Live training always sounds great, and sometimes it is. But except when has your teams work together, or the materials requires a lot of interaction, it’s often not the best way to do things.
Consider the following:
1. most of concentrated training is not retained and the concentrated delivery prevents you from trying things in your job & coming back into the class for guidance
2. it takes time away from your work
4. there is no method of having you learn the material over time unless your company can afford a coach
5 live training is expensive and often involves travel costs
6 you often don’t know who you are going to get as an instructor
The bottom line is it’s expensive and not always effective.
Universities have known this for centuries – spreading work out over 3-5 months. They are also adopting flipped classroom style where you read/watch something every week. Try it, interact with the instructor, try again, get questions answered and then go onto another lesson.
This is more effective and can even have remote teams learn together. The bottom line is several times more learning at significantly less cost.
If you’re interested in learning more, please message me (classes in Advanced Scrum Master/ Kanban) and Agile at small to mid-scale.
I am close to finishing “Adopting SAFe® for Your Organization: Achieving Business Agility from Small to Mid-Scale.” We take our own FLEX approach (FLow for Enterprise Transformation) and apply it to SAFe to help solve virtually all of the challenges we’ve seen small to mid-scale organizations have when trying to adopt SAFe. The result is using the core of SAFe while fleshing it out with Lean-Agile principles and patterns of adoption to create a simpler framework, albeit perhaps no longer SAFe, to use.
The list of these challenges is at https://goo.gl/Zcx7cu
Please take a look at let me know about any others.
Why Net Objectives Is No Longer Providing SAFe Training
After 6 years of being a contributor to SAFe in technical Agility and Kanban, my having been the first SPCT outside of SAI and us being a SAFe partner, we are amicably breaking off our relationship with SAI. I believe that SAFe has expanded the understanding of Agile at Scale and incorporates many needed practices that are not found elsewhere.
The reasons for this move include:
- SAFe has grown considerably more complex than it needs to be
- Many small- to mid-scale orgs (technology <1000 ppl) are looking to Essential SAFe even though it is not a good solution for them
- Many orgs are looking to take “SAFe out of the box” which has never been our approach
- SAFe training is not tailored to the size of the organization that will use it
While taking Implementing SAFe 4.6 a couple of weeks ago I realized that SAFe and Net Objectives are on divergent paths. We like to work with small- to mid-scale companies that want a focus on their specific challenges and not just adopt a canned solution.
We will continue to offer consulting and training to those who do SAFe using our own materials.
If you want to see how we do Agile at scale, check out The Essence of FLEX (FLow for Enterprise Transformation). If you are still interested in SAFe, check out these two articles from my upcoming book Achieving Business Agility at Small to Mid-Scale: