You might have come across the topics of emotional response, mammalian brain, fight or flight mode, etc.
In short, there are powerful mechanisms in the brain that can overpower our rational faculties and can generate immediate emotional responses seemingly almost outside of our control.
These emotional responses are very often healthy and sensible from an individual perspective, but at the same time can generate very limiting reality especially in a social and team environment.
SCARF is a framework that can be considered an extension to the simple “fight-or-flight” model. SCARF stands for Status, Certainty, Autonomy, Relatedness, and Fairness. It identifies these five dimensions that we can use for a more fine tuned awareness as to exactly what might be causing an issue.
On each of the dimensions we can experience something as a threat event or as a reward event. What SCARF research claims is that threat and reward on any one of this dimensions is experienced in the same way as a life-death event, i.e. if something is perceived as a threat on the “Status” dimension, it is experienced same as a threat to our very existence, but also very importantly, a if something is perceived as a positive reward on the same “Status” dimension, it is experienced as a life affirming event. Along with all the hormonal and physiological changes that go along with either life threatening or life affirming experiences.
How might an agile transformation consultant be triggering a threat response on all five dimensions simultaneously when interacting with educated people with many years of professional experience?
How might an agile transformation consultant be triggering a threat response on all five dimensions simultaneously when interacting with educated people with many years of professional experience?
Here are some hypothetical, but plausible thoughts that employees (developers, managers, senior managers, directors) might be having when going through an enterprise driven agile transformation. These thoughts might not even be continuous, but they might very well be sometimes:
Status – Why am I being asked to learn at work – I’m already an accomplished professional and have studied much more complex stuff for years? – being a professional is not an easy to achieve status and in many cases required significant academic effort. Suggesting that there is some “mandatory” agile body of knowledge and training might be seen as challenging this academic and professional status, i.e. as a threat event on the Status dimension.
Certainty – I’ve been doing well for the past 25 years, what am I getting when this is done and over? – Any organizational transformation is almost by definition going to trigger threatening thoughts on the Certainty dimension. But even more so an Agile transformation where the “end state” is by nature iterative, continuously shifting, and not rigidly defined. It might feel there is no end-state. We’ll-see-as-we-go kind of thing.
Autonomy – I’m a grown person who knows how to make my own decisions and be accountable for my own work – Agile training can sometimes feel a bit cookie cutter, and especially in larger enterprises might come with a prescribed set of PowerPoint slides and courses to take that specify exactly what to learn and exactly which materials and through what methods. It’s not uncommon for people to feel as if they are in a “trap” of some sort, which can be very threatening to their sense of Autonomy.
Relatedness – I’ve been working with my senior developers for years – Where did this Agile trainer come from? In many places “the agile people” are the newest additions to the show. We haven’t all spent much time together and it is difficult for others to be confident that the Agile Consultant, Scrum Master, or Agile Coach understand their problems well.
Fairness – How come I’ll have to learn this basic stuff when I’m an expert in my field, and the Agile trainer doesn’t have to learn any of the things I know when they barely know what we are doing? You can see how this though can be perceived as a threat response on both Fairness and Relatedness dimensions.
So here you have it – a well intentioned Agile Consultant making their best attempt at “teaching agile” triggering threatening emotions on all five dimensions of SCARF at the same time. According to the researchers who defined the framework, experiencing threat even on a single dimension out of the five can be akin to a life-threatening event, with all the rejection and self-preserving reactions that a life-threatening event can generate, a threat on all five dimensions at the same time can be quite the memorable experience.
So what’s the solution?
I haven’t tried enough things. Simply being aware of the possible reactions on these five dimensions can sometimes help. Taking a little bit of time to set things up better can also help. For example taking time for a short conversation to try establishing some common areas of experience can create a positive reward perception on the Relatedness dimension. Openly addressing potential concerns around Status or Fairness can also help people work things out in a more positive way.
But I am very interested to hear what you think. What has worked for making agile training and learning not be perceived as alien and threatening?
