DevOps Culture Level 2Conquering Fear and Improving Outcomes

Mandi Walls, Chef Software21 May 2015 :: IP Expo Manchester

whoami

•Mandi Walls•Joined Chef in November 2011•Professional services in the US, now building the team for EMEA

•@lnxchk

Why DevOps Culture?•The fuzzier, more challenging? part of DevOps

•Impacts how organizations react to internal and external pressures

Cultural Impacts•How does the organization react to market opportunity, embrace change?

•How does the organization remediate problems, bugs, issues?

•How does the organization treat individuals?

How Culture is Communicated•Rewards•Punishments•Allocation of Resources•Actions of Leaders

Categorizing Organizations•From A Typology of Organisational Cultures by Dr. Ron Westrum•Quality and Safety in Health Care, 01/2005• http://m.qualitysafety.bmj.com/content/13/suppl_2/ii22.full

•Looks at information flow in healthcare teams

•Patient care impact•Information drives alignment to goals, awareness, and empowerment

Three Types of Organizations•Pathological•Bureaucratic•Generative

Organizational BehaviorsPathological Bureaucratic Generative

Power Oriented Rule Oriented Performance Oriented

Low Cooperation Modest or Local Cooperation High Cooperation

Messengers Shot Messengers Neglected Messengers Trained

Responsibilities Shirked Narrow Responsibilities Risks Shared

Bridging Discouraged Bridging Tolerated Bridging Encouraged

Failure -> Scapegoating Failure -> Justice Failure -> Inquiry

Novelty Crushed Novelty Associated with Problems Novelty Implemented

•Not indicated by size or age of the org•Not necessarily indicated by industry•Specific internal behaviors may vary based on national culture, external variables

Pathological Organizations

Characteristics•Power Oriented•“Hero” culture•Obsessed with personal power, influence, glory

•Hoarding of information and access

Does it DevOp?•Low cooperation among teams•Gatekeepers•Often buy a tool or implement a project, then keep it to themselves

•Empire Builders•Use a new initiative to take over other teams, responsibilities, resources, budgets

Safety•Pathological organizations are “unsafe”•Speaking up about ideas•Reporting issues•Discussing failures

Coping in Pathological Teams•Westrum cites examples of pathological organizations being particularly dangerous – healthcare, military, aviation

•In IT, they tend to be slower to improve, respond to market dynamics

•Individuals who disagree are in particularly perilous position

•People who feel strongly are often compelled to leave

•Breaking the pattern can happen after a change in leadership

Bureaucratic Organizations

Pathological Bureaucratic Generative

Power Oriented Rule Oriented Performance Oriented

Low Cooperation Modest or Local Cooperation High Cooperation

Messengers Shot Messengers Neglected Messengers Trained

Responsibilities Shirked Narrow Responsibilities Risks Shared

Bridging Discouraged Bridging Tolerated Bridging Encouraged

Failure -> Scapegoating Failure -> Justice Failure -> Inquiry

Novelty Crushed Novelty Associated with Problems Novelty Implemented

Characteristics•Rule Oriented•Obsessed with rules, positions, “turf”•All activities, inquiries must be routed through the appropriate channels

•Responsibilities are meticulously laid out by department

Does it DevOp?•“DevOps Team”•New initiatives must be given their place in the structure and hierarchy

•DevOps isn’t everyone’s job

•Small pilot projects within a single department are often quite successful•Harder to drive wider efforts

Safety•Bureaucratic organizations are often thought to be “locally safe”•As long as your loyalty lies with your team

•Failure requires justice, so still not much risk taking and experimentation•There may be a department that is explicitly for experimentation

Coping in Bureaucratic Teams•Follow all the rules•Even when they contradict each other

•Pick your battles•Be flexible•Giving others a chance to follow their rules will build trust, new patterns of behavior

•Be patient

“Skunkworks” DevOps•Secret projects executed in small teams•Common in Bureaucratic environments•Sometimes break out, sometimes die off•Successful projects get attention, attract a following – be careful of Pathological tendencies!

Generative Organizations

Pathological Bureaucratic Generative

Power Oriented Rule Oriented Performance Oriented

Low Cooperation Modest or Local Cooperation High Cooperation

Messengers Shot Messengers Neglected Messengers Trained

Responsibilities Shirked Narrow Responsibilities Risks Shared

Bridging Discouraged Bridging Tolerated Bridging Encouraged

Failure -> Scapegoating Failure -> Justice Failure -> Inquiry

Novelty Crushed Novelty Associated with Problems Novelty Implemented

Characteristics•Performance Oriented•Individuals “bought in” to the mission•Free flow of information•Shared risks and responsibilities•High trust and individual empowerment

Does it DevOp?•“Just the way we do things here”•DevOps tasks can be anyone’s job•Automation, metrics, sharing

•Any new projects will inherit the DevOps DNA right from the start

•Sharing is common, celebrated

Safety•Generative organizations are “globally safe”

•Blameless post-mortems•Open experimentation

Getting to Generative•Build trust•Communicate•Share knowledge, lessons – be proactive in information sharing

•Embrace and build from failure•Be clear on goals, empower people

You Can Do It!•Any organization can work towards Generative•Regardless of industry•Regardless of size•Regardless of age of organization

•Examples from military, aviation, other high-risk industries

•Yes, it requires leadership support•Setting the values of the organization

The Reference•A Typology of Organisational Cultures

Thanks for Listening!Enjoy the rest of IP Expo!