Discussion:
More critical views on SAFe
Charles Bradley - Professional Scrum Trainer and Coach
2014-04-02 18:46:44 UTC
Permalink
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://kenschwaber.wordpress.com/2013/08/06/unsafe-at-any-speed/
http://scrumorakel.de/blog/index.php?/archives/45-A-critical-view-on-SAFe.html
http://xprogramming.com/articles/safe-good-but-not-good-enough/
http://danielgullo.tumblr.com/post/80172140950/safe-spc-training-a-reflection
http://neilkillick.com/2012/03/21/the-horror-of-the-scaled-agile-framework/
http://lafable.com/ (Pokes fun at the SAFe methodology)
http://www.scrumsense.com/blog/scaling-scrum-organisation
http://www.innovel.net/?p=451
Page on my site:  http://www.scrumcrazy.com/resources



-------
Charles Bradley
Professional Scrum Trainer
Scrum Coach-in-Chief
http://ScrumCrazy.com
Markus Gärtner
2014-04-02 21:07:32 UTC
Permalink
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
--
Dipl.-Inform. Markus GÀrtner
Author of ATDD by Example - A Practical Guide to Acceptance
Test-Driven Development

http://www.shino.de/blog
http://www.mgaertne.de
http://www.it-agile.de
Post by Charles Bradley - Professional Scrum Trainer and Coach
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.
http://kenschwaber.wordpress.com/2013/08/06/unsafe-at-any-speed/
http://scrumorakel.de/blog/index.php?/archives/45-A-critical-view-on-SAFe.html
http://xprogramming.com/articles/safe-good-but-not-good-enough/
http://danielgullo.tumblr.com/post/80172140950/safe-spc-training-a-reflection
http://neilkillick.com/2012/03/21/the-horror-of-the-scaled-agile-framework/
http://lafable.com/ (Pokes fun at the SAFe methodology)
http://www.scrumsense.com/blog/scaling-scrum-organisation
http://www.innovel.net/?p=451
Page on my site: http://www.scrumcrazy.com/resources
-------
Charles Bradley
Professional Scrum Trainer
Scrum Coach-in-Chief
http://ScrumCrazy.com
Michael James
2014-04-03 03:13:32 UTC
Permalink
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:
http://agilemethodology.org/playing-it-safe-can-a-large-organization-do-agile-without-changing-anything/

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)
Post by 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
--
Dipl.-Inform. Markus Gärtner
Author of ATDD by Example - A Practical Guide to Acceptance
Test-Driven Development
http://www.shino.de/blog
http://www.mgaertne.de
http://www.it-agile.de
Post by Charles Bradley - Professional Scrum Trainer and Coach
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.
http://kenschwaber.wordpress.com/2013/08/06/unsafe-at-any-speed/
http://scrumorakel.de/blog/index.php?/archives/45-A-critical-view-on-SAFe.html
http://xprogramming.com/articles/safe-good-but-not-good-enough/
http://danielgullo.tumblr.com/post/80172140950/safe-spc-training-a-reflection
http://neilkillick.com/2012/03/21/the-horror-of-the-scaled-agile-framework/
http://lafable.com/ (Pokes fun at the SAFe methodology)
http://www.scrumsense.com/blog/scaling-scrum-organisation
http://www.innovel.net/?p=451
Page on my site: http://www.scrumcrazy.com/resources
-------
Charles Bradley
Professional Scrum Trainer
Scrum Coach-in-Chief
http://ScrumCrazy.com
Mark Palmer
2014-04-03 03:38:51 UTC
Permalink
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
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
http://agilemethodology.org/playing-it-safe-can-a-large-organization-do-agile-without-changing-anything/
A quote from a friend of mine at a company that's listed as one of SAFe's
"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)
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
--
Dipl.-Inform. Markus Gärtner
Author of ATDD by Example - A Practical Guide to Acceptance
Test-Driven Development
http://www.shino.de/blog
http://www.mgaertne.de
http://www.it-agile.de
On 02.04.2014, at 20:46, Charles Bradley - Professional Scrum Trainer and
I'd like to highlight a couple of recent additions to the (moderately to
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.
http://kenschwaber.wordpress.com/2013/08/06/unsafe-at-any-speed/
*http://scrumorakel.de/blog/index.php?/archives/45-A-critical-view-on-SAFe.html
<http://scrumorakel.de/blog/index.php?/archives/45-A-critical-view-on-SAFe.html>*
http://xprogramming.com/articles/safe-good-but-not-good-enough/
http://danielgullo.tumblr.com/post/80172140950/safe-spc-training-a-reflection
*http://neilkillick.com/2012/03/21/the-horror-of-the-scaled-agile-framework/
<http://neilkillick.com/2012/03/21/the-horror-of-the-scaled-agile-framework/>*
http://lafable.com/ (Pokes fun at the SAFe methodology)
http://www.scrumsense.com/blog/scaling-scrum-organisation
http://www.innovel.net/?p=451
Page on my site: http://www.scrumcrazy.com/resources
-------
Charles Bradley
Professional Scrum Trainer
Scrum Coach-in-Chief
http://ScrumCrazy.com <http://www.scrumcrazy.com/>
srinivas chillara
2014-04-04 03:30:55 UTC
Permalink
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 <***@gmail.com>
To: ***@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:
http://agilemethodology.org/playing-it-safe-can-a-large-organization-do-agile-without-changing-anything/

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)
Post by 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
--
Dipl.-Inform. Markus GÀrtner
Author of ATDD by Example - A Practical Guide to Acceptance
Test-Driven Development
http://www.shino.de/blog
http://www.mgaertne.de
http://www.it-agile.de
Post by Charles Bradley - Professional Scrum Trainer and Coach
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.
http://kenschwaber.wordpress.com/2013/08/06/unsafe-at-any-speed/
http://scrumorakel.de/blog/index.php?/archives/45-A-critical-view-on-SAFe.html
http://xprogramming.com/articles/safe-good-but-not-good-enough/
http://danielgullo.tumblr.com/post/80172140950/safe-spc-training-a-reflection
http://neilkillick.com/2012/03/21/the-horror-of-the-scaled-agile-framework/
http://lafable.com/ (Pokes fun at the SAFe methodology)
http://www.scrumsense.com/blog/scaling-scrum-organisation
http://www.innovel.net/?p=451
Page on my site:  http://www.scrumcrazy.com/resources
-------
Charles Bradley
Professional Scrum Trainer
Scrum Coach-in-Chief
http://ScrumCrazy.com
Charles Bradley - Professional Scrum Trainer and Coach
2014-04-06 16:34:19 UTC
Permalink
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
Post by srinivas chillara
________________________________
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.
________________________________
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.
http://agilemethodology.org/playing-it-safe-can-a-large-organization-do-agile-without-changing-anything/
"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)
Post by 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
--
Dipl.-Inform. Markus GÀrtner
Author of ATDD by Example - A Practical Guide to Acceptance
Test-Driven Development
http://www.shino.de/blog
http://www.mgaertne.de
http://www.it-agile.de
Post by Charles Bradley - Professional Scrum Trainer and Coach
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.
Post by srinivas chillara
Post by Markus Gärtner
Post by Charles Bradley - Professional Scrum Trainer and Coach
http://kenschwaber.wordpress.com/2013/08/06/unsafe-at-any-speed/
http://scrumorakel.de/blog/index.php?/archives/45-A-critical-view-on-SAFe.html
http://xprogramming.com/articles/safe-good-but-not-good-enough/
http://danielgullo.tumblr.com/post/80172140950/safe-spc-training-a-reflection
http://neilkillick.com/2012/03/21/the-horror-of-the-scaled-agile-framework/
http://lafable.com/ (Pokes fun at the SAFe methodology)
http://www.scrumsense.com/blog/scaling-scrum-organisation
http://www.innovel.net/?p=451
Page on my site:  http://www.scrumcrazy.com/resources
-------
Charles Bradley
Professional Scrum Trainer
Scrum Coach-in-Chief
http://ScrumCrazy.com
srinivas chillara
2014-04-08 06:45:10 UTC
Permalink
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-***@emailchuck.com>
To: "***@yahoogroups.com" <***@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
Post by srinivas chillara
________________________________
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.
________________________________
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.
http://agilemethodology.org/playing-it-safe-can-a-large-organization-do-agile-without-changing-anything/
"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)
Post by 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
--
Dipl.-Inform. Markus GÀrtner
Author of ATDD by Example - A Practical Guide to Acceptance
Test-Driven Development
http://www.shino.de/blog
http://www.mgaertne.de
http://www.it-agile.de
Post by Charles Bradley - Professional Scrum Trainer and Coach
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.
Post by srinivas chillara
Post by Markus Gärtner
Post by Charles Bradley - Professional Scrum Trainer and Coach
http://kenschwaber.wordpress.com/2013/08/06/unsafe-at-any-speed/
http://scrumorakel.de/blog/index.php?/archives/45-A-critical-view-on-SAFe.html
http://xprogramming.com/articles/safe-good-but-not-good-enough/
http://danielgullo.tumblr.com/post/80172140950/safe-spc-training-a-reflection
http://neilkillick.com/2012/03/21/the-horror-of-the-scaled-agile-framework/
http://lafable.com/ (Pokes fun at the SAFe methodology)
http://www.scrumsense.com/blog/scaling-scrum-organisation
http://www.innovel.net/?p=451
Page on my site:  http://www.scrumcrazy.com/resources
-------
Charles Bradley
Professional Scrum Trainer
Scrum Coach-in-Chief
http://ScrumCrazy.com
pjessica603@yahoo.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-05-31 03:16:39 UTC
Permalink
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 alandd@dayleyagile.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-06-03 03:14:20 UTC
Permalink
It is fascinating to me how "Scrum has failed" in so many places where
Scrum has never actually been used.

http://agileotter.blogspot.com/2014/05/defending-scrum-against-stupid-arguments.html

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
Post by ***@yahoo.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
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 pjessica603@yahoo.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-06-08 13:56:57 UTC
Permalink
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 ***@dayleyagile.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]" <***@yahoogroups.com> wrote:





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


http://agileotter.blogspot.com/2014/05/defending-scrum-against-stupid-arguments.html




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
 
All,
Post by ***@yahoo.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
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 Trainer and Coach chuck-lists2@emailchuck.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-06-11 18:06:56 UTC
Permalink
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
Post by srinivas chillara
________________________________
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. 
 
It is fascinating to me how "Scrum has failed" in so many places where Scrum has never actually been used.
http://agileotter.blogspot.com/2014/05/defending-scrum-against-stupid-arguments.html
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
 
All,
Post by ***@yahoo.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
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
julien@mazloum.net [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-08-19 04:33:27 UTC
Permalink
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 adam.sroka@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-08-19 09:36:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by ***@mazloum.net [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
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' Kriegisch@Scrum-Master.de [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-08-19 09:46:28 UTC
Permalink
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
Post by ***@mazloum.net [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
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.
------------------------------------
Posted by: "Alexander Kriegisch" <***@scrum-master.de>
------------------------------------

To Post a message, send it to: ***@eGroups.com
To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: SCRUMDEVELOPMENT-***@eGroups.com
Ron Jeffries ronjeffries@acm.org [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-08-19 14:22:04 UTC
Permalink
Julien,
Post by ***@mazloum.net [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
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.
julien@mazloum.net [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-08-19 16:05:37 UTC
Permalink
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 ronjeffries@acm.org [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-08-19 16:22:03 UTC
Permalink
Julien,
Post by ***@mazloum.net [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
- 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
Michael Vizdos mvizdos@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-08-19 16:33:08 UTC
Permalink
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.

======

http://www.implementingscrum.com/2011/02/24/enterpirse_scrum_ignore_and_fail/

http://www.implementingscrum.com/2012/07/09/mainstreamagileandscruminsoftwaredevelopmentprojectstoday/

http://www.implementingscrum.com/2012/01/18/modifying-scrum-you-think-you-know-better/


Thank you.

- mike vizdos

michaelvizdos.com/contact

plus.google.com/+MichaelVizdos
facebook.com/VizdosEnterprises
twitter.com/mvizdos
Post by ***@mazloum.net [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
Hi Adam, Alexander and Ron,
Thanks for the feedback.
- 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' richard@accentient.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-08-19 16:51:33 UTC
Permalink
Michael, I think it’s time for a new series of cartoons. :)



From: ***@yahoogroups.com [mailto:***@yahoogroups.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2014 10:33 AM
To: ***@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.



======



http://www.implementingscrum.com/2011/02/24/enterpirse_scrum_ignore_and_fail/



http://www.implementingscrum.com/2012/07/09/mainstreamagileandscruminsoftwaredevelopmentprojectstoday/



http://www.implementingscrum.com/2012/01/18/modifying-scrum-you-think-you-know-better/






Thank you.

- mike vizdos

michaelvizdos.com/contact <http://michaelvizdos.com/contact>

plus.google.com/+MichaelVizdos <http://plus.google.com/+MichaelVizdos>
facebook.com/VizdosEnterprises <http://facebook.com/VizdosEnterprises>
twitter.com/mvizdos <http://twitter.com/mvizdos>



On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 12:05 PM, ***@mazloum.net <mailto:***@mazloum.net> [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT] <***@yahoogroups.com <mailto:***@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 Kriegisch@Scrum-Master.de [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-08-19 17:45:51 UTC
Permalink
Why are exchangeable cell phone covers popular?
What problems do they solve?

Go figure. ;-)
--
Alexander Kriegisch
http://scrum-master.de
Post by ***@mazloum.net [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
Hi Adam, Alexander and Ron,
Thanks for the feedback.
- 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.
Cass Dalton cassdalton73@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-08-19 16:23:03 UTC
Permalink
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.
Post by ***@mazloum.net [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
Hi Adam, Alexander and Ron,
Thanks for the feedback.
- 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.
Tirrell Payton tpayton@payton-consulting.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-08-19 14:52:41 UTC
Permalink
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
Post by ***@mazloum.net [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
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
http://www.payton-consulting.com
@tirrellpayton (twitter)
http://www.linkedin.com/in/tirrellpayton
pjessica603@yahoo.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-05-31 03:15:04 UTC
Permalink
---In ***@yahoogroups.com, <***@...> 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-***@...>
To: "***@yahoogroups.com" <***@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 http://www.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-***@... mailto:chuck-***@...> 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://xprogramming.com/articles/safe-good-but-not-good-enough/
http://danielgullo.tumblr.com/post/80172140950/safe-spc-training-a-reflection http://danielgullo.tumblr.com/post/80172140950/safe-spc-training-a-reflection
http://cognitive-edge.com/blog/entry/6238/safe-the-infantilism-of-management/ http://cognitive-edge.com/blog/entry/6238/safe-the-infantilism-of-management/
http://www.innovel.net/?p=451 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://kenschwaber.wordpress.com/2013/08/06/unsafe-at-any-speed/ http://kenschwaber.wordpress.com/2013/08/06/unsafe-at-any-speed/
http://scrumorakel.de/blog/index.php?/archives/45-A-critical-view-on-SAFe.html http://scrumorakel.de/blog/index.php?/archives/45-A-critical-view-on-SAFe.html
http://xprogramming.com/articles/safe-good-but-not-good-enough/ http://xprogramming.com/articles/safe-good-but-not-good-enough/
http://danielgullo.tumblr.com/post/80172140950/safe-spc-training-a-reflection http://danielgullo.tumblr.com/post/80172140950/safe-spc-training-a-reflection
http://neilkillick.com/2012/03/21/the-horror-of-the-scaled-agile-framework/ http://neilkillick.com/2012/03/21/the-horror-of-the-scaled-agile-framework/
http://lafable.com/ http://lafable.com/ (Pokes fun at the SAFe methodology)
http://www.scrumsense.com/blog/scaling-scrum-organisation http://www.scrumsense.com/blog/scaling-scrum-organisation
http://www.innovel.net/?p=451 http://www.innovel.net/?p=451
Page on my site: http://www.scrumcrazy.com/resources http://www.scrumcrazy.com/resources



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