Role: Go

Please take a few minutes to complete the following Enterprise Business Agility questions. Your open and honest feedback is appreciated and will help us grow as individuals contributing towards our teams' success.
Thank you for your time, we really appreciate it.


Customer Seat at Table - Customer Seat at Table


  • Q1:

    Personas & Customer Journeys

    High: We have educated all our departments on being Customer Focused and re-designed our processes to engage our customers frequently and gain their feedback throughout their journey.

    Low: Only a few departments interface with the customers and very few others hear their voice. We haven't invested in understanding or anticipating their true needs.

  • Q2:

    Problem & Solution Discovery

    High: We have implemented discovery processes that engage the customer to understand customer experience, identify features the customer will value, confirm customer interest in features, and validate the feasibility of developing the feature.

    Low: We do not have a process for engaging customers during discovery and design before funding or beginning development of features. 

  • Q3:

    Experiments, MVPs and MMP

    High: We have implemented discovery processes to build prototypes or small experiments that test assumptions and build Minimum Viable Products before building the larger commercial software. Early releases consist of Minimum Marketable Products with customer feedback to drive the next product release.

    Low: We typically develop from requirements identified internally without engaging the customer in the discovery, design and release review.

  • Q4:

    Validation & Optimization

    High: We engage the customer during development and after release and use their feedback to validate features and functionality and fine tune the solution to test and improve features.

    Low: We are dependent on adoption tracking or sales data to validate design decisions and provide feedback on delivered functionality.

Add any additional thoughts about "Customer Seat at Table - Customer Seat at Table"

Lean Portfolio Mgmt - Lean Portfolio Management


  • Q1:

    Strategic Intent & Themes

    High: We have clarity on our Strategic Intent (~3 year vision) and the top Strategic Themes (objectives) that guide us for this year with clear metrics for success.

    Low: Our strategic intent/vision and yearly objectives are not clear, they are too broad and it's hard to align or measure against them. 

  • Q2:

    Business Outcome Alignment

    High: Our teams, team of teams (programs/trains/tribes), portfolios and lines of business are aligned on business outcomes they aim to achieve. These outcomes are defined collaboratively between each layer (both top down and bottom up). 

    Low: We don't define or leverage business outcomes as a way of planning yet. We're more focused on planning for deliverables and work (output). 

  • Q3:

    Demand/Capacity Alignment & Visibility:

    High: Planned outcomes and deliverables are aligned and planned to the capacity of the teams and this information is highly visible to everyone. 

    Low: Demand and capacity are not measured or visible, decision-making about matching teams to work is not transparent or collaborative and plans for what will be delivered are unrealistic.

  • Q4:

    Quarterly Cadence:

    High: In addition to our yearly planning cycle, we plan our outcomes and deliverables in quarterly sized increments (or less such as every 8 - 10 weeks). 

    Low: We currently plan in yearly increments and don't have quarterly (or less) planning and demo checkpoints to measure if we're achieving our desired outcomes. 

  • Q5:

    Adaptive Funding Model:

    High: Finance and governance models align with Lean values and principles, with regular reviews and adjustments (adaptive funding). KPIs are aligned with delivery of outcomes and value delivery instead of time-cost-scope. 

    Low: Internal orgs compete for project oriented budgets annually. Decisions and budgets remain fixed and success is defined by meeting pre-defined goals with little or no adjustment. 

  • Q6:

    Run-Grow-Transform Allocation:

    High: The investment allocation in Run, Grow and Transform work is clear and supports the organization's goals. 

    Low: We don't track or have clarity on how the work of the teams is allocated across these strategic buckets. This usually leads to the organization focusing more on Run and Grow work. 

Add any additional thoughts about "Lean Portfolio Mgmt - Lean Portfolio Management"

Org Structure & Design - Org Structure & Design


  • Q1:

    Team Design & Rollout

    High: We've designed and built our cross-functional Stable Teams and they have the proper training, coaching and support needed to succeed.

    Low: We still have project based teams who work in silos and don't have a team design strategy around keeping teams stable.

  • Q2:

    Stability & Allocation

    High: Teams are together for long-term and work comes to the team as projects come and go and business needs change. Teams become high performing as they learn to collaborate and optimize. Work is allocated to teams based on predictable, measurable capacity.

    Low: Team changes are frequent and teams are formed and disbanded in accordance with the start and end of projects. Work is allocated based on individual skills and team capacity is volatile or unknown.

  • Q3:

    Manager Transition

    High: Managers have successfully transitioned from the traditional approach of assigning work and monitoring activities to effectively supporting Agile teams by creating an environment for success and growing people. Managers who are not a good fit for this new style have been moved to other roles and responsibilities.

    Low: Managers continue to use a traditional management approach and there is no clear plan or strategy for supporting managers to make the transition.

  • Q4:

    CoP & Enabling Teams

    High: We've designed and fully support effective Communities of Practice and Enablement Teams that will support our Agile teams.

    Low: We don't have a strategy or plan for Communities of Practice or Enablement Teams. We have a few but they are not well supported.

Add any additional thoughts about "Org Structure & Design - Org Structure & Design"

Agile Framework - Agile Mindset


  • Q1:

    Agile Methods

    High: We apply Agile methods effectively, selecting the appropriate practice for each process/business need, resulting in high performing teams that learn and adapt quickly.

    Low: We apply Agile methods inconsistently or not at all and do not have the knowledge and tools that we need.

  • Q2:

    Scaled Agile Planning

    High: Our practice of scaled agile planning enables us to plan and coordinate planning and delivery across the organization, minimize work in progress (WIP), establish a cadence with rapid and reliable delivery, and build incrementally, adapting quickly to feedback.

    Low: We have a need for scaled agile planning but do not have a plan or the knowledge that we need to implement it.

  • Q3:

    Agile for Business Teams:

    High: We have successfully invested in engaging, educating and applying Agile/Lean principles within our business teams, not just technology. 

    Low: Agile and Lean principles are mainly applied within technology teams. We have not invested heavily yet in educating or enabling our business teams to adopt agility within their teams.  

  • Q4:

    Facilitation & Collaboration

    High: We work in a highly collaborative environment, where barriers to communication are removed and teams are provided with the tools and support they need to work together. We have strong facilitators for our Agile meetings and to help resolve conflict.

    Low: Collaboration is not a priority or highly valued, people work in silos and physical or cultural barriers make it difficult to work collaboratively. Few people have or use effective facilitation skills.

Add any additional thoughts about "Agile Framework - Agile Mindset"

Leadership/Culture - Leadership & Culture


  • Q1:

    Leadership Agility - Education

    High: Our executives and senior leaders have been educated on Leadership Agility and support the leadership transformation required to lead high performing teams and the new way of work. 

    Low: Our executives and senior leaders don't have time OR don't see value in being educated on Leadership Agility. 

  • Q2:

    Leadership Agility - Demonstration

    High: Our executives and senior leaders have made the shift and demonstrate the behaviors and support needed for enabling agility and the new way of work. They seek feedback and show a commitment to learning and growth on this journey. 

    Low: Our executives and senior leaders have been educated but still have not shown real progress and commitment to changing their leadership style.

  • Q3:

    Leading Agile Teams

    High: Leaders create a highly collaborative environment to support healthy Agile teams, building Stable cross-functional teams, effectively applying Agile methods and practices, supporting continuous growth, resolving issues at the root cause and growing people.

    Low: Leaders use a traditional command and control approach or are not engaged. Teams are not supported with the tools they need to collaborate, apply Agile methods and practices or improve.

  • Q4:

    Tactical to Strategic Leadership

    High: Leaders focus on strategy, growing people, and providing vision and guidance. They are engaged where they are needed, allowing the people closest to the work to drive out decisions.

    Low: Leaders manage tactical details that could be left to the teams and do not attend to the strategy and vision.

  • Q5:

    Enabling Business Agility - Education

    High: We have invested in educating and re-skilling our leadership team at ALL levels on enterprise business agility and how to enable it across our organization. 

    Low: Our leadership team has not been educated or enabled to successfully enable enterprise business agility.

  • Q6:

    Enabling Business Agility - Strategy:

    High: Our leaders for each Line of Business have formed an business agility transformation team and has developed a vision, strategy and quarterly roadmap for enabling agility.  

    Low: Our leaders for each Line of Business have not yet defined a common strategy for enabling agility. We have different transformation initiatives happening across the organization that are not aligned towards a common vision for enterprise agility. 

Add any additional thoughts about "Leadership/Culture - Leadership & Culture"

Make it Stick - Make it Stick


  • Q1:

    Change Management

    High: We've collaborated on creating an effective and modern change management plan to help through the role and cultural changes needed for the transformation to succeed.

    Low: We don't have a change management plan in place OR we use emails and ineffective communications to share updates on the changes being implemented. We haven't considered or planned for the impact on various roles. 

  • Q2:

    Agile Talent Dev

    High: We have successfully engaged HR and have re-designed how we attract, hire and retain individuals based on our new cultural values. Example: We have updated job descriptions, use team based interviews, built stronger on-boarding programs.

    Low: We have not invested in changing our hiring and retention process to fit the new culture we desire. We are still hiring people who are not a culture fit. HR is not engaged in this transformation. 

  • Q3:

    Agile Talent Mgmt.

    High: We have designed a holistic plan for developing skills and growing Agile talent across our targeted roles. This includes learning roadmaps, measurement, enabling self-learning and engaging in CoPs. 

    Low: We don't have a holistic Agile talent development strategy. We run training for different roles but don't measure if new skills/capabilities have actually been gained. 

  • Q4:

    Continuous Measurement & Improvement

    High: We have adopted the right combination of qualitative and quantitative metrics to measure our teams and organization's maturity and performance. We measure our growth every quarter and commit to action for the following quarter.

    Low: We use traditional metrics that are ineffective or have no metrics that tell us how we're really doing in a simple way. We don't measure at all levels and don't commit to quarterly growth. 

  • Q5:

    Obstacle Removal

    High: We have implemented a systemic quarterly process for gathering obstacles at the team, org and enterprise levels. We have a strong commitment to engaging leaders in removing these obstacles and enabling teams to continuously grow and improve.

    Low: We don't have a systemic way to track and remove team, org and enterprise obstacles very well yet, nor do we have a method for hearing the voice of the teams so we can gather their obstacles. 

  • Q6:

    Build Internal Capacity

    High: As a transformation team, we've designed a plan to sustain the transformation and make it stick. This includes building internal change agents/coaches, learning and on-boarding new team members and leaders.  

    Low: We don't have a sustainability plan yet. 

Add any additional thoughts about "Make it Stick - Make it Stick"

Technology Agility - Technology Agility


  • Q1:

    Vision & Architecture

    High: We've defined and communicated an architecture vision and runway that enables the business vision. Architects are fully engaged at the right level to enable the implementation of this vision. 

    Low: Our architects work in a silo and engage directly with the teams rarely OR our architects don't align the technology vision with the business needs. 

  • Q2:

    Lean and Adaptive Architecture

    High: Our architecture is lean and adaptive to our business needs and changes. It emerges over time and is refined continuously. 

    Low: Our architecture is fixed and not flexible. It doesn't adapt to the business needs and is mostly technology focused. 

  • Q3:

    Technical Excellence

    High: Our Agile teams have invested in learning and applying technical excellence practices and the cultural elements needed to enable rapid and reliable delivery. The majority of our teams follow these practices consistently. 

    Low: We haven't invested in learning and applying technical excellence practices across our teams. Very few teams follow these practices. 

  • Q4:

    Software & Tools

    High: We've invested in analyzing our current tools, their effectiveness and developed a plan for building a more integrated and Agile tool set that spans the entire life cycle.

    Low: We don't have a plan for this yet or don't want to change any of our existing tool set regardless of effectiveness. 

  • Q5:

    DevOps - Technology

    High: We've invested in the right software, hardware and tools needed to enable a continuous delivery environment that meet our needs.

    Low: We haven't invested in the technical enablement for continuous delivery yet. 

  • Q6:

    DevOps - Culture

    High: We've invested in DevOps training, cross-team design (dev and ops members), cultural elements needed to enable a continuous delivery environment.

    Low: We haven't invested in the education, cross-team design and culture need to enable continuous delivery. 

Add any additional thoughts about "Technology Agility - Technology Agility"

What are the top strengths of this team? What value has this team delivered? Share this team's strengths and success stories you want to celebrate!

What are this team's growth opportunities? Think of areas that could significantly improve the overall team's performance if they were addressed.

What are the significant impediments this team has been experiencing? Some may be team related and some may be organizational.