Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

More critical views on SAFe

Expand Messages
  • Charles Bradley - Professional Scrum Trai
    I d like to highlight a couple of recent additions to the (moderately to mostly critical) views on SAFe:
    Message 1 of 23 , Apr 2, 2014
    • 0 Attachment

      I'd like to highlight a couple of recent additions to the (moderately to mostly critical) views on SAFe:

      http://xprogramming.com/articles/safe-good-but-not-good-enough/
      http://danielgullo.tumblr.com/post/80172140950/safe-spc-training-a-reflection
      http://cognitive-edge.com/blog/entry/6238/safe-the-infantilism-of-management/
      http://www.innovel.net/?p=451

      I want to give a public thanks to Ron, Daniel, and Dave Snowden for their recent reviews.  They are all excellent!  As many of you know, I don't think SAFe is Agile and don't feel like it has a net positive benefit to the industry in the long term.  Full disclosure of my bias!  If anyone else has similar reviews, feel free to let me know.  I'm collecting them on my web site.

      My full list on my site:
      http://lafable.com/ (Pokes fun at the SAFe methodology)


      -------
      Charles Bradley
      Professional Scrum Trainer
      Scrum Coach-in-Chief
      http://ScrumCrazy.com


    • Markus Gärtner
      Hi Charles, You missed the Large Agile Framework Appropriate for Big, Lumbering Enterprises - L.A.F.A.B.L.E. http://lafable.com/ Chooooo-chooooooo Best Markus
      Message 2 of 23 , Apr 2, 2014
      • 0 Attachment
        Hi Charles,

        You missed the Large Agile Framework Appropriate for Big, Lumbering Enterprises - L.A.F.A.B.L.E.


        Chooooo-chooooooo

        Best Markus
        --
        Dipl.-Inform. Markus Gärtner
        Author of ATDD by Example - A Practical Guide to Acceptance
        Test-Driven Development

        On 02.04.2014, at 20:46, Charles Bradley - Professional Scrum Trainer and Coach <chuck-lists2@...> wrote:


        I'd like to highlight a couple of recent additions to the (moderately to mostly critical) views on SAFe:

        http://xprogramming.com/articles/safe-good-but-not-good-enough/
        http://danielgullo.tumblr.com/post/80172140950/safe-spc-training-a-reflection
        http://cognitive-edge.com/blog/entry/6238/safe-the-infantilism-of-management/
        http://www.innovel.net/?p=451

        I want to give a public thanks to Ron, Daniel, and Dave Snowden for their recent reviews.  They are all excellent!  As many of you know, I don't think SAFe is Agile and don't feel like it has a net positive benefit to the industry in the long term.  Full disclosure of my bias!  If anyone else has similar reviews, feel free to let me know.  I'm collecting them on my web site.

        My full list on my site:
        http://lafable.com/ (Pokes fun at the SAFe methodology)


        -------
        Charles Bradley
        Professional Scrum Trainer
        Scrum Coach-in-Chief
        http://ScrumCrazy.com


      • Michael James
        That list is pretty good. IÆm still wondering how http://lafable.com got banned from Twitter. Though itÆs not as thorough as the others (particularly the
        Message 3 of 23 , Apr 2, 2014
        • 0 Attachment
          That list is pretty good.  I’m still wondering how http://lafable.com got banned from Twitter.

          Though it’s not as thorough as the others (particularly the critiques from Ron Jeffries and Daniel Gullo who somehow had the stomach to do the SAFe training) I’d add this:

          A quote from a friend of mine at a company that’s listed as one of SAFe’s success stories:
          "Well, we sorta tried to do the Leffingwell stuff again recently, but I am for sure ready to throw the book in the river."

          —mj
          (Michael)

          On Apr 2, 2014, at 2:07 PM, Markus Gärtner <mgaertne@...> wrote:


          Hi Charles,

          You missed the Large Agile Framework Appropriate for Big, Lumbering Enterprises - L.A.F.A.B.L.E.


          Chooooo-chooooooo

          Best Markus
          --
          Dipl.-Inform. Markus Gärtner
          Author of ATDD by Example - A Practical Guide to Acceptance
          Test-Driven Development

          On 02.04.2014, at 20:46, Charles Bradley - Professional Scrum Trainer and Coach <chuck-lists2@...> wrote:


          I'd like to highlight a couple of recent additions to the (moderately to mostly critical) views on SAFe:

          http://xprogramming.com/articles/safe-good-but-not-good-enough/
          http://danielgullo.tumblr.com/post/80172140950/safe-spc-training-a-reflection
          http://cognitive-edge.com/blog/entry/6238/safe-the-infantilism-of-management/
          http://www.innovel.net/?p=451

          I want to give a public thanks to Ron, Daniel, and Dave Snowden for their recent reviews.  They are all excellent!  As many of you know, I don't think SAFe is Agile and don't feel like it has a net positive benefit to the industry in the long term.  Full disclosure of my bias!  If anyone else has similar reviews, feel free to let me know.  I'm collecting them on my web site.

          My full list on my site:
          http://lafable.com/ (Pokes fun at the SAFe methodology)


          -------
          Charles Bradley
          Professional Scrum Trainer
          Scrum Coach-in-Chief
          http://ScrumCrazy.com




        • Mark Palmer
          http://lafable.com/ was one of the best spoofs I ve seen in a while. Kudos to Mike and team - my side still hurts. :-) Charles, thanks for compiling/keeping a
          Message 4 of 23 , Apr 2, 2014
          • 0 Attachment
            http://lafable.com/ was one of the best spoofs I've seen in a while. Kudos to Mike and team - my side still hurts. :-)

            Charles, thanks for compiling/keeping a running a list on your resources page - /favorited


            On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 11:13 PM, Michael James <mj4scrum@...> wrote:
             

            That list is pretty good.  I’m still wondering how http://lafable.com got banned from Twitter.

            Though it’s not as thorough as the others (particularly the critiques from Ron Jeffries and Daniel Gullo who somehow had the stomach to do the SAFe training) I’d add this:

            A quote from a friend of mine at a company that’s listed as one of SAFe’s success stories:
            "Well, we sorta tried to do the Leffingwell stuff again recently, but I am for sure ready to throw the book in the river."

            —mj
            (Michael)

            On Apr 2, 2014, at 2:07 PM, Markus Gärtner <mgaertne@...> wrote:


            Hi Charles,

            You missed the Large Agile Framework Appropriate for Big, Lumbering Enterprises - L.A.F.A.B.L.E.


            Chooooo-chooooooo

            Best Markus
            --
            Dipl.-Inform. Markus Gärtner
            Author of ATDD by Example - A Practical Guide to Acceptance
            Test-Driven Development

            On 02.04.2014, at 20:46, Charles Bradley - Professional Scrum Trainer and Coach <chuck-lists2@...> wrote:


            I'd like to highlight a couple of recent additions to the (moderately to mostly critical) views on SAFe:

            http://xprogramming.com/articles/safe-good-but-not-good-enough/
            http://danielgullo.tumblr.com/post/80172140950/safe-spc-training-a-reflection
            http://cognitive-edge.com/blog/entry/6238/safe-the-infantilism-of-management/
            http://www.innovel.net/?p=451

            I want to give a public thanks to Ron, Daniel, and Dave Snowden for their recent reviews.  They are all excellent!  As many of you know, I don't think SAFe is Agile and don't feel like it has a net positive benefit to the industry in the long term.  Full disclosure of my bias!  If anyone else has similar reviews, feel free to let me know.  I'm collecting them on my web site.

            My full list on my site:
            http://lafable.com/ (Pokes fun at the SAFe methodology)


            -------
            Charles Bradley
            Professional Scrum Trainer
            Scrum Coach-in-Chief
            http://ScrumCrazy.com





          • srinivas chillara
            Yes, the list is longer than most people would have patience for (I ddin t read all of that). However I did Ron Jeffries article and it is very thoughtful.
            Message 5 of 23 , Apr 3, 2014
            • 0 Attachment
              Yes, the list is longer than most people would have patience for (I ddin't read all of that).
              However I did Ron Jeffries' article and it is very thoughtful. SAFe seems to be glossing over good (hard) management as well, I still remember the resource view it took of people. 

              One of my colleagues (Steve Spearman) has summarised various scaling methodologies if you are interested I could point you in that direction.

              cheers
              Srinivas

              PS: Thanks for the list.


              From: Michael James <mj4scrum@...>
              To: SCRUMDEVELOPMENT@yahoogroups.com
              Sent: Thursday, 3 April 2014 8:43 AM
              Subject: Re: [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT] More critical views on SAFe

               
              That list is pretty good.  I’m still wondering how http://lafable.com got banned from Twitter.

              Though it’s not as thorough as the others (particularly the critiques from Ron Jeffries and Daniel Gullo who somehow had the stomach to do the SAFe training) I’d add this:

              A quote from a friend of mine at a company that’s listed as one of SAFe’s success stories:
              "Well, we sorta tried to do the Leffingwell stuff again recently, but I am for sure ready to throw the book in the river."

              —mj
              (Michael)

              On Apr 2, 2014, at 2:07 PM, Markus Gärtner <mgaertne@...> wrote:


              Hi Charles,

              You missed the Large Agile Framework Appropriate for Big, Lumbering Enterprises - L.A.F.A.B.L.E.


              Chooooo-chooooooo

              Best Markus
              --
              Dipl.-Inform. Markus Gärtner
              Author of ATDD by Example - A Practical Guide to Acceptance
              Test-Driven Development

              On 02.04.2014, at 20:46, Charles Bradley - Professional Scrum Trainer and Coach <chuck-lists2@...> wrote:


              I'd like to highlight a couple of recent additions to the (moderately to mostly critical) views on SAFe:

              http://xprogramming.com/articles/safe-good-but-not-good-enough/
              http://danielgullo.tumblr.com/post/80172140950/safe-spc-training-a-reflection
              http://cognitive-edge.com/blog/entry/6238/safe-the-infantilism-of-management/
              http://www.innovel.net/?p=451

              I want to give a public thanks to Ron, Daniel, and Dave Snowden for their recent reviews.  They are all excellent!  As many of you know, I don't think SAFe is Agile and don't feel like it has a net positive benefit to the industry in the long term.  Full disclosure of my bias!  If anyone else has similar reviews, feel free to let me know.  I'm collecting them on my web site.

              My full list on my site:
              http://lafable.com/ (Pokes fun at the SAFe methodology)


              -------
              Charles Bradley
              Professional Scrum Trainer
              Scrum Coach-in-Chief
              http://ScrumCrazy.com






            • Charles Bradley - Professional Scrum Trai
              Thanks to all for the feedback.  Lafable was actually on the original list that I sent, but I m thrilled that you all highlighted it anyway. Srinivas, I m
              Message 6 of 23 , Apr 6, 2014
              • 0 Attachment
                Thanks to all for the feedback.  Lafable was actually on the original list that I sent, but I'm thrilled that you all highlighted it anyway.

                Srinivas, I'm familiar with the Spearman et. al, work, so I encourage you to share the links here.  He and Richard Dolman are speaking on it at Mile High Agile on 4/18 here in Denver (I'm speaking on Agility Path), so I'm looking forward to their presentation.  I think they also are speaking on it at Agile2014 as well.  In short to those not familiar, they are making an attempt at comparing different angles on Scaling Agility and Scrum.
                 
                -------
                Charles Bradley
                Professional Scrum Trainer
                Scrum Coach-in-Chief
                http://ScrumCrazy.com




                From: srinivas chillara <ceezone@...>
                To: "SCRUMDEVELOPMENT@yahoogroups.com" <SCRUMDEVELOPMENT@yahoogroups.com>
                Sent: Thursday, April 3, 2014 9:30 PM
                Subject: Re: [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT] More critical views on SAFe



                Yes, the list is longer than most people would have patience for (I ddin't read all of that).
                However I did Ron Jeffries' article and it is very thoughtful. SAFe seems to be glossing over good (hard) management as well, I still remember the resource view it took of people. 

                One of my colleagues (Steve Spearman) has summarised various scaling methodologies if you are interested I could point you in that direction.

                cheers
                Srinivas

                PS: Thanks for the list.


                From: Michael James <mj4scrum@...>
                To: SCRUMDEVELOPMENT@yahoogroups.com
                Sent: Thursday, 3 April 2014 8:43 AM
                Subject: Re: [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT] More critical views on SAFe

                 
                That list is pretty good.  I’m still wondering how http://lafable.com got banned from Twitter.

                Though it’s not as thorough as the others (particularly the critiques from Ron Jeffries and Daniel Gullo who somehow had the stomach to do the SAFe training) I’d add this:

                A quote from a friend of mine at a company that’s listed as one of SAFe’s success stories:
                "Well, we sorta tried to do the Leffingwell stuff again recently, but I am for sure ready to throw the book in the river."

                —mj
                (Michael)

                On Apr 2, 2014, at 2:07 PM, Markus Gärtner <mgaertne@...> wrote:


                Hi Charles,

                You missed the Large Agile Framework Appropriate for Big, Lumbering Enterprises - L.A.F.A.B.L.E.


                Chooooo-chooooooo

                Best Markus
                --
                Dipl.-Inform. Markus Gärtner
                Author of ATDD by Example - A Practical Guide to Acceptance
                Test-Driven Development

                On 02.04.2014, at 20:46, Charles Bradley - Professional Scrum Trainer and Coach <chuck-lists2@...> wrote:


                I'd like to highlight a couple of recent additions to the (moderately to mostly critical) views on SAFe:

                http://xprogramming.com/articles/safe-good-but-not-good-enough/
                http://danielgullo.tumblr.com/post/80172140950/safe-spc-training-a-reflection
                http://cognitive-edge.com/blog/entry/6238/safe-the-infantilism-of-management/
                http://www.innovel.net/?p=451

                I want to give a public thanks to Ron, Daniel, and Dave Snowden for their recent reviews.  They are all excellent!  As many of you know, I don't think SAFe is Agile and don't feel like it has a net positive benefit to the industry in the long term.  Full disclosure of my bias!  If anyone else has similar reviews, feel free to let me know.  I'm collecting them on my web site.

                My full list on my site:
                http://lafable.com/ (Pokes fun at the SAFe methodology)


                -------
                Charles Bradley
                Professional Scrum Trainer
                Scrum Coach-in-Chief
                http://ScrumCrazy.com










              • srinivas chillara
                Hallo Charles, I didn t know you were in the hotbed of Scrumming (Denver). So I m sure you ll jaw jaw with Mr Spearman.  Hallo Steve, Please see the thread
                Message 7 of 23 , Apr 7, 2014
                • 0 Attachment

                  Hallo Charles,
                  I didn't know you were in the hotbed of Scrumming (Denver). So I'm sure you'll jaw jaw with Mr Spearman. 

                  Hallo Steve,
                  Please see the thread below and provide your latest info (that is if you aren't on your 30th vacation in Arizona). 

                  cheers
                  Srinivas

                  From: Charles Bradley - Professional Scrum Trainer and Coach <chuck-lists2@...>
                  To: "SCRUMDEVELOPMENT@yahoogroups.com" <SCRUMDEVELOPMENT@yahoogroups.com>
                  Sent: Sunday, 6 April 2014 10:04 PM
                  Subject: Re: [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT] More critical views on SAFe

                   
                  Thanks to all for the feedback.  Lafable was actually on the original list that I sent, but I'm thrilled that you all highlighted it anyway.

                  Srinivas, I'm familiar with the Spearman et. al, work, so I encourage you to share the links here.  He and Richard Dolman are speaking on it at Mile High Agile on 4/18 here in Denver (I'm speaking on Agility Path), so I'm looking forward to their presentation.  I think they also are speaking on it at Agile2014 as well.  In short to those not familiar, they are making an attempt at comparing different angles on Scaling Agility and Scrum.
                   
                  -------
                  Charles Bradley
                  Professional Scrum Trainer
                  Scrum Coach-in-Chief
                  http://ScrumCrazy.com




                  From: srinivas chillara <ceezone@...>
                  To: "SCRUMDEVELOPMENT@yahoogroups.com" <SCRUMDEVELOPMENT@yahoogroups.com>
                  Sent: Thursday, April 3, 2014 9:30 PM
                  Subject: Re: [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT] More critical views on SAFe



                  Yes, the list is longer than most people would have patience for (I ddin't read all of that).
                  However I did Ron Jeffries' article and it is very thoughtful. SAFe seems to be glossing over good (hard) management as well, I still remember the resource view it took of people. 

                  One of my colleagues (Steve Spearman) has summarised various scaling methodologies if you are interested I could point you in that direction.

                  cheers
                  Srinivas

                  PS: Thanks for the list.


                  From: Michael James <mj4scrum@...>
                  To: SCRUMDEVELOPMENT@yahoogroups.com
                  Sent: Thursday, 3 April 2014 8:43 AM
                  Subject: Re: [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT] More critical views on SAFe

                   
                  That list is pretty good.  I’m still wondering how http://lafable.com got banned from Twitter.

                  Though it’s not as thorough as the others (particularly the critiques from Ron Jeffries and Daniel Gullo who somehow had the stomach to do the SAFe training) I’d add this:

                  A quote from a friend of mine at a company that’s listed as one of SAFe’s success stories:
                  "Well, we sorta tried to do the Leffingwell stuff again recently, but I am for sure ready to throw the book in the river."

                  —mj
                  (Michael)

                  On Apr 2, 2014, at 2:07 PM, Markus Gärtner <mgaertne@...> wrote:


                  Hi Charles,

                  You missed the Large Agile Framework Appropriate for Big, Lumbering Enterprises - L.A.F.A.B.L.E.


                  Chooooo-chooooooo

                  Best Markus
                  --
                  Dipl.-Inform. Markus Gärtner
                  Author of ATDD by Example - A Practical Guide to Acceptance
                  Test-Driven Development

                  On 02.04.2014, at 20:46, Charles Bradley - Professional Scrum Trainer and Coach <chuck-lists2@...> wrote:


                  I'd like to highlight a couple of recent additions to the (moderately to mostly critical) views on SAFe:

                  http://xprogramming.com/articles/safe-good-but-not-good-enough/
                  http://danielgullo.tumblr.com/post/80172140950/safe-spc-training-a-reflection
                  http://cognitive-edge.com/blog/entry/6238/safe-the-infantilism-of-management/
                  http://www.innovel.net/?p=451

                  I want to give a public thanks to Ron, Daniel, and Dave Snowden for their recent reviews.  They are all excellent!  As many of you know, I don't think SAFe is Agile and don't feel like it has a net positive benefit to the industry in the long term.  Full disclosure of my bias!  If anyone else has similar reviews, feel free to let me know.  I'm collecting them on my web site.

                  My full list on my site:
                  http://lafable.com/ (Pokes fun at the SAFe methodology)


                  -------
                  Charles Bradley
                  Professional Scrum Trainer
                  Scrum Coach-in-Chief
                  http://ScrumCrazy.com












                • pjessica603
                  ... Hallo Charles, I didn t know you were in the hotbed of Scrumming (Denver). So I m sure you ll jaw jaw with Mr Spearman. Hallo Steve, Please see the thread
                  Message 8 of 23 , May 30, 2014
                  • 0 Attachment



                    ---In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, <ceezone@...> wrote :


                    Hallo Charles,
                    I didn't know you were in the hotbed of Scrumming (Denver). So I'm sure you'll jaw jaw with Mr Spearman. 

                    Hallo Steve,
                    Please see the thread below and provide your latest info (that is if you aren't on your 30th vacation in Arizona). 

                    cheers
                    Srinivas

                    From: Charles Bradley - Professional Scrum Trainer and Coach <chuck-lists2@...>
                    To: "SCRUMDEVELOPMENT@yahoogroups.com" <SCRUMDEVELOPMENT@yahoogroups.com>
                    Sent: Sunday, 6 April 2014 10:04 PM
                    Subject: Re: [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT] More critical views on SAFe

                     
                    Thanks to all for the feedback.  Lafable was actually on the original list that I sent, but I'm thrilled that you all highlighted it anyway.

                    Srinivas, I'm familiar with the Spearman et. al, work, so I encourage you to share the links here.  He and Richard Dolman are speaking on it at Mile High Agile on 4/18 here in Denver (I'm speaking on Agility Path), so I'm looking forward to their presentation.  I think they also are speaking on it at Agile2014 as well.  In short to those not familiar, they are making an attempt at comparing different angles on Scaling Agility and Scrum.
                     
                    -------
                    Charles Bradley
                    Professional Scrum Trainer
                    Scrum Coach-in-Chief
                    http://ScrumCrazy.com




                    All,

                    I came across the links to these critical views on SAFe and find them rather unfair. SAFe is more and more adopted by more and more companies and it seems to succeed where Scrum has failed throughout the past may years.

                    Even Fidelity Investments which was considered as a pioneer with Scrum by Ken had dropped Scrum very early on and has implemented for at least more than 10 or 15 years now something similar to SAFe called FAM with big emphasis on enterprise architecture (yes, enterprise architecture), like in SAFe.

                    In addition to this, Fidelity Investments almost never hired one single ScrumMaster into Fidelity - but all project managers or, at least, Agile project managers. 

                    Jessica



                    On 02.04.2014, at 20:46, Charles Bradley - Professional Scrum Trainer and Coach <chuck-lists2@...> wrote:


                    I'd like to highlight a couple of recent additions to the (moderately to mostly critical) views on SAFe:

                    http://xprogramming.com/articles/safe-good-but-not-good-enough/
                    http://danielgullo.tumblr.com/post/80172140950/safe-spc-training-a-reflection
                    http://cognitive-edge.com/blog/entry/6238/safe-the-infantilism-of-management/
                    http://www.innovel.net/?p=451

                    I want to give a public thanks to Ron, Daniel, and Dave Snowden for their recent reviews.  They are all excellent!  As many of you know, I don't think SAFe is Agile and don't feel like it has a net positive benefit to the industry in the long term.  Full disclosure of my bias!  If anyone else has similar reviews, feel free to let me know.  I'm collecting them on my web site.

                    My full list on my site:
                    http://lafable.com/ (Pokes fun at the SAFe methodology)


                    -------
                    Charles Bradley
                    Professional Scrum Trainer
                    Scrum Coach-in-Chief
                    http://ScrumCrazy.com












                  • pjessica603
                    All, I came across the links to these critical views on SAFe and find them rather unfair. SAFe is more and more adopted by more and more companies and it seems
                    Message 9 of 23 , May 30, 2014
                    • 0 Attachment
                      All,

                      I came across the links to these critical views on SAFe and find them rather unfair. SAFe is more and more adopted by more and more companies and it seems to succeed where Scrum has failed throughout the past may years.

                      Even Fidelity Investments which was considered as a pioneer with Scrum by Ken had dropped Scrum very early on and has implemented for at least more than 10 or 15 years now something similar to SAFe called FAM with big emphasis on enterprise architecture (yes, enterprise architecture), like in SAFe.

                      In addition to this, Fidelity Investments almost never hired one single ScrumMaster into Fidelity - but all project managers or, at least, Agile project managers. 

                      Jessica
                    • Alan Dayley
                      It is fascinating to me how Scrum has failed in so many places where Scrum has never actually been used.
                      Message 10 of 23 , Jun 2, 2014
                      • 0 Attachment
                        It is fascinating to me how "Scrum has failed" in so many places where Scrum has never actually been used.


                        SAFe is not evil and it may be far better than what a company currently has. The difficulty is when organizations believe that the mechanics of a framework are what will bring the benefits. The mechanics are important for supporting the appropriate mindset. Without an Agile mindset, the mechanical benefits of any framework are severely limited, at best.

                        The rejection of a framework but any one company is not a whole condemnation of the framework. And SAFe largely maintains a Scrum framework at the team and program levels so, SAFe is more an endorsement of Scrum than a condemnation.

                        Hopefully Fidelity is doing what works for them, in the mindset of continuous improvement that will bring them amazing benefits.

                        Alan



                        On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 8:16 PM, pjessica603@... [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT] <SCRUMDEVELOPMENT@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
                         

                        All,

                        I came across the links to these critical views on SAFe and find them rather unfair. SAFe is more and more adopted by more and more companies and it seems to succeed where Scrum has failed throughout the past may years.

                        Even Fidelity Investments which was considered as a pioneer with Scrum by Ken had dropped Scrum very early on and has implemented for at least more than 10 or 15 years now something similar to SAFe called FAM with big emphasis on enterprise architecture (yes, enterprise architecture), like in SAFe.

                        In addition to this, Fidelity Investments almost never hired one single ScrumMaster into Fidelity - but all project managers or, at least, Agile project managers. 

                        Jessica


                      • Jessica P
                        Scrum as it is taught in theoretical classes by many so-called Certified Scrum Trainers, especially the ones I know about, are no more than bad theory they
                        Message 11 of 23 , Jun 8, 2014
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Scrum as it is taught in theoretical classes by many so-called Certified Scrum Trainers, especially the ones I know about, are no more than bad theory they repeat mechanically out of context and out of conviction. And in saying that Scrum is so good ("like the truth invented by Gods for this small earth - for the people who can not think or see anything outside of Scrum") that Scrum must be used as it is, these trainers show that they only know the theory and not enough about the 99% of real corporate environments, where Scrum precisely fails, beyond maybe one or two insignificant projects. 

                          The well known fact that Fidelity Investments that has been thanked in the Scrum Guide throughout all these years (for marketing purposes?) to be a Scrum early pioneer despite the fact they had dropped Scrum for a long time in favor of another framework taking into account their corporate environment which is based on enterprise architecture (yes enterprise architecture), should be a big lesson for the Scrum gurus and experts of all kind to be less arrogant and more realistic. 

                          Beyond this mistake by the Agile and Scrum community at large to consider that the best architecture will evolve out of self-organizing teams  and thin air (except when it is about building a little dog house?) have we ever seen any well known business company that has become so successful thanks directly to Scrum's or Agile's business value, as derived from the fact that the PO is so knowledgeable and available to prioritize or re-prioritize to take into account the over changing business condition? None. 




                          On Monday, June 2, 2014 11:14 PM, "Alan Dayley alandd@... [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]" <SCRUMDEVELOPMENT@yahoogroups.com> wrote:


                           
                          It is fascinating to me how "Scrum has failed" in so many places where Scrum has never actually been used.


                          SAFe is not evil and it may be far better than what a company currently has. The difficulty is when organizations believe that the mechanics of a framework are what will bring the benefits. The mechanics are important for supporting the appropriate mindset. Without an Agile mindset, the mechanical benefits of any framework are severely limited, at best.

                          The rejection of a framework but any one company is not a whole condemnation of the framework. And SAFe largely maintains a Scrum framework at the team and program levels so, SAFe is more an endorsement of Scrum than a condemnation.

                          Hopefully Fidelity is doing what works for them, in the mindset of continuous improvement that will bring them amazing benefits.

                          Alan



                          On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 8:16 PM, pjessica603@... [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT] <SCRUMDEVELOPMENT@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
                           
                          All,

                          I came across the links to these critical views on SAFe and find them rather unfair. SAFe is more and more adopted by more and more companies and it seems to succeed where Scrum has failed throughout the past may years.

                          Even Fidelity Investments which was considered as a pioneer with Scrum by Ken had dropped Scrum very early on and has implemented for at least more than 10 or 15 years now something similar to SAFe called FAM with big emphasis on enterprise architecture (yes, enterprise architecture), like in SAFe.

                          In addition to this, Fidelity Investments almost never hired one single ScrumMaster into Fidelity - but all project managers or, at least, Agile project managers. 

                          Jessica



                        • Charles Bradley - Professional Scrum Trai
                          Jessica, You make a lot of bold statements for someone who has not admitted who they are in real life. Do you mind telling us your full name and maybe pointing
                          Message 12 of 23 , Jun 11, 2014
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Jessica,

                            You make a lot of bold statements for someone who has not admitted who they are in real life.

                            Do you mind telling us your full name and maybe pointing us to your LinkedIn profile?

                             
                            -------
                            Charles Bradley
                            Professional Scrum Trainer
                            Scrum Coach-in-Chief
                            http://ScrumCrazy.com




                            From: "Jessica P pjessica603@... [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]" <SCRUMDEVELOPMENT@yahoogroups.com>
                            To: SCRUMDEVELOPMENT@yahoogroups.com
                            Sent: Sunday, June 8, 2014 7:56 AM
                            Subject: Re: [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT] More critical views on SAFe



                            Scrum as it is taught in theoretical classes by many so-called Certified Scrum Trainers, especially the ones I know about, are no more than bad theory they repeat mechanically out of context and out of conviction. And in saying that Scrum is so good ("like the truth invented by Gods for this small earth - for the people who can not think or see anything outside of Scrum") that Scrum must be used as it is, these trainers show that they only know the theory and not enough about the 99% of real corporate environments, where Scrum precisely fails, beyond maybe one or two insignificant projects. 

                            The well known fact that Fidelity Investments that has been thanked in the Scrum Guide throughout all these years (for marketing purposes?) to be a Scrum early pioneer despite the fact they had dropped Scrum for a long time in favor of another framework taking into account their corporate environment which is based on enterprise architecture (yes enterprise architecture), should be a big lesson for the Scrum gurus and experts of all kind to be less arrogant and more realistic. 

                            Beyond this mistake by the Agile and Scrum community at large to consider that the best architecture will evolve out of self-organizing teams  and thin air (except when it is about building a little dog house?) have we ever seen any well known business company that has become so successful thanks directly to Scrum's or Agile's business value, as derived from the fact that the PO is so knowledgeable and available to prioritize or re-prioritize to take into account the over changing business condition? None. 




                            On Monday, June 2, 2014 11:14 PM, "Alan Dayley alandd@... [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]" <SCRUMDEVELOPMENT@yahoogroups.com> wrote:


                             
                            It is fascinating to me how "Scrum has failed" in so many places where Scrum has never actually been used.


                            SAFe is not evil and it may be far better than what a company currently has. The difficulty is when organizations believe that the mechanics of a framework are what will bring the benefits. The mechanics are important for supporting the appropriate mindset. Without an Agile mindset, the mechanical benefits of any framework are severely limited, at best.

                            The rejection of a framework but any one company is not a whole condemnation of the framework. And SAFe largely maintains a Scrum framework at the team and program levels so, SAFe is more an endorsement of Scrum than a condemnation.

                            Hopefully Fidelity is doing what works for them, in the mindset of continuous improvement that will bring them amazing benefits.

                            Alan



                            On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 8:16 PM, pjessica603@... [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT] <SCRUMDEVELOPMENT@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
                             
                            All,

                            I came across the links to these critical views on SAFe and find them rather unfair. SAFe is more and more adopted by more and more companies and it seems to succeed where Scrum has failed throughout the past may years.

                            Even Fidelity Investments which was considered as a pioneer with Scrum by Ken had dropped Scrum very early on and has implemented for at least more than 10 or 15 years now something similar to SAFe called FAM with big emphasis on enterprise architecture (yes, enterprise architecture), like in SAFe.

                            In addition to this, Fidelity Investments almost never hired one single ScrumMaster into Fidelity - but all project managers or, at least, Agile project managers. 

                            Jessica







                          • julienmazloum
                            All interesting views. What problems are you trying to solve? is the only question that matters for me. SAFe does seem to address one problem very well
                            Message 13 of 23 , Aug 18, 2014
                            • 0 Attachment
                              All interesting views.
                              "What problems are you trying to solve?" is the only question that matters for me.
                              SAFe does seem to address one problem very well (hence, maybe, its popularity): "High level managers do not understand where Agile will lead them and what it means for them". 
                              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".
                              For me, the biggest weakness of SAFe is that it does not have, as far as I know, a built-in mechanism to ensure and encourage "waste" reduction. Such as DoD expansion. Such as release cycle reduction. Such as evolving the system into a leaner one with 
                              - less WIP, 
                              - less dependencies (technical and cross-teams), 
                              - less failure demand (it does mandate some XP practices and that helps but I saw nowhere that the effort spent on failure demand (after release) should be monitored and improved over-time release after release).
                              But I think, this can evolve. 
                              And also, it is important to separate the framework/method (XP, Scrum, Kanban, SAFe) from its implementation. The way you implement any of those things determines your success and not the method themselves (of course you always need smart and open-minded people anyways). For me the key is to learn to analyze contexts and learn from cases, learn to grow and help the others to grow. It is very known in general management.
                              SAFe does not solve the problem of large-scale Agile because the real problem of large-scale Agile is not "Agile does not work when we are so big" but "product development does not work well when we are big".  So stop being so uselessly big, solve the root-causes (see above), become great (and Agile can help) and make the world a favour by doing so.
                              If SAFe helps to get management on board and get some money for the change, do it. 
                              If you have management that is bold enough to do what matters even more (see above), you probably do not even need SAFe.
                            • Adam Sroka
                              On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 9:33 PM, julien@mazloum.net [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
                              Message 14 of 23 , Aug 19, 2014
                              • 0 Attachment



                                On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 9:33 PM, julien@... [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT] <SCRUMDEVELOPMENT@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
                                 

                                All interesting views.

                                "What problems are you trying to solve?" is the only question that matters for me.
                                SAFe does seem to address one problem very well (hence, maybe, its popularity): "High level managers do not understand where Agile will lead them and what it means for them". 


                                They should not need to understand it. What happens is that we add transparency that uncovers all kinds of waste and dysfunction. Then they inevitably become involved. Plus, they have heard a lot of horror stories at this point. 

                                SAFe seems like a way to avoid some of the uncertainty of that. Embracing and harnessing that uncertainty is possibly a better path. 

                              • Alexander Kriegisch
                                Amen to that, Adam. Frameworks with lots of rules which mislead management to believe that the framework is like a baking recipe and their involvement is not
                                Message 15 of 23 , Aug 19, 2014
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  Amen to that, Adam. Frameworks with lots of rules which mislead management to believe that the framework is like a baking recipe and their involvement is not needed (not to mention commitment to a cause) is poison. I disagree in one point, though: They should try to understand it. Trust me, managers are usually smart and have brains. If we as Agile Coaches fail to explain it well enough, it is not their problem.
                                  --
                                  Alexander Kriegisch
                                  http://scrum-master.de


                                  Adam Sroka adam.sroka@... [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT] schrieb am 19.08.2014 11:36:

                                  > On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 9:33 PM, julien@... <mailto:julien@...> [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT] <SCRUMDEVELOPMENT@yahoogroups.com <mailto:SCRUMDEVELOPMENT@yahoogroups.com> > wrote:
                                  >>
                                  >> All interesting views.
                                  >>
                                  >> "What problems are you trying to solve?" is the only question that matters for me.
                                  >>
                                  >> SAFe does seem to address one problem very well (hence, maybe, its popularity): "High level managers do not understand where Agile will lead them and what it means for them".
                                  >>
                                  > They should not need to understand it. What happens is that we add transparency that uncovers all kinds of waste and dysfunction. Then they inevitably become involved. Plus, they have heard a lot of horror stories at this point.
                                  >
                                  > SAFe seems like a way to avoid some of the uncertainty of that. Embracing and harnessing that uncertainty is possibly a better path.
                                • Ron Jeffries
                                  Julien, ... 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
                                  Message 16 of 23 , Aug 19, 2014
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    Julien,

                                    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.

                                    Ron Jeffries
                                    www.XProgramming.com
                                    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.

                                  • Tirrell Payton
                                    I agree with Julien, It comes down to risk, where risk = uncertainty. Our customers are looking for ways to reduce uncertainty. If there is a pretty picture
                                    Message 17 of 23 , Aug 19, 2014
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      I agree with Julien, 

                                      It comes down to risk, where risk = uncertainty.

                                      Our customers are looking for ways to reduce uncertainty.
                                      If there is a pretty picture that helps their understanding of how everything "should work" and reduces uncertainty, they will gravitate toward it, even if its the wrong thing.

                                      In a lot of situations, the response is "Just trust me and try this out" and while every adoption is highly context and culture dependent, that answer does not give people a feeling of reduced uncertainty.

                                      @tirrellpayton


                                      On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 9:33 PM, julien@... [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT] <SCRUMDEVELOPMENT@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
                                       

                                      All interesting views.

                                      "What problems are you trying to solve?" is the only question that matters for me.
                                      SAFe does seem to address one problem very well (hence, maybe, its popularity): "High level managers do not understand where Agile will lead them and what it means for them". 
                                      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".
                                      For me, the biggest weakness of SAFe is that it does not have, as far as I know, a built-in mechanism to ensure and encourage "waste" reduction. Such as DoD expansion. Such as release cycle reduction. Such as evolving the system into a leaner one with 
                                      - less WIP, 
                                      - less dependencies (technical and cross-teams), 
                                      - less failure demand (it does mandate some XP practices and that helps but I saw nowhere that the effort spent on failure demand (after release) should be monitored and improved over-time release after release).
                                      But I think, this can evolve. 
                                      And also, it is important to separate the framework/method (XP, Scrum, Kanban, SAFe) from its implementation. The way you implement any of those things determines your success and not the method themselves (of course you always need smart and open-minded people anyways). For me the key is to learn to analyze contexts and learn from cases, learn to grow and help the others to grow. It is very known in general management.
                                      SAFe does not solve the problem of large-scale Agile because the real problem of large-scale Agile is not "Agile does not work when we are so big" but "product development does not work well when we are big".  So stop being so uselessly big, solve the root-causes (see above), become great (and Agile can help) and make the world a favour by doing so.
                                      If SAFe helps to get management on board and get some money for the change, do it. 
                                      If you have management that is bold enough to do what matters even more (see above), you probably do not even need SAFe.




                                      --
                                      Tirrell Payton
                                      619.663.4582
                                      @tirrellpayton (twitter)
                                    • julienmazloum
                                      Hi Adam, Alexander and Ron, Thanks for the feedback. I am indeed assuming that: - The current industry interest towards SAFe is because this is something that
                                      Message 18 of 23 , Aug 19, 2014
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        Hi Adam, Alexander and Ron,
                                        Thanks for the feedback.
                                        I am indeed assuming that:
                                        - The current industry interest towards SAFe is because this is something that appeals to high managers. 
                                        - After 13 years of Agile, I was also assuming that the companies turning to SAFe now were not much using Agile before and that it was because high management did not buy in.

                                        If you think those are wrong. Please provide me other explanations or other hypotheses on "Why is SAFe popular?" or "What problem does it solve in the industry?". 

                                        That would help.

                                        Thanks,
                                        Julien.

                                      • Ron Jeffries
                                        Julien, ... Your assumptions are good about why it s popular. I object to your apparent conclusion that it s a good thing because it might work. There are
                                        Message 19 of 23 , Aug 19, 2014
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          Julien,

                                          On Aug 19, 2014, at 12:05 PM, julien@... [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT] <SCRUMDEVELOPMENT@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

                                          I am indeed assuming that:
                                          - The current industry interest towards SAFe is because this is something that appeals to high managers. 
                                          - After 13 years of Agile, I was also assuming that the companies turning to SAFe now were not much using Agile before and that it was because high management did not buy in.

                                          If you think those are wrong. Please provide me other explanations or other hypotheses on "Why is SAFe popular?" or "What problem does it solve in the industry?".

                                          Your assumptions are good about why it's popular. I object to your apparent conclusion that it's a good thing because it might work. There are other things that are more likely to work.

                                          Ron Jeffries
                                          www.XProgramming.com
                                          It's true hard work never killed anybody, but I figure, why take the chance?
                                          -- Ronald Reagan



                                        • Cass Dalton
                                          My assumption was that managers had seen agile successes in small teams and wanted to find a brush they could use to paint an entire enterprise with that would
                                          Message 20 of 23 , Aug 19, 2014
                                          • 0 Attachment
                                            My assumption was that managers had seen agile successes in small teams and wanted to find a brush they could use to paint an entire enterprise with that would give the same improvements.  I work at a subsidiary of a very large corporation and even the strongest proponents of agile values tentatively buy in to what SAFe is selling because they are given the charter to increase agile adoption throughout the company.  The pitch that SAFe is selling is "get the benefits you've seen in your existing pockets of agile through the whole company".  It's a compelling sales pitch for executives who are getting powerpoint slides of the amazing benefits of Agile but don't really want to change the culture of middle to upper management.  One of the reasons that many of the staunch agile advocates dislike SAFe is the fact that it allows (and in fact caters to) a traditional management mindset at the top of the hierarchy which is inconsistent with some of the values of agile.

                                            So SAFe is popular with executives who have been sold on the Agile idea from subordinates and want to "help" push Agile farther along.


                                            On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 12:05 PM, julien@... [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT] <SCRUMDEVELOPMENT@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
                                             

                                            Hi Adam, Alexander and Ron,

                                            Thanks for the feedback.
                                            I am indeed assuming that:
                                            - The current industry interest towards SAFe is because this is something that appeals to high managers. 
                                            - After 13 years of Agile, I was also assuming that the companies turning to SAFe now were not much using Agile before and that it was because high management did not buy in.

                                            If you think those are wrong. Please provide me other explanations or other hypotheses on "Why is SAFe popular?" or "What problem does it solve in the industry?". 

                                            That would help.

                                            Thanks,
                                            Julien.


                                          • Michael Vizdos
                                            Hypothesis: Silver Bullet thinking at the laggard stage of the adoption curve (which is where we are the agile world) is common. People look for a way out
                                            Message 21 of 23 , Aug 19, 2014
                                            • 0 Attachment
                                              Hypothesis: Silver Bullet thinking at the "laggard" stage of the adoption curve (which is where we are the "agile" world) is common.

                                              People look for a way out of "not being agile" (what that really means)  and call it "Agile" because "everyone else is."

                                              That is why it's popular.  It's solving the problem of a vacuum in the market and it is being marketed brilliantly.

                                              I've been reminding people for years about chasing that scaling topic, but alas little old Mike Vizdos can only have a conversation with one person at a time about this (like you)?

                                              Me?  I work with people who yearn to Focus and #deliver -- no matter what size team or organization.  It's about the people.

                                              ======







                                              On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 12:05 PM, julien@... [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT] <SCRUMDEVELOPMENT@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
                                               

                                              Hi Adam, Alexander and Ron,

                                              Thanks for the feedback.
                                              I am indeed assuming that:
                                              - The current industry interest towards SAFe is because this is something that appeals to high managers. 
                                              - After 13 years of Agile, I was also assuming that the companies turning to SAFe now were not much using Agile before and that it was because high management did not buy in.

                                              If you think those are wrong. Please provide me other explanations or other hypotheses on "Why is SAFe popular?" or "What problem does it solve in the industry?". 

                                              That would help.

                                              Thanks,
                                              Julien.


                                            • Richard Hundhausen
                                              Michael, I think it’s time for a new series of cartoons. :) From: SCRUMDEVELOPMENT@yahoogroups.com [mailto:SCRUMDEVELOPMENT@yahoogroups.com] Sent: Tuesday,
                                              Message 22 of 23 , Aug 19, 2014
                                              • 0 Attachment

                                                Michael, I think it’s time for a new series of cartoons. J

                                                 

                                                From: SCRUMDEVELOPMENT@yahoogroups.com [mailto:SCRUMDEVELOPMENT@yahoogroups.com]
                                                Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2014 10:33 AM
                                                To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
                                                Subject: Re: [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT] Re: More critical views on SAFe

                                                 

                                                 

                                                Hypothesis: Silver Bullet thinking at the "laggard" stage of the adoption curve (which is where we are the "agile" world) is common.

                                                 

                                                People look for a way out of "not being agile" (what that really means)  and call it "Agile" because "everyone else is."

                                                 

                                                That is why it's popular.  It's solving the problem of a vacuum in the market and it is being marketed brilliantly.

                                                 

                                                I've been reminding people for years about chasing that scaling topic, but alas little old Mike Vizdos can only have a conversation with one person at a time about this (like you)?

                                                 

                                                Me?  I work with people who yearn to Focus and #deliver -- no matter what size team or organization.  It's about the people.

                                                 

                                                ======

                                                 

                                                 

                                                 

                                                 


                                                 

                                                On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 12:05 PM, julien@... [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT] <SCRUMDEVELOPMENT@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

                                                 

                                                Hi Adam, Alexander and Ron,

                                                Thanks for the feedback.

                                                I am indeed assuming that:

                                                - The current industry interest towards SAFe is because this is something that appeals to high managers. 

                                                - After 13 years of Agile, I was also assuming that the companies turning to SAFe now were not much using Agile before and that it was because high management did not buy in.

                                                 

                                                If you think those are wrong. Please provide me other explanations or other hypotheses on "Why is SAFe popular?" or "What problem does it solve in the industry?". 

                                                 

                                                That would help.

                                                 

                                                Thanks,

                                                Julien.

                                                 

                                                 

                                              • Alexander Kriegisch
                                                Why are exchangeable cell phone covers popular? What problems do they solve? Go figure. ;-) -- Alexander Kriegisch http://scrum-master.de
                                                Message 23 of 23 , Aug 19, 2014
                                                • 0 Attachment
                                                  Why are exchangeable cell phone covers popular?
                                                  What problems do they solve?

                                                  Go figure. ;-)
                                                  -- 
                                                  Alexander Kriegisch


                                                  Am 19.08.2014 um 18:05 schrieb "julien@... [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]" <SCRUMDEVELOPMENT@yahoogroups.com>:

                                                  Hi Adam, Alexander and Ron,
                                                  Thanks for the feedback.
                                                  I am indeed assuming that:
                                                  - The current industry interest towards SAFe is because this is something that appeals to high managers. 
                                                  - After 13 years of Agile, I was also assuming that the companies turning to SAFe now were not much using Agile before and that it was because high management did not buy in.

                                                  If you think those are wrong. Please provide me other explanations or other hypotheses on "Why is SAFe popular?" or "What problem does it solve in the industry?". 

                                                  That would help.

                                                  Thanks,
                                                  Julien.

                                                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.