I agree. For me it is simple: Agility is about complexity. More agility requires/means less complexity. Complexity is for a team and organisation what fat is in a human body. In that perspective, you just cannot call SaFe agile. Maybe a first step towards more agility, and that is ok, but nothing more. If implementing safe makes the environment more complex, agility will even go down... I am afraid this happens regularly. This cannot be the purpose.
Refreshing to hear this, especially in adding complexity. Personally, I found that it looks to control aspects, leave connections for hierarchical organisations, add language and make money. Just reflecting upon agile principle 10 it makes me question aspects.
SAFE is purposely complicated for a number of reasons - they make significant revenue from consultancy. In addition, Scrum was a challenge for many organisations as it negates the need for significant structure charts full of middle management & compliance roles. Put simply, those roles arent required, yet big enterprises have got caught up being convinced they need governance roles by, yes youve guessed it, by those who work in governance & compliance.
@richsmart321, yes, the consulting part is one of the things that I definitely see - it has to be so complicated, otherwise, you don't need consultants
I have a SAFe SM 6 certification but I don't like the framework for, essentially, the same reasons you explained in the video. I saw an "implementation" of it and it was a mess because the company just started with SAFe, they wanted to cherry picking what they liked, the Consultant just showed up now and then and it was horribly complicated by logistic. In two words: no one cared about principles and values but they focused on the "framework", how to "adapt" it to their needs and to "we have to do that for that date whatever it taked". A good experience because I had very good colleagues but a nightmare for everything else. So, basically, I don't like it and I try to avoid. Ale PS: lovely cat you have!
@@ScrumMastered That would be an experience. I think of me as a lucky scrum master because I had the chance "to apply" agility to a project with a small team and it worked great (we spoke about it when we recorded the episode of your vlog, if I remember well). To see a full SAFe implementation at work would be like winning the first prize at the National lottery. But I think that someone, somewhere, is doing it. So, finger crossed, and I wish you that your desire come true. Ale
Just like with all Agile frameworks, companies spend far more effort setting up processes and methods instead of focusing on the principles. Like you said, the SAFe principles are great. But how many companies using SAFe even consider these principles when establishing a SAFe program? How many companies apply systems thinking, preserve options and assume variability throughout development, provide autonomy and limit constraints on teams, or decentralize decision-making? The last one I list is something I have never seen in a SAFe implementation because every company I've seen use it are trying to maintain centralized decision-making while trying to convince themselves they are becoming more agile.
@kyleolson9636, yes, for sure. I'll never forget that one company I worked with with a team who told me "We are fully Agile. We have a Product Backlog defined and agreed upon for the whole project for the next 5 years. SO we don't need no help" 🤦♀️
@yunalukashyk @acoustic5738 @gbittera, I think for job search, getting some SAFe certification can be helpful as some jobs require you to have one. Probably as mentioned in another comment, a generic one will be fine, like the Leading SAFe one
@SajaStoica, I don't know enough to have an educated opinion on this, to be honest. This is what I used to say when people would ask me the same question about SAFe a couple of years ago. I probably need to spend at least (at the very-very minimum) a couple of days learning it before I can really say anything valuable.
I believe it is now a methodology and not a framework. Trying to patch every single possible process into it such as Design Thinking will always cause this. This seems to be a response to every criticism, such as that it wasn’t customer focused enough. The website contains a very large collection of high quality content online and is very useful for this. I use it more as another source of information.
@TimothyJFLd, good point. It's still called 'framework', but I think they are misusing the term, since it's supposed to only provide you with a frame within which to operate, not tell you exactly what to do every step of the way.
@youloulou6591, not sure what to say to that. I think firing shouldn't be taken lightly (especially, not in today's economy). There are other ways to address redundant roles.
I always tell my teams that SAFe is the traditional Project Manager’s revenge on Agile! 😄 Just a money making scam, in effect, and very damaging for the IT industry. For scaled Agile I recommend LeSS.
I have 100 problems with SAFe, but my main problem with SAFe: It doesn't evolve. It doesn't even give you anything on how to switch even between their own essential or portfolio stuff, and having worked in implementations which were running for 5 years+ - they still are the same. They got more efficient, but even the 2 day PI is still exactly the same. You switch (or worse add to) your org chart for a (better! - that's at least a plus) org chart - but when you run into problems later - SAFe will not help you shit. You can't even scale down then - because there is no "down". SAFe doesn't contain Kanban or Scrum teams, or teach your teams and org. how to do Scrum. You just will have the rigid next thing fitting only for exactly this size and product.
Here my 50 cents on the topic. - I don‘t believe in certifications in the IT industry. In my experience, it is often more a thing of being able to handle the screwed questioning. I strongly believe in experience. - More often than not, the problems lie in the organization. If you need a consultant for more than kick start and some coaching every now and then, I would consider the org not ready or the PM is weak. - There might be situations, where SAFe of Scrum can be implemented according to the book. In my reality, these concepts should be seen as a guideline but not as a law. For instance, I had situation where we did not had daily stand ups or where we did not deliver something at the end of a spring. It depends on the situation, team and task.
I agree. For me it is simple: Agility is about complexity. More agility requires/means less complexity. Complexity is for a team and organisation what fat is in a human body. In that perspective, you just cannot call SaFe agile. Maybe a first step towards more agility, and that is ok, but nothing more. If implementing safe makes the environment more complex, agility will even go down... I am afraid this happens regularly. This cannot be the purpose.
Refreshing to hear this, especially in adding complexity. Personally, I found that it looks to control aspects, leave connections for hierarchical organisations, add language and make money. Just reflecting upon agile principle 10 it makes me question aspects.
@redacted629, yeah, it's really a methodology to be implemented by a team of highly paid consultants.
SAFE is purposely complicated for a number of reasons - they make significant revenue from consultancy. In addition, Scrum was a challenge for many organisations as it negates the need for significant structure charts full of middle management & compliance roles. Put simply, those roles arent required, yet big enterprises have got caught up being convinced they need governance roles by, yes youve guessed it, by those who work in governance & compliance.
@richsmart321, yes, the consulting part is one of the things that I definitely see - it has to be so complicated, otherwise, you don't need consultants
I have a SAFe SM 6 certification but I don't like the framework for, essentially, the same reasons you explained in the video. I saw an "implementation" of it and it was a mess because the company just started with SAFe, they wanted to cherry picking what they liked, the Consultant just showed up now and then and it was horribly complicated by logistic. In two words: no one cared about principles and values but they focused on the "framework", how to "adapt" it to their needs and to "we have to do that for that date whatever it taked". A good experience because I had very good colleagues but a nightmare for everything else.
So, basically, I don't like it and I try to avoid.
Ale
PS: lovely cat you have!
@alebigna thanks for sharing! I would like to see a full implementation on a large scale in real-life.
@@ScrumMastered That would be an experience. I think of me as a lucky scrum master because I had the chance "to apply" agility to a project with a small team and it worked great (we spoke about it when we recorded the episode of your vlog, if I remember well). To see a full SAFe implementation at work would be like winning the first prize at the National lottery. But I think that someone, somewhere, is doing it. So, finger crossed, and I wish you that your desire come true.
Ale
Just like with all Agile frameworks, companies spend far more effort setting up processes and methods instead of focusing on the principles. Like you said, the SAFe principles are great. But how many companies using SAFe even consider these principles when establishing a SAFe program? How many companies apply systems thinking, preserve options and assume variability throughout development, provide autonomy and limit constraints on teams, or decentralize decision-making? The last one I list is something I have never seen in a SAFe implementation because every company I've seen use it are trying to maintain centralized decision-making while trying to convince themselves they are becoming more agile.
@kyleolson9636, yes, for sure. I'll never forget that one company I worked with with a team who told me "We are fully Agile. We have a Product Backlog defined and agreed upon for the whole project for the next 5 years. SO we don't need no help" 🤦♀️
Which Scaled Agile Certification do you recommend getting?
Based on the video, I am not really seeing she is recommending any.
Try: Leading Safe, its the basic General. If you are a scrum.master look after Safe Scrum Master. Gl
@yunalukashyk @acoustic5738 @gbittera, I think for job search, getting some SAFe certification can be helpful as some jobs require you to have one. Probably as mentioned in another comment, a generic one will be fine, like the Leading SAFe one
Totally agree with your point..😆
What do you think about disciplined agile?
@SajaStoica, I don't know enough to have an educated opinion on this, to be honest. This is what I used to say when people would ask me the same question about SAFe a couple of years ago. I probably need to spend at least (at the very-very minimum) a couple of days learning it before I can really say anything valuable.
SAFe reminds me of our early rollout of TQM in the US government. Too complexed and the culture will just implement it just to please management.
@TechStuff-i4n, yup, sounds about right
I believe it is now a methodology and not a framework. Trying to patch every single possible process into it such as Design Thinking will always cause this. This seems to be a response to every criticism, such as that it wasn’t customer focused enough. The website contains a very large collection of high quality content online and is very useful for this. I use it more as another source of information.
@TimothyJFLd, good point. It's still called 'framework', but I think they are misusing the term, since it's supposed to only provide you with a frame within which to operate, not tell you exactly what to do every step of the way.
It looks like another try to be agile without firing the mid-management... which IMHO is impossible.
@youloulou6591, not sure what to say to that. I think firing shouldn't be taken lightly (especially, not in today's economy). There are other ways to address redundant roles.
@@ScrumMastered Like creating another company offering a comparable product but with self-organized teams from scratch? 😇
I always tell my teams that SAFe is the traditional Project Manager’s revenge on Agile! 😄 Just a money making scam, in effect, and very damaging for the IT industry. For scaled Agile I recommend LeSS.
Shitty Agile For enterprises
SAFe is the bizarre copy paste waste mix of Many frameworks..expensive, bizarre, complicated…using too many buzzword phrases going nowhere
@@lulubee4826 I couldn’t agree more 💯💯💯💯
I have 100 problems with SAFe, but my main problem with SAFe: It doesn't evolve. It doesn't even give you anything on how to switch even between their own essential or portfolio stuff, and having worked in implementations which were running for 5 years+ - they still are the same. They got more efficient, but even the 2 day PI is still exactly the same. You switch (or worse add to) your org chart for a (better! - that's at least a plus) org chart - but when you run into problems later - SAFe will not help you shit. You can't even scale down then - because there is no "down". SAFe doesn't contain Kanban or Scrum teams, or teach your teams and org. how to do Scrum. You just will have the rigid next thing fitting only for exactly this size and product.
Here my 50 cents on the topic.
- I don‘t believe in certifications in the IT industry. In my experience, it is often more a thing of being able to handle the screwed questioning. I strongly believe in experience.
- More often than not, the problems lie in the organization. If you need a consultant for more than kick start and some coaching every now and then, I would consider the org not ready or the PM is weak.
- There might be situations, where SAFe of Scrum can be implemented according to the book. In my reality, these concepts should be seen as a guideline but not as a law. For instance, I had situation where we did not had daily stand ups or where we did not deliver something at the end of a spring. It depends on the situation, team and task.
@Vogon42, thanks for sharing.
scrum is BS