Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 12

6+1

Essential strategies for


effective Lean-Agile leadership
Mike Burrows, Agendashift
Version 8, February 2017

This paper describes six leadership strategies essential to successful
Lean-Agile transformation, together with one bonus strategy (the +1).
All seven describe patterns observed across a range of organisations in
the public and private sectors. They and their accompanying pitfalls
highlight the need for a number of specific leadership behaviours.

Youve heard of Agile software development. Youre attracted by the idea of closer
customer collaboration, better teamwork. Perhaps youre already using a defined Agile
process. Long ago you tired of long, late, painful, and ultimately disappointing project
deliveries, and can see the sense in taking an iterative and incremental approach starting
with something simple, then refining it and adding to it, having something that works all
along the way.
Youve heard also of Lean, though perhaps you associate it more with manufacturing than
with software development and other forms of creative knowledge work. But yes, the idea
of getting valuable work into the hands of customers in the minimum time possible and with
the minimum of drama does sound attractive.
It turns out that these two approaches complement each other well, hence Lean-Agile.
Furthermore, both of them share a goal of making organisational learning and development
part of the process by which the delivery work gets done. Hence Lean-Agile transformation,
an implementation approach that builds on this learning goal from the outset.
Lets be honest though: any kind of change is hard, harder still when it brings challenges to
some deeply-held assumptions. Accordingly, with each strategy I identify pitfalls that lie in
wait for the nave or poorly-advised, and some important leadership behaviours that help to
avoid them.

What do we mean by Lean-Agile transformation?


A very short (too short, and also slightly wrong) answer to this question might be the
pursuit of alignment to Agile values and Lean principles. In other words, we dont see Lean-
Agile as meaning the forced implementation of a predefined process that happens to
cherry-pick techniques drawn from the two movements. However, this answer is
incomplete in that it hides the level of challenge involved in the transformation process, and
its misleading in that our goal is not Lean-Agile for its own sake, but what the organisation
can achieve by choosing to walk this path.

Copyright 2016 Agendashift (a trading name of Positive Incline Limited). All rights reserved.
What is Lean-Agile?
We start with Agile. It represents far more than just the values expressed in its 2001
manifestoi; it now represents a vibrant community and a body of knowledge that is both
established and developing.
Agile also represents a shift in thinking, challenging traditionally-minded organisations to
leave behind some profoundly unsafe assumptions about the quality and immediate
availability of the information on which traditional plan-based and requirements-driven
delivery models depend. Agile frames product development as a journey of discovery,
delivered through explicitly iterative and incremental processes that respect, support, and
amplify the deliberate and timely interactions of skilled people. Framed this way, internal
understanding, delivered products, and the environments in which they operate are given
the opportunity to co-evolve over time.
Lean is a movement inspired by the multi-decade rise of Toyota and a growing appreciation
for the radical thinking embodied in the Toyota Production System (TPS). Lean and TPS
share a strong sense of customer alignment and are characterised by the pursuit of flow.
Unpredictability and delay (enemies of smooth flow) receive a lot of attention, but these are
not generally assumed to be due to failures of planning or control; rather they emerge from
the design of the delivery system itself. Adopting this attitude makes organisational learning
highly systematic, focused relentlessly on improving flow even while simultaneously making
the process more sensitive to changing customer demands.
Lean principlesii and Agile values turn out to be both compatible and complementary, each
addressing some perceived weaknesses and blind spots in the other. Lean provides
counterbalances to Agiles team-centricity and to some rather confused attitudes towards
leadership. Agile in turn moderates Leans perceived tool-centricity. Happily, Lean-Agile
seems to escape the popular perception of Lean as a mainly subtractive philosophy
dominated by waste elimination, more for less, etc more Lean Startupiii than Lean Six
Sigmaiv if you like.
There is no definitive Lean-Agile manifesto, but putting Lean and Agile together in this way
commonly leads to some combination of these themes:
Explicitly hypothesis-based approaches such as Lean Startups validated learning
driving both organisational and product development
The pursuit of continuous delivery as an expression of Leans just-in-time (JIT) goal,
an enabler of agility, and a reducer of conflict and risk
Customer alignment and service orientation increasingly reflected in organisation
and process design
Strategy 0: Kanban
While we are still on the subject of established bodies of knowledge and before we move
onto more transformation strategies, lets consider how Kanban fits into the picture.
Kanban has its roots in Lean, combining visual management with controls on work-in-
progress to create pull systems. These elements combine to improve process performance
and to stimulate evolution in the direction of just-in-time delivery. This century, Kanban has
been radically (and very necessarily) re-imagined for application in creative knowledge

Copyright 2016 Agendashift (a trading name of Positive Incline Limited). All rights reserved.
work, and codified in the values, principles, and practices of the Kanban Method, an
evolutionary approach to improving service delivery in creative knowledge work.
The Kanban Method can be applied on its own as the alternative path to agility, a good
choice wherever externally-defined delivery processes or their imposition have already
disappointed or are deemed inappropriate for some other reason. However, Kanban can
also be seen as highly supportive of broader Lean, Agile, and Lean-Agile transformations,
supporting them in ways such as these:
Lean: Visualising flow, its impediments and their causes; implementing pull systems
Agile: Highlighting where collaboration is needed; deepening insight into team and
process performance
Lean-Agile: Managing experiments; understanding and improving service delivery
end-to-end
Strategy 0 is an apt description many have found it to be a key enabler, foundational
even. It can lift team-level processes out of stagnation, get portfolio-level inventory under
proper control, and help integrate disparate services into a coherent whole.
It might be a stretch to describe Kanban as a leadership strategy, but it does makes explicit
reference to leadership in one of its key principles:
Encourage acts of leadership at every level, from individual contributor to senior
management
Two of its remaining principles are worthy of mention here; firm leadership may be required
if transformation is to proceed on foundations of understanding, respect, and agreement:
Start with what you do now
o understanding current processes, as actually practiced
o respecting existing roles, responsibilities, and job titles
Agree to pursue improvement through evolutionary change

Copyright 2016 Agendashift (a trading name of Positive Incline Limited). All rights reserved.
Six leadership strategies and their pitfalls
Strategies 1-3 are about addressing gaps gaps of skill, gaps in process capability, and gaps
in understanding:
1. Skills-first
2. Process-first
3. Needs-first
Strategies 4-6 impact deeper processes, structures, and themes:
4. Improvement-driven
5. Alignment-driven
6. Purpose-driven
This second set of strategies represent investments in the capabilities needed to sustain the
transformation process into the future. Theyre harder to implement than the first three
(generally requiring more senior support) and it might be tempting to defer them, but its
vital that theyre in place before the quick wins become harder to find and momentum is
lost.
Most of the six strategies should be easily recognisable in past transformations you may
have witnessed. My hope is that seeing them identified and articulated in this way will bring
some clarity. You have probably encountered some of their respective pitfalls too; hopefully
youll avoid them next time!
We make no apology for taking a strong line in certain areas:
Our inclusion in strategy 1 of some important skills are not yet considered
mainstream in corporate development
Our recognition in strategy 2 of the risks inherent to the mainly team-centric
approach that is often taken in Agile adoptions
Our insistence with strategy 3 on the primacy of needs over requirements, and the
further implication that the exploration of needs should be an integral part of the
delivery process, not limited to the early stages of projects
Our reworking of continuous improvement in strategy 4, deliberately leaving behind
some 20th century language and adopting modern tools that are applicable both to
organisational change and product developmentv
Our reference to Enterprise Services Planningvi in strategy 5, which (with plenty else)
provides concrete guidance on the implementation of effective feedback loops
Our advocacy in strategy 6 for a more complete understanding of Greenleafs model
of Servant Leadershipvii
Strategy 1: Skills-first
Our first transformation strategy addresses the skills typically needed to introduce, operate,
and sustain a fit-for-purpose delivery organisation. Bridging the skills gap can be a significant
challenge just look at the capabilities that differentiate more modern development teams:
Test-driven development, continuous integration, continuous delivery, distributed
version control some of the more important technical practices of a fast and
reliable delivery pipeline

Copyright 2016 Agendashift (a trading name of Positive Incline Limited). All rights reserved.
User research, user experience, visual design, content design just a few of the
user-centric skills needed to achieve the levels of usability we now expect in our
applications
User needs, minimum viable products, hypotheses, validated learning some of the
new language of discovery and disciplined experimentation that goes with the
important shift away from the old language of requirements
Technology and architecture: competence in the technologies employed; awareness
of open source technologies; comfort with emergent, service-oriented architectures
Some of the tools of this strategy:
Formal training sending staff out to be trained, or bringing in trainers
Coaching facilitating learning on the job, often with additional goals around
personal growth or team performance
Pairing and mentoring systematically sharing knowledge and experience between
colleagues
Personal development supporting individuals in their self-directed pursuit of new
knowledge and skills
Strategic hiring bringing in permanent and/or contract staff for the sake of specific
skills
Supplier relationships leveraging relationships with higher-capability suppliers
Pitfall: How hard can it be?
It is very easy to underestimate the skills gap, especially if we are complacent enough to use
for our baseline only the skillsets of the teams of which we have first-hand experience. It
would be more negligent still to think that the relevant leadership behaviour required here
is simply to pass on ones hard-earned skills to the next generation, effectively implying that
the skills with which we are not blessed are somehow less valuable.
Even at departmental level, effective leaders must maintain an understanding of the
competitive landscape. This includes the internal capabilities of current and potential future
rival organisations not just in terms of technology shifts but in terms of customer
engagement, service design, process performance, and so on. Neither should leaders
assume that the threat comes only from organisations like their own.
Pitfall: Lack of visible direction
A defined end state design is not a prerequisite for sustained transformation. However, a
transformation that fails to find or maintain its sense of direction is in severe trouble, and a
mainly skills-focused approach is at particular risk.
Teaching just the skills leaves so much still to be worked out that the experience can be
unsettling. How will all the pieces be assembled? Who will take responsibility for challenging
those long-held organisational assumptions? How will new knowledge be integrated into
the organisation? What will prevent the waste of time and effort on details irrelevant to the
organisations core challenges? What outcomes should be expected, and how soon?
The answer to the direction problem doesnt lie in top-down solution design or a 20th
century style of change management obsessed with overcoming resistance to change. Far
more sustainable (not to mention humane) is to expect the leadership behaviours of
presence (not just distant sponsorship), authenticity and insight in the identification of key

Copyright 2016 Agendashift (a trading name of Positive Incline Limited). All rights reserved.
challenges, and sufficient clarity in the framing of the overall response that any incoherence
or irrelevance in the implementation detail will immediately become apparent.
Strategy 2: Process-first
This strategy comes in two complementary parts:
1. Team-centric building capability at team level
2. Cross-team ensuring effective coordination between teams
Team-centric approaches are the staple of Agile transformation, often involving the
implementation of Scrum, Agiles best-known framework. Scrum is explicitly team-centric,
defining team process, team practices, team roles, and team artefacts. It is widely
understood, is well supported by tools and services, and can be an effective way to
introduce an iterative model of development where none previously exists.
Kanban too can be applied at team level, though it differs from Scrum in that it is an
evolutionary, start with what you do now approach rather than a defined process. Not
that this makes the two incompatible however Kanban applied in the context of a Scrum
implementation is common enough that the name Scrumban has been coined for it.
Scrumban comes in two distinct flavours, one in which Kanban is used inside Scrum to
optimise team process, and the other in which Kanban provides the means to manage a
larger end-to-end process, perhaps to coordinate the work of multiple teams. Sometimes
the former grows into the latter as the process matures.
Team-centric approaches will reach a plateau when the obstacles to more effective delivery
lie outside the control of the team. This effect should be mitigated by complementing team-
level change with efforts to bring the organisations overall work-in-progress under control
and to improve inter-team coordination. Indeed, it is not unusual for transformations to
start here, either with portfolio kanban systems or with initiatives aimed at improving the
performance and predictability of shared service bottlenecks.
Pitfall: Optimising for comfort
For reasons both practical and social, it is hard to overstate the importance of teams.
However, as alluded to in my first book, there are some potential negatives too: cliques,
competitive behaviour, information hiding, unfair assumptions about the motives and
intentions of those outside, and bubbles, whose walls become barriers.
When teams look mainly inwards, theres a tendency to measure progress in their own
terms: internal metrics of activity or comfort that correlate only weakly with external
outcomes. The needs and outcomes of users, customers, and other stakeholders may not
feature highly at all.
The leaders responsibilities in this should be obvious: to pay attention to how their teams
relate to those outside, and to look for externally-meaningful measures of success.
Pitfall: Optimising for compliance and consistency
Coaches and managers have their own versions of the comfort pitfall, optimising for
compliance to their preferred frameworks or looking for a best practice for everything.
Both represent lazy thinking, an unwillingness to think contextually and to apply the
principles that underpin good practices to the particular challenges of each situation.

Copyright 2016 Agendashift (a trading name of Positive Incline Limited). All rights reserved.
The time for managing by checklist is when a process is already operating effectively and
the cost of deviation is high. In a transformation this mentality risks prematurely freezing a
solution before it ever gets the chance to achieve effectiveness, or (worse) needlessly
provoking resistance and putting a stumbling block in front of the transformation before it
even gets underway.
Much better than checklists here are generative tools tools that keep attention focussed
on where there is the greatest opportunity to generate fresh insight, effective action, and
positive results, for which buy-in is established implicitly from the outset.
Strategy 3: Needs-first
Start with needs user needs not government needsviii
Ive had the genuine privilege of serving as interim delivery manager for two UK government
digital exemplar projects and I can say from first-hand experience that the Government
Digital Services (GDS) mantra of start with needs is not mere political spin. It represents a
strategic policy commitment, robustly enforced to the extent that new digital services in the
UK government sector risk public failure should they prove themselves unable to
demonstrate a lasting commitment to exploring and delivering against user needs.
This needs-first strategy highlights two very common pitfalls associated with Agile and
digital transformation and other large initiatives: confusing needs with requirements, and
widening rather than managing the gap between expectations and reality.
Pitfall: Confusing needs with requirements
As proved by countless projects, requirements and needs are not equivalent any number
of requirements can be satisfied without ever meeting a genuine need! Making a strategic
priority of needs can have a catalytic effect, radically changing the delivery model. User-
centric disciplines such as user research and service design migrate from the early stages of
the old model of project delivery to become an integral and ongoing part of a new model of
service delivery. Post-delivery validation closes the feedback loop so that insights are
generated in days or weeks, as opposed to months, years, when projects finally fail, or
never.
Here we pose a leadership challenge: for every requirement, can you identify authentic
situations of need times and places in which those features really matter to someone? Is
your process designed to test this early and frequently enough?
Pitfall: The capability gap
The exemplar projects I was associated with were blessed with excellent delivery teams.
Sometimes though, enthusiasm for user needs or customer experience turns to frustration
and disillusionment when it becomes painfully apparent that concept cant quickly be
turned into reality. By the time solutions begin to materialise, the opportunity to
incorporate valuable feedback may already have been lost, and with it the opportunity to
remodel the delivery approach.
Avoiding this pitfall may require some strategic thinking. Start where you have some chance
of delivering something useful (however small). Iterate rapidly and incorporate feedback
from real users as you go, even if this means shallow or tactical integration with core
systems. Broader scope and deeper integration can develop over time, building on a
platform of success.

Copyright 2016 Agendashift (a trading name of Positive Incline Limited). All rights reserved.
Strategy 4: Improvement-driven
Continuous improvementix has a long history, growing out of the disciplines of quality
control and process control through the work of Shewhart, Deming, Ohno, and others. More
recently, the Lean Startup movement has adapted these ideas to the needs of a 21st century
product development audience, and there is now a very healthy interchange of ideas
between the two worlds.
The basic ideas are very simple:
Find something that needs improving, hypothesise a potential improvement, try it
out, and evaluate its impact
On the results of that experiment, decide whether to adopt the change, to reject it,
to refine it further, or perhaps to pivot, trying a radically different approach
Keep this process moving, explicitly and transparently managing a portfolio of
experiments
Pitfall: What makes an improvement anyway?
In truth, many so-called improvements deliver no discernible benefit. Some are actually
rather costly new checks and balances designed to address risks that were already low in
likelihood and impact. Others give just the illusion of improvement, focusing on concerns
peripheral to how the work will be delivered.
An improvement should leave the organisation more fit for purpose, although this begs at
least two questions (which well come to later). A good rule of thumb is to reject options
that arent good for customers, for the organisation, and for the people doing the work
balanced thinking rather than zero-sum thinking.
Pitfall: Running out of steam
Sadly, the long and noble history of continuous improvement is littered with initiatives that
fell by the wayside long before new habits could be formed. The reason cited is often lack
of management support, but this is too glib a description given the magnitude of the
problem.
For it to succeed, continuous improvement needs several things:
The capacity to do improvement work alongside delivery work. The catch-22 here is
where there is the direst need of improvement, no-one believes they have the
capacity to improve!
For improvement work to be seen as real work, prioritised and rewarded in the
same way
The level of management commitment necessary to ensure that changes likely to
face significant organisational challenge will get tackled
A readiness to learn from experiments that dont go as expected and the stamina to
keep on trying
Feedback loops designed both to keep progress on track and to ensure a pipeline of
new ideas, with the required level of organisational visibility
In short, leaving continuous improvement as a background activity for others to carry out
dooms it to almost certain failure. It can only be sustained through careful attention to

Copyright 2016 Agendashift (a trading name of Positive Incline Limited). All rights reserved.
organisational design, significant management effort, and ongoing leadership. Leaders need
to make it a personal priority, providing sponsorship, safety, and commitment.
Strategy 5: Alignment-driven
Alignment-driven approaches are about the mechanisms that ensure that all the different
parts of the organisation are working coherently towards shared goals over a range of time
horizons. Key to this approach are feedback loops, regular opportunities to bring together
people, information, and accountable decision-making. Often these are lacking not so
much a transformation pitfall as an opportunity not to be overlooked.
Enterprise Services Planning (the Kanban methods bigger cousin) comes with several of
these feedback loops predefined. Most illustrative of these is the service delivery review. It
is pivotal, sitting between the feedback loops of delivery operations (the planning meetings,
daily standups etc) and the higher level feedback loops focused on strategy, organisation,
and risk.
The service delivery review often brings several disciplines together and it is a great
opportunity to see how well their work is aligned. This is well illustrated by the standing
agenda of one such meeting:
1. User feedback (received via online channels and from user research)
2. User helpdesk incidents
3. Production activity (releases, production incidents)
4. Volumes (current and projected; marketing activity)
5. Production metrics (performance, capacity, reliability)
6. Development update, with metrics (lead times, throughput, predictability)
Pitfall: Who sets the agenda?
Transformation initiatives often suffer from a lack of connection between the expectations
of senior stakeholders and the actual changes being made at ground level. Transformations
are often described as bottom-up or top-down, saying more about what is being neglected
or consciously avoided, rather than what is being done! Describing them as middle-out
doesnt solve this problem if goals arent aligned and the intentx isnt clear.
As with culture formationxi in general, I find it useful to think of the agenda for change (and
therefore its impact) not as coming from one particular source, but simply as the result of a
process. How that process is structured, informed, guided, and controlled is a question both
of organisational design and of leadership. Where its missing or a reset is necessary,
intervene to allow the agenda to both feed and be fed by multiple organisational levels,
agreeing strategic priorities that will be backed up by action.
Strategy 6: Purpose-driven
What does your organisation exist to do? Can every individual contributor describe with
confidence what they deliver, to whom, and why (in the grand scheme of things) it matters?
How well would their answers align with those of their peers and their seniors?
Assuming a degree of clarity on those questions, is your organisation fit for purpose? What
is the gap between current levels of capability and where you need it to be? What

Copyright 2016 Agendashift (a trading name of Positive Incline Limited). All rights reserved.
capabilities are missing? What mechanisms exist to ensure that fitness will be sustained for
the long term?
Casual references to Greenleafs model of Servant Leadership often miss the pursuit of
purpose that lies at its core. Through this pursuit, servant leaders help others to grow and
find meaning in their work, and at the same time help the organisation find and maintain a
sustainable position of service to society. How better to integrate both organisational goal-
setting and the development of its staff?
Pitfall: Too little, too late
Whether out of neglect or for fear of stifling existing efforts, senior leaders have often been
guilty of engaging constructively with transformation only after all other options have been
exhausted. The symptoms will be familiar: pilot projects showing initial promise before
coming up against organisational resistance; short-term delivery imperatives trumping all
other considerations; support functions such as HR and finance remaining outside the
process. Almost inevitably, the gap between aspiration and reality becomes too big to
ignore, generating both frustration and cynicism.
Summary: The leaders crucial role
Leaders need to be ready to do more than make encouraging noises from the sidelines. To
fulfil their crucial role in each of the six main strategies described in this paper they must:
1. Identify important future skills, including their own
2. Ensure that teams dont just perform well by their own internal measures, but
combine effectively to deliver excellent service
3. Prioritise external needs that will be strategically important for the organisation to
address
4. Keep the agenda for change well informed, contributing appropriate themes and
goals; demonstrate and encourage resolute behaviour when organisational
challenges must be faced
5. Pay attention to the organisations feedback loops, addressing gaps and helping to
align operational and strategic processes
6. Play a full part in the pursuit of purpose, helping others to grow into the servant
leaders the future organisation will need
It wont all happen at once, and it doesnt need to! Think of transformation as an integral
part of the role of leadership, not as a project bound in time and resources, even if for
practical reasons you need to package it that way in order to get it started.

Copyright 2016 Agendashift (a trading name of Positive Incline Limited). All rights reserved.
Introducing Agendashift Transforming Lean-Agile transformation
This paper has focused on the last of Agendashifts three main elements:
1. The Agendashift Values-based delivery assessment a refreshingly inclusive, non-
prescriptive and method-neutral assessment and survey tool. We use it 1-on-1, with
teams, and with larger business units to identify areas of organisational potential.
The values that give the assessment its name are transparency, balance,
collaboration, customer focus, flow, and leadership; these organise the 40+ prompts
of the full tool and the 18 prompts of the mini edition.
2. The Agendashift Transformation Mapping workshop delivered as standalone
events, as the follow-up to training, or as the framework for a coaching engagement.
Weve successfully integrated tools from Cynefin, Clean Language, Lean Startup, and
Lean, helping participants to dig deep and create a transformation plan that is both
aspirational and actionable.
3. The Agendashift leadership strategy framework crystalising our experience into a
framework of leadership strategies to implement and common pitfalls to avoid. It
also provides a useful cross-check to the preceding two elements.
In short: understand, engage, lead.
The first two elements the online assessment tool and the workshop materials are
available to authorised partners for a modest annual subscription. Our partners include
independent coaches, trainers, and consultants, employees of larger professional services
firms, and internal change agents (coaches and managers). See our partner directory at
www.agendashift.com/partners, and visit www.agendashift.com/partner for more
information about the partner programme.
Around the tools and their underlying ideas is a growing community of Lean-Agile
practitioners. We and our community are well described by these characteristics:
Inclusive because we're more interested in what we can accomplish with others
than in what we can achieve alone
Contextual because we respect the uniqueness of every situation, to be explored
and developed in ways both tried-and-tested and novel
Fulfilling because we find that meeting peoples needs, goals, and wishes brings us
meaning, direction, and satisfaction
Open because we're still uncovering better ways of working and new ways in
which to combine them
To learn more about Agendashift:
Read our blog: blog.agendashift.com
Join our Slack community: www.agendashift.com/slack
Join our LinkedIn group: www.agendashift.com/linkedin
Follow us on Twitter: @agendashift

Copyright 2016 Agendashift (a trading name of Positive Incline Limited). All rights reserved.
About the author
Mike Burrows is author of Kanban from the Inside (the first values-based treatment of the
Kanban Method,based on his experience as interim CTO for a late-stage startup) and
founder of Agendashift, the home of an integrated set of online, workshop-based and
coaching tools for a growing community of Lean-Agile transformation practitioners. Prior to
these roles, he was Executive Director and global development manager for a top tier
investment bank. His new book Agendashift: clean conversations, coherent collaboration,
continuous transformation is due out later this year.

References

i
Manifesto for Agile Software Development, http://agilemanifesto.org/
ii
Principles of Lean, http://www.lean.org/WhatsLean/Principles.cfm
iii
Eric Ries, The Lean Startup (Portfolio Penguin, 2011)
iv
Michael L. George, David T. Rowlands, Bill Kastle, What is Lean Six Sigma (McGraw Hill
Education, 2003)
v
See On not teaching PDCA, https://blog.agendashift.com/2016/03/01/on-not-teaching-
pdca/
vi
David J Anderson, Introducing Enterprise Services Planning,
http://www.djaa.com/introducing-enterprise-services-planning
vii
Robert K. Greenleaf, Servant Leadership: A journey into the nature of legitimate
power and greatness (25th anniversary edition, Paulist Press, 2002)
viii
Government Digital Service Design Principles, https://www.gov.uk/design-principles
ix
Sometimes continual improvement, emphasising its ongoing nature and avoiding the
implication that only gradual changes should be considered
x
Stephen Bungay, The Art of Action (Nicholas Brealey Publishing, 2010)
xi
Edgar H. Schein, Organizational Culture and Leadership (Jossey-Bass, 2010)

Copyright 2016 Agendashift (a trading name of Positive Incline Limited). All rights reserved.