When I first started coaching teams, I aimed to teach people the techniques and methods they could use to manage their work better. Recently, I’ve adopted a different approach that actually leaves techniques for last and instead starts with problems and needs.

I was thinking about my initial approach and how it’s changed over the past few years and compared that to what I see others doing. From that comparison, I came up with a short list of alternate approaches to Agile coaching when faced with a problem:

1. The coach fixes the problem: This looks like implementing new practices, frameworks, models and structures.
2. The coach helps the team fix the problem: This approach focuses on learning and growth. It could look like training and workshops or even a conversation.
3. The coach sees the people as the problem, and the coach fixes the people: This looks like reprogramming how people think, where the blame for how the system works is placed on individuals or groups within the system.
4. The coach looks for more problems: Where are the problems? What else is bothering you? Are there any other issues that are contributing to your problems? What do other people think the problem is?

The last approach, looking for more problems, is now how I start conversations with managers and teams. The problem people say they have is only part of the truth. When someone says they have a problem, the opportunity isn’t just to solve it; it’s to look at how things work and do things differently.

Recently a Manager and his Scrum Master came to me asking to help solve a problem. The challenge was that the Scrum Master was having difficulty getting status updates from his team on the status of their work items. They asked me to help the Scrum Master get those updates from the team.

I could address this problem by focusing on how they run their stand-ups or by looking at the individual characteristics of the Scrum Master and any faults they might have. I could also hunt for more problems.

• Why does he need to extract updates from his team?
• What’s wrong with the way the team shares updates?
• Why do they need updates?
• Why’s the status of the work hidden?
• Why can’t the team provide updates?
• Why’s the work late?
• What kind of commitments is the team making?

Most problems people struggle with are the effect of a system of problems, and as we discuss these questions, we’re writing things down and building a map of problems. By the end of the activity, we’ve identified many issues and previously hidden obstacles.

As we explore problems, we get a better appreciation for how the system works, which the other coaching approaches of fixing problems or fixing people miss.

However, the challenge with the “more problems” approach is that it brings people into the problem space for too long. It can be cognitively challenging and overwhelming for people to only deal with their problems for an extended amount of time without also providing them with a sense of resolution in the form of a plan or concrete improvement actions.

We can make the process easier on people by anchoring the discussion and problem-exploration activities around the team’s needs or their desired outcomes. Getting teams to come up with and agree on a set of needs also takes some effort, but it can help create alignment and a stronger motivation for change.

Start with by figuring out what annoys people or what keeps them up at night, and then poke at it from different perspectives:

• So what? What problems does it cause?
• What do you want to happen instead?
• When that happens, what else happens?
• Are there any other issues contributing to your problems?

Going back to the Scrum Master example from earlier, do you want to be able to extract status updates from your team members? Or do you actually want to deliver on your commitments on time? Problem discovery and problem mapping help uncover better needs. 

When a team has a clear goal, has a sense of direction, and can articulate their “real” challenges, it puts them in a better position to make their own changes. If teams can make their own changes, the other coaching approaches become unnecessary. No longer does it make sense for the coach to fix the problem, help the team fix the problem, or fix the people.