What are common patterns in the radar?
Here are some common patters, when analyzing a team radar:
1. Overall Radar Analysis: When you look at the radar, when the average red line is towards the center, the team has rated themselves less mature (lower on the scale), as it expands outwards, the team has rated themselves more mature (higher on the scale). So, what does the overall radar tell you?
2. Look for Patterns: Dig deeper by looking for specific patterns such as the ones below.
Pattern – Wide range of responses
This could be a symptom of several things:
- New team members
- Lack of communication on this area/competency
- Misunderstanding of what this competency means
- Different roles experience or view this differently
Pattern – Very High scores
This should be rare as there are not many teams that have achieved world class maturity and adoption of practices so when you do see very high ratings, look for the following:
- This could be accurate and the team may have developed in maturity for this specific area. Look around the rest of the radar to see if other related areas you expect to be high are actually mature as well. New teams are not likely to have achieved this level of maturity.
- Too many world-class scores could also reflect fear, misunderstanding or over-rating. Some teams are afraid to rate themselves realistically because they are afraid of looking bad or being judged by management. Teams might also have a misunderstanding of the competency or perhaps they are new and very excited about improvements in this area and reflect this excitement by over-rating as they don’t know what they don’t know. This reduces the confidence in the data quality. This is an area where the AHF has a responsibility to help the team calibrate its responses.
Pattern – Very Low Scores - Lack of Adoption, Low Maturity
Teams may rate themselves less mature for adopting specific practices. This could be a good sign of the team being open and honest and reflecting realistically where they are. Dig to see if these areas could be impacting the team and if this is an area to discuss with the whole group.
It may also be the case that team members have taken a very strict view of the criteria and scored themselves as less mature. The teams should discuss these scores in order to see if they might better align in their judgement.
3. Read the textual responses and try to understand why the team rated themselves how they did and what common threads emerge from the collective comments.
When taking the assessment, team members had the chance to add textual responses. The sections are the Sub-Dimension Notes, Strengths, Improvements, and Impediments. Teams will review these during the retrospective and use them to help create growth plan items. These are anonymous so they should not contain information that can tie them back to one specific team member.
Stakeholder results may show in orange or red, if that feature is enabled for your company.
Filter the results by participant groups
When team members are added to a team in AgilityHealth®, they are tagged with relevant participant group information. Assessment results can be filtered by selecting different participant groups, using the two green arrows in the upper left hand corner. Click on the green arrows and select which participant groups you want to see. For example: filter by Leadership Team vs. Technical to analyze how these two groups responded, or Contractor vs. Employee or Location 1 vs. Locations 2 vs. Location 3 to look for differences by geography.
Utilize the analytics table
Scroll down below the radar to view this table which provides a summary of the top 5 and lowest 5 competencies (average score), and the top 5 and lowest 5 consensus competencies (these are the ones with the narrowest and widest shading). During the retrospective, the team should review and analyze these as part of the discussion.
Here are some specific things to look for and discuss:
- Competencies with low consensus or alignment are obvious candidates for further discussion to understand the differences of opinion on the team.
- For the Highest 5 competencies, it is sometimes useful to understand the dynamics that enabled these high scores in order to discover insights that can help in other competencies.
- For the Lowest 5 competencies, it is valuable to understand why the team is less mature and identify the impediments to greater maturity. Are these within the team's control - and can they be addressed by Team Growth Items (TGIs) or are they outside the team's control and the team needs to ask for help via Organizational Growth Items (OGIs).
- Learn how consensus is calculated
You can click on any competency name in the Analytics Table to open a pop up box that will list the questions associated with that competency. If there is a Growth Portal for the radar type your team used and the Growth Portal is enabled for your company, you can click on the Growth Portal button to go directly to the resources for that competency.
Team Maturity Stage
If the assessment was for the TeamHealth® Radar, a Team Maturity Stage should be populated for the team on the Edit Assessment page. This was calculated based on responses to the qualitative questions (no quantitative questions are included) in the assessment. An AHF can override the maturity stage if they truly believe the team is in a different stage than what AgilityHealth® calculated for the team.
If the assessment was not for the TeamHealth® Radar, the Facilitator and ScrumMaster will work with your team to help determine which maturity stage the team believes they are in. You'll use the below maturity road map for guidance.
Please note: Some of our radars use High/Low or High/Medium/Low or incorporate Pre-Crawl into the Crawl/Walk/Run/Fly scale. The below is an example for Crawl, Walk, Run, Fly.
Learn more in our article: What do Crawl, Walk, Run, Fly mean as Maturity Stages.