Tag Archives: collaboration

Bias: It’s like Kryptonite to Collaboration


Collaborate: the concept is so ingrained with agile development that it’s one of the four components of Alistair Cockburn’s simplified Heart of Agile approach (along with Deliver, Reflect and Improve.)  Yet, collaboration has an “achilles heel”, a Kryptonite of sorts, that no one really talks about:  Bias.

Before we get into the roots of Bias and its effects, let’s explore what’s at the core of Collaboration.

Collaboration

To collaborate (according to Google Dictionary) is to

cooperate, join (up), join forces, team up, get together, come together, band together, work together, work jointly, participate, unite, combine, merge, link, ally, associate, amalgamate, integrate, form an alliance, pool resources, club together,  fraternize, conspire, collude, cooperate, consort, sympathize…

Collaboration relies on a combination of team skills: listening, communicating, connecting, cooperating, observing, and setting aside personal agendas and opinion.

Bias is like Kryptonite to Collaboration

Bias creeps in innocuously while we’re truly practicing our good communication skills; it can coat our words and can jade our thought process without us even being aware of it.  At best, bias skews our creativity, at worst, it kills trust and collaboration.

While we may not perceive bias in ourselves or others (“after all, we’re open and honest professionals doing our best”) – it’s there.

The good news is that Bias is like the iceberg below the surface that we didn’t know was there, and once we’re aware its there, we can dismantle its effects.

Through conscious practice and exercises, our awareness of our own biases can increase and we can override its effects.

Types of Bias

Bias comes in a variety of flavors and styles – and, we all have it in one way or another. The first step to overcoming bias is to recognize and acknowledge it in ourselves.

What kind of bias(es) do you hold?  I’ve condensed the list of bias types (from data analytics and psychology sites) and added examples for agile projects:

  1. Confirmation Bias – We skew our observation of an event, concept, person in a way that confirms our already held belief.  A pattern of highlighting news that agrees with the agenda of the left or right, and ignoring the other side.
    Example:  Changes are needed to a delivered report because legislation changed (fact), and we think “Typical of the users always changing their minds” (confirms our belief.)
  2. Attribution Bias – We attribute an action to someone based on their personality (flaws) rather than the situation.
    Example:  The project is delayed because testing isn’t finished.  We think:  “the tester doesn’t know what they are doing” (attributing it to a personality flaw) rather than looking at the situation of tester work overload.
  3. Commitment Bias – Continuing to invest in a derailed project because of the sunk costs already committed (time/effort/money.)
    Example: We think: How can we bail on this project after we’ve already spent a year and $500K on it?
  4. Labeling Bias – We (un)consciously describe or label a person/group in a way that influences how we think about them.
    Example:  We think marketing (people) have no clue about technology (so why ask them for input)?
  5. Spin Bias – We accept only one interpretation (ours) of an event or policy to the exclusion of the other.
    Example:  We spin the news (especially when there is a gap):  China banned cryptocurrencies, so it must be because of… (nefarious financial dealings…)
  6. Spurious Correlation Bias – We believe causality (without checking) between two potentially (un)related events or circumstances.
    Example:  Gas prices always go up before a long weekend.
  7. Omission Bias – Leaving out important information/people (certain facts or details) on a project because we don’t see its relevance.
    Example:  We didn’t think of including IT folks in a renovation project meetings (we omitted the importance of moving the network…)
  8. Not like Me Bias – Dismissing information or ideas because of the source or group generating it.
    Example:  We think that new hires have no idea about how our company works (when their input may be fresh and show us new ways to work.)

When we allow these unconscious biases to influence how we send or receive information, we stymie true collaboration.

What biases do you see in yourself and your workplace?  When I, personally realize I have a particular bias, I make a conscious effort to pause before responding.  When I’m prone to say something that would block collaboration (words like “we can’t do that…” or even the seemingly innocent thought in my head like “what on earth?” I try to stop and ask myself why I would think that.  Pausing to reflect and see the part that my unconscious bias plays, really helps me to collaborate better.  Might it work for you?

Would you Play Along?

Over the coming weeks, please join me in a new blog series called “The 5% Social Experiment” where I’ll post some easy social experiments to identify and overcome workplace bias.

Can I count on you to play along?

Carol

Advertisements

The Death of Brainstorming? Say it isn’t so…


I love the articles in the New Yorker, and the following one caught my eye because of the Brainstorming topic. In leadership courses, I’ve espoused the value of brainstorming when done right (without judgement and analysis) – and I’ve seen positive results.  Could it be that the creative process might actually work better when criticism is allowed to fly?

Say it isn’t so

When I teach brainstorming techniques, I always find it interesting that the creative (right brain dominant) thinkers in the group really love and contribute more during the “Brainstorming” free flow of ideas phase (before analysis sets in), while the linear, engineering style (left brain dominant) thinkers in the group can’t wait for the second phase where the ideas are analyzed and critiqued.  Divergent thinking followed by convergence of ideas.  Made perfect sense to me and the students demonstrated how safe each group felt – depending on which side of the brain dominated their idea flow.

So now, it appears that the “Steve Jobs” style of criticism before acceptance, domineering boss-like, judgment first ways of working have merit, or do they?  Read the article then read on and comment (please!)

Here’s the link to “Groupthink” if you cannot reach it above.

I’m conflicted…

about this latest “research” and given my international experiences in presenting in over 30 countries to technical audiences, I have to say that Information Technology and software development are as much about the people and psychology (trust and communication) as they are about technology and engineering problems.

I’ve seen success with collaborative approaches like Kanban, agile, Rational (Use Cases) – which I believe succeed because we bring disparate viewpoints of the customers and suppliers together and address various learning styles (visual, audio and kinesthetic) to gain the highest levels of understanding.  Brainstorming is one such technique whereby the most dominant (i.e., typically the most critical of all ideas except his/her own) no longer gets to direct the problem solving.

What’s BEEN your experience?

I look forward to your comments – do you agree with these findings? – and to further research… and to hopefully announcing that Brainstorming is NOT dead, in fact, it just needed a wake-up call to re-energize the benefits for a new iPad generation!