001-2023-0828 DLBNWAM01 E Course Book

AGILE MANAGEMENT
DLBNWAM01_E
AGILE MANAGEMENT
MASTHEAD
Publisher:
IU Internationale Hochschule GmbH
IU International University of Applied Sciences
Juri-Gagarin-Ring 152
D-99084 Erfurt
Mailing address:
Albert-Proeller-Straße 15–19
D-86675 Buchdorf
media@iu.org
www.iu.de
DLBNWAM01_E
Version No.: 001-2023-0828
Dr. Anja Hagedorn
© 2023 IU Internationale Hochschule GmbH

This course book is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
This course book may not be reproduced and/or electronically edited, duplicated, or dis-
tributed in any kind of form without written permission by the IU Internationale Hoch-
schule GmbH (hereinafter referred to as IU).
The authors/publishers have identified the authors and sources of all graphics to the best
of their abilities. However, if any erroneous information has been provided, please notify
us accordingly.
2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
AGILE MANAGEMENT
Introduction
Signposts Throughout the Course Book . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Basic Reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Further Reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Learning Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Unit 1
Introduction to Agile Management 13
1.1 Introduction to the Topic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

1.2 Definition of the Term Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
1.3 Definition of the Term Agility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
1.4 Agility and Mindset . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Unit 2
Drivers of Agility 25
2.1 Agility in Response to Change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

2.2 External Drivers for Agility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
2.3 Internal Drivers for Agility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Unit 3
Agile Concepts 37
3.1 Scrum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
3.2 Kanban . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
3.3 Further Agile Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
Unit 4
Agile Organization 49
4.1 Concept of an Agile Organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51

4.2 Self-Organization as a Core Element . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
4.3 Transformation and Maturity Model of the Organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
4.4 Transformer Model for Agile Organizational Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
3
Unit 5
Agile Leadership 67
5.1 Changed Role of the Manager . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68

5.2 Concept and Principles of Agile Leadership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
5.3 Self-Management as a Prerequisite for Agility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
Unit 6
Agile Planning 83
6.1 Concept and Principles of Agile Planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85

6.2 Agile Planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
6.3 New Planning Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
Unit 7
Agile Staff Deployment 95
7.1 Concept and Classification in the Staff Management Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97

7.2 Agile Strategic Workforce Planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
7.3 Framework Conditions for Agile Staff Deployment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
Unit 8
Control in Agile Organizations 107
8.1 Concept and Function of Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108

8.2 Agility and Control: A Contradiction? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
8.3 Management Control Systems in Change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
Unit 9
Digital Tools as a Prerequisite for Agility 117
9.1 Collaboration Tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118

9.2 New Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
Unit 10
Critical Reflection 123
10.1 Agility as a Panacea . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124

10.2 Agility as a Health Risk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125
10.3 Agility and Hierarchy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
Appendix
List of References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
List of Tables and Figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140
4
INTRODUCTION
WELCOME
SIGNPOSTS THROUGHOUT THE COURSE BOOK
This course book contains the core content for this course. Additional learning materials
can be found on the learning platform, but this course book should form the basis for your
learning.
The content of this course book is divided into units, which are divided further into sec-
tions. Each section contains only one new key concept to allow you to quickly and effi-
ciently add new learning material to your existing knowledge.
At the end of each section of the digital course book, you will find self-check questions.
These questions are designed to help you check whether you have understood the con-
cepts in each section.
For all modules with a final exam, you must complete the knowledge tests on the learning
platform. You will pass the knowledge test for each unit when you answer at least 80% of
the questions correctly.
When you have passed the knowledge tests for all the units, the course is considered fin-
ished and you will be able to register for the final assessment. Please ensure that you com-
plete the evaluation prior to registering for the assessment.
Good luck!
6
BASIC READING
Moran, A. (2015). Managing Agile. Strategy, implementation, organisation, and people.
Springer. http://search.ebscohost.com.pxz.iubh.de:8080/login.aspx?direct=true&db=c
at05114a&AN=ihb.27455&site=eds-live&scope=site
Moreia, M. (2013). Being Agile: Your roadmap to successful adoption of Agile. Apress. http://
search.ebscohost.com.pxz.iubh.de:8080/login.aspx?direct=true&db=cat05114a&AN=i
hb.27449&site=eds-live&scope=site
Stellman, A., & Greene, J. (2014). Learning Agile. O’Reilly Media. http://search.ebscohost.co
m.pxz.iubh.de:8080/login.aspx?direct=true&db=cat05114a&AN=ihb.45937&site=eds-li
ve&scope=site
7
FURTHER READING
UNIT 1
Browaeys, M.-J., & Fisser, S. (2012). Lean and Agile: An epistemological reflection. The
Learning Organization, 19(3), 207–218. http://search.ebscohost.com.pxz.iubh.de:8080/
login.aspx?direct=true&db=edsemr&AN=edsemr.10.1108.09696471211219903&site=e
ds-live&scope=site
UNIT 2
Teece, D., Peteraf, M., & Leih, S. (2016). Dynamic capabilities and organizational agility:
Risk, uncertainty, and strategy in the innovation economy. California Management
Review, 58(4), 13–35. http://search.ebscohost.com.pxz.iubh.de:8080/login.aspx?direct
=true&db=bsu&AN=117950227&site=eds-live&scope=site
UNIT 3
Nerur, S., & Balijepally, V. (2007). Theoretical reflections on agile development methodolo-
gies. Communications of the ACM, 50(3), 79–83. http://search.ebscohost.com.pxz.iubh.
de:8080/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edscma&AN=edscma.1226739&site=eds-live&sco
pe=site
UNIT 4
Ali, I. (2016). Doing the organizational tango: Symbiotic relationship between formal and
informal organizational structures for an agile organization. Interdisciplinary Journal
of Information, Knowledge, and Management, 11, 55–72. Available online.
Brosseau, D., Ebrahim, S., Handscomb, C., & Thaker, S. (2019, May 10). The journey to an
agile organization. McKinsey & Company. Available online.
Theobald, S., Prenner, N., Krieg, A., & Schneider, K. (2020). Agile leadership and agile man-
agement on organizational level: A systematic literature review. In M. Morisio, M.
Torchiano, & A. Jedlitschka (Eds.), Product-focused software process improvement.
PROFES 2020. Lecture Notes in Computer Science: Vol. 12562 (pp. 20–36). Springer. http:
//search.ebscohost.com.pxz.iubh.de:8080/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edsvle&AN=eds
vle.AH38169465&site=eds-live&scope=site
8
UNIT 5
Attar, M., & Abdul-Kareem, A. (2020). The role of agile leadership in organisational agility.
In B. Akkaya (Ed.), Agile business leadership methods for Industry 4.0 (pp. 171–191).
Emerald. http://search.ebscohost.com.pxz.iubh.de:8080/login.aspx?direct=true&db=e
dsbas&AN=edsbas.4B62213&site=eds-live&scope=site
Parker, D. W., Holesgrove, M., & Pathak, R. (2015). Improving productivity with self-organ-
ised teams and agile leadership. International Journal of Productivity and Performance
Management, 64(1), 112–128. http://search.ebscohost.com.pxz.iubh.de:8080/login.as
px?direct=true&db=edswis&AN=edswis.ECON821090798&site=eds-live&scope=site
UNIT 6
Alyahya, S., Alqahtani, M., & Maddeh, M. (2016). Evaluation and improvements for agile
planning tools. In Y. T. Song (Ed.), 2016 IEEE 14th International conference on software
engineering research, management and applications (SERA) (pp. 217–224). IEEE. http://
search.ebscohost.com.pxz.iubh.de:8080/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edsbas&AN=edsb
as.A4CA54C9&site=eds-live&scope=site
Riedel, R., Jentsch, D., Horbach, S., Ackermann, J., & Müller, E. (2013). Agile planning pro-
cesses. In V. Prabhu, M. Taisch, & D. Kiritsis, (Eds.), IFIP Advances in Information and
Communication Technology: Volume 414 (pp. 143–150). Springer. http://search.ebscoh
ost.com.pxz.iubh.de:8080/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edsbas&AN=edsbas.929EEFCC&
site=eds-live&scope=site
UNIT 7
Holbeche, L. (2018). The agile organization: How to build an engaged, innovative, and resil-
ient business (2nd ed.). Kogan Page. 205–224. http://search.ebscohost.com.pxz.iubh.d
e:8080/login.aspx?direct=true&db=nlebk&AN=1816011&site=eds-live&scope=site
Muduli, A. (2013). Workforce agility: A review of literature. IUP Journal of Management

Research, 12(3), 55–65. http://search.ebscohost.com.pxz.iubh.de:8080/login.aspx?dire
ct=true&db=bsu&AN=89529685&site=eds-live&scope=site
UNIT 8
Heer, R. (2012). How agile is your planning? Strategic Finance, 93(10), 45–50. http://search.
ebscohost.com.pxz.iubh.de:8080/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bsu&AN=74148960&site
=eds-live&scope=site
Miller, D., Allen, M., Schnittger, S., & Hackman, T. (2013). How rolling forecasting facilitates
dynamic, agile planning: An alternative to the annual budgeting process allows hospi-
tals and health systems to make more accurate operating projections and be agile in
9
responding to changes. Healthcare Financial Management, 67(11), 80–84. http://searc
h.ebscohost.com.pxz.iubh.de:8080/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edsgbe&AN=edsgcl.35
2752345&site=eds-live&scope=site
UNIT 9
Muthucumaru, A. (2021). The future of collaborative technology within Scrum/Agile practi-

ces. The iJournal: Student Journal of the Faculty of Information, 7(1), 1–10. http://searc
h.ebscohost.com.pxz.iubh.de:8080/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edsbas&AN=edsbas.25
87434D&site=eds-live&scope=site
Mihalache, A. (2017). Project management tools for agile teams. Informatica Economica,
21(4), 85–93. http://search.ebscohost.com.pxz.iubh.de:8080/login.aspx?direct=true&d
b=bsu&AN=127182968&site=eds-live&scope=site
UNIT 10
Deshpande, A., Sharp, H., Barroca, L., & Gregory, P. (2016). Remote working and collabora-
tion in agile teams. International Conference on Information Systems. AIS. Available
online.
Miller, G. J. (2013). Agile problems, challenges, and failures. The PMI Global Congress 2013.
Project Management Institute. Available online.
10
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
In the face of a complex business environment with volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and
ambiguity (VUCA), agile management plays an essential role in securing the business
foundations of organizations. The management paradigm can be used to respond to
short-term changes, which helps ensure their sustainability.
This course book introduces core ideas, methods, and challenges of Agile Management.
Students will become familiar with the main definitions and rationale, understand rele-
vant concepts, and apply fundamentals, such as the Scrum and Kanban methods, to
projects. Supportive tools and recommendations will also be provided. The requirements
and challenges in applying its concepts will be discussed.
The implementation of agile management at an organizational level will also be covered.

Basic planning and an introduction to how an agile human resources department works
will both be presented. Agile leadership will also be touched on, along with the core prin-
ciples that should be considered by anyone in this role. From this book, students will be
able to explain the mindset necessary for agile leadership and understand its different
approaches. Agile management can require planning and control processes when it
comes to organizing scarce resources within a company. The two methods for this will be
covered.
This course book closes with a critical reflection on agility to empower students to use the
concepts and ideas of agile management in daily life and determine if agility should be
applied.
11
UNIT 1
INTRODUCTION TO AGILE MANAGEMENT
STUDY GOALS
On completion of this unit, you will be able to ...
– define agile management.

– explain the relevance of leadership in organizations.
– understand the meaning of an agile mindset in an organization.
– evaluate if a company is agile or not.
1. INTRODUCTION TO AGILE MANAGEMENT
Case Study
Holiday Cottages is a European organization selling log houses for gardens and vacation
properties. Its core competence is organizing manufacturing process, which can be execu-
ted using either a standardized or customized plan. The company’s headquarters are in
Munich, Germany, but the wood it uses is purchased at a favorable price in Ukraine and
delivered to a sawmill in Lithuania, where the housing parts are manufactured. After cut-
ting and planning the components and applying tongue and groove to each part of a
board, the house is prepared by a logistics partner for delivery to each customer. Smaller
and more standardized homes are stored in the logistics centers of each country where
Holiday Cottages offers its products. The advantage of this organization is that it can pro-
duce quickly, meaning shorter waiting times for customers, higher sales of standardized
products, and a cost-effective delivery.
By 2020, sales had grown steadily from 12 to 24 percent. From 2020 onwards, the company
experienced a sales growth of 120 percent, which was its highest growth since the 2008
financial crisis. People wanted to invest in home improvement projects during the
COVID-19 lockdown, but the company was experiencing a strain on resources in what was
an already challenging market.
The company was challenged to find enough cheap wood to meet the increased demand,
partner with reliable shippers to transport the wood to the sawmill, and continue offering
products to the customer at a reasonable cost. A bottleneck was also created: Eastern
European truckers had to comply with quarantine and inspection regulations in various
countries, resulting in long delays. In addition, increased prices combined with extreme
changes to demand posed the risk of illiquidity and bankruptcy.
Another threat to the company is now additionally posed by the Ukraine war. Timber pre-
viously purchased from Ukrainian foresters is now unavailable and cannot be exported to
the sawmill in Lithuania. Holiday Cottages, therefore, must switch from cheaper Ukrainian
wood to more expensive Scandinavian lumber to maintain product quality. As a result,
logistics must also be reorganized, as the wood is now sourced from another area in
Europe. All of these factors, along with haulage services strained by driver shortages,
increased fuel prices, and the associated costs, threaten the company’s ability to operate.
So, how can Holiday Cottages best respond to the challenging market situation? What
measures should be taken, and how could agile management address the challenges?
14
1.1 Introduction to the Topic
Twenty-first century society is characterized by rapid technological developments that
cause fast-changing market developments. Internet technology (IT), with its software- and
hardware-based systems, is one of the most significant technological innovations to date.
It significantly influences almost every part of daily life, including how an individual
works, communiates with others, and spends their free time.
Technological development has always existed. Innovations with disruptive characteris- Innovations
tics can trigger megatrends, which have the potential to change markets by either making The term “innovation”
refers to the economic
them unnecessary or creating new ones. An example of this is when digital cameras were exploitation of an idea or
introduced, making film-based cameras virtually obsolete. The result was a total change in research results. It can be
how photos are produced, causing economic harm to companies relying on the old tech- distinguished in different
ways, such as its intensity
nology. Polaroid, for example, was forced to undergo a major change. (incremental or disruptive
development), domain
(business model innova-
These unmanageable and complex developments require new management approaches
tion, process innovation,
for planning, steering, and controlling processes within an organization. Since manage- and product innovation),
ment style, organizational structure, and culture are strongly intertwined, the adaptation and market direction
(demanded by customers:
of a company to changing conditions is accompanied not only by organizational innova- market-pull is when a
tions, but also by changes in corporate culture, framework conditions of work, and product is demanded by
demands on employees. Agile management addresses these aspects holistically and tries customers, whereas mar-
ket-push is when a prod-
to adapt the organization to a volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity (VUCA) uct is supplied by compa-
environment. nies).
Megatrends
In VUCA environments, “volatility” refers to the high dynamics of changes. “Uncertainty” A trend that causes mac-
roeconomic change and
represents the inability to predict the probability of events and the lack of understanding influences the products
that surrounds new issues, challenges, and unforeseeable developments. “Complexity” in being sold in the market.
VUCA refers to the previously discussed challenge that complexity bears for companies.
Finally, “ambiguity” highlights the lack of linear relationships in favor of multilinearity
when describing and analyzing situations and the risk of misunderstandings (Gaida, 2021).
Agile management is, therefore, not just a question of leadership adapted in times of
uncertainty. It permeates all areas of the company, from recruiting to accounting to pro-
duction. The main aspects that agile management addresses are listed below.
15
Figure 1: Aspects of Agile Management
Source: Anja Hagedorn (2023).
1.2 Definition of the Term Management

“Management” is an elusive term. It can refer to stress management, change manage-
ment, waste management, and event management, amongst others. It is an essential
component for maintaining organizational competitiveness and sustainability, but what
does it actually mean? What are its requirements, and how can those responsible meet
them?
Academic Contextualization of Management
In academic research, management and organizational theories have a long scientific tra-
dition. The word “manager” was initially documented in a letter from 1589 (Witzel, 2016).
Today’s management theory is derived from the United States of America’s (U.S.’s) scien-
tific reorientation in the 1950s (Barzelay, 2019). Due to the many different attempts by
companies to classify management, numerous definitions exist today. There are two gen-
eral views that define management: the process view, which is what managers do, and the
agency view, which is derived from principal agency theory that sees managers acting as
agents of shareholders (Witzel, 2016).
This course book focuses on the process view. Daft (2016) defines management as “the
attainment of organizational goals effectively and efficiently through planning, organizing,
leading, and controlling organizational resources” (p. 4). In this definition, some require-
ments regarding managers’ capabilities are already defined. Witzel (2016), who relates
management to the control and coordination of organizations to reach desired goals,
16
mostly agrees with this definition. A more human-centered definition by Kreitner and Cas-
sidy (2011) describes management as “[…] the process of working with and through oth-
ers to achieve organizational objectives in a changing environment” (chapter 1). Kosch-
nick (1995) defines the term as both a group of persons and a function that applies
methods to organize (p. 365). From the last definition, it can be concluded that “manage-
ment” describes not only a role within a company held by a group of people, but also a
function that involves specific methods of achieving goals.
Scope of Managerial Activities
As introduced by the definitions above, the management of organizations is commonly

understood as a holistic process that combines resources to allow a company to imple-
ment its business model. Following this resource-based interpretation of management,
the figure below demonstrates management’s areas of responsibility. A company operates
in a market and is surrounded by various influences of, for example, a political, social, or
technological nature. Growth and economic cycles of national economies are also part of
this. In this context, a company creates products or services for specific markets within the
scope of its core competencies. In the context of Porter’s (1985) value chain, a distinction
can be made between supporting processes and primary business processes. Primary pro-
cesses encompass any activity leading to the creation a company’s products or services.
Supporting processes represent the operations that must be carried out as a condition for
the organization to implement the production process.
17
Figure 2: Management Process
Source: Anja Hagedorn (2023), based on Porter (1985).
18
Here, management is responsible for planning, controlling, and monitoring the company’s
processes and adapting them in the event of exogenous shocks or changes. The latter con-
dition represents the actual competence of management, because once established, the
company’s processes can be carried out independently by self-organization, provided that
the hierarchy permits this.
Managerial Tasks
Several functions of the term “management” are highlighted below (Kieser, 2006):
• planning: development of a company’s overall strategy, or a strategy for a particular

subarea, as well as the associated implementation. Planning should also be reviewed
and adjusted regularly as part of a plan, do, act, check (PDCA) cycle Plan, do, act, check
• organizing: design of processes and procedures to implement set goals (PDCA) cycle
a cycle of strategic revi-
• Staffing: defining roles and tasks of personnel, making hiring decisions, transferring per- sion to provide continu-
sonnal, and the providing descriptions of requirements for employees to be deployed ous improvements to a
• leadership: disciplinary leadership of groups, as well as the far more difficult role to lead process or product
as a visionary and consensus-oriented personality

• coordination: processing requests to and from the workforce or departments, and effi-
ciently allocating resources
• monitoring: keeping track of progress and goals, documents outcomes, as well as iden-
tifying levels of goal achievement and process errors
• reporting: presenting how the company is achieving objectives so that others can easily
understand, and processing feedback from relevant departments
Managerial tasks have changed over time, due to the development of how businesses are
conducted. For instance, Daft (2016), along with Kreitner and Cassidy (2011), describe a
shift in managers’ leadership requirements and competencies according to organizational
culture. Managers used to be autocratic leaders of teams who control the progress of the
work; they are now enablers of employees, who self-organize their own working progress.
The respective role of managers must be considered against the corporate context’s back-
ground and fit the organization’s requirements. In a small company with ten employees,
for example, it would not be practical to install an excessive bureaucracy and microma-
nagement. It would be inappropriate to request more than one document when employ-
ees are absent, or to comply with several decision-making levels when procuring work
materials at a small company. In contrast, from the perspective of a corporation with
10,000 employees, it would make sense to standardize central support processes to sim-
plify workflows.
Managerial Skills
Although different managerial roles require additional area-specific knowledge (e.g., mar-
keting managers) and contain level-specific authority (e.g., first-line managers), the com-
petencies needed remain similar. Competencies
The term “competency”
capability to apply or use
knowledge and a set of
skills to successfully per-
19
form “critical work func- In addition to specialist knowledge, managers must have the correct character traits to ful-
tions” or tasks in a
defined work setting. fil their tasks. There are different academic approaches to define the skill set a manager
should develop to master daily work life. Griffin (2022), for instance, defines the following
skill set:
• conceptual skills
• decision-making skills
• diagnostic/analytical skills
• communication skills
• time-management (self-management) skills
Another skill set has been defined by Katz (1974), who categorized necessary skills as:
• conceptual skills: analytic thinking and integrative problem solving

• human skills: emotional intelligence and the ability to work with others
• technical skills: specific task proficiency and application of expert knowledge
All of these abilities can be categorized as “soft skills,” and although various training offers
exist to develop them, they take time to master.
Managerial Roles
Various roles can be categorized in the context of managerial activities that also define the
competencies a manager should develop. Mintzberg (1973), who studied managers at
work, distinguishes three types of roles based on the behaviors or actions presented in the
following graph.
20
Figure 3: Mintzberg’s Managerial Roles
Source: Anja Hagedorn (2023), Mintzberg (1973).
Using Minzberg’s (1973) definition, there are three main roles in the interpersonal man-
agement category. The first is the figurehead, who symbolizes authority and is obliged to
perform routine duties of legal and social nature; the second is the leader, with multiple
responsibilities relating to motivating, staffing, and training; and the third is the liaison,
who comprises the use of self-developed networks to provide information and favors.
Informational managers play a monitoring role that goes along with seeking and receiving
internal and external information to develop a comprehensive understanding of their
organization and its environment. It can also take the form of a disseminator’s role to
transmit information from outsiders or employees to other organization members. Infor-
mational managers can also be spokespeople, who transmit information from inside the
organization to outsiders.
Decisional managers include entrepreneurs, who stress activities that nurture opportunity
recognition and project development. It also includes the role of the disturbance handler,
who is responsible for corrective actions in instances of a disturbance outside or within a
company. Another critical role in this group is the resource allocator, who is accountable
for distributing organizational resources and decision-making. Furthermore, the negotia-
tor role represents the company in all critical external negotiations (Robbins et al., 2015).
All those roles within one of the three groups or between the groups contain linked and
intertwined activities that might not be generally distinguishable in daily working life.
21
1.3 Definition of the Term Agility
What does “agility” mean? In short, it is a major business concept that acts as a solution to
the fast-changing environment of modern commerce. In layman’s terms, “agile” refers to
mobility and activity, and it contrasts being “sluggish” (Weber & Berendt, 2017). The term
was introduced in social sciences in the 1950s when Talcott Parsons, a professor who
taught economics at Harvard University, developed the“agile scheme,” a model from his
action theory (Förster & Wendler, 2012).
The beginnings of the term “agility” in business can be traced back to informatics. It was
re-introduced by Beck et al. (2001). The group was made up of 17 senior developers who
were dissatisfied with the prevailing style of project management and, as a result, created
the Agile Manifesto in 2001. The usual approach to project management at that time was
the “waterfall model,” which poses several challenges in the face of changing framework
conditions. In waterfall management, progressing to a new phase of a project is impossi-
ble if the previous phase has not been completed. As well, everything must be compre-
hensively documented to eliminate uncertainties, and thus, avoid manageability for stake-
holders (e.g., users). For the senior developers, this resulted in long meetings, wasted
time, and a loss of motivation to encounter upcoming problems (Kazandijan, 2019; Weber
& Berendt, 2017).
The Agile Manifesto is a code of values that breaks down the existing paradigm of software
development: The code is designed to foster new ways of thinking and working methods
via a change in values. It is based on the following principles (Nath & Schalkwyk, 2021, p.
78):
• individuals and interactions over processes and tools

• working software over comprehensive documentation
• customer collaboration over contract negotiation
• responding to change over following a plan
The manifesto’s authors suggest that “Agile” is an attitude toward working processes that
are implemented through twelve principles, which were originally directed towards the IT
industry (Beck et al., 2001; Stellman & Greene, 2021). The principles can be summarized as
follows:
• customer centricity: The top priority is to satisfy customer needs through the early and
continuous delivery of valuable software.
• embracing change: Openness to changing requirements, even if they occur late in
development; the primary goal remains to support the customer in maintaining and
expanding their competitiveness.
• frequent delivery: The regular delivery of working software (weeks to months), with a
preference for a shorter timescale.
• interdisciplinary collaboration: Developers and company employees must work
together for the duration of the whole project.
• foster motivation: Projects should be built around motivated individuals; they should
get the needed working environment and be trusted.
22
• use personal communication: Face-to-face communication is the most efficient way to
exchange information.
• progress measurement: The primary measure of progress is based on results.
• agile processes: A sustainable development should be promoted and stakeholders
should be able to maintain a constant pace.
• embracing excellence: Agility is enhanced by continuous attention to technical excel-
lence and sound design.
• make use of simplicity: The ability to minimize the amount of unfinished (i.e., unneces-
sary) work is an essential factor.
• foster self-organization: Self-organizing teams foster the best architectures, require-
ments, and designs.
• reflection: The team should regularly reflect on how to become more effective and
adjust accordingly.
A core component of the Agile Manifesto is its emphasis on the “we” (i.e., the team) in con-
trast to focusing on a purely technical component of software development (Bartonitz et
al., 2018). Only when all stakeholders work together can the increasing complexity in soft-
ware development be addressed. For example, problems in daily collaboration must be
identified and openly named, or customers must be asked about their usage habits.
Although the Agile Manifesto initially emerged to assist with software projects, it has
become part of management over time. Since its publication, the original Agile principles
have been further developed and adapted for different areas of work by other authors,
such as Hofert (2018), Dams (2019), Kusay-Merkle (2021), and Moran (2016). This gave rise
to various methods and approaches for project work, product and business model devel-
opment, and leadership. Based on the Agile Manifesto and its 12 associated principles, an
attitude emerged to both enable the self-organization of workers and give them greater
scope for action.
1.4 Agility and Mindset

The term “Agile” originates in, the Agile Manifesto, which has now been translated into
many languages. The authors show a clear desire to reduce rigid processes and proce-
dures in exchange for a greater focus on people and flexibility in the face of suddenly
changing conditions (Bartonitz et al., 2018, p. 5). Agile management cultivates a mindset Mindset
that balances natural constraints and the flexibility of cultural adaption (Moreira, 2013). A mindset is an attitude
that consciously or sub-
This does not mean that aspects like documentation, process management, negotiating consciously influences
contracts, and planning are unimportant. They merely take a back seat in favor of one’s thinking, acting,
increased openness to pragmatic, practical, and time-saving solutions, along with the and evaluating.
social dimension of the project (Bartonitz et al., 2018).
The agile mindset is characterized by two basic assumptions. First, changes always hap-
pen, and sooner or later, they an organization. Second, it is easier to deal with change if it
is seen as something positive (Dams, 2019). For example, organizations with an agile
23
mindset would never pretend to know what a customer will want next year (Moreira,
2013). Instead, they learn and adapt to changing customer needs, which are evaluated by
continuous customer feedback.
By developing a positive fundamental attitude in the change process, the motivation of

those involved is increased, and there is more willingness to perform in spite of challenges
(Dams, 2019). However, promoting a positive attitude includes a “culture of error,” which
views failure as necessary for improvement, and thus, allows it. Forbidding mistakes is an
Self-efficacy obstacle to agility, because the self-confidence and self-efficacy of those involved will
This is a persons’ belief become inhibited if there is pressure to avoid mistakes. Hence, agile management
that they can (positively)
impact their own environ- strengthens the resilience of companies in the face of increasingly frequent crises.
ment, even in challenging
situations It is crucial that managers give their employees the necessary freedom in their daily work.
Therefore, agility requires different working conditions that differ from traditional work
environments. The management role changes from a leadership position based on team
management to a leadership mindset in which the manager is an enabler and advocate of
their team. It is, therefore, essential that all departments take part in the transformation
when a company makes the decision to become agile. This means that agility is not
restricted to small, isolated project groups: It must reach all areas of the company.
SUMMARY
This unit introduced the concept of agile management. It began with a
case study that illustrates the need for agility. Given the crises it out-
lined, the need for reorganization and adaptation is crucial, and the
company represents the issues that can arise when implementing tradi-
tional management strategies. For big companies, small things often
become challenges in the long run. Individual missed opportunities
resulting from inertia and a lack of responsiveness subsequently lead to
path dependencies that become difficult to correct. “Management” and
“Agile” were both defined and examined, and the mindset of Agile man-
agement was introduced.
24
UNIT 2
DRIVERS OF AGILITY
STUDY GOALS
– discuss the internal and external causes that determine agility.

– understand the connection between technological advancements and economic devel-
opment.
– identify the factors that cause complexity in organizations.
– explain how agility can encounter complexity and disruptive situations.
2. DRIVERS OF AGILITY
Case Study
The start-up BIOMES has launched its product, INTEST.pro. INTEST.pro is the first DNA-
based intestinal flora analysis in the German-speaking market. The biotechnology com-
pany, made up of roughly 50 employees, analyzes the deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) of
microbes living in and around the intestine.
To do this, the company identifies the entirety of all known bacterial genomes in the
human gut and compiles worldwide scientific findings in a database to interpret them.
Home users can order the test kit online or buy it in pharmacies and, after sending it to
BIOMES, have the bacterial cultures in their intestines analyzed. The analysis is used to
provide customers with personal microbiota profiles, which are used to provide them with
individual recommendationss. The analysis includes a comparison with a database, an
assessment of unique microbiome, and the state of the immune system regarding inflam-
matory factors. Depending on the customer’s wishes, the company offers a personalized
nutrition plan on its website and supports pre- and probiotics. Their product is a self-pay-
only offering, meaning the target audience is nutrition- and health-conscious people with
sufficient income to pay for testing.
As a young start-up, the company was urged to strengthen its funding base because of the
economic uncertainty triggered by COVID-19. Since the company’s core competency is
sample analysis, it offered to provide polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing for people
suffering from COVID-19 at a local hospital. The hospital’s demand soon became higher
than the demand for its core product. When the pandemic began to subside, the local hos-
pital’s demand for BIOMES support dropped, resulting in the overnight cancellation of
orders from its significant customer. BIOMES stumbled financially, as the company was
bearing high costs from the PCR tests.
2.1 Agility in Response to Change

Change, indeed, is the story of life: People are born, grow, develop, age, and die. It should
be no surprise that change is also a constant in society, politics, and economic activity.
Natural Change in Economies
Human beings are governed by a set of biological and psychological patterns. Similar pat-
terns can be seen within the economy. This is perhaps best illustrated by agriculture,
where seasonal changes set the pace of food production, leaving it subject to natural fluc-
tuation. Although some food is grown using greenhouses, and tons of produce are impor-
ted and exported to take advantage of weather conditions worldwide, it does not compen-
sate for the use of fields producing barley, wheat, oats, rapeseed, and sunflower oil.
26
The connection of supply and demand leads to changing cycles, which manifest them-
selves in pig cycles. Here, it is observed that the price of pork is subject to a process, Pig cycles
which leads to a fluctuation in its pricing. When the price of pork is high, farmers produce This is the cyclical
changes of the supply and
more of it to take advantage of the profits. At a certain point, the increase in production demand for pork (or other
floods the market, and prices then fall. livestock) and the result-
ing changes in the price
on the market.
However, the Fourth Industrial Revolution is leading to ever faster cycles and increased Fourth Industrial
global connectivity. Machines (particularly computers) are the force driving this latest Revolution
industrial phase and have propelled production forward because, unlike humans, they do This is the digitalization
and automation of indus-
not need breaks. In contrast to the human workforce, a computer, once programmed, can trial production facilities.
be switched on and perform work indefinitely. This development will have a profound
change on business models: Approaches that have proven themselves over decades will
suddenly have to be rethought as their relevance decreases with changing market dynam-
ics (Sauter et al., 2018).
In many ways, change is an advantage. It offers opportunity or risk for market players,
depending a company’s position when the changes start taking place. Adequate risk man-
agement can help mitigate the threats posed by change. Opportunities most likely arise
when organizations approach change openly and creatively, and when they can adapt.
This requires a confident personal attitude that can be referred to as agility.
For example, the COVID-19 pandemic offered numerous risks, such as small companies
going out of business and the less entrepreneurial endeavours due to lockdowns. At the
same time, new opportunities came to the forefront. This is perhaps best exemplified with
the trend of German restaurants converting into test centers to find a new source of
income.
Types of Change
Whether a company is confronted with a cyclical change or an unexpected change makes

a difference. Whether a change happens quickly or over the course of a long period also
has an impact.
Regarding change of any length, it is important to distinguish what the impact on the com-
pany will be. Here, a distinction can be made between changes of a disruptive nature and
incremental, cumulative changes. The former is often triggered by exogenous shocks (e.g.,
wars, natural disasters, and economic crises), while the latter do not initially pose a signifi-
cant problem and instead become issues over time if ignored (e.g., demographic change
and the associated availability of labor).
Changes occurring in the medium- and long-term can be anticipated through strategic
foresight. Various techniques and methods are used for this purpose. One of those techni-
ques is future-oriented scenario analysis. Using trend analyses and the company’s expert
knowledge about future developments, scenario-based future models can be created.
Publications on megatrends and industry-specific forecasts, often released by research
institutions or industry associations, are just as suitable as focus group surveys and inter-
views with experts to examine potential technological, societal, and economic develop-
ment paths. The consideration of weak signals can also be helpful in certain circumstan-
27
Weak signals ces. The assessment must consider as many different sources as possible: This prevents
A weak signal is a first, companies from committing to a potential development too early. Unrealistic scenarios
and often unrecognized,
indicator of change that should also not be ruled out too early, although an occurrence forecast should be realisti-
may become relevant in cally assessed in terms of probability. Development paths are reconstructed or interpola-
the future. ted from the collected information to create descriptions of potential situations in the
future and are also called “future models.” These refer to factors, such as daily lives, living
conditions, and working styles. Future models describe a possible future, which should
reflect a realistic scenario. The aim is to derive possible responses to this scenario so that
the company can develop a strategic approach when changes occur. Examples of medium-
and long-term changes are changes in demographics and the associated availability of
skilled workers, the availability of resources, economic developments on international
markets (e.g., “the Asian century”), and climate change.
Unanticipated short-term changes with a disruptive effect are much more problematic for
a company. These usually occur without warning. In classic risk management, a company
can respond to these exogenous shocks using various tactics, such as sustainable financial
planning, lean andaAgile management, and strengthening its competitive position.
Robust companies that use capacities efficiently and deploy resources profitably and sus-
tainably are more resilient to short-term changes and crises.
Agility as Capability to Master Change?
Agility is the ability to identify relevant trends, anticipate change, and proactively align an
organization to deliver results. A turbulent environment manifests itself in frequent adjust-
ments of an evolutionary and revolutionary nature. Agile organizations build a great deal
of experience and routine in designing and implementing change processes over time.
The prerequisite is an appropriate and tolerable balance between agility and stability
(Deutsche Gesellschaft für Qualität, n.d.).
Today’s developments present companies with a rapidly changing and confusing eco-
nomic environment. Every company operating in the market has individual challenges in
mastering or proactively addressing changing circumstances. Individual challenges
depend on a company’s size, business field, industry, and employee structure.
For instance, medium-sized manufacturing companies are finding it increasingly difficult

to keep up. They do not have sufficient liquid funds to adapt to changing conditions and
find themselves rapidly burning through capital. In many instances, they may also lack the
necessary human and material resources to maintain additional structures for adapting to
framework conditions and production.
Large companies tend to have an advantage because their market position has generally
enabled them to gain a favorable position in the market. This means that smaller, isolated
issues do not carry much weight if they are infrequent. Large companies also carry an
advantage in their ability to relocate operations to other countries and to diversify (large
companies often operate in a range of business areas). However, in the case of changes
taking the form of cluster risks, poorly diversified companies could be put into jeopardy.
Cluster risks arise when individual sectors are affected by a change, for instance, the cur-
rent landscape for European energy-intensive companies.
28
At the same time, large companies and groups have a significant disadvantage in their
decision-making, which tends to be much slower than small- or medium-sized companies.
Large companies are, therefore, not always able to react quickly, and thus, have an even
greater need for strategies to implementaAgile management throughout the whole com-
pany.
2.2 External Drivers for Agility

This section discusses external drivers for agility and why they can push companies to
implement new management strategies. It should be noted that drivers act in various
ways both inside and outside of companies. They can, therefore, merge, which is why no
single cause can be identified.
Economic Activity and “Creative Destruction”
One of the most well-known cycles of economic activity is caused by recurring fluctua-
tions in the global economy. The development phases of the production and consumption
cycle lead to growth in an economy’s gross domestic product (GDP). Still, producers need Gross domestic product
to react to consumption saturation, which leads to stagnation and recession before a new the summarized value of
all produced goods and
cycle begins. This cycle is caused by the behavior of various stakeholders participating in services within a country
the economy, and potentially by monetary stimuli (e.g., interest rates and inflation). over a period of time
Why do these cycles occur? What is behind the emergence of those cycles? Why doesn’t
the balance of demand and supply remain constant?
Cycles of economic activity occur because of competition and technological progress. The
results of people’s desire for change and development lead, for example, to technical pro-
gress, which is offered on the market as innovation. Schumpeter (as cited in Pfarrer &
Smith, 2015) refers to this development as “creative destruction” (p. 121). The Austrian
researcher argues that creative destruction, a standard economic mode of activity, is
caused by competing companies striving for high profits and a high market share. In doing
so, new technological developments arise that have the potential to create tremendous
impacts (Pfarrer & Smith, 2015).
Kondratieff Waves
Technological developments disrupting whole markets and causing the creation of new
ones can occur over longer time frames. In business management, these periods are
called Kondratieff cycles (Grinin et al., 2017).
Scientist Nikolai Kondratieff identified the most significant technological innovations that
resulted in megatrends. Analyzing the history of industrial developments and economic
dependence, Kondratieff identified five essential disruptive innovations, beginning with
the development of the steam engine.
29
Figure 4: Simplified Kondratieff Wave Pattern
Source: Rursus (2009). CC-BY-SA 3.0.
As shown in the above figure, there are currently five Kondratieff cycles. Within a cycle,
economic development proceeds from upswing to recession, followed by depression and
recovery. The final Kondratieff cycle was triggered by information technology (IT) in 1990
and, according to the model, we are currently on the threshold of a sixth cycle. However,
the technology that will establish the next wave is currently unknown (Grinin et al., 2017).
30
Information Technology – The Modern Driver for Economic Change
A company’s daily work shows a continued increase in the complexity of tasks due to
increasing complexity in the rapid development of communication technology (Mirow,
2022). Today, it takes just seconds to send information to anyone, anywhere, at any time.
This development sparked the transition from an industrial society to an information soci-
ety.
While many benefit from this development, the achievement brings a new set of chal-
lenges. Before the rise of new communication technology, news was available on radio,
television, and print media at different, predefined times and places. Its distribution was
limited to a store’s opening hours or the schedule of a broadcasting program. Today, news
is available 24/7 about any topic. Sometimes, news stories contradict one another, with
the story rapidly changing over the course of just days. Witnessing news in constant devel-
opment can make it difficult for the average person to filter and contextualize what is rele-
vant from the flood of information.
To summarize, today’s world is a connected one: There are few parts of the world that
remain undiscovered to the public. This is not without consequences for individuals, or for
organizations. An excess of information leads to tremendous competitive pressure for
companies with short cycles and puts them at risk of falling behind. Conversely, globaliza-
tion also increases the chances of opening up new markets, thereby better positioning
products and services.
Complexity as External Driver for Agility
As a result of growing technical and economic networking, the complexity and dynamics
of daily life are increasing rapidly. Mechanic, linear relationships can be described by
cause-effect chains and are dissolved by increasing complexity, while rising complexity
leads to increased competitive pressure (Kruse, 2020). The attempt to reduce complexity
through abstraction almost inevitably leads to the fading out of potential risks and oppor-
tunities, creating a blind spot in the company, which may result in a complexity trap Complexity trap
(Rotermund, 2021). To address complexity in
the business environ-
ment, a company needs
The fast pace of developments in the corporate environment makes it increasingly difficult to raise complexity inside
for companies to anticipate relevant developments. The higher the density of intercon- its organization. By doing
so, it raises complexity in
nectedness, the higher the probability of unpredictable effects and repercussions. For this general.
reason, organizations are only fit for the future if they respond to the growing complexity
and dynamism with a culture that enables internal structures to be continuously net-
worked (Kruse, 2020).
At the same time, communication technology is increasing the density of breaches. Com-
panies are digitizing business processes and automating production workflows. As dem-
onstrated during the 2008 financial crisis, small pieces of information can have worldwide
effects. For instance, in 2008, it came out that the American bank Lehmann Brothers was
insolvent. The effects reached Europe, 6,000 kilometers away, and put the welfare of coun-
tries at risk.
31
The following figure summarizes the resulting external drivers for agility. The leading
cause, technological innovation, has already been explained. Rising interconnectivity ena-
bles companies to implement strategies to reduce production costs, such as manufactur-
ing products in countries with lower labor costs, manufacturing in areas with high
resource availability, or manufacturing near target markets to save transport costs. The
result is increased globalization. This process enhances networking activities among com-
panies and individuals, and it increases heterogeneity and specialization. As a result, inter-
dependences and complexity grow. At the same time, competitive pressure rises due to
the presence of globally operating web-based marketplaces. In such a global market, com-
panies should consider that any company might sell the same product at varying prices
and levels of quality. This creates enormous pressure to innovate and dramatically increa-
ses competition (Rahn, 2018).
Figure 5: Impact of Complexity on Companies
Source: Anja Hagedorn (2023), based on Mirow (2022).
32
2.3 Internal Drivers for Agility
When societal changes accumulate within a company, agility can have strong internal driv-
ers. Changing societal paradigms and values occurring due to generational changes must
also be taken into account, for instance, between baby boomers and Generation Z. As
Baby Boomers gradually retire, the values of the succeeding X, Y, and Z generations will
start to become more noticeable. For instance, the philosophy of younger generations is
more aligned with engaging in meaningful work, rather than paving a career that will gen-
erate the highest earnings. These changes in worker values are reflected in employee
motivation and, thus, their approach to daily work. A company must, therefore, to this
internal driver of agility.
New Work
As exemplified above, changes in demographics are a critical internal driver for agility
(Rahn, 2018). Organizations must stay competitive in the labor market to acquire suitably
skilled workers (i.e., create attractive offers to retain them). Employees themselves will
sometimes require or demand certain conditions of their employment, demonstrating a
major difference between the values of younger and older generations. This is accompa-
nied by a change to the term “work.” Work used to refer to a means of earning money to
support a family. Now, younger generations, especially in Western industrialized nations,
have a different definition of the term. First and foremost, work should create meaning
and serve a purpose. Due to the change from an industrial society to an information and
knowledge society, new work tasks and changing work environments are also emerging.
For example, in the past, employees were mainly used as line workers involved in the
assembly of a product. Today, the classic worker is a “knowledge worker,” or a person who
uses the internet to gather, analyze, and present information on any topic. Knowledge
workers usually work on a project-based or freelance basis.
New framework conditions for work are needed to meet the younger workforce’s require-
ments and to avoid a lack of workers. In the past, an important achievement of the work-
ing class was the 40-hour week, which consisted of regulated working hours and breaks.
Today, the focus is on working from any place at any time. For example, as a countermove-
ment to the dissolution of work boundaries, regulations for maintaining a “work-life bal-
ance” have started to emerge. In the context of agile management, this is referred to as
“New Work” (Freyth, 2020). The term stands for creating framework conditions that offer
employees the most favorable working conditions possible, including working from home,
flexible working hours, and attractive office spaces that offer variety and promote creativ-
ity among employees. Finally, teamwork should be encouraged and prioritized within the
framework of New Work.
New Business Models
Given the profound changes faced by companies, along with the potential for new busi-
ness models made available by IT, companies also need to think ahead in terms of which
tasks and employee competencies will be necessary. For example, “stockpiling knowl-
edge” is no longer of any benefit. Instead, companies must look for employees who have,
33
and can promote, implementation skills. The difference here is that employees no longer
acquire pure knowledge and develop specific skills, but rather develop competencies to
identify relevant expertise and apply it. The internet makes all knowledge available world-
wide, but it requires the ability to filter and distinguish relevant from irrelevant knowledge
for use in solving problems. At the same time, the worldwide availability of knowledge
also increases the uncertainty of missing things. In the face of high ambiguity, workers
must be prepared for the unknown (e.g., roles and jobs that do not yet exist; Hofert, 2018;
Sauter et al., 2018).
How Can Agility Encounter Complexity in Organizations?
Networking and the self-organization of groups within a company are more important in
increasingly complex organizational environments (Kruse, 2020; Rotermund, 2021).
As a management concept, agility can counter increasing complexity in the corporate

environment by targeting individual employee responsibility for company success and
increasing flexibility. The aim is to establish self-organization within the organization and
its internal groups. Self-organization acts as a reaction pattern to changes in the corporate
environment that make rapid intervention necessary.
To successfully apply agile management in a company, prerequisites must be met: First,

the corporate culture must be able to establish self-organization. This includes trust,
appreciation, and employee encouragement. Second, leaders must implement a non-hier-
archical management and leadership style, as this is often restrictive and leads to commu-
nication barriers and a reduction in self-organization. Third, a partial application of agile
concepts can cause uncertainty and confusion within the workforce, so agile management
should encompass all company areas.
SUMMARY
This unit looked at the current situation of companies in the face of an
increasingly networked, dynamic world. It began with the example of a
start-up that had proactively sought new ways to secure revenue in a cri-
sis while remaining true to its core business. Indeed, the company does
not lack agility. The example shows that seizing an opportunity in the
face of a crisis can quickly become a business risk, especially if the com-
pany neglects core business.
The concepts of economic cycles, Kondratieff waves, and complexity

traps were introduced. The internal and external factors that drive cor-
porate agility, both the technological progress in connection with digiti-
34
zation and the resulting competitive pressure. Finally, the potential of
agile management to reorganize management structures and cope with
a VUCA environment was discussed.
35
UNIT 3
AGILE CONCEPTS
STUDY GOALS
– define agile management.

– identify the most important actors and principles in Scrum.
– discuss the differences between agile management and lean management.
– develop Kanban for projects.
3. AGILE CONCEPTS
Case Study
The company Car2Lease offers insurance and banking services with car leasing contracts.
In 2021, its annual sales topped €125 billion, and it reported a profit of around three bil-
lion. Its core business is leasing cars of various sizes and models to both corporate and
private customers in conjunction with insurance and financing transactions.
Since its foundation in 1994, the company has grown to over 12,000 employees worldwide
and is one of the largest car leasing companies in Europe.
The company is now facing the challenge of renewing its in-house software, which is 20-
years-old and was, at one point, considered a pioneering piece of digitalization. The
effects of this innovation will be felt company-wide. The previous software, programmed
specifically for the company, has grown over the years and taken on increasing functions
in the workflow.
For Car2Lease, this task is a mammoth project with a billion-euro budget calculated over
five years. It took two years of preparation for the project to establish a project manager, a
steering committee, a change committee within the framework of PRINCE2, a formulation
of a business case with project objectives, a compilation of a project solution approach, a
project description, a timeline, and a project management team. Three controllers were
hired and tasked with monitoring the project’s progress and adherences to the budget and
schedule.
Car2Lease acquired Bits&Bytes, a large systems house that develops and implements
large-scale projects and desired information technology (IT) infrastructure, to adapt and
implement the software. As an experienced IT service provider, Bits&Bytes relies on Scrum
for project management because it allows the development teams sufficient flexibility to
quickly and comprehensively consider customer requests and adapt to the pace of imple-
mentation.
For Car2Lease, the use of Scrum poses a challenge, as it partly contradicts the detailed
planning of the project. This is because Scrum’s goal is first to develop a prototype that fits
the brief as much as possible: It then adapts according to customer requirements.
Car2Lease, on the other hand, implements the project management method PRINCE2 in a
top-down approach. That means that individual work packages are processed one after
the other. Thus, the challenge for Car2Lease is that the processing order should be differ-
ent from the developer’s point of view, which means that planned work packages are
delayed.
Using various technical terms from the two project management methods also gives rise
to numerous misunderstandings that increase the communication effort. Finally,
Bits&Bytes is also unaccustomed to the fact that individual sprints must be interrupted at
short notice for extended periods to apply changes to the work packages according to
38
PRINCE2. Initially, the cooperation of both companies with different project management
methods is somewhat cumbersome. Nevertheless, after a brief reorganization of the
project components, the work of the developers can be integrated at a micro level into the
project management of Car2Lease as a framework.
3.1 Scrum
Scrum is an Agile product development method originating from IT development (Kazan-
dijan, 2019; Schiefer, 2022). However, even though Scrum is often used as a method for
project management in IT projects, this does not mean that the principles associated with
it cannot also be applied elsewhere.
Lately, it has become one of the most well-known methods for Agile project management
(Gaida, 2021). Scrum is popular because it has a strong focus on simplicity, productivity,
and the ability to integrate other Agile methods (Kazandijan, 2019). The process is charac-
terized by its high flexibility and customer-centricity, making it ideal for implementing
Agile management (Gaida, 2021).
This section introduces the essential principles of Scrum.
Essential Principles of Scrum
Scrum consists of three firmly defined, predetermined roles assigned to individual mem-
bers of a project management team. These are the Product Owner, the Scrum Master, and
the product development team (Kazandijan, 2019).
The Product Owner is the client of a project. This person owns the product to be devel-
oped, which means they are fully accountable for its development progress. The Product
Owner works with the development team, the project group, and other stakeholders.
Tasks include defining and prioritizing the product’s functionalities through “user stories.”
The Product Owner also describes the ideal customer (“persona”) to help the develop-
ment team better understand the tasks and set project goals. To solve these tasks, the
Product Owner interacts with clients to explore valuable features. All decisions and
descriptions are documented in the Product Backlog by the Product Owner, as well as the Product Backlog
formal acceptance or denial of each sprint (Kazandijan, 2019; Sauter et al., 2018; Schiefer, a list of features or func-
tions that either defines
2022). the product (product
backlog) or the sprint
This also shows the direct implementation of the Agile Manifesto, since the Product (sprint backlog)
Owner, as part of the project team, is in constant and close contact with its members.
However, continuous cooperation and communication are still required. Another essential
role in the Scrum team is the Scrum Master. This person assumes an organizational and
spokesperson role for the group as a servant leader (Kazandijan, 2019). The Scrum Master
organizes regular exchanges between the team, as well as between the team and the cli-
ent. They remove obstacles or challenges to the project and are responsible for organizing
the development process, which is carried out as an iterative process in the form of sprints
(Kazandijan, 2019; Sauter et al., 2018).
39
However, it is crucial to understand that the Scrum Master is not a team leader who
assigns tasks to members or controls progress as a supervisory authority. This would not
be in the spirit of the Agile manifesto. A Scrum Master is simply someone who provides a
working framework for the team. For instance, problems in the processing of individual
tasks are discussed within daily or weekly meetings, and personal and motivational chal-
lenges of members are addressed. The role of the Scrum Master can be described as a
coach to the development team and the Product Owner (Sauter et al., 2018).
The development team is a self-organized and self-governed team of product developers

who choose its mode of operation within the Scrum project. Three to nine people usually
make up the development team, and the Scrum Master is not part of it (Dams, 2019;
Sauter et al., 2018) and their task is to develop the product according to the definitions of
the Product Owner. To do so, they transform user stories from the Product Owner into an
existing product. As Scrum consists of an iterative development process, the development
team’s goal is to end up with a potential “shippable product” in each sprint (Kazandijan,
2019).
Scrum Process and Principles
Scrum consists of an iterative process of development cycles called Sprints. When imple-
menting a Scrum process, the following principles should be considered (Gloger, 2016):
• interdisciplinary self-organization: Employees of a company should be involved in ach-

ieving development processes.
• communication: The team meets at a regular time and place for task communication.
• pull: The team takes work from the front of the Scrum line and focuses on it before mov-
ing on to the next task.
• iteration: Multiple repetitions of activities should achieve an approximation of the
desired result.
• timebox: Activities have a schedule according to the results. The planning and develop-
ment phases alternate.
Before these Sprints begin, the Product Owner defines the product to be created. To do
this, the Product Owner should define a list of requirements from communication with
stakeholders, described as user stories. This must be documented in the Product Backlog
before the first Sprint so that the development team can organize itself. The development
team also supports the creation of the Product Backlog. Each user story is assessed and
discussed in a product backlog meeting. The goal of the meeting is to achieve a common
understanding of individual tasks and estimate the difficulty of implementation so that a
points system can then be defined. In addition, “acceptance criteria” will be defined for
each user story. This limits the endpoint for the development team and shows them when
the task in question has been completed (Kazandijan, 2019; Kusay-Merkle, 2021).
Once this step has been completed, it’s time for the actual implementation work. The
development team works on the individual features of the desired product in numerous
Sprints. For this purpose, a “Sprint Planning” is held at the beginning of each sprint. The
goal of the sprint is defined, and the team decides on a “definition of done”. This is to
ensure that there are no misunderstandings with the Product Owner and that the product
40
is produced to their satisfaction. In the context of the sprints, the team members have
short daily meetings (dailies), along with weekly meetings (weeklies; Dams, 2019). The
purpose of the dailies is to briefly communicate what has been worked on successfully,
what will be performed next, and any possible challenges (Kazandijan, 2019, Kusay-Mer-
kle, 2021).
Additional meetings are scheduled after each Sprint, including the Sprint Review and
Sprint Retrospective. While the Product Owner and other stakeholders also participate in
the Sprint Review, the Sprint Retrospective is internal. Both events serve to review the
Sprint’s product, exchange feedback, and reflect. For the development team, reflection is
also essential to shortening the processing time (Dams, 2019, p. 20; Kazandijan, 2019,
pp. 46–48; Kusay-Merkle, 2021, pp. 50–51).
Meaning of Scrum for Project Management
Scrum can be used to implement various types of projects quickly, easily, and with the
customer playing a central role. Advantages are clearly defined roles and a structured, but
flexible, process. Through continuous improvement and focus on high quality, it strives to
best serve customer needs (Dams, 2019). It is important to recognize that a Scrum team
cannot be scaled infinitely. A Scrum team should not contain more than nine people.
Beyond this, it is recommended to form a new group. Additionally, complex products can
be challenging for Scrum (Kazandijan, 2019).
3.2 Kanban
Kanban, which means “signboard” in Japanese, is the most widely used agile approach
after Scrum (Bertagnolli, 2020; Kusay-Merkle, 2021). Although it has existed for more than
70 years, today’s version differs from the original (Schiefer, 2022). Like Kaizen, the method Kaizen
originated from Toyota. It was developed to control the flow of materials in production to This is an manufacturing
approach developed to
ensure continuous delivery without overburdening the people involved (Kusay-Merkle, foster innovation and to
2021; Kazandijan, 2019). Kanban is a visual communication tool for coordinating produc- optimize workflows and
tion and transportation between production processes (Dams, 2019). other manufacturing pro-
cesses.
A Kanban was attached to each intermediate or final product in its original version. If one
of the goods was consumed, a card was removed from the associated container; if a good
was created, a card was placed in the related container. This way, it was easy to check the
material status in production and where bottlenecks might occur. However, Kanban was
also easily used in goods management to achieve an overview of sold goods (Bertagnolli,
2020; Kazandijan, 2019).
Kanban Board, Kanban, and Work in Progress Limit
In the newer version of Kanban, the main focus is on using a Kanban board. In its simplest
form, a board is created physically or virtually to represent the different production or
project stages. The beginning of each board, where a ticket (i.e., Kanban card) starts, has
commitment points. At the end is the delivery point, where a ticket is closed (Medinilla,
41
Kanban 2012; Schiefer, 2022). The Kanban card advances according to production progress in this
The term “Kanban” refers simple method. The board has three columns: “to do,” “in progress,” and “done” (Schiefer,
to the method and the
card itself. There is no 2022). With a multi-dimensional Kanban system, one can quickly identify and eliminate
consistent name, which is bottlenecks and breaks in material flows or project progress.
why “Kanban” and “Kan-
ban card” or ticket syno-
nyms are used in the text. The Kanban card represents a work project on the board. Here, the most critical informa-
tion about subprojects are documented. This usually entails a short description, the name
of the responsible person, relevant team members, and the estimated scope of work. The
amount of work on each card should be kept manageable. Like Scrum, the cards are
organized in the form of a backlog called “Single Source of Truth” (Sauter et al., 2018;
Schiefer, 2022).
A card it removed from the board when it has moved from the left to the right to reach its
destination. Sometimes, however, cards may remain in a column longer than planned
while other cards move up. To prevent too many work packages from accumulating in one
column, a work-in-progress (WIP) limit must be defined. This can vary from column to col-
umn. If a WIP limit is reached, the team must work through all existing tasks before start-
ing with the next ones. This limit can be used to quickly evaluate bottlenecks so that proc-
ess optimization or additional personnel can be deployed (Dams, 2019; Schiefer, 2022;
Stellman & Greene, 2021).
The Six Principles of Kanban
Within the framework of Kanban, the following six principles are considered necessary
(Kusay-Merkle, 2021; Schiefer, 2022):
1. Making work visible

2. Limiting the amount of work being started
3. Managing flow
4. Explicitly stating process rules
5. Implementing frequent feedback mechanisms
6. Implementing collaborative improvements
With these six principles, Kanban has numerous advantages for production processes.
Through Kanban, a reduction in material and information throughput time can be ach-
ieved. The achieved process transparency can harmonize the flow of materials, reducing
inventory and the need for storage areas. Delivery and response times can also be short-
ened (Bertagnolli, 2020).
However, Kanban is not suitable if production processes are characterized by fluctuating

demand or if production times and processes diverge. Kanban, in its original form, also
requires a lot of discipline. Today, however, the tracking of production processes can be
done electronically (Kazandijan, 2019; Schiefer, 2022).
42
Practical Example
As shown below, a Kanban board can be created for any project or activity with a work-
flow. The simple example illustrates the implementation of a bachelor thesis. Assuming
that a topic has already been decided, the preparation of the bachelor thesis would be
broken down into various sub-steps. These sub-steps are placed on the board as tickets
(yellow), equal to the work’s progress or the current processing status. They start with the
search for relevant literature, literature evaluation, data collection and evaluation, writing,
and revisions. The thesis is considered complete when all texts have been revised and the
formal requirements have been considered.
43
Figure 6: Kanban Board for Writing the Bachelor Thesis
44
The individual components of the bachelor thesis are sorted into their respective fields
according to processing status. It is also possible to expand the Kanban board to include
information about elements, such as the deadline or people involved. At first glance, the
above graphic shows work is still in flux, as important sub-steps have not yet been com-
pleted. For example, the project is currently undergoing data analysis and the student is
writing in parallel with revising, but still has to invest time in the literature analysis.
Kanban and Scrum
Scrum and Kanban have some similarities in terms of their principles. Work should be visi-
ble and the workload itself should be limited (Medinilla, 2012). Both methods are, per defi-
nition, agile and people-focused (Schiefer, 2022). Collaborative improvements and com-
munication are in the foreground.
Unlike Scrum, Kanban does not require a fundamental reorganization of organizational

structures or project teams. It is easily integrated into any daily routine, and digital tools,
such as Trello, can also be used interactively and independently of time and place. Fur-
thermore, it has the advantage of rules that are easy to understand. Additionally, it is
based on comprehensible, time-saving mechanisms, and it can be applied in stressful
work environments (Kusay-Merkle, 2021, p. 52; Schiefer, 2022, pp. 30–31).
3.3 Further Agile Methods

Agile methods were initially developed for individual projects implemented by respective
teams (Boehm & Turner, 2005). The approach offers numerous advantages, especially the
higher speed of implementation, increased quality, and improved employee satisfaction
(Müller, 2022). Therefore, it is common for companies to establish an agile approach
across their entire organization. This is referred to as “scaled agility.” Many companies
encounter diffculties in coordinating all of the different teams and groups (Ebert & Paasi-
vaara, 2017). Some will also face challenges with the corporate culture and a hierarchical
management style inhibiting self-organized, agile working. Agile methods often do not
accommodate these needs and are insufficient in their range of applications (Turetken et
al., 2017). However, various new approaches of agile work at the enterprise or group level
have emerged that aim to address them. Examples include Scaled Agile Framework
(SAFe), Large-Scale Scrum (LeSS), Disciplined Agile Delivery (DAD), Nexus, and
SCRUM@Scale (Müller, 2022; Schiefer, 2022).
Agile Frameworks: Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe)
In this course book, SAFe is used as an example of a method for implementing Scrum
frameworks on a larger scale (Siedl, 2018). This scaling is done at all levels of an organiza-
tion. It includes guidance for implementing roles, responsibilities, artifacts, and activities
beyond teams to program and portfolio levels (Azadi & Gallardo, 2021). SAFe is based on
lean-agile principles and values (Siedl, 2018). At the concept’s core is Program Increment
(PI) Planning, a regular event used to synchronize all stakeholders across organizations
(Rhode-Schubert, 2021). In simple terms, these are planning days at regular intervals, with
45
respective iterations being coordinated, evaluated, and jointly aligned (Rhode-Schubert,
2021).SAFe is available in different application formats depending on a company’s size.
There formats are: essential, Large Solution, and Portfolio (Schiefer, 2022). Various free
and paid assessments and questionnaires are available for companies, such as the “agility
health radar.” These can be used to derive detailed results about the state of the organiza-
tion and how it fits with Scrum. They are used to define targeted measures to optimally
apply and scale Scrum. Various criteria are considered, such as the willingness of employ-
ees to change, their work and reaction speed, and the degree of agility already achieved
(Siedl, 2018).
Lean Management
Like agile management, mindset is a central component of lean management (Bertagnolli,

2020). Although this method has many manifestations (e.g., lean entrepreneurship and
lean software management), its origins can be traced back to Japanese manufacturing
companies (Förster & Wendler, 2012; Kazandijan, 2019). It is an agile concept because it
aims to reduce redundancies and optimize processes in a simple and resource-efficient
way. It follows five fundamental principles (Medinilla, 2012):
1. Understand and maximize value: The entire production network should aim to under-
stand why the customer values the product and try to maximize it.
2. Optimize the value stream: This is shortening production time, which is best done by
understanding the processes used to produce value and then applying methods to
shorten them.
3. Pull production: This is the strategy of manufacturing new products when the cus-
tomer demands them, which reduces stockpiling costs and excess product. To apply
this strategy successfully, an agile and fast reaction to changing demands is required.
4. Single-piece flow: A single piece should flow smoothly through the different produc-
tion steps without interruptions or barriers
5. Continuous improvement: Workers should strive for the incremental optimizing of
processes, products, and themselves.
The five principles listed above can also be seen in Kaizen and Kanban (Medinilla, 2012).
Rapid Prototyping
Imagine a company developed a brand-new app that takes exact environmental measure-
ments on a smartphone. They have two available marketing strategies: The first is that
they can finish the product and ensure all the features can be used properly before selling
it to the customer. The second is to program the product in its basic features, sell it to cus-
tomers in a beta version, and see where the customer would like to see improvements to
satisfy their needs.
This second option is an applied use of rapid prototyping, a method often observed in the
development of engineering services and software development (e.g., the app that did not
have many functions initially but developed as time went on). This has gained importance
over time, especially in connection with “lean entrepreneurship.”
46
Rapid prototyping’s philosophy is that it is better to have an unfinished product than no
product at all. By quickly sketching and implementing a product or service, the founda-
tions for the ideas are implemented, and a manageable basis is created on which the
product can be further developed. Since innovations are new to the market. it is often not
possible to determine which functions will be essential for the customer. Uncertainty sur-
rounding essental functions can carry cost risks, which rapid prototyping can help reduce.
The method allows a product to enter the market so that feedback about essential funca-
tions and weak points can be given by customers. From here, companies can invest in the
appropriate product alterations. Another benefit is that rapid prototyping introduces
products to the market quickly, giving a company an advantage over its competitors.
Design Thinking
Another method for agile work is design thinking. This is a method that finds creative solu-
tions to complex problems. This technique can be applied in various agile settings and
uses an iterative development process (Dams, 2019; Sauter et al., 2018). Design thinking
can also be used to redesign existing products, services, and expand the range of applica-
tions.
In this method of thinking, economic viability initially takes a back seat. The primary goal
is to discover customer needs empathetically, so that the team can effectively understand
their desires and apply them to product and service innovations. Various tools are used for
this purpose (e.g., empathy map, personas, storyboard, interviews, and customer journey
mapping; Dams, 2019; Gaida, 2021). Economic feasability is only considered once the first
step has been satisfied. Design thinking broadly aims to answer the following three ques-
tions:
1. Are customer needs being addressed?

2. Is the innovation idea technically feasible?
3. Can the innovation be marketed at an economical price?
Design thinking processes also often involve creative design methods, such as experi-
ments and rapid prototyping. In addition, one of the key ideas is using diversity and inter-
disciplinarity to arrive at new perspectives (Gaida, 2021; Dams, 2019; Sauter et al., 2018).
Typically, a design thinking process consists of understanding, exploring, synthesizing,

ideating, prototyping, and testing phases. This is done in an iterative process, which
includes feedback loops and reflection phases (Gaida, 2021; Sauter et al., 2018).
Design thinking argues that to understand customer needs, the problem needs to be iden-
tified and understood from various perspectives. The technique’s exporation phase cele-
brates an intensive search-and-discovery process to learn about customer needs. One
approach is to conduct “working hypotheses”: After building a hypothesis-driven survey,
the design thinking team then discusses the problem in more detail with the customer to
take their perspective. In the synthesis phase, requirements are collected and condensed
to identify key challenges. After identifying the most critical impediments for customers,
47
the team begins brainstorming for solutions. The key to a successful ideation phase is that
it is built on a thorough analysis, because good ideas can only emerge when the problem
is understood.
The ideation phase values quantity over quality: At this stage, the team should present
several potential solutions, each of which are worked into rough sketches. From here, the
best ideas are identified and developed in the prototyping phase. In the last step of the
iterative process, the prototype will be tested with a group of potential customers. Doing
so should ensure that the solution is helpful and addresses the right problem (Sauter et
al., 2018).
SUMMARY
There are many approaches that can be applied to different aspects of
production, management, and administration. In this unit, a selection of
agile management methods and concepts are introduced. We started
with a very compact overview of Scrum, which is a technique developed
from IT management and software development. Afterward, we intro-
duced you to Kanban, an approach developed by Toyota.
Frameworks were discussed, using SAFe as the main example. After-

ward, lean management was explained, which is the basis for Kanban.
This unit finished by breaking down rapid prototyping and design think-
ing; these are two of the more creative agile methods, which are also
used in entrepreneurship.
48
UNIT 4
AGILE ORGANIZATION
STUDY GOALS
– discuss the difference between agile and non-agile organizations.

– explain an agile maturity model.
– apply an agile maturity model to practice.
– describe barriers to agile transformation.
4. AGILE ORGANIZATION
Case Study
Jobs4Students is a start-up connecting students to employers with internship and job
opportunities via a self-learning artificial intelligence (AI). The start-up offers students and
graduates the opportunity to position themselves in the job market, which is especially
beneficial for those with no experience in their field. The company has been founded by
four people, and a few information technology (IT) employees from a partner company
are working on implementing the business model. It has already succeeded in winning
four business customers – or in this case – universities, who offer the service to their stu-
dents. In total, the platform has 2,300 end customers using its services.
Although the start-up is still at the beginning of its life cycle, its open organizational struc-
ture offers opportunities and risks for the further course of business. For example, there is
the question of how scarce human resources can be organized efficiently to tackle the
many different tasks. Employees and company founders require a high degree of role flexi-
bility, and increased demands are placed on various skills. However, given the wide variety
of tasks that a few employees must fulfill, a hierarchical structure where tasks and dis-
cussed in advance and overseen by a manager is not realistic. Management does not yet
play a prominent role in the small team, and although this will change as the company
grows and hires more employees, self-leadership is of great importance in its current
phase. This means that the individuals members can structure and complete their tasks
independently, as well as develop solutions should a problem occur. Nevertheless, in this
initial phase, founders need to consider which corporate culture and organizational struc-
ture the company should adopt in the future. Linked to this is the question of corporate
values, which are expressed in a corporate mission statement.
Since the start-up is an IT service provider, an agile organizational structure lends itself to
a high degree of self-organization and responsibility among employees and volunteers. To
introduce an agile organization, the founding team consciously examines where agile
principles can thrive and where obstacles may arise. Their business plan is adapted to a
five-year timeline, but the company is still facing difficulties in predicting its future
because it is not on the market officially, nor is it fully operational at this stage. Neverthe-
less, the founders think about the agile orientation of their company in one of their regular
workshops and record this in an organizational plan. Indeed, some agile practices are
already being implemented, such as the founders discussing current tasks and challenges
in weekly meetings. They are also reflecting on tasks, which they monitor together, in fort-
nightly reviews. The founders are, therefore, confident that an agile corporate culture
aligns with their mindset and should implemented for other areas of the company.
50
4.1 Concept of an Agile Organization
Agile organizations have a competitive advantage in today’s world because they can adapt
quickly to changing market conditions without losing sight of customer needs. When it
comes to disruptive developments arising from technical progress or social crises, agile
companies are more capable of acting and can even proactively tackle changes when
compared to traditional companies. This unit will provide a more detailed picture of what
constitutes agile organizations and how a previously traditional company can change its
organizational structure to become an agile organization.
What makes an agile company unique? Is a company with a team that partially uses Scrum
or Kanban agile? Is it enough to make customer-related departments agile, or should the
entire company transition? These questions will be given more attention in this unit, but
before breaking down the specifics of an agile organization, it is important to provide
comparisions by outlining more traditional structures.
Traditional Organizational Structures
An organizational structure is the essential foundation a company chooses for economic

success. It determines an organization’s size, technology, environment, and culture
(McMillan, 2002). In companies, it provides a framework in which employees act and fulfill
their daily work. The organizational structure and process organization are documented in
an organizational chart, which describes a company’s fixed architecture, its sub-units, who
manages what, and which subareas take care of particular tasks. However, an organiza-
tional structure is not fixed over time: It can develop according to a company’s life cycle
(Galván, 2019).
In practice, depending on the life cycle stage a company is in, there are many types of
organizational structures, such as the divisional structure, network structure, and circular
structure (Galván, 2019). Among those, two primary forms, which act as the basis for the
above mentioned types, can be identified: the functional structure and the matrix struc-
ture. These organizational structures can be distinguished into centralized and decentral-
ized groups based on hierarchy.
Functional Organizational Structure
In a functional organizational structure, the company is organized by the different divi-

sions that work together to provide goods. It represents the Taylorism idea of the division
of labor to produce efficiently, which is why this structure was the preferred organization
in the 20th century (McMillan, 2002). It still prevails today in many small- and medium-
sized manufacturing companies. The tasks are clearly delineated and rarely change.
51
Figure 7: Functional Structured Organization
52
Usually, a workflow is added to the functional organization structure to describe how the
different divisions and groups work together.
The funcational organizational structure also supports primary and supporting business
activities (Porter, 1985). All activities that are directly involved in the production of a prod-
uct or service are called primary activities. In a company with consumer goods, this
includes the procurement of raw materials or pre-products, respective production lines in
plants, and the outbound logistics, marketing, and distribution departments. Meanwhile,
supporting activities do not directly contribute to the creation of a product. Still, they
must be carried out as a precondition or alongside production so that the company can
offer the product or service. Within traditional manufacturing companies, this can include
the accounting, human resources (HR) management, the IT department, and research and
development (R&D) departments. To summarize, supporting business activities help to
develop the company’s infrastructure and provide the preconditions necessary for pro-
duction.
Matrix Organizational Structure
Another classic form of company organization is the matrix organization, in which com-
pany divisions are arranged as if overlapping in a grid. This type of organization is often
found in large companies with several locations or production lines. The example of a car
manufacturer illustrates this form of organization. Most large manufacturers outsource the
production of car parts and opt instead to obtain the preliminary products from a few sup-
pliers, some of whom only have car parts for one manufacturer. Simplified, the production
of a car requires car parts, a production line in which the employees assemble the pieces,
an accounting department for billing, management for employees in the plant, and a sales
department. Let’s assume a car manufacturer produces three types of vehicles: Each pro-
duction line would be a column, with a production step assigned to each line. This means
that car model A has a production line A, an accounting department A, and a personnel
management department A. The same pattern follows for car models B and C. In simpli-
fied terms, the matrix organization splits support functions, such as accounting, according
to production line. The accounting department in this scenario would, therefore, have
three subsections for production lines A, B, and C.
53
Figure 8: Matrix Organization
Source: Anja Hagedorn (2023), based on Stuckenbruck (1979).
54
Now that standard non-agile organizational structures have been addressed, this unit will
move on to describe agile architectures.
Agile Organizational Structure
To date, there is no explicit agile organizational structure that is applicable to an organiza-

tion as a whole. However, the Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe) makes it possible to upscale
Scrum processes to an entire organization. However, it does not influence the fundamen-
tal organizational design, which is what allows for a fully agile transformation. However,
managers must check to see if a total transformation of the company is necessary, and, if
so, how it could be transformed in the best way. Such a total transformation is often a
matter of a company-wide change that goes hand in hand with the development and
implementation of a new strategy. If the company assumes an overarching agile manage-
ment style, the result would be project-based work in frequently changing, interdiscipli-
nary, and agile teams. This can even mean that a company-wide product owner would
present the projects regularly and the employees pick the projects or its tasks based on
their own competency and motivation (Edelkraut & Mosig 2019). Team building and team-
work then will be based on the self-organization capability of its members (Edelkraut &
Mosig 2019).
If managers come to the conclusion that the transformation to agile processes should not
be implemented completely, it is common for single, customer-focused departments to
become agile, or the agile organizational part is excluded as a spin-off (Rahn 2018). Spin-off
This term refers to either
the exclusion of one or
In order to develop an overarching agile organizational structure, a company should more departments from a
implement measures based on agile principles into its design. However, a fully agile company or the establish-
organizational design might hinder other, more pragmatic organizational processes, such ment of a start-up based
an innovation, such as a
as production lines. Therefore, companies usually have an underlying traditional structure new product line.
that has agile components, or they implement a hybrid structure based on agile and non-
agile organizational designs. This means that the company includes agile principles within
its organizational structure, or it develops an additional layer to support agile work. Those
agile principles are (Bartonitz et al., 2018; Gaida, 2021; Dautovic, 2021).
• flexibility and rapid adjustment to environmental changes

• priority to customer demands and, subsequently, high customer centricity
• continuous product and process optimization
• welcoming customer requests to change products and processes
• daily intensive collaboration among experts from different divisions
• projects should be established with highly motivated people
• framework conditions and support should enable motivated employees to work on
their tasks
• trust in the competencies and self-organization abilities of teams and team members
• team meetings to discuss and share information efficiently
• speed of development should last throughout the whole project or process
• continuous focus on professional excellence and creation of an optimal task flow to
enhance agility
• make use of simplicity and minimize work not done (i.e., unecessary work)
• self-organized teams create the framework and set its conditions
55
• regular reflection improves quality
If the agile principles mentioned above are implemented in the organizational structure,
an increase in flexibility, autonomy, and self-organization of the individual areas will
result. According to research by Rahn (2018), work should be done in decentralized net-
works, rather than fixed functional structures. Hence, the organizational structure must
allow the exchange of information and decision-making powers. Furthermore, the self-
organization of agile teams requires the flexible processing of tasks that arise in everyday
life and possibly overlap with other departments. An agile organization requires team
members to be spontaneous and actively collaborate with other departments when nec-
essary. Self-autonomy and flexibility can go so far that even working hours and workpla-
ces become flexible (Rahn 2018).
In summary, the most significant difference between an agile organization and more tradi-
tional organizational structures is that agile organizations operate fluidly, rather than on
fixed terms (Häusling, 2020). A fully fluid organization means that day-to-day business and
the development of new products are organized in the form of a network structure (Häus-
ling, 2020). This ensures that changes can be responded to quickly within individual
departments, meaning that an agile organization can be designed like an organizational
structure. Departments are interconnected, but autonomous, self-organized network
nodes can be formed (Kahra, 2022).
Desouza (2006) outlined the common following factors in agile organizations and identi-
fied:
• perceive environmental signals

• adequate processing
• mobilize resources and processes to take advantage of emerging opportunities
• are continuously optimizing business processes
• take fast action at minimal cost or effort
Above all, an agile organization’s goal is to maintain a complete customer focus and maxi-
mize the creation of benefits. An agile organizational structure also implies flat hierarchies
(Kahra, 2022).
An agile organizational structure is based on shorter planning and implementation cycles

with concrete results and immediate opportunities for adaptation (Rahn 2018). Further-
more, agile organizational processes are decentralized and can be used flexibly to meet a
client’s needs (Häusling, 2020). Only a few central approval processes are associated with
this, which must be carried out from a defined budget level. The needs of employees get
less attention in larger agile companies, owing to the fact that the number of people to be
considered increases with company size (Kahra, 2022).
A huge disadvantage in this form of organization is that it is difficult to map and document
existing customer business in large companies (Kahra, 2022). Agility always has a slight
tendency towards chaos if communication and the flow of information are hindered. One
must consider that with higher flexibility and self-organization, the demand for communi-
cation rises; this is necessary to ensure that relevant persons know what’s happening in
56
the company and can react accordingly. Therefore, Kahra (2002) recommends maintain-
ing a dualistic organizational structure: one following a functional form and another that
applies Agile functions. In that way, stability is maintained during the transition process.
4.2 Self-Organization as a Core Element

The core principle of an agile company is the promotion and maintenance of the self-
organization capability vis á vis its departments or teams. A self-organized team acts
autonomously and regulates itself according to daily tasks (Parker et al., 2015). Self-organ-
ization means that a team is autonomous in deciding which tasks are executed and how to
go about them; these decisions have to take a flexible workflow, a high customer focus,
and the pursuit of excellence into account. By acting responsibly, meaning that the
employees work in the best interests of the company, they earn their managers’ trust. This
trust is the basis of a failure culture that allows an employee to make mistakes and learn
from them, even if it brings pitfalls for the company. Self-organization enables empolyees
to try their best for the company.
Therefore, the design of the respective organizational structure must allow sufficient flexi-
bility to enable self-organization. The organizational culture is the connecting element
between the organization and the agile principles. If agility is widely anchored in the cor-
porate culture, this is also expressed in the organizational structure. This also makes it
possible for agile principles to be automatically lived by employees in their everyday
work. Another positive effect of anchoring agile principles in the organizational structure
is that by practicing and applying agile principles in daily work, managers less familiar
with agile principles are supported in their new role. Suppose the company has learned
mechanisms that promote Agile principles: This scenario makes it easier for managers to
apply them with respective teams.
4.3 Transformation and Maturity Model of

the Organization
Not every organization is agile at its inception. Traditional companies with a long operat-
ing history usually have a classic organizational structure that evolved over time. The
same applies to large multinational cooperations that split into several branches in differ-
ent countries. Eventually, this gives rise to hybrid structures that sometimes develop a life
of their own. When transforming a company into an agile organization, it is, therefore,
essential to examine all areas of the company to see where agility can be applied and to
what extent it can be implemented to improve adaptation performance. The following
sections provide an overview of the traditional, non-agile maturity models and introduce
agile maturity models in comparison.
57
Traditional Maturity Models
Management research offers various maturity models in organizations. In classical organi-

zations, a maturity model is structured according to a company’s life cycles. A classic
model is, for example, that of Mayrhofer et al. (2015), which is shown in the next figure.
A company’s life cycle begins with a build-up phase, also known as the start-up phase, or,
in the case of Mayrhofer et al. (2015), the “pioneer phase.” This is when the company
comes into being, develops and markets its first products, and aims to establish itself on
the market by building up a sufficiently large customer base and pay back the costs incur-
red at the beginning. Internally, the organization is highly dependent on the founders. The
following processes are characterized by Mayrhofer et al. (2015):
• an intense family structure

• direct, ad hoc communication
• improvisation
• an attempt to achieve a high level of customer loyalty
In the following phase, called the differentiation phase, the company grows and subdi-
vides its services. Internally, the first managers are hired, processes are developed, tested,
and established, while externally, the company makes an attempt to differentiate itself
more strongly from competition (Mayrhofer et al., 2015).
These steps only succeed if the new company can establish itself on the market. To do so,
its offerings must also meet market demand. Moreover, a company must adopt a corpo-
rate purpose that distinguishes it from (potential) competitors. The first step to a success-
ful market approach is for a company to find its niche and manage it to stand out from the
competition. If this fails, a competitive advantage can be achieved, according to Porter
(1985), using the price policy. Otherwise, the company will disappear from the market.
Whether the company can successfully enter this phase usually becomes apparent in
three to five years. At this stage, the start-up phase is considered to be over. However, this
time estimate depends on the type of company and market volatility.
The differentiation phase is followed by the integration phase (Mayrhofer et at., 2015). In
the best-case scenario, the company has grown enormously and it has become necessary
to internalize departments and management levels. Team structures are introduced, and
the strategic market orientation is tested. The organization has achieved a good market
position. The main strategy now is to integrate gained experience and consolidate the cus-
tomer base. Finally, Mayrhofer et al.’s (2015) maturity model ends with the association
phase. Here, a company strengthens networking with its stakeholders. Optimizing pro-
cesses and carefully using resources also play an essential role in this phase. Each step has
company-specific challenges that must be overcome.
58
Figure 9: Mayrhofer’s Maturity Model
Source: Anja Hagedorn (2023), based on Mayrhofer (2015).
Agile Maturity Model
Management research currently applies various approaches, some of which have been fur-
ther developed from other maturity models or elaborated on (Desouza, 2006; Gunsberg et
al., 2018; Wendler, 2014).
Kahra (2022) describes a model with four maturity levels, which is based on work by busi-
ness management consultancy Kienbaum and Häusling (2020). Companies still develop-
ing their primary business operations are at the first and lowest level of development. The
primary goal is to create the greatest possible efficiency and combine it with stable com-
pany processes. Customer and employee orientation, flexibility, and agility are still low at
59
this level. In the second stage of the model, the company develops a competitive and mar-
ket orientation. Customer and employee orientation increase, as do flexibility and effec-
tiveness, while self-focus, efficiency, and stability slowly decrease. On the third level of the
model, companies have a strong customer orientation, self-focus has diminished, pro-
cesses are designed to be very flexible, and volatility can affect every day work. The com-
panies with a benefit orientation are at the fourth and highest level in the development
process. Here, the customer and employee focus are maximized, as well as effectiveness
and flexibility (Kahra, 2022).
60
Figure 10: Maturity Model of an Agile Organization
Source: Anja Hagedorn (2023), based on Kahra (2022).
61
Agile Transformation
One of the critical questions for non-agile organizations is how to evolve their business
towards more agility. A change process is required that includes processes, structures, and
culture such that a non-agile company can develop into an agile organization. This change
process is called agile transformation (Kupiek, 2021; Schweitzer & Mehmeti, 2021). The
associated values and principles should always be lived during the transformation
towards an agile company. This means that autonomy and self-organization should be
tested among employees and management levels right from the start. Depending on the
type of organization, this can be more difficult if previously strong hierarchies inhibit the
ability of employees to self-organize. The agile mindset then requires an effective change
in the behavior and attitude of the people involved (Kupiek, 2021; Schweitzer & Mehmeti,
2021). An agile coach can support the company’s desire to undergo an agile transforma-
tion.
Before the company embarks on an agile transformation, it should be clarified whether its
structure and history are suitable and what benefits would most likely result from this
transformation. This is because not all companies can or should work in an agile manner.
For example, highly regulated companies cannot become agile due to the legal regulation
of processes. As well, copmanies in which routine tasks are often given priority, or where
the industry environment is very stable, might not benefit from an agile workplace. Lastly,
the support from management is essential to an agile transformation (Kupiek, 2021;
Schweitzer & Mehmeti, 2021).
There are various approaches to help companies though an agile transformation. Kupiek
(2021) and Schweitzer and Mehmeti (2021) describe a four-stage process based on an initi-
alization, pilot, scaling, and continuous improvement phase.
Kahra (2022) presents another model, proposing a transition is three-stages. In phase

zero, initial experience with the agile way of working is gathered, and an initial idea is
developed as to how the company can develop further in an agile way. Here, individual
teams try agile methods or behaviors and gain initial experience. A positive evaluation of
this phase may lead to the decision to integrate agile practices into the organization on a
larger scale. In this context, Schweitzer and Mehmeti (2021) suggest conducting a maturity
assessment in the first phase to analyze from which standpoint the organization wants to
undergo an agile transformation. In contrast to Kahra (2022), Schweitzer and Mehmeti
(2021) also advise companies against randomly experimenting and instead recommend
identifying an area in the company to conduct a pilot test of agile practices. This should
allow sufficient scope for innovation and creativity. Therefore, areas of the company
where routine tasks are performed are rather unsuitable (Schweitzer &Mehmeti 2021;
Kupiek, 2021).
This is followed by the next phase of agile transformation, which Kahra (2022) calls the
preparation phase. In this phase, the idea for agile transformation is further concretized in
a targeted manner. This involves continuously analyzing challenges and possible hurdles
in the company to create framework conditions for agile working. It is advisable to set up a
team for this phase that explores, prepares, and coordinates the implementation of the
transformation process.
62
The third and final phase is the actual transformation, in which the idea for the further
agile development of an organization is implemented. This can, in turn, be divided into a
start-up, pilot, and scaling and establishment phase. While the start-up phase is intended
to remove obstacles to agile transformation and create framework conditions, the pilot
phase is used for structured testing of agile working methods by pilot teams. Further infor-
mation is also to be gathered here, which agile conditions can transition fully in the scal-
ing phase. Finally, in the scaling and establishment phase, all relevant internal company
processes and structures are to be transformed into an agile framework, employees are to
be trained accordingly, and the experience gained is to be optimized as part of an
improvement process (Kahra, 2022).
Following the agile maturity model, different agile transformations can be derived. Wen-
dler (2014) established a model consisting of four levels whose development categories
range from levels zero (no agility present) to three (organizational agility). In between, a
distinction is made between level one (agility basics) and level two (agility transition;
Wendler, 2014).
4.4 Transformer Model for Agile

Organizational Development
The transformation into an agile organization is a long-term task that often requires a radi-
cal change and the rethinking of habitualized systems. A systematic approach is, there-
fore, needed to identify and cover key elements. Any company looking to transition to an
agile system should hold thorough discussions about how to go about doing so. In the fol-
lowing text, a transformer model for agile organizational development will be presented
by Pavlichenko and Ramos (2022).
Firstly, a company interested in becoming agile should start by adopting a customer-per-

spective (i.e., an understanding of marketing and customer needs). Afterward this, Pavli-
chenko and Ramos (2022) recommend reducing complex organizational structures that
focus on production and leaving other considerations aside. The second principle then
covers the fact that a company’s culture cannot be changed directly into agile systems.
They recommend that managers focus on theie employees’ behavior and their working
conditions. In the third principle, managers must understand the context of the work
being done so that they can properly assess changes. Finally, the fourth principle
acknowledges that an agile mindset needs to be practiced; therefore, teams should learn
to practice self-organization and autonomy in solving work-related tasks from the begin-
ning of the agile change project. Lastly, a knowledge management should be applied to
better understand the nature of tasks within the company and access starting points for
agile change (Pavlichenko & Ramos, 2022).
Transformation into an agile organization begins once the above fundamental principles
have been fully understood and applied within the organization’s daily work. Using this as
a foundation, the actual transformation process can start and be be differentiated into a
phase with a project-like character that lasts several months and requires continuous
63
supervision. The preperation and implementation of agility into one or more product
groups usually lasts three to four months each, due to group members who may be busy
with day-to-day work and lose motivation if the transition process lasts too long.
Once the transition has been prepared, product groups can start launching, a process
which generally just takes a few days. When the agile organization is active, the second
phase, continuous supervision, begins. The third phase, coaching and personal develop-
ment for team members and product owners, should be implemented continuously (Pavli-
chenko & Ramos 2022).
For the implementation of the three steps, Pavlichenko and Ramos (2022) provide some
remarks that help to overcome potential pitfalls that can occur during the change process.
Firstly, one has to keep in mind, that the different tasks in the process steps may be execu-
ted parallel or only within certain periods and managers should be aware of the timing so
that they can provide necessary support to their teams. At this time, managers should also
use their authority and act as initiators to support Scrum team building and development.
Management, therefore, should always be included in agile transformation processes. For
motivational reasons, it is also important to establish an organizational vision for the agile
transformation process. By doing so, business objectives and team expectations can be
derived and optimized. It not only helps to communicate the purpose of the agile transfor-
mation, but also refocuses the business perspective and aligns team members with the
process and goals. Furthermore, the organization and its managers should regularly
reflect on the transformation process. Lastly, managers and project members should
apply agile project management methods, such as Scrum, throughout the whole process
so they can practice and get familiar with it. Understanding the role of a Scrum Master,
defining what the term “done” means to an agile team, practicing sprints, and preparing
for regular reviews are all important components to reflect on.
SUMMARY
This unit focused on the agile organization. Organizational structure has
a tremendous influence on market success. Therefore, agility should be
implemented in the organizational structure if the company faces a
dynamic or disruptive volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous
(VUCA) environment. To become more agile, organizations often need to
transform their structure, culture, and processes so that they are in
agreement with agile principles. Therefore, all divisions must examine
whether agility can be used or whether barriers exist.
One core principle that must be enabled on an organizational level is

self-organization. Only with self-organization can a company practice
full agility. Therefore, hierarchies and bureaucracy must be reduced in
exchange for greater trust, self-management, and autonomy in the
workplace.
64
Ultimately, an agile transformation can fail, especially if the corporate
culture is incompatible with an agile setting or mindset. When piloting
agile practices, it is important to consider which areas of a company, or
which types of companies, are suitable for an agile transition.
65
UNIT 5
AGILE LEADERSHIP
STUDY GOALS
– define the characteristics of an agile leader.

– describe agile competencies.
– discuss the differences between traditional and agile leadership.
– implement agile leadership.
5. AGILE LEADERSHIP
Case Study
Frank is a manager at healthcare company Symbion Healthcare. The large-scale company
produces high-precision machinery to scan and analyze biological samples on a microar-
ray. The company recently opened a new branch that procures artificial intelligence (AI)
software to help analyze hidden patterns in human medical information more efficiently.
His team had been working on building a new product platform, HealthScan. This product
consists of a microchip that can directly analyze data of biological samples using high-pre-
cision sensors. To do this, either a drop of blood or a tissue sample is placed directly on
top of the chip. The chip is then inserted into a computer that processes the data.
The hardware component is to be linked to information technology (IT) software and

Frank, together with his team, is moving to a start-up founded to look after this aspect.
Frank was previously a team leader, but now he will manage an entire department. He
must get used to his new role, as well as the change in structure. After all, the parent com-
pany was established with traditional hierarchies and a long history. Now Frank not only
has to take care of developing the product platform further, but also create structures,
integrate new team members from IT, and consider the personal expectations of each
team member. This is because the start-up works in an agile manner. This is still difficult,
especially because he has not yet known the team for that long.
Frank has plenty of tasks to accomplish and also has to work on establishing an agile lead-
ership culture that looks stable enough to be compatible with the parent company. How
will Frank be able to solve these tasks? What skills does he need? What experience does he
need to gain in order to survive as a manager in the field of tension between agility and
tradition?
5.1 Changed Role of the Manager

Managers are an essential pillar of an agile organizational structure. The increasing com-
plexity in the corporate environment and the increasingly dynamic demands on compa-
nies can be countered with an agile organization. However, the internal organizational
structure must also be set up to accommodate these changes.
Managers are usually an authority figure to the departments or teams that report to them.
This means that they are responsible for employee performance and results. When a team
makes a mistake or fails to meet set goals, it reflects on their leader, who must then
answer to their manager. At the same time, a leader has some power over the processes in
their jurisdiction.
68
This section aims to describe how a manager’s role changes in an agile envorinment. To
begin, the section will first give a brief excursus on management leadership theory.
Changing Leadership Theories
Understanding optimal leadership of organizations has always been part of management Leadership
research. It develops in three streams: property-oriented approaches, behavior-oriented This is the control and
coordination of tasks to
approaches, and situational approaches (Hofert, 2018; Lippold, 2019). achieve production goals.
The question of how to make the most efficient use of scarce resources, especially labor,
has always been relevant to companies (Peters, 2015). Over the centuries, this question
has been repeatedly adapted to production styles, available technologies, and environ-
mental factors. The change in the understanding of leadership is a constant that runs like
a thread through the history of business management doctrines.
Up until the 1930s, the focus of management research was on studying leadership traits
(trait theory). In essence, leadership tasks consisted of assigning tasks, giving directions,
and controlling outcomes with little tolerance for dissent (Peters, 2015). Underlying this
school of thinking is the assumption that effective leaders exhibit character traits that
bring people to perform certain actions (Lippold, 2019). Thus, the trait exhibited by a good
leader became the focus of greater research (Hofert, 2018; Lippold, 2019). The resulting
philosophies include the great man theory (Stogdill, 1948), the theory of charismatic lead-
ership (Weber 1976), the theory of transformational/transactional leadership (Bass 1985),
and the dominance, initiative, constancy, and conscientiousness (DISG) model (Marston, DISG
1928). a diagnostic instrument
developed in personnel
psychology and used to
In terms of understanding leadership, the period following World War Two has been influ- estimate fundamental
enced by more liberal and, in some cases, anti-authoritarian trends. Political change was personal behavior and
predict job performance.
also accompanied by technological and economic change, which required more complex It is used in the recruit-
tasks in day-to-day operations. This resulted in a more significant division of labor, which ment process, talent
management, and team
is why tasks could no longer be delegated easily. Workers and employees contributed
building.
competencies required for processing, which required a partial transfer of responsibility to
the employees by the manager. This gave rise to the concept of cooperative leadership
(Peters, 2015).
The trait-oriented approach to leadership research was replaced by the behavior-oriented

approach, which focuses on the behavior of leaders, and thus, on impact. In this line of
research, different leadership styles were identified, studied, and compared (Lippold,
2019). These include authoritarian versus collaborative leadership styles (Tannenbaum &
Schmidt, 1973), the Ohio State Leadership Quadrant (Halpin und Winer 1957), and the grid
leadership model (Blake & Mouton, 1983). This line of research also asked whether good
leadership can be learned or if it is intrinsic to one’s character (Hofert, 2018).
As tasks became more complex and the knowledge needed to process them increased,
more responsibility was transferred from managers to employees. Tasks were delegated
rather than just ordered, resulting in growing decision-making capabilities within the
69
workforce. Thus, the manager increasingly changed from an authority figure to a compan-
ion or coach who provides employees with a framework to complete tasks. This was also
accompanied by differentiation of possible roles that a leader should fulfil (Peters, 2015).
Situational leadership models assume that the promising individual behavior of a man-
ager is context-specific. Therefore, successful human resource leadership should analyze
the action context and select and apply the most appropriate leadership style (Lippold,
2019). These include the contingency theory (Fiedler, 1965), the “path-goal theory”
(House, 1976), and the maturity model (Hersey & Blanchard, 1981). Situational leadership
models might also be applicable in an agile context.
From Traditional to 22nd Century Leadership
Managers are confronted with numerous requirements in a digitally networked world. At

higher levels of management, leaders must be able to deal with a heterogeneous group of
people across different locations. At the same time, generational and cultural differences
must be considered. New leadership approaches, therefore, move in conflict between the
following (Lippold, 2019):
• digitalization and technological change

• formal and informal media and communication across continents
• generational change and hybrid work
The changing conditions under which leadership is implemented today are driven not
least by a change in the values. The baby boomer generation (born between 1945 and
1965) followed values that put hard work into focus. Those values included the willingness
to perform, cooperation, and ambition. In contrast to baby boomers, later generations,
such as millennials (born between 1980 and 1995), valued team orientation, multitasking,
and technological proficiency. The baby boomers’ attitude towards work can also be
expressed by the guiding principle “live to work”; whereas for millennials, “live first, then
work” was coined. Accordingly, Generation Z’s (born between 1995 to 2010) attitude
toward work is expressed as “living and working as a fluid process” (Lippold, 2019). Con-
sidering the values of millenials and Generation Z, classic leadership models no longer
apply in the way that they used to. A manager’s role is changing from the classic decision-
making authority to a function of empowering team members (Siedl & Nietschke, 2021).
There is a shift from merely managing employees to being supporters and companions –
the manager’s role changes to that of a companion or coach (Puckett & Neubauer, 2018).
Thus, the manager’s image is changing from an authoritarian decision maker to path-
finder or service worker who supports the team in implementing its tasks. In addition,
future managers will have to manage the tension between decentralized and self-organ-
ized groups, along with higher-level coordination (Siedl & Nietschke, 2021). The following
chart provides an overview of the changing demands on managers as leaders.
70
Table 1: Comparison Between Traditional Leadership and Agile Leadership
Traditional leadership Agile leadership
Responsibility Responsibilities are described A manager’s responsibilities

by the job description. Managers cover a spectrum of tasks that
ensure the delineation of are constantly being redefined
responsibility by defining by both themselves and others.
responsibilities and authorities. Tasks are taken in the short- or
long-term, depending on con-
text and ensures a network of
competencies.
Task sharing Managers control the orders and Regular and overarching coordi-
resources of their designated nation processes. Teams priori-
area. They also set priorities, tize tasks alongside customers.
delegate tasks, and control task
results.
Decision-making Decision-making power is based Universally applicable principles

on a hierarchy. Managers in a and processes apply to every-
higher position have more one, including managers. The
power. feasibility of these principles
and processes is regularly
reviewed, and extraordinary cir-
cumstances may lead to their
temporary disablement.
Information and communication Information is provided on a Managers create transparency of

top-down basis. Decisions sur- information and leaves it to
rounding its relevance, scope, employees to get informed on
who is responsible for it, and its relevant issues.
timing lie within the hierarchy.
Performance evaluation Performance reviews based on The focus in on customer satis-

individual performance and tar- faction and team performance.
gets happen periodically. The There is a continuous exchange
monitoring of target achieve- about common goals and contri-
ment and feedback on behavior butions from individual team
is given in bilateral discussions. members. There is a commit-
ment to regular feedback and
self-monitoring of the results
being achieved, personal behav-
ior, process quality, and cooper-
ation.
Error culture and conflict man- Managers should ensure that Managers ensure obligatory pro-
agement there are guidelines in place to cesses focused on learning from
prevent errors and conflicts. mistakes and productive conflict
They monitor compliance and resolution. They ensure these
decide on appropriate action processes are learned.
should a guideline be broken.
Conflicts are dealt with defen-
sively.
Source: Anja Hagedorn (2023), based on Freitag & Freitag (2016).
The above graphic illustrates how the role of a manager changes in the face of the agile
principles. The basic principle of agile management, which is to control and plan the proc-
ess as a team, means that the manager loses power and influence over their employees
and the tasks they must perform. When a company changes its organizational culture
71
from traditional management styles to an agile culture, this can lead to conflicts, disorien-
tation, and fear of loss among managers. They must grow into a changing role and adapt
to the new requirements. This includes internalizing agile management principles so they
can set an example for their team and provide support in case of problems and implemen-
tation difficulties. The challenge for managers here is the changing mindset that they
must support (Morisio, 2020).
A company rooted purely in agility represents the ideal image: The agile manager shapes
the framework conditions, acting as the interface between the team and central adminis-
trative tasks. In practice, variations and mixed forms can be seen, especially in companies
that still operate using traditional hierarchies.
The Fear of Losing of Power
As a company, it is better to strengthen the self-organization in times of highly dynamic

changing markets. However, some executives may fear losing power in the face of the new
managerial expectations. They may try to compensate for this with micromanagement
(Siedl & Nietschke, 2021). Micromanagement is characterized by excessive small-scale
planning, the controlling of work tasks, the unnecessary introduction and complication of
decision-making processes, and an increased need for information and coordination.
Micromanagement can be interpreted as an expression of fear and a lack of trust in subor-
dinate employees. It eats time and resources, promotes inflexible and lengthy planning
cycles, inhibits creativity, and undermines the self-confidence of employees. In organiza-
tions where micromanagement has been pervasive, employees often find themselves
unable to decide or implement ideas independently. The effects of micromanagement are
often manifested in weak decision-making, long planning cycles, lengthy rounds of meet-
ings, missed opportunities, and, in the worst cases, crises, since a company cannot act.
Thus, micromanagement inhibits agility and self-organization.
At the same time, a top-down management style and intensive planning have not always
been disadvantageous: In phases with a low frequency of change and in organizations
where quality and safety are of great importance, controlling employee work performance
is rational. In the past, employees earned their merits by working at a company for many
years and rising to a management position. These seasoned managers know the company
inside out and have detailed understanding of what needs to be done and when. However,
this is contrasted by today’s high staff turnover among employees and managers, as well
as the information overflow that makes it impossible for a single person (in this case, a
manager) to immediately identify, retrieve, and consider all the information. To counter-
act the fears and possible loss of control associated with the new role, managers should
be supported in developing an agile mindset as part of management development (Siedl
& Nietschke, 2021).
72
5.2 Concept and Principles of Agile
Leadership
Agile leadership means adapting quickly to changing conditions and market require-
ments. agile organizations are proactive and take the initiative in seizing opportunities as
they arise. Agile leadership aims to support employees in finding the best solutions to
challenges together in an interaction at eye level. Central values include an openness to
new things, communication, and flat hierarchies (Helmold, 2022).
Agile Leadership Principles
Leadership harmonizes external requirements with company processes, which should

align a focus on customer needs with the core competencies (Leppelmann & Leppelmann,
2021). The resulting leadership style is a practical implementation of the “shared leader-
ship” principle. Employees determine the process for handling tasks themselves, giving
them direct involvement in decision-making (Azadi & Gallardo, 2021). Considering the
breaking down of hierarchical structures, this decision-making can go so far that employ-
ees determine their boss (Lippold, 2019). The same applies to a leadership style called
“servant leadership.”
As well, a leader who pursues agile values cannot help but trust their employees’ abilities
and grant a certain amount of leeway in decisions regarding the best possible customer
interaction. This is because employees are generally close to the customer and therefore
learn very quickly through feedback what the customer’s needs are and how these can
best be considered.
Managers aren’t the only ones facing increased demands in terms of flexibility and dyna-
mism. Employees are often given a higher level of responsibility, which may result in pres-
sure to self-optimize and meet predefined goals. As a result, they have to be aware of their
own boundaries and set limits for themselves. For instance, they have to decide if they can
cope with their given tasks, and if so, how. Employees also have to figure out which tools
they need to fulfil their tasks and take initiative in requesting them. Ultimately, they must
recognize and evaluate their competencies and engage each other in feedback processes
(Lippold, 2019).
Not every employee is comfortable with the rising demand for self-leadership and self-
organization, because not all want to take on the responsibility and the associated pres-
sure to perform. It has been noted that heterogeneous teams require greater coordination
in decision-making processes (Lippold, 2019).
In the context of new agile leadership approaches, the interaction between managers and
team members increases, and communication becomes bidirectional compared to tradi-
tional models. This is also accompanied by increasing trust in employees and their abili-
ties. In contrast to traditional organizations, everyday work in agile companies is organ-
ized more democratically and in a less authoritarian manner (Lippold, 2019).
73
Figure 11: Components of Agile Leadership
Source: Anja Hagedorn (2023), based on Puckett & Neubauer (2018).
Agile Leadership Models
In practice, new leadership models are emerging from changing leadership principles.
Leadership becomes a service that supports the employee in doing their work. These
include the servant-leadership model, the empowerment-leadership model, and the host
leadership model (Azadi & Gallardo, 2021). The servant leadership model is based on the
assumption that a manager and their employees are on the same hierarchical level. This is
74
why servant leadership is described as “leadership at eye level.” Here, managers must
serve subordinates (Peters 2015; Greenleaf 1998). In studies, the servant leadership model
strongly influences employees’ job satisfaction (Çakmak et al., 2015).
Servant leadership is a radical approach that flips the traditional strucuture. A milder ver-
sion, known as empowerment leadership, also exists. Empowerment leadership’s core
concept is to strengthen employees’ psychological factors to help enable an autonomous
mode of working. Empowerment describes a psychological construct that changes
employees’ perception so that they have a positive attitude toward their work (Furtner &
Baldegger, 2016). This entails positive feedback, focusing on one’s strengths instead of
weaknesses, and allowing team members to state opinions and act on them. It also aims
to provide the necessary tools, information, and skills to enable employees to solve tasks
independently. To do so, a manager must evaluate the competencies of each team mem-
ber and give them appropriate tasks that allow them to use existing competencies or
develop new ones. For instance, a sales manager could assign one of their team members
to prepare sales pitches under the manager’s supervision and become a skilled expert.
Later, when the team member becomes experienced enough, they can hold pitches alone.
In empowerment leadership, employees perceive their actions as influencing their envi-
ronment. The result is that employees are able to find meaning in their work (Furtner &
Baldegger, 2016). Research shows that empowerment at work positively impacts work
quality, innovation ability, and motivation (Pieterse, et al., 2010). The concept of empow-
erment is also used in the leadership models of transactional and transformational leader-
ship.
Another leadership model based on agile values and principles is “host leadership”
(McKergow & Bailey, 2014). In this model, the leader acts in a role comparable to that of a
host. The following six functions are to be performed by the leader in this model.
75
Figure 12: Six Functions of an Agile Leader
Source: Anja Hagedorn (2023), based on Leppelmann and Leppelmann (2021).
In the initiator role, the manager takes a proactive approach by initiating new processes or
ideas. In contrast, a manager playing the role of an inviter should approach employees
and invite them to participate and make offers. As a space creator, the manager provides
physical and mental space for employees to work. In the role of a gatekeeper, the leader is
responsible for protecting boundaries and defining, to some extent, what is allowed in
terms of a company’s vision. As a connector, the manager creates connections and net-
works, then links people together to enable new ways of doing things. Finally, a manager
also has the role of co-participator, meaning they are present and participate in what is
happening (Leppelmann & Leppelmann, 2021).
5.3 Self-Management as a Prerequisite for

Agility
Agile leadership offers several advantages to an organization, which lie primarily in the
stronger customer centricity, speed, and adaptability to market changes. Agile leaders are
confronted with various new requirements when transforming a company towards agile
76
action, ranging from a new mindset about the understanding of leadership to new compe-
tencies required for agile leadership. This section will take a closer look at the competen-
cies required for agile leadership and the development of self-organization.
Self-Organization
The ability to self-organize is one of the core components of agile organizations. A manag-
er’s primary task is to create a supportive framework for their team to facilitate the self-
organization. It affects every person, structure, and process of an organization. Self-organ-
ization means that teams make decisions on planning, organizing, and prioritizing tasks
themselves, rather than receiving instructions from their line manager (Leppelmann &
Leppelmann, 2021).
The self-organization capability drives people and companies to act independently. This
assumes that employees have an ability to structure and organize their own work (Moran,
2016). The ability to self-organize in an agile context can be promoted at the individual
level and at the team or organizational level. A prerequisite for this is regular communica-
tion between the people involved.
Two clear advantages can be found in the self-organization of agile teams: First, decisions
at the operational level (especially in projects) can be made more quickly. Managers often
slow down decision-making processes because they have a high workload and many deci-
sions to review and complete. If teams are allowed to make decisions independently, they
can react more quickly to changes. Being experts in their field, they are usually better able
to assess the decision-making modalities; this eliminates the time required by a manager
to familiarize with small-scale issues. Second, project teams usually have a better under-
standing of customer needs than their managers. Leppelmann and Leppelmann (2021)
assume that agile teams make their decisions with a more robust customer focus.
Individual level
The ability to organize oneself is an essential component of entrepreneurial activity. Psy-

chologically, the ability to manage oneself is a result of intrinsic motivation, the conviction
that one is influencing their environment (self-empowerment), and the attribution that
events are the result of one’s own actions (internal locus of control). Without these psy-
chological drivers, however, people usually have no reason to become active.
Autonomy, the experience of perceiving one’s own needs and expressing them, is an abil-
ity not inherently present in everyone. For example, not everyone has an entrepreneurial
mindset; not every person is comfortable with taking risks. However, with patience and
motivation, an entrepreneurial mindset can be learned. The manager’s task is, therefore,
to check which team members’ skills can be developed or which team composition is the
most favorable for the task at hand. It is important to maintain an organizational culture
that allows mistakes and enables teams to learn from them. When it comes to the applica-
tion of agile methods, this principle is a must.
77
On an individual level, the manager can encourage the development of the ability to self-
organize to a certain extent. For example, they can ensure that all team members give an
equal amount of feedback, or look for tasks that match individual skills. The manager
then acts as a coach by discussing personal ambitions with each respective team member
and providing individual support.
Organizational level
Humans make up organizations. Therefore, it is only natural that their attitudes and
behavior also shape an organization’s culture, processes, and the way the organizations
respond to environmental changes. Thus, an organization becomes a living construct that
develops and changes over time just as its employees do. However, development and
response to challenges can only happen in a learning environment. This learning environ-
ment helps employees to develop necessary competencies as a response to change and
integrate them into the organization, through repetition, consolidation, and reflection. For
instance, repeated actions or tasks might become habitual for humans and standard on an
organizational level. Creating and maintaining this learning framework is the task of an
agile manager. The framework supports employees to apply agile principles and values in
their daily work. The work of Hoda et al. (2010), Morgan (1996), and Moran (2016) summa-
rizes four factors that contribute to self-organization in companies:
1. A definition of minimum requirements to lead a team and minor constraints that will
allow it to function smoothly.
2. The redundancy of functions allows one person to perform multiple functions, ena-
bling sharing and learning within the organization.
3. The adoption of the “learning to learn” mentality, which describes the team’s ability
to self-reflect and adapt to changes in internal and external environments.
4. A requirement for diversity to establish a match between the volatility of market seg-
ments and the organizational unit responsible for meeting their needs. Underlying
this is the idea that the adaptability of self-organizing teams provides a balance
between the two. Therefore, in very stable environments with low turnover, self-
organizing teams are not necessary.
A manager can take action to ensure principles are implemented. Similarly, at the meta-
level of teamwork, the manager is responsible for uniting the different interests of the
individuals in a team and ensuring that the group follows a self-imposed goal. This
requires the creation of a shared sense of purpose. Together with a common language,
both the manager and their team aim at organizing activities based on the division of
labor efficiently and effectively (Moran, 2016). Here, too, the manager must have coaching
skills, such as the ability to moderate, perceive the different moods in the group, and be
goal-oriented.
In addition, the manager has the task of creating an organizational framework for agile
teams. The task is to clarify how the team can act as quickly and autonomously as possi-
ble; it is also important to decide how individual team members interact with each other
(Leppelmann & Leppelmann, 2021).
78
This high degree of self-organization and the encouragement of further development by
the immediate work environment means that further development can be tailored to the
employee. However, the frequent change, especially of technical managers, can unsettle
employees and prevent further development if the various feedback is too heterogeneous.
To prevent this, it must be ensured that employees can manage themselves and, if neces-
sary, call on the support of managers or coaches as needed.
Agile Competencies
Managers are expected to promote self-organization in teams. To meet these require-

ments, they must have or develop the corresponding competencies. The competencies
that managers should have for their role as agile leaders are summarized in the graphic
below.
Table 2: New Leadership Competencies
Traditional competencies New Agile competencies
Perfection: A comprehensive analysis of a problem Promptness: To bring an idea to life quickly

and delivery of the highest quality to a customer
Leading a team: A focus on interorganizational pro- Thinking in networks: A focus on extra-organiza-

cesses tional stakeholders
Continuing successes: To apply a tried and tested Disruptive thinking: The regular challenging and
method to the future questioning of one’s own approaches
Set goals: To communicate own goals and values. Inspire: To communicate a value or purpose in an
The content is more important than the form encouraging manner. The content and form are
equally important.
Source: Anja Hagedorn (2023), based on Lippold (2019).
HAVE Model
There are concepts and models that assist with implementing agile management and
leadership. Consultants primarily develop these from everyday practical experience. This
course book presents the humble, adaptable, visionary, engaged (HAVE) model by Puckett
and Neubauer (2018) as a practical example of how agile leadership might be implemen-
ted. The model addresses the question of whether leaders have agile competencies and
how to support them in developing missing agile competencies. It is a model that can also
be used to analyze competency profiles and organizational development (Puckett & Neu-
bauer, 2018).
Puckett and Neubauer (2018) identify three behavior patterns relevant to the success of
agile leaders: attentiveness, informed decision making, and quick action (this leads to
decisiveness and imperfection; Puckett & Neubauer, 2018). Competencies can be devel-
oped hand in hand with these behavior patterns.
79
Figure 13: Success-Relevant Behaviors of Managers
Source: Anja Hagedorn (2023), based on Puckett & Neubauer (2018).
Acting quickly can be particularly beneficial in crises. This should not be done mindlessly,
but rather in conjunction with informed decision-making. In summary, the three behav-
iors, when combined, can lead to promising agile action. Furthermore, Puckett and Neu-
bauer (2018) describe four core competencies that managers must fulfil to implement
agile leadership, including the following:
• humility and openness to feedback

• adaptability
• a visionary approach with a focus on long-term goals
• an engagement with the work and the willingness to interact
The HAVE model can now be divided into two sides: the “modesty” and “commitment”
components. Modesty represents a value expressed in particular in dealing with the team
or employees. At the same time, commitment is a value exemplified by managers when
they are strongly motivated to reach corporate goals (Puckett & Neubauer, 2018). Based on
their model, the authors propose various measures to examine and, if necessary, further
develop these competencies.
SUMMARY
The unit has shown the various demands that managers face when
implementing agile leadership. They often not only have to adapt them-
selves to agile values and principles, but also ensure, particularly in het-
80
erogeneous teams, that employees feel comfortable with the principles
and see them as a basis for work. Sources of conflict can quickly arise,
especially when transforming a company with a long history into an at
least partially agile company. Therefore, the manager – as the direct
contact person for agile teams – has an important role to play. They
ensure the appropriate agile setting, support the team in difficult situa-
tions and serve as a mouthpiece both to customers and within the com-
pany. For the organization, they serve as implementers for the organiza-
tional culture. For other leaders, they serve as enablers.
This also increases the amount of coordination and communication

required. Sometimes the executive experiences a loss of personal
authority and power when demoted to tasks that would have been dele-
gated to subordinates. This can lead to internal conflicts within the exec-
utive that inhibit agile working, especially if the executive has served in
strong hierarchies for many years. The associated resistance must be
reflected on and analyzed independently or with a coach.
81
UNIT 6
AGILE PLANNING
STUDY GOALS
– differentiate between agile and non-agile strategizing processes.

– describe the principles of agile planning.
– apply steps to develop an agile strategy.
– evaluate an agile plan.
6. AGILE PLANNING
Case Study
GoodEducation is a company offering continuing education and retraining for adults. The
company is certified in the European Union (EU) as a training provider. It also offers, in
cooperation with authorities and state institutions, training in the form of in-class courses
and live online learning. GoodEducation offers training courses at different levels, with
different time frames and lengths in various fields. The company offers over 1,800 differ-
ent courses, such as nursing and training in various software programs (e.g., Adobe InDe-
sign and Python). These must be recertified at regular intervals. This requires adapting to
current topics and conditions in the various courses and developing new teaching meth-
ods.
The alignment of all 1800 courses to customer needs and market conditions is small-scale
and time-consuming. To implement the regularly recurring revision effort quickly and flex-
ibly, the product development team works using agile methods. Since no team can keep
track of all the issues, the manager depends on self-organized action and exchange
among the team members.
Therefore, to maintain a customer orientation, the team must develop a mechanism to

exchange ideas. Since the product development team at GoodEducation Ltd. is spread
across various locations and works virtually, physical separation is another challenge that
must be overcome to maintain effective exchange. Given the fast-moving topics, semi-
annual meetings are too infrequent to keep up with the changes.
However, employees must consider the various trends and future topics in their regular
strategy meetings. For this reason, the team has decided to establish a backlog to collect
emerging issues and resulting tasks. During their monthly virtual agile planning work-
shops and semiannual face-to-face strategy-meetings, the team discusses when to
address the backlog. If a new trend arises, it will be presented and discussed. In this proc-
ess, the strategic relevance for the company will be examined. For this purpose, employ-
ees from other management areas are included and can then pass on the product devel-
opment topics as multipliers. If the team concludes that a strategic relevance is given, the
topic is further processed in the company’s strategy committee. This committee, in turn,
includes the product development team. Together, the strategic significance is worked out
there, as well as a plan for how product development can contribute to utilizing the new
topic on an agile basis. In most cases, a new training program is set up and certified at
short notice and implemented as a pilot program.
By working this way, the product development team expanded the course offering by 30
additional courses within one year, 21 of which were held. The participant limit for run-
ning a pilot course is eight people. The resulting sales growth was an impressive 46 per-
cent within one year.
84
6.1 Concept and Principles of Agile
Planning
Agile planning requires a unique approach due to the basic principles of agility. Flexibility
and a sufficient time buffer are two aspects that must be considered: Given a continuously
changing corporate environment, planning processes are an ever-present task for an agile
company that wants to adapt to evolving needs with its customer focus.
Research
In management research, some models and theories already consider the volatility of
organizational conditions and have developed concepts to deal with them. These are the
resource-based view (RBV) and the theory of dynamic capabilities (Attar & Abdul-Kareem,
2020; Easterby-Smith et al., 2009; Schreyögg & Kliesch, 2005; Teece, 2007; Teece et al.,
2016; Zollo & Winter, 2002).
In the RBV, the existence of a company is attributed to its resources. One of the distin-
guishing factors among companies is how they combine and use their resources. Depend-
ing on this, a company can develop competitive advantages. To do this, it needs core com-
petencies that are unique to the company and which promote selling goods and products
on the market. By going back to the organization of internal processes and developing
them further, a company can develop its core competencies and enhance its competitive
advantage (Barney & Arikan, 2006; Kraaijenbrink et al., 2010; Peteraf, 1993; Wernerfelt,
1984).
Since competencies come from people and encompass motivation, skills, and knowledge
(Erpenbeck, 2006), it makes sense that people, as the most critical resource in the context
of RBV, must be supported by managers to develop them. The resulting focus is on people
and their needs, as an agile principle enables the theory to be connected to the agile way
of working. The return to core competencies in the company and the focus of manage-
ment activities on maintenance and further development enables fast and adequate
action in volatile situations.
Another theory is dynamic capabilities (Teece et al., 2016). Dynamic capabilities represent
a type of meta-competence that allows a firm to integrate, develop, and adapt external
and internal resources and competencies (Teece 2010; Teece et al., 1997). The goal is to
adapt to rapidly changing business environments (Teece 2010). Thus, the theory of
dynamic capabilities aims at the problem that agile transformation wants to implement.
In this context, dynamic capabilities give an organization the flexibility and stamina nee-
ded to cope with crises (Moran, 2016). However, both theories and models are accused of
lacking explanatory approaches and practical support for developing the competencies
they address.
85
Practice
Agile principles aim to assume responsibility for society as a whole (Laloux, 2018). The
goal of an agile company is to generate benefits that are meaningful and sustainable as
opposed to only maximizing profits (Kahra, 2022). Here, employees are solely guided by
the company’s vision, them autonomous. By contrast, non-agile companies usually work
with strict and detailed orders (Kahra, 2022).
From this vision, decentralized strategies are developed in the respective teams that aim
to achieve the most significant possible contribution to fulfilling the corporate vision. In
this way, the agile organization achieves a high degree of autonomy and self-organization
(Kahra, 2022).
6.2 Agile Planning

Strategy This section discusses the development of an agile strategy and then focuses on imple-
a specific plan to achieve menting it in the context of agile planning. Unlike non-agile companies, agile companies
one or more goals that
can be achieved in the involve people outside, top management in strategy development (Holbeche, 2018;
short- or long-term Pidun, 2019). This is only logical given the fundamental agile principles, which aim to
ensure that basic decisions about work processes are made by agile teams to achieve a
greater, more significant focus and place people at the center of the work. For agile com-
panies, strategy development is an experimental process that focuses on idea develop-
ment in the sense of a trial-and-error approach. This includes exploring ideas, harvesting
profit in the context of idea exploitation, adapting the concept based on customer feed-
back, and developing other new ideas (Worley et al., 2014). A classic strategy development
process is described below to clarify what constitutes agile strategy development and
what the differentiates it from previous approaches.
Traditional Strategy Development
In management theory, various basic approaches exist to develop a strategy and its imple-
mentation. As a rule, this comprises the identification of problems or issues that are rele-
vant to a company, diagnosing the problem, developing solutions, and implementing sol-
utions (Moran, 2016). Developing a strategy to steer the company or its subdivisions is a
task for management and executives, who act as subject matter experts (Mussnig, 2007).
This is the first significant difference in the agile organization. Management is responsible
for the fundamental orientation of an organization, and thus, the (re)organization, plan-
ning, and control of strategic and operational changes.
An ideal strategy development process consists of various individual steps. These usually
begin with the definition and delimitation of the problem (Sternad, 2015). In the case of
realigning corporate strategies, this can be derived from the corporate mission statement
or company vision. Based on this, questions are derived from the problem definition to
use as guiding themes for analyses (Ehringer, 2020).
86
A distinction can be made between internal business analysis and external business analy-
sis. The external business analysis focuses on competitors, potential clients, and anything
that is relevant to the company’s environment (regulations, political decision-making,
market developments, disruptions, innovations, etc.) The internal business analysis refers
to the company’s resources, competencies, and values, focusing on cost and differentia-
tion advantages. Based on the analysis results, strategies are developed, evaluated in
terms of their feasibility and viability, and the most suitable one is selected. In the final
step, the preferred method is implemented in the company using project groups, depend-
ing on the problem, and its implementation is monitored to achieve the desired goals
(Sternad, 2015; Ehringer, 2020).
87
Figure 14: The Ideal Typical Strategy Development Process
Source: Anja Hagedorn (2023), based on Sternad (2015).
88
In addition to the above-mentioned ideal process, there are various instruments for carry-
ing out analyses within the context of the strategy. It is important to note that the list in
this section is not exhaustive and the topic can only be examined superficially. Two very
well-known analyses are the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT)
analysis and the competitive or Porter’s (1985) industry structure analysis. One possible
tool for conducting business environment analysis is political, economic, social, techno-
logical, environmental, and legal (PESTEL) analysis (Ehringer, 2020; Farmer & Richman,
1965; Fahey &d Narayanan, 1986). The holistic analysis option, target/actual analysis, is
explained in more detail below.
Target/actual analysis determines an organization’s status quo about a given topic.

Options for possible situation outcomes can be developed using scenario analysis. In a
target/actual analysis, the current state of a subject or situation is compared with the
desired target state. This involves asking how the company can get from its current situa-
tion to a target. For example, the target/actual analysis can provide information on how a
mechanical engineering company can increase its sales in a particular business area, such
as automation. Revenue is also analyzed in the context of the production processes, and
ABC analysis from the marketing department can categorize the products with the highest
sales.
After reviewing the numbers, a decision can be made in order to reach a sales target for
one of the products, for example, a 20 percent increase with product C. The following tar-
get analysis asks how the desired 20 percent increase can be achieved. The company
could open up new international sales markets, or change the product characteristics to
give it more uses. Adjustments to pricing would also be a solution. These potential
answers are followed by a scenario analysis, where optional developments of the desired
goal achievement are compared with the actual market conditions. Competitors, trends,
politics, economic development, legal regulations, and raw material availability are con-
sidered. It could be that in scenario A, economic expansion is inhibited and business cus-
tomers reduce their production to save resources. This would mean that product C is only
demanded in specific industries. Scenario B could, for example, be that demand in emerg-
ing countries grows disproportionately because environmental protection measures are
implemented there. In the scenario analysis, the likelihood that respective scenarios
actually occur is also estimated. Based on the scenarios developed, concrete steps can
now be worked out to fulfill the overall objective of increasing product C’s sales be 20 per-
cent.
When it comes to creating and implementing strategies, there is no one-fits-all solution.

Although classic approaches aim to assist with implementation, the question and the cus-
tomer’s wishes should always be the first consideration in practice. The appropriate meth-
odology should be selected based on this and, if necessary, adapted. Professional consul-
tants, therefore, first discuss the customer’s wishes and problems before selecting the
most suitable method. The industry, as well as the size and maturity level of the company,
are also important considerations that factor into this selection.
89
Agile Strategy Development
In agile companies, strategy development proceeds according to agile principles. That is

why traditional strategy processes might not be appropriate. For example, classical indus-
trial organization theory does not sufficiently take into account uncertainty resulting from
volatility; the premises of the model assumes a stable environment (Moran, 2016). When
choosing a suitable strategy development concept it is, therefore, essential to consider
whether its fundamental assumptions fit with the current sitation.
Since agile organizations have given themselves the mission to enter into a continuous
change process for the best possible satisfaction of customer needs, it is only reasonable
that strategy development is an ongoing process. Strategies can be developed in the con-
text of small monthly or quarterly meetings (“quick review”), where the plan for imple-
menting strategies is developed, rather than in a large, infrequent strategy process. The
plan for implementing these strategies is developed in these meetings as well (Pidun,
2019). The goal is not to forecast the future in its completeness but to develop appropriate
plans and prepare for critical situations (Pidun, 2019). A monthly review of the strategy
functions as a quick evaluation of the current situation. It can also be used to recognize
early warning signs and react to them. Recurring strategic issues can also be discussed in
regular meetings and undergo iterative processing and maturation (Pidun, 2019).
90
Figure 15: Strategy Development in Comparison to Non-Agile Organizations
Source: Anja Hagedorn (2023), based on Pidun (2019).
91
The objectives and key results (OKRs) method can be used to derive goals from the corpo-
rate vision in an agile organization. While the objectives describe what is to be achieved,
key results mark the individual steps that will be taken to achieve it. OKRs are developed
jointly in the team and considers agile principles. Thus, the purpose of the company is
cemented in its objectives. At the same time, the manager helps to set the focus and to
control and implement goal achievement, relevance, and direction (Bock et al., 2021).
6.3 New Planning Methods

Traditional management tools for planning and implementing strategy can often be
applied to agile management as well. However, when selecting the tools, a consideration
should be made about whether the underlying principles are compatible. For example, a
planning tool is unsuitable if it creates excessive bureaucracy or if the processes lead away
from self-organization and team autonomy. For instance, a planning tool is not useful for
implementing agile strategies if it implements old hierarchical structures.
Schnell and Schnell (2019) present some instruments and tools that increase the commu-
nication flow within the company, promote exchange between employees, and strengthen
their decision-making ability. One tool is the “decision-making knowledge instrument,”
which helps implement clear decision-making processes in the team. This method con-
sists of six steps (Schnell & Schnell 2019):
1. Definition of the decision and its options for action

2. Definition and contextualization of the goal
3. Determation of the scope of the decision
4. Development of options for action
5. Evaluation and condensation of options
6. Making the decision
Another straightforward approach is the plan, do, check, act (PDCA) cycle, also known as
the Deming cycle, which is a concept of quality management (Deming, 1982; Shewhart
1938; Shewhart & Deming, 1986). Since it can be used independently of large overarching
tasks, it is suitable for agile settings. In addition, an iterative way of working is possible
with this instrument.
The PDCA cycle is suitable for agile working because it is self-organized in the team rather
than at management level. The tool also allows for a continuous process of adaptation
and improvement, making it compatible with agile values (Bertagnolli, 2020). The con-
stant pursuit of improvement is supported by agility in the context of regular reflection,
and it also enables iterative work. In the course of repeating processes, outcomes can be
constantly optimized. This applies to iterative processes, such as in innovation, product
development, and quality management. Moreover, the PDCA cycle enhances rapid learn-
ing and testing, and also fosters feedback within the team. For use in the agile setting,
however, the PDCA model should focus on outcomes over processes (Schnell & Schnell,
2019).
92
Figure 16: PDCA (Deming) Cycle
Source: Anja Hagedorn (2023), based on Bertagnolli (2020).
93
Other in-depth models can alos be used to plan, such as the define, measure, analyze,
improve, control (DMAIC) cycle from the Six Sigma quality management method, which
builds on the PDCA cycle (Waurick, 2014).
SUMMARY
This unit covered the transformation of an agile strategy into an agile
planning process. Additionally, instruments and methods were
explained that support the development of a strategy and its transfor-
mation into a plan. Overall, an agile strategy process and agile planning
follow the same principles as agile management. Customer focus, self-
organization, autonomy, democracy, and flexibility are important values
in the agile canon that must be considered when developing an agile
strategy.
Agile planning is also based on the above-mentioned values. Moreover,

the planning process highlights the velocity and flexibility in implement-
ing strategies. When a strategy has been developed and adopted, agile
development can be applied for its implementation: The agile team sets
the framework for implementation. They prioritize the subsequent tasks
independently and define when to take each step. Strategy implementa-
tion can then be monitored through Sprint Reviews on a regular basis. In
doing so, the agile strategy process can be changed quickly and easily
according to upcoming events and external pressure.
94
UNIT 7
AGILE STAFF DEPLOYMENT
STUDY GOALS
– discuss how agile management impacts human resource management (HRM).

– differentiate between non-agile and agile HRM.
– apply different stages of agile HRM.
7. AGILE STAFF DEPLOYMENT
Case Study
Consulting company Soleria has been operating for 20 years. Beginning as a spin-off from
an information technology (IT) company, it provides consulting and IT services for the
banking, insurance, aviation, public, and IT industry sectors. The company has 6,000
employees divided into small regional groups across 11 European countries.
Employees temd to work in small teams at IT companies, and employees may be organ-
ized into different teams depending on their area of expertise. For human resource man-
agement (HRM), this poses a difficulty in keeping track of staff deployment. It relies heavily
on information from employees about which projects they are involved in. This informa-
tion can also be held by the group leader, who then passes it on to the human resources
(HR) department. Group members regularly meet as a “home group” to report on current
activities and challenges. The company also has “specialist” or “project groups,” where
employees work together on different projects across teams. Depending on the intensity
of the project, these groups meet briefly on a daily or weekly basis to report on the spe-
cific status of work and address challenges. In these meetings, HR staff play a supervisory
role, acting only in the event of a bottleneck, if there is a training need, or to handle pay-
roll accounting.
Staff deployment is usually not organized by the HR department, but rather by specialist
departments and division heads. For instance, if a new project begins and there is still a
need for employees, managers can use a “talent pool” in which all consultants are listed
with their competencies and the projects they have worked on so far. They can filter the
most suitable employees from the database using keywords and availabile data.
When new employees join the company, they undergo an onboarding phase organized by
the respective group. Every employee is provided with a mentor, who accompanies them
for the first few months. In addition, new employees are familiarized with the culture dur-
ing onboarding, and the basic principles of collaboration in projects are clarified.
In recent years, Soleria AG has increasingly moved towards location-independent working,

as the consultants are usually off-site at the client’s premises anyway. Available “bench
time” (i.e., time between projects), can be organized by employees. There is no obligation
to be on-site at one of the branches. For the most part, a training program is completed
during this time and employees arrange themselves in target discussions with the man-
ager. As a result of the location independence, the HR department is even more depend-
ent on the cooperation of the consultants, who divide their time themselves. Only the
results from the working time are reported to the HR department or the group supervisor.
Agile management demands a unique approach regarding strategy development, plan-

ning, and project management, and (perhaps most importantly) skilled labor to cope with
the daily challenges of agile work in volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous (VUCA)
environments. In the context of the every day, agile working means that tasks can change
96
at short notice, the content focus of work shifts, new tasks are added and prioritized, and
entire work packages are deferred. Therefore, agile workers must be flexible in solving a
broad spectrum of daily tasks.
This unit investigates staff deployment in agile settings.
7.1 Concept and Classification in the Staff

Management Process
Recruiting
Traditional HRM divides the process of recruitment into different management aspects
that follow the candidate’s journey. The staffing process starts with recruiting, which also
includes employer branding. Recruiting, or the targeted selection of the required work-
force, can take place regularly or on demand. In addition, recruitment includes preparing
and disseminating job offers on the appropriate channels. To achieve this, a job profile
must first be created in which the requirements of the position are defined in terms of the
knowledge and skills needed from candidates. This is often done in collaboration with the
responsible specialist departments.
The result is an advertisement containing a job profile for the corresponding vacant posi-
tion, based on the organizational chart and functional descriptions. In relation to agile
organizations, this process is confronted with a challenge: How should job offers be for-
mulated when the field of activity is volatile and characterized by changing requirements?
In IT, for example, it has proven beneficial to name one or more core competencies as
requirements relevant to the different tasks one will face on the job. However, when
describing the vacant job position, it might be difficult to narrow down specific tasks. This
result is a generalized descriptions, which can make it challenging for the applicant to
understand whether the job fits their competencies. For this reason, some agile compa-
nies today opt to omit job descriptions and competence profiles: Instead, the develop-
ment and deployment of the respective employee are made dependent on personal
strengths (Edelkraut & Mosig, 2019). Agile organizations will often rely on team members
to help them understand the main aspects of job-related tasks (Rahn, 2018; Marinkovic,
2021). Thus, the development of job descriptions result either in general depictions of the
job or in specific, “hands-on” characterizations. In either case, there is less focus on the
use of standardized functional descriptions.
Another task is the design of a recruitment process that includes the application, screen-
ing, and selection of potential candidates for the vacant position. The latter is known as
“aptitude diagnostics” and includes a set of quantitative and qualitative psychological
instruments. In agile organizations, applied aptitude diagnostic tools, such as case studies
or sample work, concentrate on the fit of agile values and competencies (Rahn, 2018).
97
Job applications are often submitted via an online platform and preselected automati-
cally. This facilitates the screening process. In addition to the application, job screening
may also include assessment centers or work samples. The interview is an important part
of the screening process, where the candidate can get to know the employer and the
employer can evaluate the candidates’ suitability. In this context, recruiting supports the
preparation and execution of interviews, which are often conducted by specialist depart-
ments. Good recruiting is, therefore, a valuable task, as it ensures a steady flow of the
required human resources.
After having selected the best candidate, companies usually create an onboarding proc-
ess. In this process, the new employee will be familiarized with a company’s most impor-
tant functions, along with the organizational structure, culture, and issues. The onboard-
ing process marks a crossover of HR functions; consequently, some companies categorize
it as part of recruiting, while others consider it as training and development. In truly agile
organizations, no onboarding process exists because there is often no generalizable, for-
mal process or structure for the new employee to know about: Instead, a mentor is imple-
mented, who functions as networking partner and supporter for the new employee, help-
ing them to find their way through the company’s organization and culture (Rahn, 2018).
Employer Branding
Employer branding includes marketing and public relations (PR) activities, which use their
company’s vision and mission to make the organization competitive (i.e., a desireable
place to work). Employer branding can be done on the internet, using search engine mar-
keting or social media marketing, or offline by way of printed media, jobs fairs, and hiring
events. Also, employer branding activities stress the specialty of working for a particular
company by highlighting special benefits. For instance, a tech company, like Google or
Amazon, is likely to position itself as a highly innovative, leading e-commerce or IT com-
pany. This will be shown in every aspect of the organization’s presence, including in HRM.
Google, for instance, completes that image by offering special working conditions and an
innovative working space at their national headquarters. When it comes to employer
branding, the company becomes the customer and, therefore, the main focus. However,
applying agile practices may come with strings attached if the first round of candidates are
not suitable for the vacant job (Rahn, 2018).
Current employees play a major role in the selection of new hires. While the early stages of
a recruiting process are executed by the HR department, in agile organizations, recruiting
is often done by employees. Identifying potential candidates, known as “active sourcing,”
is also often done by employees. This implements both the value of self-organized work
and the need for personal development to master communication processes associated
with hiring and training. As a prerequisite, employees then need to be involved in personal
planning processes and provided with relevant information. Therefore, the transparency
and flow of information from the HR department to employees is crucial. (Rahn, 2018).
98
Performance Management
Another critical part of HRM is performance management. Performance refers to goal-ori-

ented task solving within a predefined period and goals. Performance management con-
tains all measures that help an employee achieve more at work. There are feedback and
development meetings, where personal goals in the daily work are set. While performance
management can be carried out on an individual level or within the organization, the term
is usually used in the context of individual behavior. Therefore, the development of a
standardized process is necessary (Rahn, 2018).
Regarding performance management, it should be noted that the nature of agile working
makes continuous performance assessment difficult. This is because consistent specifica-
tions concerning the employee competences are not always available. In other words,
changing tasks are accompanied by different requirements, which are sometimes organi-
zational in nature and characterized by a high fluctuation of tasks and speed of change.
Agile companies rarely define specific performance goals anymore; these definitions are
replaced by team goals. However, on team level, performance metrics are drastically
reduced, simplified, or replaced by peer feedback instruments (Edelkraut & Mosig, 2019;
Marinkovic, 2021).
Despite its challenging nature, many agile companies continue to practice performance
management, which is used to shape career paths and compensation. Other agile organi-
zations have abolished performance management, implementing a feedback culture rely-
ing on a continuous exchange between managers and employees, or between employees
themselves (Rahn, 2018; Edelkraut & Mosig, 2019). Feedback between employees is regu-
larly implemented as a part of team processes. Another option is the use of objectives and
key results (OKRs), which can be used to plan key performance indicators (KPIs) in agile
environments (Marinkovic, 2021).
Overall, agile organizations have a trend towards reducing fixed performance standards.
However, forms of performance measurement can vary depending on the agile maturity
level and the company area. For example, in divisions with low agile maturity, there may
be a greater need for measuring performance via fixed standards, while employees in
business units with a higher level of maturity provide feedback to each other in a self-
organized manner. This does not mean that there is no performance monitoring at all.
Rather, this is mostly implemented through social control. An alternative solution can be
that teams, together with their manager, develop their own mechanisms for performance
measurement and control (Rahn, 2018).
Training & Development
Another major task within HRM is the development of skills and competencies among
employees, usually called “people development,” “talent management,” or “training and
development.” Tasks within this field deal with the planning, coordination, and/or imple-
mentation of training based on the career level, work tasks, and interests. Training can be
delivered through different methods (e.g., talks, presentations, workshops, and BarCamp)
99
and in a variety of settings (e.g., online, offline, and outdoor). The intensity of the training
varies based on the type; for example, there is studying, as well as group, individual, and
on-the-job training.
The content and goals of each training type differ. A distinction can be made between spe-
cialized training, soft-skill training, and individual development through coaching. Fur-
thermore, training can be delivered for an individual topic or continuously over a certain
period. The latter occurs in the development of managers or when workers are given the
chance to develop an expert career path. Usually, training is planned and implemented in
coordination with goals set by performance management and recruiting. This helps to
ensure employees are supported to develop necessary task-related goals based on their
job description. People development will generally involve a set of external suppliers who
implement the training for the HR department.
In contrast, agile personnel development does not require job or function descriptions.
Instead, it focuses on the requirements currently arising in connection with the work tasks
(Rahn, 2018). As a result, HR development is becoming less rigid and more flexible in the
further development of its employees. Nevertheless, the careers of individual employees
will be considered in further training, especially if it exhausts the further training budget.
Few agile companies rely on fixed career development plans. Exceptions are mostly large
companies with hierarchies that still partially exist. Here, specialist career paths are made
possible in addition to management career paths (Rahn, 2018).
A flexible workforce that can adapt to changing requirements while remaining motivated
to collaborate and possess a broad spectrum of competencies is required to meet the day-
to-day work demands of agility (Edelkraut & Mosig, 2019). Agile workers should be willing
to continuously learn new skills at short notice to handle new, unprecedented tasks or sit-
uations. In further training, the teaching of social competencies is seen as more important
than technical and methodological skills. Agile companies, therefore, often rely on short-
term, situation-specific employee training (Rahn, 2018; Edelkraut & Mosig, 2019).
In his survey, Rahn (2018) identifies a gradation in the share of responsibility for the selec-
tion and implementation of training courses, depending on the maturity of the agile
organization. Not surprisingly, it was found that the more strongly an organization has
implemented agile principles, the higher the level of autonomous training. In very agile
companies, employees can decide on their further training within the respective budget.
By contrast, a non-agile organization arranges further training according to a career or
position. In the case of a moderately pronounced level of maturity, further training plan-
ning is usually carried out in consultation with the manager after the employee has taken
the initiative to inquire about it. Other factors must, therefore, be considered in the imple-
mentation of further training planning, which are based on mutual dependencies (e.g., the
organizational structure and leadership style).
Continuous analysis of needs is necessary to meet the resulting workforce demand. By

means of employee-oriented communication, ad-hoc topics or new training needs can be
identified. In this context, it might make sense to issue an employee survey focusing on
100
potential competencies that may be required in the future. Due to their proximity to the
customer and market, members of agile teams should only be included in planning when
a survey queries trends in personnel development.
An underlying mindset of agile employees is called the “growth mindset,” where employ-
ees are encouraged to develop and to grow. Generally, HR departments are less active in
the role of personnel development. Instead, employees use their own initiative to self-
organize and take advantage of further training opportunities. In organizations with a high
degree of agile maturity, the HR department has a mediating and coordinating role at
most. The demand for agile leadership training and coaching of agile leaders might
increase in mature agile organizations (Rahn, 2018).
Staff Renumeration
Another field of HRM is staff remuneration. This includes s payroll management and the
management of additional monetary benefits, such as bonuses. This area is strongly regu-
lated by local, regional, or national laws that define taxes and social insurance. It also
depends on the information of recruiting when it comes to negotiating and fixing the mon-
etary compensation. Payroll management must also handle different categories of
employees, such as long-term and short-term employees, freelancers, and interns. Free-
lancers and other types of short-term contractors play an important role in agile environ-
ments by enabling an organization to compensate for a high workload that occurs on
short notice.
Considering the transformation of an organization from a traditional, hierarchical struc-

ture (non-agile companies) to a company with an Agile mindset and values, Rahn and Ale-
weld (2018) propose a four-level model that takes a gradual approach to achieving an
agile compensation system:
1. The first level is non-agile. Salary decisions are made by a management board based
on criteria, for example, the levels of responsibility, competence, experience, and
benchmarks.
2. The second level is when salary adjustments must be justified and negotiated in front
of your own team. Usually, a percentage increase, not an absolute increase, is dis-
cussed.
3. The third level is when temporary allowances are granted if specific tasks and roles
are assumed on a temporary basis.
4. The fourth level is fully agile. Employees set their own salary, which must then be con-
firmed by their colleagues.
In practice, this structure appears in many mixed forms. In agile business units, the model
in which the team is used as a reference point for salary development is more common.
101
7.2 Agile Strategic Workforce Planning
Agile principles have a tremendous effect on the organization of the workforce. In an agile
organization, principles of agility are enforced. Customer centricity and self-organization
principles have an especially high impact on strategic workforce planning.
Customer centricity is a key value, emphasizing that all tasks being solved focus on the
customer’s needs. This includes a thorough investigation of customer demands and con-
tinuous requests, as well as an analysis of customer feedback. For agile workforce plan-
ning, this principle can be challenging: Customer needs can change over time or the cus-
tomer might not know what they want. It then becomes the agile team’s task to help the
client to define what they are looking for.
In agile settings, customer centricity can result in unforeseen changes to plans or staff
supply and demand. Therefore, it is necessary to plan accordingly, by setting either buffer
time, which may be costly for the organization, or involving an additional external work-
force to compensate for the short-term need.
A delay in tasks or project deliverables can also be compensated by workers taking on sev-
eral projects. In this scenario, planning skills are necessary to align tasks with deadlines.
This also includes communication skills to coordinate potential challenges and keep the
team motivated. Daily stress can become overwhelming and lead to illness, especially in a
multi-project setting. Therefore, a company should include health management to reduce
stress.
Another principle is the self-organization of individuals and teams. This arises from cus-
tomer centricity, because it is assumed that in a liberal, people-centered, purpose-driven
organization, employees in direct contact with them. The work organization of agile man-
agement results in dissolving traditional organizational structures, which are replaced by
agile structures.
In an agile setting, tasks may change suddenly and frequently: They may become obsolete
or suddenly require greater attention than initially expected. If classic structures no longer
prevail, it becomes difficult for HR departments to maintain an overview of who is doing
what. For agile work, this may have unprecedented results, such as when the workforce is
poorly planned or is unavailable due to long breaks from work. However, in the context of
an agile company, employees must decide for themselves when they need further support
and report this to the HR department. Thismeans that employees are expected to assume
a high degree of responsibility in an agile setting.
Since self-organization is one of the guiding principles of work organization in the agile
environment, the control of the HR department in planning employee deployment is
largely eliminated. This is, however, not possible in all business areas of a company. A min-
imum level of coordination should take place in areas that represent a critical survival fac-
tor for the company, for example in the measurement of the functionality of meshes, an
area where failure must be ensured at all times to avoid high costs.
102
In the agile setting, team composition among projects can vary greatly. For agile workflow
planning, this affords high flexibility and continuous monitoring of available human
resources. Fortunately, agile management heavily relies on self-organization. In the con-
text of workflow planning, this means that team members organize themselves in and out-
side of projects. Employees are often encouraged to develop new projects themselves or
to join new project teams independently.
Unfortunately, there is very little written about workflow management in the literature on
agile HRM. This makes sense, as workflow management is carried out by the employees
and team members, rather than the HR department. Hence, only a few examples exist to
advise on how agile workflow management can be developed (Marinkovic, 2021).
Figure 17: Challenges of Agile Workflow Management
In summary, there is no ideal type for agile strategic workflow management, as numerous
framework conditions must be considered for its development. At the same time, agile
workflow management faces several challenges that need to be taken into account when
implementing agile HRM. These are summarized again in the graphic above. A fully or par-
tially agile company will have to face issues and develop individual solutions. Solutions
for the above challenges are adapted to the respective culture, strategy, and working con-
ditions of the company and must, therefore, always be considered holistically and individ-
ually.
103
7.3 Framework Conditions for Agile Staff
Deployment
Integrated HRM has been introduced to manage both agile and non-agile companies . This
has created a framework that leads to the efficient implementation of both classic and
agile HRM in accordance with the respective company divisions (Marinkovic, 2021). How-
ever, the application of integrated HRM depends on the development status of the HRM
and the business model a company follows. Using a matrix, where the two extremes of
classic and agile HRM form the divergent poles, five combinations of HRM can be derived
(Stock-Homburg et al., 2016):
• Non-agile, non-performance-oriented HR: There is no particular affinity shown for

either agile or classic performance-based HR approaches, but the activity focus is on
the administration of HR tasks.
• Performance-oriented HRM: This is based on a Tayloristic understanding of work. It
aims to achieve economies of scale with the aid of appropriate HR and is characteristic
of companies in the manufacturing industry.
• Agility-oriented HR: This supports self-organized HR teams to realize different HR tasks.
Employee flow and reward systems aligned with agile principles are used for this pur-
pose. It is used primarily in start-ups and IT companies.
• Juggling HRM: This form of HR recognizes the importance of integrated HR manage-
ment and strives to promote both traditional and agile approaches. Since full integra-
tion has not yet been achieved, HRM is in a transitional phase.
• Integrated HRM: This includes HR tools from agile and non-agile settings available
throughout an enterprise. They offer self-organized units a choice for their preferred
working model.
In addition to the specific HR conditions that must be taken into account when applying
agile HRM, the overall strategy of an organization must be respected as well. The compa-
ny’s strategy provides important key points when implementing agile principles in both
the company and the HR department. If the agile principles cannot be implemented or do
not match the organization’s strategy, agile HRM is unlikely. However, in the transforma-
tion from a traditional to agile company, single departments may pilot agile culture. This
leads to agile HRM practices.
SUMMARY
HRM has a huge impact on the implementation of agile values and prin-
ciples, and, thus, on a company’s transformation into an agile organiza-
tion. New hires must be selected based on the sharing of an agile mind-
set and competencies. Traditional values and mindsets in HR might
hinder agile organizations from reaching a fully mature agile state. When
considering the implementation of agile principles in HR, it should be
taken into account that not every task or function can be transformed
104
into agile HRM. Some functions might not work within an agile scheme,
such as payroll, whereas others, such as training and development, fit
more naturally (Edelkraut & Mosig, 2019).
The application of agile principles in HRM can significantly accelerate

the development of new HR systems and tools. However, these often
conflict with lengthy processes lengthy and, therefore, slow down up the
agile transformation. These topics are subject to co-determination and
legal framework conditions (Edelkraut & Mosig, 2019).
105
UNIT 8
CONTROL IN AGILE ORGANIZATIONS
STUDY GOALS
– describe how controlling can support agile transformation.

– implement goals on the basis of objectives and key results (OKRs).
– select tools using the Cynefin-framework.
8. CONTROL IN AGILE ORGANIZATIONS
Case Study
The company DataMgm develops data analyses for various project fields. Their range of
analyses extends from marketing, including growth hacking, to financial analyses, to fore-
casts for divisions and for entire companies. The company has locations in 13 countries,
including Brazil, the Czech Republic, Georgia, Germany, Slovakia, South Africa, Thailand,
and Vietnam. The company can work with customers on- or off-site, depending on work-
load and skill requirements.
To keep an overview of the various projects and customers in terms of financial flows and
target achievement, the controlling department in the parent company works together
with the responsible teams, depending on the country or customer. Miriam Schneider,
together with her group leader, looks after business with banks and insurers in Australia
and Oceania. Since she lives in South America, however, she is regularly called upon to
join Anthony Witt’s team, who is in charge of this region and values his colleague’s knowl-
edge of the language and culture. The controlling team work in an interdisciplinary and
cross-project manner, so the group composition is constantly changing.
At the team and department levels, the company’s sales staff use objectives and key
results (OKRs), which they create together with the respective specialist departments.
Goals and the associated key results are set at regular intervals. With this management
approach, goals can be implemented in the short term.
In addition, the sales team managed to increase sales by 20 percent last year and are con-
tinuing this sales increase in the current year. The controlling team provided advisory sup-
port and is satisfied with the achievement of the goals. The sales team also works with
teams of analysts, who provide relevant information about potential customers, collect
customer feedback, and implement this feedback into the approach. This creates a com-
prehensive, systematic, agile approach in the company tailored to customer needs.
This unit addresses the pros and cons of control in the agile context, as well as the ques-
tion of whether it makes sense to apply control, and to what extent control should be
applied to avoid the destruction of agility.
8.1 Concept and Function of Control

Within any company, it is important that activities transparent and can be tracked. Only
then is there certainty that the various tasks contribute to the company’s strategic goals or
corporate mission statement.
108
Companies normally have a detailed reporting system for this purpose, which present
activities on an annual, semi-annual, quarterly, or monthly basis. The reporting system
serves to track the company’s own activities, check its success, and optimize it if it falls
short of expectations. However, a reporting system is intended to give outsiders an
impression of the company’s performance. Imagine that a company wants a short-term
loan from a bank to buy goods needed within the production process. The bank is obliga-
ted to comply with numerous legal regulations; therefore, it must check the company’s
credit to ensure money borrowed will be repaid. How does the bank decide that the com-
pany is creditworthy if there are no reporting systems?
Controlling is also referred to as internal accounting, while the term “accounting” is usu-
ally referred to as external accounting, depending on the focus of cash flows. For many
companies, reporting on corporate activities is part of good corporate governance, and
they are committed to its implementation. This means that companies commit to rigor,
transparency, and honest disclosure of relevant information in their reporting.
By developing a reporting system that records the financial flows within a company and
outside it, information can also be provided about its performance. However, internal and
external reporting systems do not only provide a way to collect relevant financial data
about the company. With this data, it is also possible to plan, forecast, and react to devel-
opments within a company environment. In general, both systems serve as tools for plan-
ning, managing, and monitoring what is happening in the company. In short, these sys-
tems cannot be neglected because they provide relevant data that also serves as an
anchor for agile organizations to make the important adjustments to changing conditions.
While the implementation of accounting in companies is based on systems that are largely
regulated by national or international legal requirements, there is a great deal of scope for
the company implementation of controlling. Although there is scope for discretion in
accounting, this is specified within the framework of national regulations. By contrast,
controlling systems can be adapted toindividual companies. Accordingly, the obligations
to perform accounting in accordance with national regulations also apply in agile compa-
nies.
Controlling is an instrument for mapping internal processes in the company. A basic dis-
tinction can be made between operational and strategic control. While strategic control-
ling focuses on the long-term development of a company by taking its environment taking
into account, operational controlling collects and analyzes the company’s data to follow
up on the fulfillment of its goals. Therefore, operational controlling also develops a set of
key performance indicators (KPIs), such as the break-even-point. Thus, controlling
includes not only figures of production costs and revenues, but also other extensive key
figures. These are static or dynamic in nature, indicating the company’s development. In
management, several different sets of KPIs are used.
Depending on the type and size of a company, controlling can be structured either as sim-
ple cost and activity accounting or as a more complex system. In most cases, cost of sales
and other cost types are defined for this purpose and subdivided according to product
109
type or category. Based on this breakdown, further costs can be allocated and compared
with the revenues from sales and other income. The financial flows into and out of the
company are recorded in controlling.
In principle, any department within a company can introduce controlling and should do so
to an appropriate extent. When departments report partial activities to the controlling
department in the form of KPIs, an overall picture can be developed from the many pieces
of the puzzle. Therefore, own departments usually provide individual reporting to deter-
mine the levels of achievement of the agreed goals, which results in a contribution to
overall goal achievement.
However, controlling, as it was traditionally organized, no longer meets the requirements

of the modern volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous (VUCA) world. The approach
of making decisions and analyzing on a numbers-only basis is no longer effective. In
everyday life, controlling often fails to define and analyze causalities to derive conclusions
for the future from past-oriented data (Lehmann et al., 2022).
In an agile organization, controlling can be adopted based on the different projects and
products a company produces. The different teams then report key figures about their
project to the controlling department, which collects and analyses data. The controlling
department might give recommendations to the team on how to develop company goals.
According to agile values, this process must be self-organized, meaning that both the con-
trolling department and the team interact autonomously based on mutual trust, credibil-
ity, and honesty. The controlling department then might communicate information about
the development of key figures to the company or relevant teams. It can be reasonable to
use a hybrid structure if the agile organization is not mature or some parts of it remain
non-agile due to framework conditions or internal reasons.
8.2 Agility and Control: A Contradiction?

One might argue that agility, which involves autonomy and self-regulation, contradicts
control or the application of controlling mechanisms. However, achieving the goals of an
agile organization does involve some planning and coordination. According to agile val-
ues, customer centricity is one of the most important focuses. To achieve this, the com-
pany must get an idea of what customers want and constantly evolve to meet their needs.
This is because the demand for new technologies and further development (market-pull)
leads to the continuous further development of products and changes demand behavior.
Controlling as a planning and monitoring tool is particularly important in a VUCA world.

Using controlling systems based on data from the past is not expedient, especially under
dynamic conditions, because neither the consequences for one’s own company, nor the
changing conditions, can be gauged. Acting on gut feelings in such situations is fraught
with risk. For this reason, controlling must provide appropriate information quickly and
proactively, which can then be used for decision-making. This task is not always easy,
especially when controlling is based on comprehensive, rigid number systems that must
110
be recorded and analyzed. At this point, it would be better to look at a company’s cross-
sectional data, which is collected in an automated manner and represents initial indica-
tors.
Controlling is, therefore, undergoing a transformation from its role as a pure “number
cruncher” to that of a value-creating partner. As part of its realignment, controlling is
increasingly taking on a consulting function. To fill this position, agile principles must be
implemented in controlling, or controlling must be integrated into a hybrid organizational
structure. This is accompanied by a hard-to-control cultural change, which enables it to
bridge the gap between self-organization and hierarchy. At the same time, however, con-
trolling must apply its core competence of providing context-dependent, relevant data
and selecting approaches to solutions (Lehmann, et al. 2022).
8.3 Management Control Systems in

Change
In a fully agile organization, controlling should be considered as part of an agile ecosys-
tem. Therefore, it should follow agile principles and be implemented into departmental
activities. Employees handling controlling must be open to agile values and develop an
agile mindset. Values, such as trust, flexibility, and openness, should be promoted in con-
trolling as part of an agile transformation.
In agile management, controlling is organized across teams. This includes the promotion
of cross-departmental cooperation and increased flexibility of management structures.
During agile transformation, employees in controlling work on a projects and with differ-
ent supervisors, depending on the field of work. For example, controlling in the mail order
company Otto has become agile: A controller is assigned to specific brands or business
units within the group, sometimes depending on the retail location. The contoller is then
deployed to the projects that most closely relate to their competencies (Scharner-Wolff &
Witte, 2018).
Working in teams leads to more sharing, and the increased communication can have both
positive and negative effects. If team resources are used systematically, new ideas are
brought forth from the breaking up old structures. However, communication efforts also
need to increase, which means additional time must be allotted to coordination and com-
munication. This includes putting time aside to be present in longer conversations that
might not directly contribute to one’s own topic. However, it is important to maintain a
balance and not to exchange unnecessary redundant information over a longer period of
time. Short, frequent agreements in the form of “dailies” or “weeklies” are more effective
(Scharner-Wolff and Witte 2018).
111
Maintaining control with OKR
In the context of agile collaboration, OKRs are becoming increasingly popular. This
approach can be used as an instrument for setting goals and following up on their fulfil-
ment. OKRs have been used since the 1980s and involve an iterative approach and the
idea of self-organization within teams and the promotion of a continuous improvement
process. Objectives are determined by the teams. They are usually detailed and short-term
in nature. Key results should be as ambitious as possible to motivate employees to find
new solutions (Marinkovic, 2021).
While objectives usually focus on the goal to be reached, key results indicate the way to
achieve them. Accordingly, the objectives should be formulated in an active manner, vivid
and from an individual perspective to clearly visualize the situation and create a sense of
responsibility. Key results should be communicated throughout the company or team to
increase engagement.
When applying OKRs, every objective has two to four key results. Each team might have an
individual “OKR-set,” which consists of up to five objectives with two to four key results
each. Sometimes, companies will have OKRs at the company level. Every OKR set has an
OKR-set owner, who is responsible for monitoring the fulfillment of the goals. Further-
more, every OKR set has a time box, which limits the length of an OKR cycle (meaning the
time until the goals should be implemented). An OKR cycle might be implemented in
accordance with the type of the company: Some can happen quickly, while others need
more than three months, which is considered the “usual” length. After the three months, a
new OKR set might be defined. OKRs should not exceed six months, as they are intended
to be used as a short-term tool. Additionally, regular meetings are set within each OKR
cycle, including a goalsetting workshop, weeklies, review meetings, and a retrospective,
similar to Scrum. The OKR cycle starts with a goal-setting workshop. Here, interdependen-
cies between teams should be identified and solved. In the goal-setting workshop, objec-
tives are set from the top-down and OKRs are implemented on each level of the company.
The status of the implementation is discussed in the OKR weekly. The OKR review focuses
on the results and learnings of the cycle, while the OKR retrospective is executed to reflect
on the collaboration to improve the company processes and collaborations. Both work-
shops are set at the end of the cycle. In general, inspections, reflections, and adaptions
should be applied to OKRs. This means reflecting on what has been done, how it has been
done, and how can it be improved. Applying OKRs within a company requires an OKR
mindset. This mindset consists of five values: focus, collaboration, bravery, transparency,
and alignment.
1. Focus: Reduce narrow goals to the most important ones to make sure they are imple-
mented.
2. Collaboration: This assumes a team can accomplish more than several individuals.
3. Bravery: Set ambitious goals and be brave in being the first to try something new.
4. Transparency: Everyone sees the OKRs, dependencies between OKRs or individuals
are disclosed, and information about the degree of goal achievement is communica-
ted honestly.
5. Alignment: Everyone is committed to achieving the OKRs.
112
Corporate goals also affect each individual and are, therefore, sufficiently tangible. All
departments of a company can set, implement, and track goals in Agile methodology (Lihl
et al., 2019).
Cynefin Framework
For agile transformation or the different agile and non-agile task types, it is recommended
to use the Cynefin framework. Developed in 1999 by the International Business Machines
Corporation (IBM) employee David Snowden, this is a decision-making aid for choosing
agile or non-agile methods. Five areas are defined, which recommend the use of a respec-
tive agile method. For this purpose, tasks are divided into five areas according to difficulty:
simple (1), complicated (2), complex (3), chaotic(4), and confusing (5). Processes or tasks
are classified according to this matrix and corresponding methods suitable for the respec-
tive category are selected by the controller. These can then be either agile or non-agile.
The Cynefin Framework supports problem analysis, which leads to finding an adequate
solution to an issue (Lehmann et al., 2022).
113
Figure 18: Cynefin Framework
Source: Anja Hagedorn (2023), based on Lehmann et al. (2019).
114
In controlling, a complex situation might result from an introduction of a business intelli-
gence tool, while a complicated situation is a demanding standard process, such as com-
menting on a periodical report. In complex situations, it is necessary to review possible
and acceptance criteria to develop the final result, which is followed by an implementa-
tion of the project (e.g., Scrum). An example of a clear and understandable situation might
be a regular reporting of repeated activities, or routine tasks. Furthermore, chaotic situa-
tions may be caused by unusual events, such as crises. There are also confusing tasks or
situations, which means it is not yet understood which of the four categories a scenario
belongs to. Those situations must be reviewed carefully and categorized once enough
information is available to do so (Lehmann et al., 2022).
The Cynefin model supports the selection of an appropriate method for a specific situa-
tion or task in an agile context. However, it is important to keep in mind that the bounda-
ries between them are fluid, and not every situation can be clearly assigned. The more the
complexity of events increases, the more suitable they are for the application of agile
methods (Lehmann et al., 2022).
SUMMARY
This unit has shown that agility and control are not mutually exclusive.
Rather, a minimum level of control is important for the coordination of
agility within a company. It also serves to track the achievement of cor-
porate goals, identify undesirable developments, and take counter-
measures at an early stage. In this way, control in an agile organization is
not intended to monitor the individual units on a small scale, but rather
to orchestrate the departments in an effort to optimize working
together. Controlling provides impetus, advises departments and man-
agement on the operational implementation of measures to achieve
goals, and warns of undesirable developments at an early stage.
115
UNIT 9
DIGITAL TOOLS AS A PREREQUISITE FOR
AGILITY
STUDY GOALS
– explain why digital tools support the implementation of agile management.

– describe two agile tools.
– collaborate with teams using agile-specific tools.
9. DIGITAL TOOLS AS A PREREQUISITE FOR
AGILITY
Case Study
The company JobHop is a startup that specializes in finding student jobs that match
career ambitions. To do this, a web-based platform containing a self-learning algorithm
was developed together with an information technology (IT) company. The individual
development steps were mapped using Scrum and the web tool Jira. In Jira, the individual
user stories can be described, summarized, and organized into tasks. The tasks are then
used to organize Sprints for the Development Team. To do this, the Product Owner must
create individual product properties as tasks or processes in Jira. The Development Team
then independently determines which process to be prioritize and how. At the end of sev-
eral Sprints, all tasks should be implemented in Jira. Notes about issues that need to be
discussed accumulate in the Jira backlog.
The Development Team is satisfied because the customer has already agreed to many of
the implementations. They can comment on questions or disputed points directly within a
process by using the online tool and, if necessary, a task can be assigned to the respective
person. In this way, the Development Team can organize itself efficiently in each Scrum
project, despite numerous parallel projects. For the individual developer in the team, only
the respective tasks are visible. There is no need to deal unnecessarily with other topics
from colleagues if they are not addressed in the Sprint Reviews. With the help of Jira, the
Development Team can quickly develop an initial prototype from the idea. The customer
is satisfied and can subject their product to a test in a timely manner so that it can be fur-
ther developed on this basis. After approximately nine months of development, the prod-
uct is rolled out in a beta version and presented to its first customers.
9.1 Collaboration Tools

In the context of Agile working, the design of collaboration is an important factor. Agile
methods such as Scrum or objectives and key results (OKRs) already specify how people
should work together to achieve common goals. The most important point is usually
assumed to be the self-organization of teams, but how can teams work together when
they are sometimes located across continents and time zones?
This is one of the reasons why collaborative tools are becoming increasingly important. It
must be possible to organize work despite the absence of one or more employees. Loca-
tion- and time-independent collaboration is also an important part of daily work for inter-
national teams, which are not only becoming increasingly important for multinational
companies, but are also dispensable factors for maintaining productivity in view of the
demographic changes in Western industrialized nations.
118
At the beginning of digitization, only a few rudimentary ad hoc means of communication
existed. In the 2000s, online communication took the form of chat services, such as Skype
and ICQ. However, these were mostly used by younger generations; in the business sector,
email remained the preferred communication tool. Emails carry the disadvantage delayed
communication. Tracking individual communication strands is also tedious and time-con-
suming. In addition, chat programs allowed allow audio and video streaming.
With the increasing development of internet technology (IT), which now allows for high
data throughput, an increasing number of new providers of communications services
have entered the market. Today, the availability and quality of these services is so good
that they can be used continuously (with minor performance losses). Direct communica-
tion through internet tools is, therefore, no longer a problem for distributed, Agile teams.
Nevertheless, until recently, email was still the number one choice for communication
because it offers another advantage over chat programs: the transfer of files in the form of
attachments. Although this is now also possible with messenger services for mobile com-
munication, handling these types of files on small screens is inconvenient. With email,
attachments can be previewed and even edited, meaning this platform has remained the
most-used communication tool.
In recent years, other digital programs have joined the market or have taken further mar-
ket shares. These programs combine the advantages of an email and chat programs and
enable team-based work in which groups with different access authorizations can be cre-
ated. One example of a tool is Microsoft’s Teams, which integrates online streaming, call-
ing, messaging, file sharing, and editing within its systems. The program was launched in
2017 and entered into direct competition with Google’s G Suite, now called Google Work-
space. Google’s collaborative workspace offers similar capabilities, as well as features that
may be added over time or integrated from Google’s catalogue. The big difference is that,
aside from cloud space and file sharing, Google doesn’t have all of these features installed,
whereas Teams works better in the desktop version. There are also numerous differences
in the technical configuration options of both providers. The last major difference is that
the basic version of Google Workspace is free of charge, whereas a company-wide license
usually has to be purchased for the use of Teams.
Perhaps technology will evolve from the software platform that offers on-screen video
conferencing to creating entire virtual realities where people can meet, step into meet-
ings, and even join together in a three-dimensional (3D) experience to discuss work with
each other. These types of augmented realities (ARs) are currently in existence but are not
yet established for the masses.
Previous explanations have shown that the technical development of internet services
continues to advance and new tools and instruments are constantly being created for
workplaces. As the possibilities increase, so does the flexibility and agility in the teams;
however, the dangers of the dissolution of boundaries also continue to grow. For example,
a lack of regulated working hours and the potential to be tracked on all devices leads to
increased pressure among employees. One solution could be to establish a corporate cul-
ture that promotes health, and to empower employees in their use of digital technologies.
119
9.2 New Technologies
The technological progress emerging as part of digital transformation is almost unstoppa-
ble. It is a megatrend influencing all areas of life worldwide. The resulting digitalization
will, sooner or later, have an impact on companies that previously thought of themselves
as non-agile or digitalized.
In the context of agile collaboration, new software tools are constantly emerging that
attempt to close problem areas and gaps in collaboration. Digital tools here include not
only the aforementioned communication media or file-sharing instruments. Rather, there
is a whole range of software available for creative work, for organizing and keeping track
of agile projects with Scrum, and for cross-departmental collaboration in relation to cor-
porate goals. In the following, some tools will be discussed in more detail to outline how
advanced the programming techniques already are, show agile teams can benefit from
them, and offer concrete advice for one’s own agile work.
Atlassian/Jira
Atlassian is one of the market leaders in the field of agile working. They offer Jira, a tool
suitable for mapping various work or business-related processes, working in them, and
developing solutions for one’s own company. This makes it a modern online workspace
for the agile organization.
To map the various business processes and work on them within the platform, a new
project is created after logging in. Here, Atlassian offers a preselection of possible catego-
ries from which different standard tasks or project types can be selected. For example, the
task “Onboarding” can be selected under the category “Person,” or the task “Document
Management” can be selected from the “Administration” category. Other categories, such
as “Software Development,” “Service Management,” “Work Management,” “Product Man-
agement,” and “Marketing,” are offered by the platform. In other words, the platform has
many possible applications, and Atlassian maps numerous processes in the company with
its service offering. There is a wide range of choices and, depending on the category, vari-
ous frequently requested tasks are offered in the form of prefabricated workspaces. There
is also the option of creating an empty project, where the workspace has to be set up your-
self.
Atlassian is also ideally suited for agile projects because it can map classic project man-
agement according to Scrum by using the “Jira” module. These are primarily suitable for
software development, but Scrum can also be used for other projects with a strong cus-
tomer focus. This is a method with which agile projects can be developed in a customer-
centric manner. The advantage of Jira is that the entire Scrum process is mapped. For
example, Sprints can be organized directly. For this purpose, the individual product com-
ponents are developed by the Product Owner in collaboration with the Sprint Team and
the Scrum Master, then stored in Jira in the form of tasks.
Jira knows different task types, which can be classified either as Story, Epic, Bug, Task, or
Sub-Task. An Epic is a User Story that extends over several Sprints and can be thought of
as an overall goal. An Epic can be broken down into smaller User Stories. In Scrum, the
120
User Stories summarize a functionality of a website in one sentence. In turn, they can con-
tain tasks, which are packages of tasks that are processed directly. By working through the
tasks, user stories are implemented and the Epic is also implemented.
The Sprints are also compiled in Jira by the Agile team itself. For this purpose, Jira allows
individual tasks to be selected and categorized into Sprints depending on their prioritiza-
tion. Leftover tasks or unclear matters are also organized in Jira in the form of backlogs.
Companies must pay to use Jira, but trials are available for those who want to test it. It
should be noted that due to Atlassian’s tendancy to make major changes within the Jira
model, this course book has opted for a broader description of the tool.
Trello/Kanbanize
Another digital tool in agile working is Kanban. Various providers now exist to facilitate
this method, such as Trello, which is now part of the Atlassian family. Another Kanban tool
is Kanbanize. With both Trello and Kanbanize, processes can be visualized in the form of a
Kanban. Kanban is a method from Japan and translates to mean “signal card.” Kanbanize
allows for the sketching of Kanban processes and is free to use. Individual task bundles
are now defined within the project. For this purpose, various information can be integra-
ted, such as start dates, deadlines, and who is responsible. Depending on the processing
status, tasks are moved along the workflow. The advantage is that the status of individual
tasks can be visualized immediately. Thus, idle times are reduced and overloads can be
alleviated. A Kanban, therefore, helps to optimize the use of resources in terms of location
and time, which ultimately reduces costs. The tool is agile because it is highly customer-
focused, flexible, and strengthens the self-organization capabilities within a team.
Asana
Asana offers many comprehensive options for structuring individual work and is based on
a classic division of project tasks. The software allows workers to plan and track their
tasks, create to-do lists, design and organize workflows, and exchange messages and files.
This puts Asana in direct competition with Teams. A special feature is the possibility to
automate tasks for the team within workflows. This makes it possible to organize fre-
quently recurring tasks more efficiently. Another special feature is the integration of a
dashboard in the workspace of the platform, which can be used to quickly get an overview
of tasks to be completed and current topics and processes. Assigning and sharing individ-
ual tasks within the team is also possible in Asana. Overall, Asana can be seen as an inte-
grated workspace for daily work in agile and non-agile environments, apart from the
project tasks that can be structured within the framework of Kanban, it otherwise offers
hardly any special features for agile work.
121
SUMMARY
The importance of agile collaboration and how it can be built up and
strengthened was explored in this unit. In addition, agile digital instru-
ments were presented that make it possible to work together in a team,
regardless of time and location. With the help of these tools, some of
which are subject to a fee, the entire agile potential can be exploited. By
taking agile values and principles into account, customer needs can be
optimally satisfied while maximizing the self-organizational competence
and autonomy of the team members.
122
UNIT 10
CRITICAL REFLECTION
STUDY GOALS
– consider challenges presented by agile environments.

– discuss the pros and cons of agility.
– evaluate agile work.
10. CRITICAL REFLECTION
Case Study
A young e-commerce start-up is under pressure to grow quickly to meet the expectations
of its venture capital providers. As a result, employees are also under pressure to give their
best to achieve the company’s growth objectives. The company is uses agile management
principles and tools in many areas. For example, teams are self-organized and employees
have the freedom to work remote, flexible hours. Yet, as the company is still young, many
operations are not yet standardized. The company’s continuous growth leads to a steady
increase of the number of employees and the creation of new teams.
David Emerson was one of the first employees at the company. Due to his experience, he is
tasked to assist new employees during their onboarding process. His opinion is also val-
ued by the company’s managers. Due to his experience, he is currently carrying a double
burden within his team, which is results in several additional hours of work. He feels
increasingly frustrated: Managers continuously emphasize the importance of customer
centricity, yet a decreasing amount of time is available to address individual customer
questions or complaints.
There is no doubt that an agile mindset helps to absorb short-term changes in a company,
while also meeting the wishes of customers. For many companies, particularly in the infor-
mation technology (IT) industry, agility represents a critical success factor, especially
when the main area of activity is project management. In the face of an ever-changing
world, agility seems to be one of the best answers to maintaining competitiveness and
productivity. However, how much acceleration in everyday life can humans absorb?
Today, actions around the world lead to decisions made within milliseconds, nations and
people are becoming more interconnected, and individual events taking place in one
country are becoming increasingly important, even internationally. It is easy to become
overwhelmed. How much agility is needed to keep up with global competitors who,
because of the internet, can enter markets from anywhere in the world. This is one of the
critical questions that will be discussed in the final unit.
10.1 Agility as a Panacea

Agility is more popular than ever. Even administrations that are not agile by nature have
taken an interest in the concept. The need for the management style is clear, especially
when it comes to crises that can have a major impact on the economy, society, and poli-
tics. These crises are triggered by increasing globalization, new technologies, and socio-
ecological developments. However, increased networking and the constant accessibility of
individuals and companies contribute to the spread of information and behaviors that
favor crises or result from crises. Agility brings many advantages, such as flexibility, cus-
124
tomer centricity, autonomy, and self-organization in daily work. It is also important to
note that mindless action is unproductive: therefore, in addition to the agile way of work-
ing, the overall context and the systemic connections should be monitored.
Agile is a helpful approach that break down rigid, outdated processes and practices. With
agility come new values, thought patterns, approaches, and methods. Nevertheless, agile
management will not be a solution for every company. Often, agility is misunderstood and
seen as a carte blanche for employees to withdraw, or as occupational therapy. Some
companies have misunderstood agile management as, for example, leaving people to
their own devices and, at the appropriate time, confronting them about what they have
done. Therefore, it is always important to emphasize that without the implementation of
agile values, agile management makes no sense. After all, an agile mindset can only
develop if it is also being lived.
Some industries can only partially implement an agile workplace, while others are com-
pletely unable to do so. These include highly regulated sectors, such as the defense of a
country or its financial supervision, medicine, and aviation. It is not uncommon for admin-
istration sectors try to work in an agile manner, but in many areas of activity, laws and
administrative regulations restrict this action. Similarly, a pilot working for an airline can-
not simply become agile. The same goes for doctors, as both of these professions are strict
in their adherance to procedures that guarantee the safety of customers and themselves.
But even in some private companies, fully agile working can be a hindrance. For example,
if a company produces in bulk, production processes cannot be implemented in an agile
manner: the advantage arising from economies of scale would be lost. In manufacturing
companies, it is, therefore, generally necessary to fall back on predefined standards. Nev-
ertheless, this should not obscure the fact that single divisions of the companies men-
tioned above can certainly work in an agile manner, especially in the case of administra-
tive or management tasks.
10.2 Agility as a Health Risk

Agile management gives its employees the freedom to develop and organize themselves
in a way that no other working method can. In a fully agile company, teams and team
members organize their tasks independently. However, this is accompanied by a great
deal of individual responsibility. Within the framework of self-organization, employees
assume responsibility not only for the execution of their own tasks, but also for the func-
tioning of company processes. This means that the responsibility for processes and ach-
ieving success is largely transferred from the company to its teams, while central depart-
ments, such as human resources management (HRM) or controlling, assume a more
advisory and supervisory role. This involves a high degree of assumption of responsibility,
self-management competence and communication skills. Not every employee is able to
handle the growing competence, nor is everyone interested in taking it on. Particularly in
young, fast-growing companies, agile working and the accompanying shift in responsibil-
ity can be perceived as a heavy burden when accompanied by great pressure to achieve
goals (or if the company still has to find itself, i.e., if the goals and vision are not yet
125
entirely clear). In the long term, this personal pressure can lead to excessive demands,
stress, and psychological problems, such as depression or burnout and their associated
psychosomatic complaints. Psychological challenges may primarily affect those people
who make particularly strong demands on themselves or have career ambitions.
The transfer of responsibility for tasks and processes has produced obscurities in some
companies. In some organizations, agile working and the associated personal responsibil-
ity are used in such a way that employees or teams are left alone in their work and deci-
sion-making processes. This is accompanied by a certain ignorance of problems that arise
for the respective individuals or teams – problems that they cannot solve on their own due
to a lack of leadership authority. This leads to further stressful situations. Some workers
are more susceptible to the pressure and can fall ill, while others try to escape the associ-
ated problems with absenteeism or internal resignation. Either way, for companies experi-
encing these kinds of problems, it’s important to know that agility is not the primary
cause. Most of the time, these problems are more of a symptom. The cause of such chaotic
conditions is usually anchored in leadership competence and corporate culture. There-
fore, it is usually difficult to find an immediate solution to the problems.
In the past, the requirements for self-organization that accompany agile working have no
longer been limited to work tasks. Increasingly, employees are also required to self-organ-
ize their working conditions. In the context of self-organization as an agile value, the topic
of “New Work” is increasingly coming to focus. As a buzzword, New Work means nothing
more than the introduction of agility to a workplace’s framework. This includes the issue
of location-independent working, but also asynchronous working (i.e., working independ-
ently of time). Although the flexibilization of working conditions sometimes leads to the
dissolution of boundaries between work and private life, it also offers advantages for fami-
lies, for example, if they can adapt their working hours to the care times of daycare centers
and schools.
New Work emerged as a response to the increasingly digital way of working, which
brought with it diverse requirements in terms of availability and dealing with an overflow
of information. It also provided diverse freedoms and simplified the work processes. In the
context of increasing digitalization, employees in companies either find themselves under
pressure to work more frequently and for longer stretches of time, or to acquire far-reach-
ing new competencies in dealing with IT, information overflow, and information procure-
ment.
New Work takes the employee’s point of view into account and is also becoming increas-
ingly important in the battle for competent specialists among employers. New Work
should, therefore, be seen as a response to the pains arising from the employee perspec-
tive during digitization and as a desire to optimize work processes to deliver satisfactory
results. At the beginning of the digitization of processes, managers were not yet able to
trust or understand digital services, leading to the incorrect planning of processes. Cost-
intensive and inefficient parallel structures, in which emails were printed out, stamped
and filed, were met with a lack of understanding, especially from younger generations.
The desire for change came at a time when digital natives had grown up with smart-
phones and computers. New Work, therefore, considers the emerging work situation from
126
the employee’s perspective and should be understood as a search for meaning and a
desire to design processes appropriately. This way, processes can be used meaningfully
and become redundant if digitization is not implemented sufficiently.
In other words, New Work does not just mean that employees are exposed to an increased
flexibility of work tasks to accommodate the increasing change in the corporate environ-
ment from a company’s perspective and in consideration of its customers. Rather, in the
context of New Work, the employee approaches their employer to adapt the working con-
ditions to the agile tasks.
10.3 Agility and Hierarchy

Agility and hierarchy in companies have limited compatibility. Hierarchy arises when
power structures are established in a company to regulate the distribution of power and,
by association, various freedoms and privileges. Those further up in the hierarchy have
power over others and are are usually referred to as managers. Tensions may arise if infor-
mal leaders, such as persons with long-term experience or informal leaders within a team,
challenge hierarchical leadership. Managers are appointed because of persuasiveness,
whereas an informal leader can be appointed because of assertiveness, charisma, experi-
ence, and likability among colleagues. Agile management structures are prone to power
asymmetries when employees have a superior who takes disciplinary decisions while they
follow an informal leader in content-related questions. Various covert and unofficial
power structures emerge in a company if informal leaders and managers contradict each
other in their actions.
If a company is in the process of transforming to become agile, this is usually accompa-

nied by a loss of power for managers. Some managers may find this a relief because they
no longer have to deal with individual decisions, while others fear for their authority and
question their roles. Therefore, when transforming agile companies, all those affected
should receive sufficient support.
The loss of power can express itself through compensatory actions, in which individuals
increasingly try and exercise their power elsewhere. For employees, a manager trying to
exercise power can result in increased micromanagement. This means that employees
have to report in detail on topics and have to be accountable, and the manager also wants
to be involved in detailed and unimportant individual decisions. This, in turn, can lead to
difficult conflict situations. For instance, when employees are given freedom to work in a
more self-organized manner, a manager might tighten their reins in other areas, making it
difficult for those affected to see what the manager values and pays attention to. It is,
therefore, also difficult to meet the requirements. From the perspective of the employees,
such arbitrary requirements lead to pressure and stress. In such cases, it is important to
work with experienced coaches to resolve this situation.
127
Managers could also react with a lack of understanding towards agile methods and try to
disregard it is a management style. This leads to tensions between the respective teams
and the manager. Managers should, therefore, work to ensure that agile working is imple-
mented jointly and to the same extent in respective areas of the company.
SUMMARY
This unit provided a critical reflection of agile management. One major
take away is that agile working does not always make sense. As a conse-
quence, companies should consider whether the requirements for agile
management can be met.
The effects of agile working were also discussed. In some companies,

the effects are advantageous for the workforce, because they allow more
freedom and a larger decision-making scope by increasing self-organiza-
tion. In other companies, especially those that operate in a very compet-
itive business environment, agile working can increase the pressure on
employees to perform. This is particularly problematic when companies
themselves have internal problems in their organization and the work-
ing conditions are, therefore, unsafe.
Ultimately, agile transformation can result in a loss of power for manag-

ers, which in turn leads to problematic behavior. Therefore, agile man-
agement should not be implemented simply because it is trending:
Detailed preliminary considerations should be made before it is imple-
mented. At the same time, the support of agile coaches during agile
transformation is an indispensable element to prevent problems and
find solutions in management and the workforce.
128
BACKMATTER
LIST OF REFERENCES
Ali, I. (2016). Doing the organizational tango: Symbiotic relationship between formal and
informal organizational structures for an agile organization. Interdisciplinary Journal
of Information, Knowledge, and Management, 11, 55–72. https://doi.org/10.28945/343
9
Azadi, W., & Gallardo, K. (2021). Agile Rollen in SAFe bestmöglich besetzen [Best possible
use of Agile roles in SAFe]. In: M. A. Pfannstiel, W. Siedl, & P. F.-J Steinhoff (Eds.): Agili-
tät in Unternehmen. Eine Praktische Einführung in SAFe und Co [Enterprise Agility. A
Practical Introduction to SAFe and Co]. (pp. 295–338). Springer. https://doi.org/10.100
7/978-3-658-31001-1
Barney, J. B., & Arikan, A. M. (2005). The resource-based view. In: M. A. Hitt, R. E. Freeman,
& J. S. Harrison (Eds.), The handbook of strategic management (pp. 123–182). Black-
well. https://doi.org/10.1111/b.9780631218616.2006.00006.x
Bartonitz, M., Lévesque, V., Michl, T., Steinbrecher, W., Vonhof, C., & Wagner, L. (Eds.).
(2018). Agile Verwaltung [Agile management]. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-
662-57699-1
Barzelay, M. (2019). Rediscovering management: Analysis and synthesis. In M. Barzelay

(Ed.), Public management as a design-oriented professional discipline (pp. 16–36).
Edward Elgar. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781788119108.00009
Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. Free Press.
Beck, K., Beedle, M., van Bennekum, A., Cockburn, A., Cunnigham, W., Fowler, M., Gren-
ning, J., Highsmith, J., Hunt, A., Jeffries, R., Kern, J., Marick, B., Martin, R. C., Mellor, S.,
Schwaber, K., Sutherland, J., & Thomas, D. (2001). Manifesto for agile software devel-
opment. http://agilemanifesto.org/iso/en/manifesto.html
Bertagnolli, F. (2020). Lean management. Einführung und Vertiefung in die japanische Man-
agement-Philosophie [Lean management: Introduction and in-depth study of Japa-
nese management philosophy]. Springer. http://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-13124-1
Blake, R.-R., Mouton, J.-S. (1983). Besser verkaufen durch GRID: Das Verhaltensgitter als
Methode zum optimalen Verkauf in Handel, Industrie und Dienstleistung [Better selling
through GRID: The behavioral grid as a method for optimal selling in trade, industry
and services] (3rd ed.) Econ-Verlag.
Bock, S., Schneider, F., & Siedl, W. (2021). Durch OKRs Strategien effektiver im SAFe Kon-
text umsetzen [Using OKRs to implement strategies more effectively in the SAFe con-
text]. In M. A. Pfannstiel, W. Siedl, & P. F.-J. Steinhoff (Eds.), Agilität in Unternehmen.
Eine Praktische Einführung in SAFe und Co [Enterprise Agility. A Practical Introduction
to SAFe and Co], (pp. 163–181). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-31001-1_9
130
Boehm, B., & Turner, R. (2005). Management challenges to implementing agile processes
in traditional development organizations. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engi-
neers, 22(5), 30–39. https://doi.org/10.1109/MS.2005.129
Çakmak, E., Öztekin, Ö., Karadağ, E. (2015). The effect of leadership on job satisfaction. In
E. Karadağ (Ed.), Leadership and organizational outcomes. (pp. 29–56) Springer. https:/
/doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-14908-0_3
Daft, R. L. (2016). Management (12th ed.). Cengage Learning.
Dams, C. M. (2019). Agiles Event Management [Agile Event Management]. Springer. https://
doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-25500-8
Dautovic, A. (2021). Einführung von Agilen Methoden im Unternehmen [Introduction of

Agile methods in the company]. In M. A. Pfannstiel, W. Siedl & P. F.-J. Steinhoff (Eds.),
Agilität in Unternehmen. Eine Praktische Einführung in SAFe und Co. [Enterprise Agility.
A Practical Introduction to SAFe and Co.] (pp. 1–13). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/
978-3-658-31001-1_1
Deming, W. E. (1982). Out of the crisis. The MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/114

57.001.0001
Desouza, K. C. (2006). Agile information systems. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/97800

80463681
Deutsche Gesellschaft für Qualität. (n.d.). Agiles Qualitätsmanagement [Agile quality man-
agement]. https://www.dgq.de/themen/agiles-qualitaetsmanagement/
Easterby-Smith, M., Lyles, M. A., & Peteraf, M. A. (2009). Dynamic capabilities: Current
debates and future directions. British Journal of Management, 20(s1), 1–8. https://doi.
org/10.1111/j.1467-8551.2008.00609.x
Ebert, C., & Paasivaara, M. (2017). Scaling agile. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engi-
neers, 34(6), 98–103. https://doi.org/10.1109/MS.2017.4121226
Edelkraut, F., & Mosig, H. (2019). Schnelleinstieg agiles Personalmanagement. Business

Agility, Führung und Transformation [Quick Start Agile Human Resource Management.
Business agility, leadership and transformation]. Haufe Group.
Ehringer, W. (2020). Instrumente zur Strategieentwicklung. Methodische Unterstützung für

Praktiker [Tools for strategy development. Methodological support for practitioners].
Springer https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-32688-3
Erpenbeck, J., Bergmann, g., Daub, J., Ebeling, E., Friedrich, P., Lantz, A., Martens, D.,
Meuer, G., Machtigall, C., North, K., & Scharnhorst, A. (2006). Metakompetenzen und
Kompetenzentwicklung [Meta-competencies and skills development]. Bundesministe-
rium für Bildung und Forsching. https://ams-forschungsnetzwerk.at/downloadpub/re
port-95-teil1.pdf
131
Fahey, L., & Narayanan, V. K. (1986). Macroenvironmental analysis for strategic manage-
ment. West.
Farmer, R. N., & Richman, B. M. (1966). Comparative management and economic progress.
Thunderbird International Business Review, 8(1), 19–20.
Förster, K., & Wendler, R. (2012). Theorien und Konzepte zu Agilität in Organisationen [Theo-
ries and concepts of agility in organizations]. Article number 63/12. https://nbn-resolvi
ng.org/urn:nbn:de:bsz:14-qucosa-129603
Fiedler, F. E. (1965). Engineer the job to fit the manager. Harvard Business Review, 43(5),
115–122.
Furtner, M., & Baldegger, U. (2016). Self-Leadership und Führung. Theorien, Modelle und
praktische Umsetzung [Self-Leadership and Leadership. Theories, models and practi-
cal implementation] (2nd ed.). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-8349-3837-4
Freitag, K., & Freitag, M. (2016) Was versteht man unter agiler Führung [What is agile lead-
ership]? Organisationsentwicklung: Zeitschrift für Unternehmensentwicklung und
Change Management [Organizational Development: Journal for Corporate Develop-
ment and Change Management], 35(2),69–73.
Freyth, A. (2020). Veränderungsbereitschaft stärken [Strengthen willingness to change].

Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-28470-1
Furtner, M., & Baldegger, U. (2016). Self-Leadership and Führung [Self-Leadership and
Leadership] (2nd ed.). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-13045-9
Gaida, I. (2021). Agiles Arbeiten in der Praxis: Wie Unternehmen besser arbeiten und mehr
Werte schaffen [Agile working in practice: How companies work better and create
more value]. Springer. http://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-63965-8
Galván, I. P. (2019). Designing local E-Government: The pillars of organizational structure.

Emerald. http://doi.org/10.1108/9781789732276
Gloger, B. (2016). Agile Leadership mit Scrum [Agile leadership with Scrum]. In T. Petry
(Ed.), Digital Leadership: Erfolgreiches Führen in Zeiten der Digital Economy [Digital
Leadership: Successful leadership in times of the digital economy] (pp. 197–212).
Haufe.
Greenleaf, R. K. (1998). The power of servant-leadership. Berrett-Koehler.
Griffin, R. W. (2022). Management (13th ed.). Cengage Learning.
Grinin, L. E., Grinin, A. L., & Korotayev, A. (2017). Forthcoming Kondratieff wave, cybernetic
revolution, and global ageing. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 115, 52–
68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.09.017
132
Gunsberg, D., Callow, B., Ryan, B., Suthers, J., Baker, P. A., & Richardson, J. (2018). Applying
an organisational agility maturity model. Journal of Organizational Change Manage-
ment, 31(6), 1315–1343. http://doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-10-2017-0398.
Halpin, A. W., & Winer, B. J. (1957). A factorial study of the Leadership Behavior Description
Questionnaire LBDQ. In R. M. Stogdill & A. E. Coons (Eds.), Leader behavior: Its descrip-
tion and measurement (pp. 32–51). Bureau of Business Research, College of Commerce
and Administration, Ohio State University
Häusling, A. (2020). Agile Organisationen: Transformationen erfolgreich gestalten Beispiele

agiler Pioniere [Agile Organizations: Successfully Shaping Transformations Examples
of Agile Pioneers] (2nd Ed.). Haufe.
Helmold, M. (2022). Leadership. Agile, virtuelle und globale Führungskonzepte in Zeiten von
neuen Megatrends [Leadership. Agile, virtual and global leadership concepts in times
of new megatrends]. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-36364-2
Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. H. (1981). So you want to know your leadership style? Training
and Development Journal, 28(2), 22–37.
Hofert, S. (2018). Agiler führen [Lead more agile] (2nd Ed.). Springer. https://doi.org/10.100
7/978-3-658-18561-9
Hoda, R., Noble, J., & Marshall, S. (2011). The impact of inadequate customer collabora-
tion on self-organizing Agile teams. Information and Software Technology, 53(5), 521–
534. doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2010.10.009.
Hoda, R., Noble, J., & Marshall, S. (2010). Organizing self-organizing teams. International
conference on software engineering, volume one. (pp. 285–294). IEEE.
Holbeche, L. (2018). The agile organization: How to build an engaged, innovative, and resil-
ient business (2nd ed.). Kogan Page.
House, R. J. (1976). A 1976 theory of charismatic leadership. (Working paper no. 76-06). Uni-
versity of Toronto. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED133827
Kahra, L. (2022). Quick guide agile transformation. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-

662-65700-3
Katz, R. L. (1974). Skills of an effective administrator. Harvard Business Review, 52(5), 90–
102. https://hbr.org/1974/09/skills-of-an-effective-administrator
Kazandijan, O. (2019). Agile change: How change management can adapt to an agile world
(2nd ed.). Indepently published.
Kieser, A. (2006). Organisationstheorien [Organizational theories] (6th Ed.). Kohlhammer.
Koschnick, W. (1995). Management. Walter De Gruyter.
133
Kraaijenbrink, J., Spender, J.-C., & Groen, A. J. (2010). The resource-based view: A review
and assessment of its critiques. Journal of Management, 36(1), 349–372. https://doi.or
g/10.1177/0149206309350775
Kreitner, R., & Cassidy, C. (2011). Management (12th ed.). CengageLearning.
Kruse, P. (2020). Next practice: Erfolgreiches Management von Instabilität [Next practice:
Successful management of instability]. Gabal.
Kupiek, M. (2021). Agile Transformation: der Weg in die Emotion Economy [Agile transfor-
mation: the path to the emotion economy]. In M. A. Pfannstiel, W. Siedl, & P. F.-J
Steinhoff (Eds.), Agilität in Unternehmen. Eine Praktische Einführung in SAFe und Co
[Enterprise Agility. A Practical Introduction to SAFe and Co] (123–148). Springer. https:
//doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-31001-1_7
Kusay-Merkle, U. (2021). Agiles Projektmanagement im Berufsalltag [Agile project manage-

ment in everyday work] (2nd ed.). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-62810-
2
Laloux, F. (2018). Reinventing organizations. A guide to creating organizations inspired by

the next stage of human consciousness. Nelson Parker.
Lehmann, M.-L., Keimer, I., & Egle, U. (2021). Agile Controlling: Grundlagen Agilität [Agile
controlling: Basics agility]. Controller Magazin, 1, 10–15. https://www.controllerakade
mie.de/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/agile-controlling-agility-basics.pdf
Lihl, H. T., Mahlendorf, M. D., & Schmoltzi, D. (2019). Agiles Controlling mit OKR für
schnelles Wachstum [Agile controlling with OKR for rapid growth]. Controlling & Man-
agement Review, 63(8), 42–49. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12176-019-0059-9.
Lippold, D. (2019). Führungskultur im Wandel [Leadership culture in transition]. Springer. h

ttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-25855-9
Leppelmann, G., & Leppelmann, G. (2021). Sicherheit in der Unsicherheit: Eine Landkarte
für Führung in der Selbstorganisation [Security in uncertainty: A map for leadership in
self-organization]. In M. A. Pfannstiel, W. Siedl, & P. F.-J Steinhoff (Eds.), Agilität in
Unternehmen. Eine Praktische Einführung in SAFe und Co [Enterprise agility: A practical
introduction to SAFe and co] (pp. 101–121) Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-65
8-31001-1_6
Marinkovic, D. (2021). HR und Agilität: Eine Auswertung empirischer Studien [HR and agil-
ity: An evaluation of empirical studies]. In A. Karlshaus, & A. Wolf (Eds.), Agile human
resources [Agile Human Resources] (pp. 27–44) Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-
3-662-63538-4_2
Marston, W. M. (1928). Emotions of ordinary people. Harcourt Brace & Company.
134
Mayrhofer, W., Furtmüller, G. J., & Kasper, H. (2015). Personalmanagement, Führung,
Organisation [Personnel management, leadership, organization] (5th Ed.) Linde.
McKergow, M., & Bailey, H. (2014). Host. Solution Books.
McMillan, E. (2002). Considering organisation structure and design from a complexity

paradigm perspective. In G. Frizelle, & H. Richards (Eds.), Tackling industrial complex-
ity: The ideas that make a difference (pp. 123–136) Cambridge Institute for Manufactur-
ing.
Medinilla, Á. (2012). Agile management: Leadership in an agile environment. Springer. https

://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-28909-5
Mihalache, A. (2017). Project management tools for agile teams. Informatica Economica,
21(4), 85–93. http://doi.org/10.12948/issn14531305/21.4.2017.07
Mintzberg, H. (1973). The nature of managerial work. Harper & Row.
Mirow, M. (2022). Wege aus der Komplexitätsfalle: Strukturen und Strategien im Unterneh-
men neu denken [Ways out of the complexity trap: Rethinking structures and strat-
egies in the company]. Hanser.
Moran, A. (2016): Managing agile: Strategy, implementation, organization, and people.

Springer.
Moreira, M. E. (2013). Being agile: Your roadmap to successful adoption of agile. Apress.
Morgan, G. (1996). Images of organization. Sage.
Morisio, M., Torchiano, M., & Jedlitschka, A. (Eds.). (2020). Product-focused software proc-
ess improvement. 21st international conference, PROFES 2020. Springer. https://doi.o
rg/10.1007/978-3-030-64148-1
Mussnig, W. (2007). Strategien entwickeln und umsetzen. Speziell für kleine und mittel-
ständische Unternehmen [Develop and implement strategies: For small and medium-
sized enterprises]. Linde.
Müller, K. (2022). Entwicklung Eines High Performance Learning Journey Konzepts Zur
Organisationalen Weiterbildung Agiler Rollen Im Rahmen Von SAFe: Spezifiziert Am
Beispiel des Scrum Masters [Development of a high performance learning journey
concept for organizational training of agile roles in the context of SAFe: Specified
using the example of the Scrum Master]. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-3
6869-2
Nath, S. V., & van Schalkwyk, P. (2021). Building Industrial Digital Twins. Packt. https://sear
ch-ebscohost-com.pxz.iubh.de:8443/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edsknv&AN=edsknv.
kt012W12A4&site=eds-live&scope=site
135
Nerur, S., & Balijepally, V. (2007). Theoretical reflections on agile development methodolo-
gies. Communications of the ACM, 50(3), 79–83. https://doi.org/10.1145/1226736.12267
39
Parker, D. W., Holesgrove, M. and Pathak, R. (2015). Improving productivity with self-organ-
ised teams and agile leadership. International Journal of Productivity and Performance
Management, 64(1), 112–128. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-10-2013-0178
Pavlichenko, I., Ramos, C. (2022). Creating agile organizations: A Systemic Approach. Addi-
son-Wesley Professional.
Peteraf, M. A. (1993). The cornerstones of competitive advantage: A resource-based view.

Strategic Management Journal 14(3), 179–191. DOI: 10.1002/smj.4250140303.
Peters, T. (2015). Leadership: Traditionelle und moderne Ansätze mit vielen Beispielen
[Leadership: Traditional and modern approaches with many examples]. Springer.
Pfarrer, M. D., & Smith, K. G. (2015). Creative destruction. In C. L. Cooper (Ed.), Wiley ency-
clopedia of management, (pp. 120–146). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/978111878531
7.weom030020
Pidun, U. (2019). Corporate strategy: Theory and practice. Springer.
Pieterse, A. N., van Knippenberg, D., Schippers, M., Stam, D. (2010). Transformational and
transactional leadership and innovative behavior: The moderating role of psychologi-
cal empowerment. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31(4), 609–623. DOI: 10.1002/
job.650
Porter, M. E. (1985). Competitive advantage: Creating and sustaining superior performance.

Free Press.
Puckett, S., & Neubauer, R. M. (2018). Agiles Führen: Fuhrungskompetenzen fur die agile
transformation [Agile leadership: Leadership competencies for agile transformation].
BusinessVillage.
Rahn, M. (Ed.). (2018). Agiles Personalmanagement. Die gestaltung von klassischen per-
sonalinstrumenten in agile organisationen [Agile human resource management. The
design of classic human resources instruments in agile organizations]. Springer. https:
//doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-23022-7
Rahn, M.; Aleweld, T. (2018): Vergütung in agilen Organisationen: Lassen Sie sich inspirie-
ren [Compensation in agile organizations: Get inspired]. Comp & Ben, 1, 7–9. https://w
ww.totalrewards.de/comp-ben/magazin/2018/
Rhode-Schubert, C. (2021). “There is no magic in SAFe … except maybe for PI Planning”. In

M. A. Pfannstiel, W. Siedl, & P. F.-J. Steinhoff (Eds.), Agilität in Unternehmen: Eine Prakti-
sche Einführung in SAFe und Co [Enterprise agility: A practical introduction to SAFe and
Co] (pp. 379–399). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-31001-1
136
Robbins, S. P., Bergman, R., Stagg, I., & Coulter, M. (2015). Management (7th ed.). Pearson.
Rotermund, U. (2021). Ausbruch aus der Komplexitätsfalle: Leitfaden zum selbstorgani-

sierten Zusammenarbeitsmodell für Manager und Macher [Breaking out of the com-
plexity trap: Guide to the self-organized collaboration model for managers and mach].
Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-62928-4
Rursus (2009). Simplified Kondratieff wave pattern. Wikimedia. https://commons.wikimedi

a.org/wiki/File:Kondratieff_Wave.svg
Sauter, R., Sauter, W., & Wolfig, R. (2018). Agile Werte- und Kompetenzentwicklung: Wege
in eine neue Arbeitswelt [Agile value and competence development: Paths to a new
working world]. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-57305-1
Scharner-Wolff, P., Witte, E. (2018). Agiles Controlling: Veränderung als Chance [Agile con-
trolling: Change as an opportunity]. Controlling and Management Review, 62(4), 24–33.
DOI: 10.1007/s12176-018-0019-9.
Schiefer, D. (2022). Agile Skalierungsframeworks in der Theorie und Praxis: Einsatzgebiete

und Grenzen im Vergleich [Agile scaling frameworks in theory and practice: A compari-
son of areas of application and limitations]. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-6
58-37772-4
Schnell, N., Schnell, A. (2019). New work hacks: 50 Inspirationen für modernes und innova-
tives Arbeiten [New work hacks: 50 inspirations for modern and innovative work].
Springer.
Schreyögg, G., Kliesch, M. (2005). Dynamic capabilities and the development of organiza-
tional competencies [discussion paper 25/05]. Freie Universität Berlin.
Schweitzer, S., Mehmeti, D. (2021). Transformation und Management von agilen Organisa-
tionen [Transformation and management of agile organizations]. In M. A. Pfannstiel,
W. Siedl, & P. F.-J. Steinhoff (Eds.), Agilität in Unternehmen: Eine Praktische Einführung
in SAFe und Co [Enterprise agility: A practical introduction to SAFe and Co] (pp. 247–
259). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-31001-1
Shewhart, W. A. (1938). Application of statistical methods to manufacturing problems.

Journal of the Franklin Institute, 226(2), 163–186. DOI: 10.1016/S0016-0032(38)90436-3
Shewhart, W. A., Deming, W. E. (1986). Statistical method from the viewpoint of quality
control (2nd ed.). Dover.
Siedl, W., Nietschke, U. (2021). Ohne Führungskräfte geht es nicht. Die Rolle von Führung-
skräften bei der erfolgreichen Einführung von SAFe. In M. A. Pfannstiel, W. Siedl, & P. F.-
J. Steinhoff (Eds.), Agilität in Unternehmen: Eine Praktische Einführung in SAFe und Co
[Enterprise agility: A practical introduction to SAFe and Co] (pp. 84–100). Springer. htt
ps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-31001-1
137
Siedl, W. (2018). SAFe: Reiseführer zum lean-agilen Unternehmen: Wie Sie mit SAFe und
dem Enterprise Transformation Cycle lean-agile Methoden und Tools in Ihrem Unter-
nehmen einführen [SAFe: Guide to the lean-agile enterprise: How to introduce lean-
agile methods and tools into your company with SAFe and the Enterprise Transforma-
tion Cycle]. In M. A. Pfannstiel, & P. F.-J. Steinhoff (Eds.), Der Enterprise Transformation
Cycle [The enterprise transformation cycle] (pp. 73–94). Springer Fachmedien Wiesba-
den. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-22694-7_4
Stellman, A., & Greene, J. (2021). Learning Agile. Upfront Books.
Sternad, D. (2015). Strategieentwicklung kompakt. Eine praxisorientierte Einführung

[Strategy development compact: A practice-oriented introduction]. Springer. https://d
oi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-10367-5
Stock-Homburg, R., Groß, M., & Roller, D. (2016). Agilität und Effizienz richtig ausbalancie-
ren–Wettbewerbsvorteile durch integriertes Personalmanagement [Balancing agility
and efficiency properly-competitive advantages through integrated human resources
management]. Personalführung [Human resources management] 7–8, 18–24.
Stogdill, R. M. (1948): Personal factors associated with leadership: A survey of the litera-
ture. The Journal of Psychology 25(1), 35–71. DOI: 10.1080/00223980.1948.9917362
Stuckenburck, L. C. (1979). The matrix organization. Project Management Quarterly, 10(3),

21–33. https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/matrix-organization-structure-reason-ev
olution-1837
Tannenbaum, R., Schmidt, W. H. (1973). How to choose a leadership pattern. Harvard Busi-
ness Review. https://hbr.org/1973/05/how-to-choose-a-leadership-pattern
Teece, D., Peteraf, M. A., & Leih, S. (2016). Dynamic capabilities and organizational agility:
Risk, uncertainty, and entrepreneurial management in the innovation economy [work-
ing paper number 2771245]. California Management Review. https://doi.org/10.2139/s
srn.2771245
Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and microfoundations of

(sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal 28(13), 1319–
1350.
Teece, D. J. (2010). Technological innovation and the theory of the firm. In: B. H. Hall, & N.
Rosenberg (Eds.), Handbook of the economics of innovation (pp. 679–730). Elsevier.
Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management.
Strategic Management Journal 18(7), 509–533. DOI: 10.1002/
(SICI)1097-0266(199708)18:7<509::AID-SMJ882>3.0.CO;2-Z
Turetken, O., Stojanov, I., & Trienekens, J. J. M. (2017). Assessing the adoption level of
scaled agile development: A maturity model for Scaled Agile Framework. Journal of
Software: Evolution and Process, 29(6), e1796. https://doi.org/10.1002/smr.1796
138
Waurick, T. (2014). Prozessreorganisation mit Lean Six Sigma: Eine empirische Analyse
[Process reorganization with Lean Six Sigma: An empirical analysis]. Springer.
Weber, M. (1976). Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft [Economy and society] (5th ed). Mohr Sie-
beck.
Weber, F., & Berendt, J. (2017). Erfolgsfaktor: Agile Führung [Success factor: Agile leader-
ship]. In F. Weber & J. Berendt (Eds.), Robuste Unternehmen [Robust companies]
(pp. 38–46). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-18135-2_5
Wendler, R. (2014). Development of the organizational agility maturity model. Federated

conference on computer science and information systems, (pp. 1197–1206). IEEE. https:
//annals-csis.org/Volume_2/pliks/79.pdf
Wernerfelt, B. (1984). A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal

5(2), 171–180. DOI: 10.1002/smj.4250050207.
Witzel, M. (2016). Management. In A. Wilkinson & S. Johnstone (Eds.), Encyclopedia of

human resource management (p. 268). Edward Elgar.
Worley, C. G., Williams, T., Lawler, E. E., & O’Toole, J. (2014). The agility factor: Building
adaptable organizations for superior performance. Jossey-Bass.
Zollo, M., Winter, S. G. (2002). Deliberate learning and the evolution of dynamic capabili-
ties. Organization Science 13(3), 339–351. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3086025
139
LIST OF TABLES AND
FIGURES
Figure 1: Aspects of Agile Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Figure 2: Management Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Figure 3: Mintzberg’s Managerial Roles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Figure 4: Simplified Kondratieff Wave Pattern . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
Figure 5: Impact of Complexity on Companies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
Figure 6: Kanban Board for Writing the Bachelor Thesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
Figure 7: Functional Structured Organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
Figure 8: Matrix Organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
Figure 9: Mayrhofer’s Maturity Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
Figure 10: Maturity Model of an Agile Organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
Table 1: Comparison Between Traditional Leadership and Agile Leadership . . . . . . . . . . . 71
Figure 11: Components of Agile Leadership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
Figure 12: Six Functions of an Agile Leader . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
Table 2: New Leadership Competencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
Figure 13: Success-Relevant Behaviors of Managers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
Figure 14: The Ideal Typical Strategy Development Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
Figure 15: Strategy Development in Comparison to Non-Agile Organizations . . . . . . . . . . 91
Figure 16: PDCA (Deming) Cycle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
Figure 17: Challenges of Agile Workflow Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
Figure 18: Cynefin Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
140
IU Internationale Hochschule GmbH
IU International University of Applied Sciences
Juri-Gagarin-Ring 152
D-99084 Erfurt
Mailing Address
Albert-Proeller-Straße 15-19
D-86675 Buchdorf
media@iu.org
www.iu.org
Help & Contacts (FAQ)

On myCampus you can always find answers
to questions concerning your studies.

001-2023-0828 DLBNWAM01 E Course Book

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

001-2023-0828 DLBNWAM01 E Course Book

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

001-2023-0828 DLBNWAM01 E Course Book

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

AGILE MANAGEMENT

© 2023 IU Internationale Hochschule GmbH

1.1 Introduction to the Topic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

2.1 Agility in Response to Change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

4.1 Concept of an Agile Organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51

5.1 Changed Role of the Manager . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68

6.1 Concept and Principles of Agile Planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85

7.1 Concept and Classification in the Staff Management Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97

8.1 Concept and Function of Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108

9.1 Collaboration Tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118

10.1 Agility as a Panacea . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124

Muduli, A. (2013). Workforce agility: A review of literature. IUP Journal of Management

Muthucumaru, A. (2021). The future of collaborative technology within Scrum/Agile practi-

The implementation of agile management at an organizational level will also be covered.

On completion of this unit, you will be able to ...

– define agile management.

Source: Anja Hagedorn (2023).

1.2 Definition of the Term Management

Academic Contextualization of Management

Scope of Managerial Activities

As introduced by the definitions above, the management of organizations is commonly

Source: Anja Hagedorn (2023), based on Porter (1985).

• planning: development of a company’s overall strategy, or a strategy for a particular

as a visionary and consensus-oriented personality

• conceptual skills: analytic thinking and integrative problem solving

Source: Anja Hagedorn (2023), Mintzberg (1973).

• individuals and interactions over processes and tools

1.4 Agility and Mindset

social dimension of the project (Bartonitz et al., 2018).

By developing a positive fundamental attitude in the change process, the motivation of

On completion of this unit, you will be able to ...

– discuss the internal and external causes that determine agility.

2.1 Agility in Response to Change

Natural Change in Economies

Whether a company is confronted with a cyclical change or an unexpected change makes

Agility as Capability to Master Change?

For instance, medium-sized manufacturing companies are finding it increasingly difficult

2.2 External Drivers for Agility

Economic Activity and “Creative Destruction”

Source: Rursus (2009). CC-BY-SA 3.0.

Complexity as External Driver for Agility

Figure 5: Impact of Complexity on Companies

Source: Anja Hagedorn (2023), based on Mirow (2022).

New Business Models

How Can Agility Encounter Complexity in Organizations?

As a management concept, agility can counter increasing complexity in the corporate

To successfully apply agile management in a company, prerequisites must be met: First,

The concepts of economic cycles, Kondratieff waves, and complexity

On completion of this unit, you will be able to ...

– define agile management.

This section introduces the essential principles of Scrum.

Essential Principles of Scrum

The development team is a self-organized and self-governed team of product developers

Scrum Process and Principles

• interdisciplinary self-organization: Employees of a company should be involved in ach-

Meaning of Scrum for Project Management

Kanban Board, Kanban, and Work in Progress Limit

The Six Principles of Kanban