… or “Retrospectives are only Step 1 (of 2)”
“How can I motivate people to do retrospectives?” is a question I used to hear frequently.
If you ask me, that’s the wrong question. It’s wrong because you don’t have to motivate people to do something that they perceive as valuable.
Which makes the real question:
Why aren’t they getting value out of their retrospectives? And is there anything anyone can do to get them their
money’s time’s worth?
The only time, when the “motivation” question is admissable is if you’re trying something for the first time. You’ve never done a retro before? Yes, then you’re asking for a leap of faith from participants. And maybe the first one is wonky and you need a second one to make it count. But that’s it. From then on retros have to pay their own way – just like any other meeting should. If it’s not creating value then why are you doing it?
Btw, the retrospective itself is usually not the problem. It’s what happens afterwards. Which is often enough: nothing. It’s unfair to tell people “come on, we’ll look for improvements” and then not implement a single improvement idea. The actual meeting is Step 1. Following up on the agreed upon action items is Step 2.
Sometimes this problem with Step 2 originates in the retro: The improvement ideas are too vague to be actionable. Other times it’s outside: There’s not enough time or money to do anything. If retrospectives don’t affect any change or these changes aren’t beneficial the majority of times, then yes, people don’t want to do them anymore. And rightly so. They shouldn’t. In these circumstances, retros are a waste of time.
Ironically, I’d use a retro to figure out what’s going wrong and how to actually make them more valuable 😛