And, if I’m not genuinely curious and only show up when there’s a failure, then I am failing as a senior leader. — 13: 186-187
It is based on a compelling curiosity for what makes high-performing technology organizations great, and how software makes organizations better. — 18: 250-251
FOCUS ON CAPABILITIES, NOT MATURITY — 26: 382-382
The DevOps mantra of continuous improvement is both exciting and real, pushing companies to be their best, and leaving behind those who do not improve. — 39: 578-579
You can, of course, use these tools to model your own performance. Use Table 2.3 to discover where in our taxonomy you fall. Use our measures for lead time, deployment frequency, time to restore service, and change fail rate, and ask your teams to set targets for these measures. However, it is essential to use these tools carefully. In organizations with a learning culture, they are incredibly powerful. But “in pathological and bureaucratic organizational cultures, measurement is used as a form of control, and people hide information that challenges existing rules, strategies, and power structures. As Deming said, ’whenever there is fear, you get the wrong numbers’” (Humble et al. 2014, p. 56). Before you are ready to deploy a scientific approach to improving performance, you must first understand and develop your culture. It is to this topic we now turn. — 43: 644-651
Generative (performance-oriented) organizations focus on the mission. How do we accomplish our goal? Everything is subordinated to good performance, to doing what we are supposed to do. — 46: 687-688
John Shook, describing his experiences transforming the culture of the teams at the Fremont, California, car manufacturing plant that was the genesis of the Lean manufacturing movement in the US, wrote, “what my . . . experience taught me that was so powerful was that the way to change culture is not to first change how people think, but instead to start by changing how people behave—what they do” (Shook 2010). — 53: 795-798
Our research lends support to what is sometimes called the “inverse Conway Maneuver,”2 which states that organizations should evolve their team and organizational structure to achieve the desired architecture — 71: 1064-1066