Save £12 Million every year > Save £3 Million every quarter   
The Big Agile Toolkit: no Dogma, no Bias, no Accreditation, no Exams & no Fees   
 Anonymous Declaration  Anonymous Declaration   Readiness Response Experiences   Readiness Response Experiences

Each Readiness Statement has one of four possible responses. These are called Readiness Responses and use a simple and memorable acronym: ACDC. The attendee may respond that they Accept or Confirm the statement, or the attendee would Debate or Contest it. You have quickly understood the acronym but let us explain the responses using a simple matrix.

The Readiness Responses demonstrate agreement or disagreement. If you agree with the statement you will be able to either accept or confirm it. If you disagree with the statement you will be able to either debate or contest it. Looked at conversely therefore if you accept or confirm the statement you are agreeing to it. If you debate or contest the statement you are disagreeing with it. It is the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement, and the evidence you can bring to bear to demonstrate it, that we wish to enquire upon, understand further and collect as part of the responses to the Readiness Statement. To Confirm a statement we can evidence that ALL of the statement is correct. To Contest a statement we can evidence that AT LEAST PART of the statement is not correct.

Hmmm, we can see a matrix coming up next.

If you agree with the statement and cannot demonstrate evidence of it, you Accept it. If you agree and can demonstrate evidence of the statement, you Confirm it.

If you disagree with the statement and cannot demonstrate evidence of your disagreement, then you would Debate it. If you disagree and can demonstrate evidence of your disagreement, then you Contest it.

This is one of those situations where it is a straightforward concept to grasp especially if you take the explanation or description no further than a matrix. However, we want you to stand up in a workshop with confidence and conviction, so we will go through an example rather than accept it.

We want to confirm it. Let us assume one Declaration statement is as follows:

Paris is the capital city of France.


This is easy. Okay, we know Paris is the capital of France so we accept the statement. Now we have to consider whether we confirm it. This is where the evidence comes into play. If we feel we can demonstrate evidence that all of that statement is correct then we can alter our response. We could go to our preferred search engine and validate that Paris is the capital city of France, print off a map and show it to our colleague. Your colleague may start to view you a little strangely for indiscriminately presenting printed maps of European capitals but worry not. When we do this, we can confirm all of the statement is correct. Let us try another.

Marseille is a port in France and it is the capital city.

Now then, Marseille is a port in France we know this part of the statement is correct. But we know that Marseille is not its capital city. In this instance we would debate that statement. Now we have to consider whether we contest it. This is where our evidence comes in again. If we feel we can provide evidence that any of that statement is incorrect; for example Marseille is not a port or is not the capital city of France then we have the information to contest the statement. Simply return to your preferred search engine and demonstrate that Marseille is not the capital city of France. So in this instance we would not just debate that statement; we will definitely contest it. At least part of that statement is incorrect and we can demonstrate this is incorrect. It is as easy as ACDC.
Buffer



 Anonymous Declaration     Anonymous Declaration   Readiness Response Experiences    Readiness Response Experiences



Glossary:     a  »   b  »   c  »   d  »   e  »   f  »   g  »   h  »   i  »   j  »   k  »   l  »   m  »   n  »   o  »   p  »   q  »   r  »   s  »   t  »   u  »   v  »   w  »   x  »   y  »   z


#personas  »   #artefacts  »   #archetypes  »   #patterns  »   #change  »   #personas  »   #increasingoutput  »   #reducingvariation  »   #improveefficiency  »   #abstraction  »   #predictionandcontrol  »   #management  »   #organisations  »   #socialnetworktheory  »   #failfast  »   #quality  »   #waste  »   #complexity  »   #learning  »   #adapt  »   #inspect  »   #improvement  »   #models  »   #complexadaptivesystems  »   #informationflow  »   #sytemsthinking  »   #butterflyeffect  »   #unpredictability  »   #chaos  »   #emergence  »   #emergentbehaviour  »   #distributedcontrol  »   #continuousimprovement  »   #complexityscience  »   #gametheory  »  
 Agile In 6 Steps    |    Projectivity    |    Instant Agile    |    Risks    |    Auditing Agile Projects 
Big Agile Toolkit Book (Amazon Japan)   |   Big Agile Toolkit Book (Barnes and Noble)
Buy the Big Agile Toolkit Book   |   Buy the Big Agile Toolkit Kindle eBook
Readiness Responses






   


The Big Agile Toolkit

 SPADE: Successful Pragmatic Agile Delivery Everytime™ 
   
Topic: 242  Page: 369/444  Progress: 83.1%
 About    |    Author 
Follow @BigAgileToolkit


This content can be copied to third parties for personal use if you acknowledge the source of the material with website URL (http://www.bigagiletoolkit.com/) and Twitter hashtag (#BigAgileToolkit).
In all other cases, no part of bigagiletoolkit or associated text or website may be copied reproduced or redistributed in any form or by any means without prior permission in writing from the author.
Agile Project Governance for Cost Conscious Companies™

All rights reserved.