agile | Agendashift

I keep repeating myself – more so since the announcements of the latest edition of SAFe – so let me put it here for the record. It’s based on previous comments on Twitter, LinkedIn, and elsewhere; nothing I haven’t said before, but not all in one place.

My concerns (I do have them) are entirely around implementation, but SAFe is by no means unique in that regard. It’s one on a long list of things for which how you approach it matters way, way more than the thing itself.

See SAFe as 1) a curriculum 2) a demonstration of how things can fit together: fine, whatever, if that floats your boat. That much should be clear from chapter 4 (the scaling chapter) of Right to Left. Some aspects I praise, the principles most of all, and I suggest ways to start from there.

See SAFe as a realisation of patterns such as iterated self-organisation around goals, you’re on pretty good foundations. Credit where credit is due, I found in my researches for the book that SAFe makes this more explicit than any of its rivals, at least when it comes to descriptions easily accessible to outsiders (and I didn’t stop there).

See SAFe as a solution to be implemented: you are courting disaster. Implementing something as big as this with any kind of determination leads almost inevitably to imposition, and that’s the way to destroy collaboration, self-organisation, problem-solving, and innovation. Why would you do that?

This problem is not specific to SAFe, and it’s the driver behind engagement models such as Agendashift (mine), OpenSpace Agility (Mezick et al); moreover it’s a big enough problem that we actively cooperate, not compete.

The sad truth is that mainstream Agile acts like the last two decades of organisation development never existed. If the impact weren’t so serious, it would be laughable. It’s certainly embarrassing, shameful even. SAFe must take its share of responsibility for that, but it is by no means alone.

There. I said it. Arguing about the relative merits of the framework becomes a way of dancing around that most crucial point. So don’t ask me to endorse or condemn it; I just won’t. But don’t think I don’t care…

What if we put agreement on outcomes ahead of solutions?

There’s a contact button on the landing page for Right to Left, and through it I got this question which I have permission to reproduce:

Keep up the good work, and btw how do you use the Kanban Method these days, after your current progression?

My reply (verbatim):

In Right to Left you’ll see Kanban as just one of a set of complementary patterns in the Lean-Agile space (none of them more important than the others), and a more general approach to organisation development and the leadership that goes with that.

In my own work, Kanban is still in the mix but I’m very definitely needs & outcomes first, not solutions/framework first. STATIK tries to do a bit of that* but it does rather presuppose the answer! I prefer Reverse STATIK anyway, and my very occasional Kanban training uses that. The principles and practices are abstracted in the values, and they live on through the Agendashift delivery assessment (a conversation-starter, not a checklist of practices).

*To be fair, it does this quite valiantly and self-consistently compared with peer frameworks, but my comment stands.

And a PS, sent moments later:

One thing to add: this is not to diminish anyone’s work on Kanban (my own included) or any other framework. Testing boundaries is learning. But it’s also healthy to draw back a bit and broaden one’s horizons from time to time. And integration is also learning.

Some links to help with decoding the above (I knew my correspondent to be familiar with most of them):

Right to Left: The digital leader’s guide to Lean And Agile (August 15th, a week from today!)
Kanban from the Inside (2014, my first book, based around the nine values of my model for Kanban, my own case study, a good description of STATIK, and references to other frameworks and bodies of knowledge)
Agendashift: Outcome-oriented change and continuous transformation (2018, my second, making what I do these days more easily transferable to others)
STATIK, Kanban’s hidden gem (2014, the acronym coined)
Introducing the pathway edition (2016, Agendashift support for Reverse STATIK)
Introducing Kanban through its values (2013, the career-changing blog post)
Resources: Agendashift Assessments

Autumn workshops
– Stockholm, Athens, London, Istanbul, Berlin, and online

9-10 September, Stockholm, Sweden (myself and Kjell Tore Guttormsen):
2-day Advanced Agendashift workshop: Coaching and Leading Continuous Transformation
17-18 September, Athens, Greece (myself and Nikos Batsios):
2-day Advanced Agendashift workshop: Coaching and Leading Continuous Transformation
3-4 October, London, UK:
2-day Advanced Agendashift workshop: Coaching and Leading Continuous Transformation
15-16 October, online, two 2-hour sessions, mornings UK time:
Agendashift online: Learning the language of outcomes
26th October (changed from the 23rd), Istanbul, Turkey:
1-day Core Agendashift workshop: Facilitating outcome-oriented change
13-14 November, Berlin, Germany:
2-day Advanced Agendashift workshop: Coaching and Leading Continuous Transformation
5-6 December, online, two 2-hour sessions, afternoons UK time:
Agendashift online: Learning the language of outcomes

Leading change in the 21^st century? You need a 21^st century engagement model:

Agendashift

Agendashift

Serving the transforming organisation

Tag: agile

What I really think about SAFe

A question among the good luck emails

Autumn workshops
– Stockholm, Athens, London, Istanbul, Berlin, and online

Agendashift

Autumn workshops – Stockholm, Athens, London, Istanbul, Berlin, and online

Autumn workshops
– Stockholm, Athens, London, Istanbul, Berlin, and online