Navigating the Overlap: When Agile Meets Adaptive Leadership

It is no secret I am fond of Adaptive Leadership. In fact, it is a mission of mine to raise awareness on the Adaptive Leadership framework - because I believe it is a mindset and skillset that can help change the public/private/nonprofit sector for the better of all humankind.

Adaptive leadership takes a more human-centric approach than that of other systems, and requires active participation from stakeholders in order to work. In other words, you are not "selling" your vision for other to act on: you are bringing people together to act around the work that is needed to make progress. People are needed beyond just a sales pitch to others - it is a collaborative effort to move across the finish line with all key stakeholders considered and accounted for. But what happens when the organization is more "technical" focused? Would a more human-centric approach conflict with the systems currently in place? Answer: Not at all.

In fact, it is systems like Agile that have quite a bit of overlap with Adaptive leadership. The systems thinking roots are evident across both frameworks, along with the cross-functional work and experiment-oriented mindset needed to be succussful. The difference lies in their application. Agile is usually used for process improvement and product development; Adaptive Leadership is for human systems improvement and development. To best explain this, let's look at the story of the anecdotal tech company Horizon Software:

When Horizon Software faced declining customer satisfaction and increasing development costs, the leadership team initially approached it as a technical problem. After all, they were well-versed in Agile methodologies, having implemented Scrum across their development teams three years prior.

"We need to tighten our sprints and improve our velocity," declared Marcus, the CTO, during a leadership meeting. The team nodded in agreement and implemented more rigorous Agile practices: better backlog grooming, more detailed acceptance criteria, and daily standups that strictly adhered to the 15-minute timeframe.

Three months later, they were still struggling.

Analysis:

Horizon was treating an adaptive challenge as a technical one. Technical challenges can be solved with existing knowledge and tools—like optimizing Agile practices. Adaptive challenges, however, require changes in values, beliefs, and behaviors across the organization.

Sarah, the newly hired VP of Product, had experience with Adaptive Leadership and suggested a different approach. "I think we're missing something deeper here. Let's take a step back and observe the patterns across departments."

She initiated a series of cross-functional workshops where team members from development, product, marketing, and customer support shared their perspectives on the challenges they faced. These sessions revealed that while engineering was efficiently delivering features based on the product roadmap, there was a fundamental disconnect: the features being built weren't addressing the evolving needs of their enterprise customers.

Analysis:

Sarah employed the first principle of Adaptive Leadership—"Get on the balcony"—to observe the system as a whole rather than getting caught in the trenches. This revealed systemic issues that couldn't be solved by Agile methodologies alone.

The company then embarked on a dual approach:

1. They continued using Agile methods for the technical aspects of delivery: sprint planning, standups, and retrospectives.

2. They incorporated Adaptive Leadership principles to address the deeper challenge of understanding customer needs:

   • They created cross-functional teams with direct customer exposure

   • Leadership gave these teams permission to experiment with new approaches

   • They established psychological safety for teams to report findings that contradicted existing beliefs

"We need to be comfortable with discomfort," Sarah explained. "Some of what we learn might challenge our core assumptions about our product strategy."

Analysis:

This approach exemplifies "giving the work back to the people" in Adaptive Leadership—empowering teams to own both the problem and the solution, while providing a supportive container for experimentation.

Six months later, Horizon had implemented a modified Agile framework that incorporated continuous customer feedback loops and allowed for more flexible roadmap adjustments. Customer satisfaction scores began to climb, and team morale improved significantly.

Where Agile and Adaptive Leadership Converge

The Horizon case illustrates how Agile and Adaptive Leadership can complement each other:

• Systems Thinking: Both frameworks recognize the interconnectedness of all parts of the organization. Agile focuses on development systems, while Adaptive Leadership addresses broader organizational systems.

• Experimentation: Agile's iterative approach aligns with Adaptive Leadership's emphasis on small experiments. The difference lies in scope—Agile experiments focus on product features, while Adaptive experiments can challenge fundamental business assumptions.

• Learning Orientation: Both approaches value continuous learning, but Adaptive Leadership extends this beyond process improvement to include questioning deeply held beliefs and values.

Final Thoughts:

By embracing both technical and adaptive approaches, organizations like Horizon can address the full spectrum of challenges they face in today's rapidly evolving marketplace.