The Agile Manifesto suggests our highest priority is to maximize value delivered. This requires looking at the potential increments of value delivery and determining what items provide the greatest value for their cost. Agile development often uses “time-boxes” (Scrum’s sprint) to provide a framework for delivering complete chunks of value in a short time. Continue reading “Adopting Agile in an Agile Way”
I have decried calling Lean “faster, better, cheaper” because “faster” is not the goal as much as removing delays with the result being “quicker”. I also think the focus is on quality &being effective. But in SAFe &/or Scrum adoption, Lean provides a different perspective than the standard focus on certification &frameworks, &maybe “faster, better, cheaper” is the right moniker. Continue reading “How Lean can make SAFe and/or Scrum adoption faster, better, cheaper”
We have come to value:
- Individuals and interactions over PowerPoint presentations
- Actual increased ability over understanding frameworks
- Helping students over following a set curriculum
- Adjusting to needs of the student over preparing for certification
- Our highest priority is to increase the ability of the student through early and continuous learning
- Welcome changing needs of students, even late in the course. Agile courses harness change for the learners’ advantage
- Deliver small, absorb-able increments so the students actually learn
- Teach individuals on their own projects and in their own environment. If they stagnate, trust that they are doing their best and see how to help them.
- The ability to create software of value is the primary measure of progress.
- Agile teachings promote sustainable learning.
- Continuous attention to Agile skills enhances agility
- Simplicity–the art of maximizing the amount not required to teach–is essential.
- The best learning paths are those that allow for ability to emerge by attending to skills that enhance future learnings.
- At regular intervals, the consultant reflects on how his students are doing and adjusts the curriculum as needed.
There is an alternative to being too heavy or too light and we’ve been doing it for over a decade. It’s not a one-size fits all so writing it up is a bit difficult. But the process we use is straightforward: Continue reading “If your technology group is 50-500 people and you think SAFe’s too big for you & that Less doesn’t have enough management then you are right.”
I posted a tweet & mentioned “the state of Agile” with an obvious negative overtone. I was attacked for having done so, not coincidentally by a CST. Interestingly, I had never said what “the state of Agile” was.
I realized this morning that I hear two groups of people talking about “the state of Agile.” Continue reading “The state of Agile”
At Net Objectives we’ve been leading with Agile Product Management for 13-14 years. Borrowing from Denne and Cleland-Huang’s Minimum Marketable Feature we created the term Minimum Business Increment which is the smallest chunk of value that can be realized that makes business sense. It is not about delivering less, but delivering sooner. Continue reading “Why you need to lead with Product Management regardless of your Agile approach”
This blog is written specifically written for those whose technology groups can readily be thought of as being composed of groups that are 40-75 in size, regardless of the current or anticipated level of SAFe adoption.
By learning Agile Product Management before shifting to a SAFe-like program increment planning event, groups can shorten the program increment being planned to 2-4 sprints instead of the normal 5-7. This results in savings from not having to refine 2-3 sprints. It also results in quicker realization of value by having a shorter release horizon. This more than makes up for the investment required to do this. Just as important, the additional focus enables easier management of proper work-in-process levels and results in teams being more efficient. If you are just learning to adopt SAFe, this is a great way to start. If you are already using SAFe, this can be a method of shortening the program increment and getting to be both more effective and efficient. If you don’t want to use SAFe, product management with some Lean-Agile coaching can be used instead.
Focus on the work, not the framework
Learning Agile Product Management will encourage people to adopt a supportive framework. It doesn’t always work the other way around.
The goal is to speed up the delivery date of your first release and continue improving after it.
Agile Product Management – The Key to Effective Agile
The intent of Agile Product Management is to identify the most valuable work to be done, focus on just that work, prepare it for the teams to work on and guide them in building the functionality needed in thin slices. This creates quick feedback, the ability to pivot & faster value realization. The goal is business agility–the quick realization of value predictably, sustainable &w/high quality. Product management creates clarity on what is most valuable for the organization to build while providing teams guidance in its implementation. By discovering & removing unnecessary scope & provding this slices of work, teams become focused on true value delivery while becoming more efficient. This enables dramatically shorter times from start to initial value delivery.
Many people are looking to improve their ability to deliver value by becoming Agile. When considering such an adoption, it is useful to consider the following current and additional costs.
- Dollar cost of new training/coaching
- People cost (their lost time) due to this training/coaching takes
- Added cost of delay of value realization that this training/coaching costs
- Resistance (if any) that people have to this training/coaching
Obviously, these costs must be offset by gains. In our view, these gains should be met before the end of the next program increment.
The trick to getting a return requires focusing on the actual Agile work required, not the framework that surrounds it:
- focusing on quick business value realization by identifying those scenarios that will result in the quickest return for the greatest value
- shortening the program increment length in order to return value more quickly
- training and coaching product managers and product owners how to identify, sequence and thinly slice the most valuable work to be done
- creating small slices of functionality with clear scope, requirements and acceptance criteria
- having teams align around manifesting business value quickly
The key is the focus on business agility – the quick realization of business value predictably, sustainably and with high quality. This can be readily done by guiding work through the use of minimum business increments (MBIs) to create a focus on the smallest pieces of work that will realize the greatest value. Having smaller pieces enables shorter program increments. Smaller is also easier to manage as reflected in Eli Goldratt’s (creater of Theory of Constraints) observation – “Often reducing batch size is all it takes to bring a system back into control.”
Using smaller batches and shortening the length of the increment has several advantages. First, it reduces the amount of planning required. Second, it enables the group to pivot based on the feedback learned in the shorter increment. But perhaps most importantly, it focuses the group on delivering quickly. While SAFe suggests to “develop on cadence and release on demand” most planning events tend to define releases. By focusing on the implementation of minimum business increments (MBIs), even if a release is held to the end of the program increment, it is more likely more value will be created even if unexpected delays occur. See more here.
Of course, an investment in training and coaching must be made. But it should not take more than a few days. The core skills are to:
- know what to focus on so as to avoid overworking the development team
- only have teams work on things of real importance
- only refine the backlog for those things about to be built
- communicate what is needed to the development team in a way that creates clear scope, clarity and acceptance criteria for what the customers really need
The two key elements here are the use of MBIs and Acceptance Test-Driven Development (ATDD). ATDD is mostly a collaborative method for product owners, developers and testers to define scope and clear requirements. Automation does not need to be included in ATDD although it can be a first step towards that. Unless you have an unlimited budget of time and money, it is best to focus on actual Agile skills. Midisze companies are usually better off improving their skills and creating or modifying a framework that suits their work instead of investing in a framework and then trying to figure out how to do Agile.
Running a Planning Event effectively
A planning event is about collaboration and dependency management in order to maximize the teams to work together to maximize business value. A focus on finishing MBIs, not merely getting everything done by the end of the increment must be manifested by all teams.
- having teams align around the business value of what is being planned
- focusing the planning event on realizing value, not merely getting the work done in the increment
See Running Effective Planning Events for more.
Learning how to do Agile Product Management with ATDD improves both what you are working on and how you are working on it. By mixing ATDD into the blend, teams get great clarity on scope and acceptance criteria setting up further gains by enabling automating testing. I am not claiming that Net Objectives does anything magical here. Anyone who can effectively train and coach in product management, ATDD and team-agility can do what we do. Just make sure that’s who you engage with. The trick is in getting training and coaching before the planning. You can get more details about a framework (if you are using one) while you are doing the work.
We have created a new team-level course that integrates about 1/2 of a Scrum Master class with a full-blown Acceptance Test-Driven Development (ATDD), using Given When Then that has been remarkably successful. The mantra is “focus on the work, not the framework.” Continue reading “Why you need to start with ATDD with SAFe even more than with Scrum”
I love MVPs and think Ries’ Lean Startup‘s brilliant. But MVPs are about discovering if something’s of value &was designed around startups a focus on what to work on exists. While the thinking underneath MVPs can be used in existing orgs this is too abstract for many. Continue reading “The infatuation with MVPs is taking us away from our real need”
Scrum has proven to be effective but companies often encounter severe challenges with its adoption. The common reasons given include problems with the team or management or insufficient commitment in time, money or determination. At Net Objectives, we believe otherwise. After using and teaching Scrum for two decades, we see the root cause of challenges with Scrum adoption lie in how it is promoted and the ways in which it is adopted. Continue reading “The goal is not to adopt Scrum. The goal is to increase your agility while using Scrum as a vehicle.”