team to" and "please schedule this effort into your upcoming sprints" are often seen as requests to do something regardless, especially in organizations where this kind of thinking was the norm, irrespective of the intent of management.
   * Management unwillingness to make the hard calls: Sometimes management are presented with a problem and are unable to make a decision. Even though the Team has evaluated various positions management response is “If we just did it like this ... we can do both of these ...”. Spoken like a person who doesn’t actually have to do the work.
   * Management unwillingness to protect the Team from the consequences of “not now”: While Teams make the call, and Management agree, you will often see Management fold when their customer or stakeholder complains about the decision. Don’t get me wrong, there is often a need to change plans, but if that discussion does not include a discussion about taking work off the Team, all management is really saying is “you have to do it.”
@@ Line 40: / Line 41: @@
 In many ways these are all examples of short term thinking that has huge consequences in the long term.
-This assumes that management understands the issue and want to do something about it. Organizations sometimes have a culture that simply doesn't have an interest in what is actually possible, where the date and what we want by that date is seen as the only driving factor. This type of situation is often seen where the development function is treated as a feature factory. Demands come in from the business or product management to the development function but since there is no relationship between the amount of the demand and what can actually get done, the development function is doomed for failure. Rather than work to address the issue, people demand more as, after all, they didn't get what they wanted last time, repeating the cycle and creating a hostage-like environment. Sadly, in my snarkier moments, I picture a screaming spoilt child demanding more and more while parents struggle to accomodate.
+This assumes that management understands the issue and want to do something about it. Organizations sometimes have a culture that simply doesn't have an interest in what is actually possible, where the date and what we want by that date is seen as the only driving factor. This type of situation is often seen where the development function is treated as a feature factory. Demands come in from the business or product management to the development function but since there is no relationship between the amount of the demand and what can actually get done, the development function is doomed for failure. Rather than work to address the issue, people demand more as, after all, they didn't get what they wanted last time, repeating the cycle and creating a hostage-like environment. (Note: Sadly, in my snarkier moments, I picture a screaming spoilt child demanding more and more while parents struggle to accomodate. Not a worthy picture.)
 ====== What Can We Do To Reduce Need to Overcommit? ======