In Agile: Do we need managers or leaders?
‘Agility’ is the mantra of being Agile. When a process is agile, it is expected to be adaptable for the changes during its entire course. This adaptability requires a clear vision to sketch proper goals so that the milestones are achieved as planned imbibing impromptu changes. So to be agile, one needs the vision of a leader so that unplanned can be strategically planned and authoritative control of a manager to execute as per the scheduled plan. So, for the sustenance of ‘agility’ which competency is more crucial to attaining, managerial, or leadership? In other words, who plays the hero of agile, and who is the supporting actor?
Let’s first have an insight into each role and then evaluate their priority for being agile. There could be many different definitions, roles, and responsibilities to define a manager. But the baseline would be the one who can manage to stay on-track and utilize the maximum throughput of all its resources from the period of inception of the project to its completion. According to one of the articles from Harvard Business Review, managers should know the strength and weaknesses of each of its resources managers to capitalize on their unique traits however unconventional it may be so that they can be integrated in the best possible way for the most synchronized and coordinated implementation of the act.
Coming next to a Leader, they are the torch-bearer, who has the vision and the capability to translate that vision to reality. To ‘lead by example’ is an apparent quality that a leader possesses. According to the same Harvard article, leaders capitalize on the uniformity of their pack and not their dissimilar trait of uniqueness. This makes them different from leaders. They celebrate the uniformity in diversity to consistently excel in what they are doing and also influencing others for excellence reflecting his vision as their own. In my opinion, it is more of a personality trait than a skill that can be learned. Few qualities of a leader can be nurtured within but to acquire the persona to unleash other people’s energy is difficult to achieve.
So, it becomes evident that if the baton is given to a manager, there is a very high probability that the process will become metric-driven. Utilizing these metrics, a manager decides if the entire development is on track or is deviating from the schedule. In contrast, a leader tolerates few deviations, a little chaos so that it does not digress the progress of the entire team. Instead, a leader knows how to handle the psychodrama of the team and team members to keep control of any unexpected pandemonium breakouts and let vision play the lead act. Today we have several institutions that help in honing the management skills and innumerable books and articles to give a deep insight into tools and techniques which can help one to be proficient in leadership skill.
Now, Agile emphasizes collaboration, continuous improvement to attain high customer satisfaction with each increment. Maintaining the trust of the customer is the metric it aims at while within the team every member should support and motivate each other. But to envision this metric, celebrate the uniformity among team members and to capitalize on their distinctiveness who will be better — a leader, a manager, or an amalgamation of both? Let’s take an example outside of the IT world or to say the professional world to have a clear picture. When parents take care of their child they try to manage their tantrums at some times, give them their vision or hope about the future, and keep a close eye on their report card, as their annual metric report. What keeps them going is their emotional connection with their kid. They always try to perform best, retrospect their actions to learn from mistakes, and evolve accordingly. They also discuss their mistakes or achievements with their partner to keep the learning going “mutually”.
Doesn’t it sound relatable? If we treat the project or work as our “own” then all the pieces of the puzzle fall into its place. As per human psychology, “emotional connection” is the pivot for any activity performed in any event or situation. It helps to bring the best of ourselves, to excel in our performance as per the demand of the situation whether it is managing sometimes or to lead. So, the best word would be “Owner”. In Agile thus we need every team member to take ownership of the work. They all need to lead as well as manage themselves throughout the product lifecycle. They should equally participate in the retrospective meetings to own their mistakes and make headways for the next iteration.
In my sincere opinion, Agile doesn’t need a single (or few) managers or leader(s). Instead, only when every member of the team acts as an owner, in other words, leads and/or manages themselves the best could be accomplished.