Firm Servant Leadership

For me, the role of ScrumMaster was the first introduction I had to the idea of servant leadership.

Yet servant leadership wasn’t mentioned in the original version the scrum guide, back in 2010:

The ScrumMaster is responsible for ensuring that Scrum values, practices and rules are enacted and enforced. The ScrumMaster is the driving force behind all of the Scrum and helps the Scrum Team and the organization adopt and use Scrum to produce a higher quality product. The ScrumMaster is not the manager but leads by coaching, teaching and supporting the team. The ScrumMaster helps the Team understand and use self- management and cross-functionality.

But crept in the 2011 version:

The Scrum Master is a servant-leader for the Scrum Team.

I speculate that this was because early Scrum adopters struggled, as they did the simplest thing and translated Project Managers into ScrumMasters.

In contrast to traditional project management, servant leadership appeals to me for a couple of reasons. Firstly, as a developer who wants to have some autonomy in their work. Secondly, it also appeals to me as a leader who doesn’t want to spend their time micro managing people or “cracking the whip” as they point at a cascading Gantt chart.

Problems arise though when a team is still maturing in to the self organising team you want them to be. It might be that your team has more junior members, or seniors that are used to being passive and being told what to do. Or maybe you have a number of team members who don’t really know how to play well in a team setting. Or a team who generally has trouble meeting expectations - for whatever reasons.

What are you supposed to do then, without resorting to “traditional” leadership?

Managing Parenthood #

As parent of soon to be teens, my biggest concern is how do I get them to transition from childhood to adulthood with a minimum of huffing and puffing (and other bad habits). I’ve never wanted to be the parent that cracks the whip here either, for obvious reasons. But being completely permissive is also not an option, for reasons not the least of which is that children and teenagers need boundaries to feel safe.

This tension between a distaste for authoritarian parenting and my children’s need for boundaries was something that I really struggled with a few years ago. Through the help of a parenting coach, I was exposed to the practice of Positive Parenting, and I specifically bought the book “Positive Parenting for Teens”. It was exactly what I needed, and although it’s not the easiest practice, it has transformed the relationship I have with my kids.

Additionally, as I read and explored positive parenting, I couldn’t help but see the parallels between both traditional parenting and traditional management (both command and control, trust minimisation structures) and the alternative positive parenting / agile (self organising, responsibility and shared values). The problem with traditional management has always been the need to tell and direct, with the brains and the vision commonly located above the work being done, in some design and architecture board. Trad parenting also had this ‘we know best’ attitude. In both cases, those being subjected either did what they told like obedient children, or rebelled… which has its own stressors.

A Firm Mindset #

Now I’m not saying you should treat your development team like pouting teenagers, but let’s face it… There are more than a few times when they’ve acted the part. Instead, I offer a refinement of the term “Servant” in “Servant Leadership”: we should instead aim to practice “Firm Servant Leadership”.

Instead of directive control, Positive Parenting aims towards firmness and encouraging adult responsibility in those you are responsible for. It focuses on creating agreements and then ensuring those agreements are followed - largely by contextualising the cost when they are not. There’s a strong core of shared values - not unlike the Scrum values upon which agreements are made in a Scrum team.

The key difference is that instead of telling, we as managers make agreements and be firm in their application. Note firm, but not strict. Agreements are not promises and can be renegotiated. Can and should be. Renegotiated between adults, as adults are responsible for their own behaviour and decisions.

If the use of the term “adults” in the above makes you squirm a little, replace it with “professionals”. The replacement might not be necessary if you’re familiar with Transactional Analysis, but a discussion of that is beyond this article - but definitely check it out as it can also re-contextualize the traditional/servant leadership duality.

Maturing Teams and Teens #

Will the team accept all this responsibility on their own? Possibly not at first, especially where there is pressure to never fail and to do it perfect the first time (or be punished). This is where the supporting aspect comes in. Your experience as a manger provides a safety net.

For example, there will be situations in which the team can fail. As a manager, you try to make sure they are limited in the extent of the failure by pointing out risks, alternatives and so on. What you don’t do is try to save them from it by forcing your “correct decision” - the team needs to own their own decisions. If they do fail, or do things worse than you would have liked, you’re there to ensure that they effectively learn and grow.

Does this work in practice? In my experience applying this Firm Servant Leadership with teams and with teenagers, more often than not they’ll surprise you by exceeding your expectations. And they’ll do so in ways you would never have expected.