I was recently reminded of this quote by Maya Angelou when I happened to watch Groundhog Day, a Hollywood movie that features a protagonist who is very unhappy with his life.
In the movie, Phil is the protagonist and a weather reporter whose life carries a routine which is exactly the same every day, aka, a time loop. He struggles as he tries to make sense of the events in his life that are strikingly the same – it is not only the work he does, and the people he works with that he sees every day. It is also the beggar on the street, the accidental insurance agent, the pothole he happens to step into, etc. He soon starts hating the environment, the town, the people and the celebrations around the Groundhog Day and finds himself cheating others, getting into one-night stands and reckless driving. He tries to get out of the time loop by committing suicide multiple times, nevertheless wakes up to the same day, repeating his routine.
Finally he comes out of the time loop by changing his attitude towards life – using the knowledge he has gathered during the time loop, of every individual in the locality - he goes out of his way to help others, learns the piano, shows his vulnerable side to his girlfriend and ultimately confesses his love to her.
IF YOU CANNOT CHANGE ANYTHING OUTSIDE OF YOU, CHANGE YOURSELF.
Popular posts from this blog
Tangible vs Intangible- where do you focus ? When you are setting up a new team or business unit, or want to bring about change in an existing setup, what do you do ? create/modify structures and processes - those which are tangible and measurable. Intangibles like people's perceptions, feelings, assumptions and beliefs are difficult to work with. Quite often, these intangibles make or break change programs and business goals. I found this excellent article on HBR that uses the tangible-intangible conundrum in explaining the execution-strategy gap - 'It is important to focus on what people think rather than what they do' https://hbr.org/2017/10/closing-the-strategy-execution-gap-means-focusing-on-what-employees-think-not-what-they-do
The Agile manifesto and the principles have been clearly called out, but many companies focus so much on getting the processes right, that they end up ignoring the people factor. Which means it is the same old story as traditional development (aka, waterfall). Yes, processes and tools are important, but, hey, aren’t people who are more important ? Aren’t people who have to put the processes and tools to good use ? Aren’t people who have to be good at relating to one another and the customer, to build great products and be satisfied at work ? Read more: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/agile-techno-structural-od-intervention-vijaya-devi-s/?lipi=urn%3Ali%3Apage%3Ad_flagship3_profile_view_base_post_details%3BEkfmoJkUQGqCSe%2FfpWyU9A%3D%3D
One of the core aspects of Scrum is self-organizing teams that deliver software in small iterations called sprints. For those that try to move from traditional development models to Agile, one of the major challenges is forming self-organizing teams. The sprint teams are truly cross-functional teams that choose the best way to do their work without being directed by others from outside. How does such a team differ from the project teams in the traditional models? Are there any design principles or theoretical frameworks that can help us go about forming such teams? Designing Agile Teams using Socio-technical Systems Theory One of the core aspects of Scrum is self-organizing teams that deliver software in small iterations called sprints. For those that try to move from traditional development models to Agile, one of the major challenges is forming self-organizing teams. The sprint teams are truly cross-functional teams that choose the best way to do their work without