A little knowledge is a dangerous thing, right? Agile is no different. Along with a couple of colleagues, I am involved in a website called Comparative Agility. This is free website that allows teams to assess how agile they are. Team members are presented with the set of statements and then decide if those statements are true or false. For example, one statement is, management sets goals but doesn't tell team members how to achieve them. Team members assess whether that is false, mostly false neither true nor false mostly true or true. Another sample statement team member would see is all bugs are fixed during the sprint in which they are found. The questions on the comparative agility assessment are grouped into seven different areas called dimensions, such as teamwork, requirements planning, technical practices, quality, and so on. The questions about quality have to do with the practices that produce quality products. Things like, is the product owner involved in determining acceptance criteria? Are tests being automated? Our tester's involved right from the start and things like that. One of the nice things about the Comparative Agility website is that it allows us to track a team's answers over time. We can see how agile they are today, and then again at some point in the future. I want to share something interesting I found with some, not all, but some of my clients involving the quality dimension of The Comparable Agile Assessment. And that is that teams with six months of experience with Agile had higher quality scores than teams two years of Agiles experience. What you see on the screen here are the results from one company. These are averages for all teams six month into their Agil adoption and then two year into Agils adoption. And as you can see, they appear to be getting worse at producing quality products. Yet I could take every one of you to visit this company, and we would all agree in some subjective manner that they have improved over the 18 months between these two periods. There would be no doubt in our minds, but here they are saying they'd gotten worse. So what happened? Remember, these results come from self-assessments. This is an example of the Dunning-Kruger effect. When we asked these team members with six months experience if they were testing early and if were they testing often, they said, testing is through the roof. It's all we do. We automate all the time. we write two or three, sometimes even four tests per sprint. To their agile novice minds, that was a lot. They were like the horrible singers who decide to appear on America's Got Talent. They didn't know what they didn' know. But when we asked them again when they had two years of experience, they were thinking, wow, we test all the time, but it's not enough. We have so far to go. Two years in, They knew better. They know better because they knew more. So especially when you are first learning, Remind yourself of the need for intellectual humility. Then, just when you are certain you've got something mastered, remind yourself how far you probably really have to go to really master something.