 I'm not meant to start until 2.30, so if you're okay, we just wait for another four minutes. Okay? Cool, thanks. All right, I'm going to cheer a bit, guys. I'm going to still one or two minutes early, just because I got a few things I want to talk about and I only have 20 minutes. I just want to go through things. You can hear me? Can you hear me now? Over there? Can you hear me? Good. Can you hear me over there? Cool, thank you. Thank you very much for coming to this session. So my name is Harry Biputra. I work for REA Group with the number one property portal in Australia. And today I'll be talking to you guys about crossing the T's and doting the I's. It's a bit weird title, I know. So T is to refer to the T-shaped people, general specialist, and I is to refer to a specialist. And it's really about my experience in the organization, how we grow T-shaped people. So just a little bit about REA. So we started in 1995 in a little garage in a suburb in Melbourne. We have about 700 people working globally for us. We have offices in Hong Kong, Luxembourg, Italy. And that's our purpose really. We want to help people to live their property dreams and do it in such a way that it's simple, efficient, and stress-free. A little bit about market capitalization of REA. That's the share price in the last five years. And as you can see in the last one year and a bit, it just skyrocketed. We valued at $6.5 billion at the moment. And that put us within, I don't know, top 80 or top 70 in Australia. So we also like to think that we can achieve this because we moved to AirJal in about four years ago, which enabled us to react faster to customer needs. And as a result, you know, we can do much things better. Just a little bit about the culture of REA. Things that we value are things such as collaboration, passion, and innovation. So pictures here are about hack days that we do. So you've heard about hackathons, FedEx days, so this is similar. So every three months, the whole company stops for about two days. When I mean the whole company, it's literally the whole company. And we will create teams, small teams, and talking about different functions from the teams, marketing cells, operations, product IT, getting together, working on ideas. And the last half day, we will showcase to everyone. And there will be trophies and prizes and everything. That's our CEO over there with the funky glasses and our CIO with the funky Santa Claus head. Okay, so today, talking about growing T-Share people in the organization. My passion is about building people, growing people. Toyota has a really cool saying, you know, first we build great people, then we build great cars. So I like to think the same way. Like, first we want to build great people, and then we build great software. We build great products for our users. And I really love when I see people grow in the organization. And as a result of that, I love to see when a team work together, collaboratively together. So last November, I went to Toyota. I went to Japan for a week to do a lean study tool. And as part of that, I had the opportunity to visit Toyota. One thing I learned from Toyota is they have a concept of multi-skilled worker, which means that when people join Toyota, typically as a friend is when they graduate, and the training program is about 10 years in Toyota, they would learn different skills. There's no role description for that person to come in. There's no specific roles for that person. They would come and learn different things and get rotated around the organization, around the factory, and learn different things. And in Toyota, there's a concept of work cells. And every work cell must produce something out every tech time. There's a tech time, which is like a heartbeat. So Toyota produces cars every four minutes or five minutes, depending on what the tech time is. Every four minutes, new cars coming out of the production line. And every work cell must be able to produce something every tech time. Now, a work cell can consist of five, six people, and they must work together to be able to produce something out every four or five minutes. Now, if one person in that team is struggling, the other must help. So the work cells travel together as a team, as a unit. There's no one left behind. There's no one can say, I'm done. It's your job now. If you're behind, it's your fault. No one can say that. The whole work cell must do that. And if they can't do that, they have to pull the line. And when they pull the line, the whole production line stops. And that's really bad. So I'm going to talk about two case studies that I have to write. So the first case study is about the classical deaf and ops side one. I don't know if you have experienced this. I think in my experience, I see a lot of this. The developer happily writing software and then handball to ops. Ops deployed in production. It doesn't work. And there's a lot of, you know, blaming games happen over there. And this is what I saw in REA when I joined three years ago. The operations people will deal with the production issues. And the developer over there, the team, move on to the next great thing. And that is just not fair. Ops get woken up in the middle of the night dealing with production issues. They don't even know. They don't even build the software. And yet they have to deal with these things. It's just not fair. And this is a wall that we have about production deployment planning. And when I joined REA about three years ago, we do our deployment every two weeks. It used to be four weeks and then they reduce it to two weeks. And every two weeks, it took two days to do deployment. It's just extremely painful. And my first job when I joined REA is, all right, now you deal with deployment. And I had to deal with deployment and it's just extremely painful. Every morning, we have to get about, I don't know, three percent of it from each team to get together in front of this wall to talk about, okay, what are we going to deploy today? What the dependency are? And we waste about 15 to 30 minutes just doing that. Just imagine the waste in doing all this. So, and I think the root cause of the issue is this, which is the organizational structure. We have a CIO that has two direct reports, which is head of operations and head of delivering. And as you can see, straight away, there's a silo there. When there's a silo, people will naturally align to what their team is doing. That's what they're being optimized to do. And we're seeing exactly that. So, we decided three years ago, we're going to do some rotations. We want to build some empathy and we want to build some, you know, collaboration between the two teams. So, we will rotate two people every six months from operations to delivery, from delivery to operations. And just keep doing that. And meet one of my team members. His name is Edad. He's probably the oldest developer I've ever seen in my life. But he is awesome. He was the first one to put his hand up and say, look, I want to move to the operations team. I want to learn a bit more about what they're doing. And I want to feel their pain. So, he rotated it into the operations team. And we got the operations team of people coming in. And we noticed that the collaboration started getting better. People started working together. The whole team started caring more about the software that they built. But it wasn't enough. There's something else is missing. So, Meet Trent. Trent was the operations engineer. And he moved from the operations team to delivery. And he was the one that noticed this problem. What we've done, essentially, we moved the silo from outside the team into the team. So, we have these operations people coming into the team. And yet they are still the one that doing all the deployment and get called in the middle of the night. And it just doesn't make any sense. So, now, instead of the whole team dealing with the problem in the company, we have one or two people within the team dealing with the problem. So, we discussed at length with Trent. And we want to improve this situation. We got the opportunity to start a new project. So, what we did is we gathered people from around the company that has the mindset, that has done the rotations. We put them together and we told them, that's it, there's no ops in your team. You're all responsible for operations right from the start. And these people, because they have experienced the pain, they understand, they want to do it. They want to do it themselves. And we said, look, Trent is going to help you guys, but Trent is going to leave the team after a few months. You guys need to be self-sufficient and you guys need to be able to do it yourself. Right from the start, they start talking about monitoring. They start talking about alerting. They start talking about continuous delivery pipeline. And it's just amazing. It completely changed the mindset. And it's now more about how we can do this together. Rather than, this is my role, that's your role, but this is how we do it together. So, I see more of that. I see more Trent coaching people how they can do the infrastructure well. How they can deal with production issues well. And this team created the first single-click deployment in the whole REI. That was the showcase that we did about two years ago. That's our head of delivery, pushing the button for the first software that we did with single-click deployment. And it's just changed the whole culture in REI. And there's so much excitement that we are finally able to do this within the organization. And I started to see production issues getting less. We can now deploy multiple times a day. And even the attitude of the product manager changed. In the past, the product manager will like to jam every single thing into the release because the next release might be two weeks away. But now, can't do it today? That's fine, we'll do it tomorrow. Because we can deploy much faster. All right, I'm going to talk about case study number two. So, I inherited this team about two years ago. And I wasn't sure what this team was doing, whether they were doing workflow, whether they were doing agile, or they were doing something in between. They're an agile team. They got a wall. But one thing that's interesting is they got big upfront requirements. The product manager and the BA will get together and design solutions. And not only that, they want the team to estimate on it. They want the team to, okay, we get a solution. Can you guys estimate on it? Once they've done the estimation, they put it away. They don't even start working on it. Six months later, the product manager will say, okay, we got the requirements, we got the estimation, let's do it. It's just like, what? It doesn't make any sense. You're holding someone accountable for irrelevant information. Something in information that's already not valid. And we find that instead of actually delivering value to our customers, we are focusing more about following a plan. We are focusing more about meeting a deadline. Success is about meeting a deadline rather than delivering value to our customers. So this is Natalia. Natalia is a BA, sorry, Natalia is a QI in that thing. So when I look at that situation, something has to change. And I try to influence the product manager as much as I can, but the organizational structure still the blocker. The product manager belongs to another line of another functional line. So I try to influence the BA and that's within my direct influence. And I try to work with the BA at that time to challenge the product manager to ask the question, why are we doing this? What is the failure we're trying to bring to our customers? What is the problem we're trying to solve and try to get the whole team to be involved? And it was clear to me after four or five months the BA wasn't ready for this journey. So I had to move the BA to another team because he wasn't ready. But I have Natalia here, which is a QI in that thing. During our regular catch-ups with Natalia, I found that she saw exactly the same thing and she was the one that voicing a lot of these concerns. And she was ready to leave the team, actually, because she was frustrated with the way the team worked. So I said to Natalia, look, there's an opportunity to make a difference now. Why don't you step up? Why don't you become the BA of that thing? And if you're frustrated, this is your chance to be able to make a difference. And she took that opportunity. She jumped and became a BA. She didn't have any BA training before, but she has the right mindset to do it. So she became the BA of that team. And quickly, I see a difference in the team. The teams start working together. Natalia will challenge the product manager. Why are we doing this? Whenever the product manager asks her to come up with a solution, it's just like, no, no, no, no. We have to bring the whole team into discussion. So I started to see a lot more huddles. So Natalia is doing the huddles with everyone in the team and started asking about why, what's the problem we're trying to solve? We were doing personas, trying to understand the people that we're building the software for, doing concept mapping and doing a lot of workshop with the team together. And the team owns the solution now. And there's no greater waste in actually, you know, building something that the user will not even use. So by doing this, we understand more about the user. The team actually took the initiative also to meet with real estate agents, understanding more about how they use the system and learning from them. But now I have another problem. Natalia was the only QI in that team. And now I'm losing a QI. So then the team started asking me a question, you know, like, what are we going to do? We don't have a QI. And I discussed this at length with Natalia and I discussed this at length with key members in the team. And it's funny because their answer was, we'll do the QI. We don't need a specialist QI. We will do the QI together. And eventually the team said, cool, we'll do it together. There are people in the team that's not comfortable. They've been doing the liver development coding for 10, 15 years. Now they have to do QI. And somehow there's some sort of stigma that QI is less prestigious than development. But, you know, I just don't understand how you can, you know, you can get away with trying to write code and get someone else tested for you. You've got to have the full ownership of the whole team. Quality is the responsibility of the whole team. It's not the responsibility of someone. So we agree as a whole team that the whole team will do QI. Natalia will act as a coach. So Natalia will coach the team how to do good QI. Natalia will help them to build a good test plan and how to execute it. But Natalia will not do the work. The team has to do the work. And I can see a lot of improvements from that. You know, I see less issues, less back and forth stories going from QI to doing less of that. I can see the whole team actually having conversations now, you know, with the help desk, going to offer to the help desk, talking to them directly. What is the problem that the customer is facing? Rather than going through and the ticket or JIRA issues or, you know, talking to the product managers, talking to the BA, they actually create conversations now within the organization. So that's what I have. Key takeaways is you've got to break down the functional silos. To me, the functional silos is a barrier to high-performing agile teams. As long as you have roles, you will optimize to your role. You will not focus on the goal of the team. So by break, you've got to make the whole team focus on the goal. What are we trying to achieve rather than what the role is trying to achieve? And cultivate people. You need to build a learning organization where people can learn different aspects of the different functions. They can learn more wider skills, not just one skill that they know. And by doing that, people become more well-rounded, people become more mature, and as a result, they become more effective, not just for themselves but for the whole organization as well. And by doing this, we also create a leadership pipeline. So people like Natalia, people like Trent, people can observe this problem in the organization. They are the next candidate for the next leaders. And I'm happy to see Trent is one of the leaders in the organization now. He's leading an initiative and he's doing really well. So that's what I have. If you have any questions, I'm not sure. Three minutes. If you have any questions, I'll be more happy to answer them. QA also does the testing. Or does it just be process assurance? What are the team processes? So the QA, what I'm talking about is both. So it's doing the testing. But the process is we have the defined process. So we do TDD and BDD and then at the end, we do exploratory testing. So that all thing is already set up from the start. So it's really the manual act of doing the testing. Eventually it's the one that the team has to do it. What percentage of that QA did you finally end up automating? Sorry? The QA? How much of it did you end up automating? We automate a lot of the QA. So it's more about the exploratory testing that the team has to do it themselves. But even the automated testing, the team has to create them themselves. So good question. We no longer have head of operations. So that role is now CTO. And the CTO just have multiple delivery teams. There's no operations team and delivery teams anymore. Any other questions? Thank you very much.