Pavlo Mizetskyi Anson Chan

Agile change management implementation in Microhand software solutions a

case study
Introduction

This case study aims to delve deeper into the solutions that Microhard Software, a
multinational company, can implement using various types of agile and change
management approaches.

Approaches

In the company, we believe that agile change management is a better way to meet
our client's desire for more communication within the team, as classic management
simply doesn’t fit the idea of accommodating to clients ’demands. One way to
address delays and improve the team's productivity is to create a scrum
management system, such as sprints, where they spend 2-4 weeks delivering small,
incremental improvements. This helps to improve coordination, collaboration, and
efficiency, mitigating misalignment with end users.

Daily stand-ups of 10-15 minutes will ensure alignment, better communication

between team members, and help identify hurdles during the project within their
respective departments. These meetings allow the whole team to understand issues
and make quick decisions together, mitigating client resistance due to a lack of
communication between team members.

The company can also apply the Dreyfus learning model to understand each
member’s capabilities and skillsets, mitigating wasted potential and learning time,
which will increase productivity.

Weekly or daily retrospectives may increase colleagues ’reflections on their jobs,

helping them notice primary issues in their respective roles or acknowledge each
other’s efforts. This, in turn, improves team cohesion and productivity.
Enhanced documentation and communication are imperative in assisting the team in
understanding the process and the details of everyone’s roles. This can also address

misalignments with clients and within the team, as Sun Tzu once said, “The one who
knows thyself and thy enemies shall win many wars in the future.” Documentation
enhances knowledge of roles, activities, and peers.

After much discussion, we decided that there are certain key documents to utilize for
the company, such as risk registers and issue logs. Risk registers help project
managers and teams identify and track potential risks in the project, including risk
descriptions, probabilities, severities, responsible persons, minimization strategies,
and risk statuses (active, solved, minimized). Issue logs track current problems,
especially urgent and significant ones. The issue log includes the issue description,
report date, discoverer, urgency/priority, assigned team member, time required to
resolve, and status. These documents facilitate clearer communications among team
members and project managers, delegating and distributing responsibilities
according to the team’s abilities.

The company may also use change management documents to enhance the
process of changes and ensure all clients and stakeholders agree with the project
direction and alignment. This increases trust and customer loyalty in the market
segment.

The company may adopt models like the Lewin Change Management Model,
Bridges Transition Model, Kotter’s 8-Step Change Model, or Prosci’s ADKAR Model.
The Lewin Model emphasizes unfreezing detrimental old habits, introducing
innovative ideas, and adapting to new strategies. The Bridges Change Management
Model classifies three stages of emotions (ending, neutral zone, and new
beginnings) during the adaptation of new strategies. Kotter’s 8-Step Change Model
is a bottom-up approach ensuring changes and innovation in the team. The Prosci
ADKAR Model stands for Awareness of the need to change (A), Desire to change
(D), Knowledge of how to change successfully (K), Ability to adopt new changes in
behaviors or skills (A), and Reinforcement of the change (R). These models ensure a
benefit-realization tool, achieving preferable results and outcomes, increasing return
on investment (ROI), and avoiding excessive project costs.

The company may also bring in stakeholder analysis and engagement and pilot
testing. Stakeholder analysis and engagement involve initiating meetings with
stakeholders/clients to ensure their support/loyalty in the project, especially when
they are resistant to change. Pilot testing implements the product/service on a small
scale to identify potential problems without affecting or risking the reputation and
operation of the entire organization.

Project managers may engage in matrix structures within the company. There are
three types of matrices that project management and functional management can
adopt:

Weak matrix structure: Staff members coordinate primarily among themselves,

with the functional manager inspecting or spectating. This might benefit quick
decision-making but could overwhelm colleagues with work outside their expertise.

Balanced matrix: One staff member is assigned as a project manager in addition to

their functional role, collaborating closely with functional managers in allocating
budgets and tasks.

Strong matrix: Dedicated project managers lead their teams, with a project
management team assigning appropriate projects and supporting resource allocation
and expertise selection.

Lastly, the company can plan and create several team bonding activities to increase
cohesion and minimize conflicts. The project teams may also allow open and public
communication channels to facilitate communication between teams.

Outcomes
With the implementation of the listed methods, we aim to improve the overall quality
of products at Microhard Software Solutions. With Agile management, within a month
of adjustment, we expect significant improvements in meeting deadlines and overall
team cohesion. Clearer goals due to project division into smaller tasks will help the
team stick to schedules. Additionally, 15-minute stand-ups will ensure clear and
frequent communication, allowing quick reactions to delays and roadblocks.

Risk registers and issue logs will, after the first few project goals are achieved, help
pinpoint exact issues within teams, allowing us to realign participants and tasks
based on competencies. The closer involvement of the project manager with teams
will dramatically improve response times to challenges, facilitating near-
instantaneous changes to address current model pitfalls.

One of the most underestimated factors that agile management will help achieve is
an increase in employee engagement. Team-building activities will de-stress
employees during tight deadlines, increasing satisfaction and creating a more
personal and engaged work environment. This will lead to fewer sick leaves, higher
productivity, and improved morale.

Direct communication channels with team members will create a more democratic
environment. The ideal outcome of strategy implementation is to have a perfectly
flexible team, speeding up project timelines.

Another important aspect is aligning client desires with the team’s vision and end-

users ’needs. Direct communication between project managers, teams, and end-
users will facilitate improvements, with project managers acting as mediators.
Change-management documents will provide stakeholders with direct connections to
the project at every development stage, enabling rapid implementation of suggested
changes.

According to Khamal T. Research on agile strategies implementation in software

development, the outcomes regarding the improvement at the workplace are
projected to reach 90 percent positive in some cases, for example involving
communication. Another important improvement when implementing agile
management techniques is the teams noticeable decrease in resistance to change.

Conclusion
With the implementation of agile management, we aim to achieve significant
improvements in project execution, team cohesion, and client satisfaction at
Microhard Software Solutions. The solutions are projected to have noticeable
positive results within one week. Agile management in itself will be sufficient in
creating a productive work environment and addressing the existing problems.

Literature
Kamal, T., Zhang, Q., & Akbar, M. A. (2020). Toward successful agile requirements
change management process in global software development: a client–vendor
analysis. IET Software, 14(4), 380-388. [Link]