One of the things I dislike from the conventional consultant approach to "Agile" is the anonymous retrospective. It's problematic for a lot of reasons, and I don't do it.
First off, if your team is right-sized, it's unlikely that any retro observation won't be associated with someone on the team. In fact, that's a reason that someone may not feel comfortable bringing it up at all. But if the team doesn't peg the source, then it lacks context. No one likes feedback that isn't associated with a source because it's hard to make it actionable if you don't have the context.
More importantly though, doing this anonymously says that you don't have the culture and environment for psychological safety. Feedback is not, in fact, welcome if you can't safely provide it without fear of retribution. It isn't team work.
I have my team post retro items on a board ahead of time, with their initials. When we reach that part of the routine, we go around the room and have people talk about what they wrote in the usual categories... what went well, what didn't, what we can do differently. This allows for conversation and clarity and gives every member of the team an opportunity to lead a discussion, which I happen to think is important for professional development.
If you do anon retros, try this. I think you'll find the results far more useful.
No comments yet.