Agile Leadership and Management Training Course

Participants can establish clear roles, boundaries and working agreements for agile or hybrid teams.

• Scrum accountabilities: Product Owner, Scrum Master and Developers
• Kanban roles and service delivery expectations within existing structures
• RACI limitations when teams require shared ownership and rapid decisions
• Team charters defining purpose, membership, boundaries and service commitments
• Working agreements covering availability, escalation, communication and conflict resolution
• Cross-functional team design using skills maps and dependency analysis

Participants can translate strategic intent into outcomes, priorities and team-level goals.

• Outcome statements separating customer impact from activity and output
• OKRs written with measurable objectives and evidence-based key results
• Product goals connecting near-term delivery with strategic direction
• Impact mapping links actors, behaviours, outcomes and delivery options
• Cost of Delay compares urgency, value, risk reduction and opportunity
• Prioritisation decisions documented through explicit assumptions and trade-offs

Participants can set decision rights that increase team autonomy while retaining appropriate oversight.

• Delegation Poker identifies appropriate authority levels for recurring decisions
• Seven delegation levels clarify leader involvement and team discretion
• Decision logs record context, owner, rationale and review triggers
• Consent decision-making distinguishes objections from preferences and personal disagreement
• Escalation paths defined for financial, regulatory, operational and customer risks
• Guardrails establish non-negotiable controls without prescribing implementation details

Participants can lead delivery flow using Scrum and Kanban cadences, visualisation and limits.

• Sprint goals provide focus beyond a collection of backlog items
• Daily Scrum leadership avoids status reporting and manager-directed task assignment
• Kanban boards visualise workflow stages, blockers and work ageing
• Work-in-progress limits expose bottlenecks and encourage completion before starting
• Replenishment meetings select work according to capacity, policy and priority
• Service level expectations establish predictable response and completion commitments

Participants can create conditions for candid communication, learning and constructive accountability.

• Psychological safety supports speaking up, questioning and reporting emerging risks
• Edmondson's framing practices position uncertainty as legitimate team work
• SBI feedback model structures specific, timely and observable performance conversations
• Lencioni's team dysfunctions diagnose trust, conflict, commitment and accountability issues
• Retrospectives examine system conditions rather than assign individual blame
• Conflict protocols separate interests, positions, facts and workable agreements

Participants can use delivery and outcome data to guide improvement without distorting behaviour.

• Lead time measures elapsed duration from request to completed delivery
• Cycle time identifies workflow delays after active work begins
• Throughput tracks completed items across comparable time periods
• Cumulative flow diagrams reveal queues, bottlenecks and unstable workflow
• Outcome measures test customer behaviour, service quality and business results
• Goodhart's Law prevents metric targets from replacing meaningful performance improvement

Participants can align stakeholders through transparent communication, review cycles and proportionate controls.

• Stakeholder maps assess influence, interest, expectations and communication needs
• Sprint Reviews create evidence-based conversations about value, progress and choices
• Roadmaps communicate direction, assumptions, horizons and decision points
• Dependency boards expose hand-offs, external constraints and coordination commitments
• Risk-based governance matches assurance effort to impact, uncertainty and exposure
• Information radiators provide visible delivery evidence without excessive reporting overhead

Participants can guide teams through agile change while managing resistance and existing controls.

• ADKAR model identifies awareness, desire, knowledge, ability and reinforcement gaps
• Kotter's change steps adapted for team-level operating model changes
• Resistance analysis separates valid operational concerns from loss-of-control reactions
• Hybrid delivery models combine agile cadences with mandated stage-gate requirements
• Change impact assessments identify affected roles, processes, systems and controls
• Sponsor behaviours reinforce priorities, remove barriers and model desired practices

Participants can produce a sequenced plan for applying agile leadership practices with their teams.

• Leadership self-assessment identifies current strengths, gaps and behavioural patterns
• Team operating model canvas records purpose, roles, decisions and cadences
• Ninety-day action plans sequence experiments, owners, measures and review dates
• Implementation backlogs prioritise leadership changes by value, effort and urgency
• Personal leadership commitments specify behaviours, triggers and accountability partners
• Review checkpoints test evidence, adapt actions and sustain beneficial routines