Strong Development Teams don't maintain a ‘Pecking Order’
Understanding what ‘Pecking order’ is all about in a team’s construct
What does the term ‘Pecking Order’ stand for?
The basic pattern of social organization within a flock of poultry in which each bird pecks another lower in the scale without fear of retaliation and submits to pecking by one of higher rank broadly: a dominance hierarchy in a group of social animals.
How do you find the ‘Pecking Order’?
The pecking order is, literally, determined by pecking. Bigger, stronger, and more aggressive chickens bully their way to the top of the flock by pecking the others into submission with their pointy beaks. First, they strut about, fluff their feathers, and squawk, but if that doesn’t get the point across, they peck.
From where does this term ‘Pecking Order’ originate?
Pecking order or peck order is the colloquial term for the hierarchical system of social organization. It was first described by Thorleif Schjelderup-Ebbe in 1921 under the German terms Hackordnung or Hackliste and introduced into English in 1927.
The original use of pecking order referred to the expression of dominance in chickens. Dominance in chickens is asserted by various behaviors, including pecking, which was used by Schjelderup-Ebbe as a measure of dominance and leadership order.
In his 1924 German-language article, he noted that “defense and aggression in the hen are accomplished with the beak”.
This emphasis on pecking led many subsequent studies on fowl behavior to use it as a primary observation; however, it has been noted that roosters tend to leap and use their claws in conflicts.
And why do animals establish a ‘Pecking Order’?
The basic concept behind the establishment of the pecking order among, for example, chickens, is that it is necessary to determine who is the ‘top chicken,’ the ‘bottom chicken’, and where all the rest fit in between.
The establishment of the dominance hierarchy may reduce the incidence of conflict and thus reduce the expenditure of energy required for aggressive competition.
The dominance level determines which individual gets preferential access to resources such as food and mates.
What does ‘Pecking Order’ has to do with Scrum Teams?
Most of the Software engineers (if not all) are relatively quiet and don’t promote or create visibility for them through their social interactions.
Imagine in this context, what if
- Smart talk substitutes for action?
- An individual’s position or rank is measured only by their social interactions?
More harm is done with such a crude measure put in practice. This creates a pattern of blocking interactions, belittling others’ suggestions, and aggressive interruptions especially between the senior and junior development team members when they come together to work as a team.
Am leaving it up to your imagination with this pattern around other factors like:
- Years with the company
- Academic Background
- Expertise by repeated assertion
- Dominating personality
Not limited to the list above, there are many other ways to faux the experience and increase the differences on the ground creating a ‘Pecking Order’.
Remembering these wonderful questions forming the core of Scrum,
- What conditions allow teams to best address complex adaptive problems and delivering products of the highest possible value?
- How can a team be best organized to optimize flexibility, creativity, and productivity?
The obvious pecking order is a sign there is a serious problem when we might try to struggle to figure out answers to those questions.
What should be done about the challenges with a ‘Pecking Order’?
The most important aspect is not how well the individuals work rather how well the team is working together solving problems.
Management and leaders spending time measuring relatively to discern a pecking order not only aids in measuring individual performance but also has a negative impact on the team.
There is no harm in valuing true expertise and timely rewarding them with higher incentives and promotions. But factors behind such decisions shouldn’t be made only on the pecking order.
What about individuals at the bottom and middle of such order? It is more around measuring individual performance and that too around a single dimension. The dimension of a self-proclaimed genius suppressing the less vocal contributors in the team.
In a well functioning team, individuals make the best use of what they can with their expertise in the team.
As Scrum Masters and Coaches, we need to help the People Managers / Line Managers perceive a team view catering to multiple dimensions.
Wrap Up!
Deferring to expertise is not a wrong thing unless such humble submission and respect are enforced or it limits other team members from contributing, learning, and growing their skills.
Stop ‘Pecking’ and stop encouraging ‘Pecking Order’ in Scrum Teams. After all, we are not those animals hunting for a dominant hierarchy to achieve things.
