57946Re: [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT] Re: More critical views on SAFe
- Aug 19, 2014Julien,On Aug 19, 2014, at 12:33 AM, julien@... [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT] <SCRUMDEVELOPMENT@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
We can argue for years that this is not the way it should be and that they should not decide what they are not hands-on on. From a principle perspective, this point of view makes sense. From an evolutionary perspective, this point of view is not logic. Because it says "no evolution is better than a small evolution with a small but possible positive outcome".Most mutations are fatal in biology: that might be useful to keep in mind.With a corporation, we do not get to try three or four ways of "going Agile". We're lucky if we get to try one.Therefore, since presumably we're not mutating organizations at random and accepting the inevitable massive die-off, we should mutate them wisely. SAFe does have a small possible positive outcome. But trying it will mean that company does not try an approach with a larger, more probably positive outcome.Since such approaches exist, it is unwise to recommend SAFe.
Sometimes you just have to stop holding on with both hands, both feet, and your tail, to get someplace better.Of course you might plummet to the earth and die, but probably not: you were made for this.
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>