Are you misleading people about Agile, Scrum and the Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe)?
This past week (and for years) I have experienced several people and even a fairly well known “agile tool space” vendor passing misinformation around about Agile, Scrum and the Scaled Agile Framework for the Enterprise (SAFe). The offending parties, in the context of their misrepresentations, are attacking the Scrum framework and the SAFe. Labeling them as processes!
To what end?
If you are working in the Agile tool space or as a consultant selling agile frameworks, methodologies, and processes you have a professional obligation to the field to maintain integrity. An obligation to honor the principles of the Agile Manifesto.
Labeling the frameworks as processes may seem inconsequential. However, after further inspection and understanding of Agile principles (of software development or otherwise) and the frameworks (Scrum/SAFe) intent and implementation it is clear neither is a process or a methodology. I will leave it to others (see references below) to explain the differences between frameworks, methodologies, and processes. That discussion has been hashed out for a long time now.
Moving on to the point
Continuing to push misinformation about Agile, Scrum and the SAFe is damaging to the frameworks and the industry. It is clearly unprofessional and does harm to the mission of making the world a better place to work in. To claim them as processes or methodologies destroys the basic foundational value of being a framework, not a process. Or a method. First, and foremost perhaps, because it makes it difficult for organizations to learn, understand and adapt the frameworks as part of an organizational transformation. As prescriptive guidance, frameworks make sense. As a defined process, something as tremendous as enterprise wide transformation is impossible if you are selling a wholesale turn-key throw all your stuff away solution.
“All your process are belong to us” philosophy and attitude leads directly to organizational transformation failure.
If an organization or a person (say, an executive trying to listen to an Agile coach about why they should use Agile, Scrum or Kanban or SAFe or whatever other agile framework or method) understands the sometimes subtle (not really) differences between frameworks, methodologies, and processes and Agile, Scrum and the SAFe are being sold as processes or as methodologies then you have a disaster from start. Smart people pick up on the misuse of the words and then begin to question the integrity of everything you say from that point on.
Second, read a damn dictionary. Define the words framework, methodology and process. Then correct yourself. Introspection. Inspect & adapt. This reminds me of the too common misuse of “Quality Assurance” for “Quality Control.” We need to do QA on that code…. sigh.
If Agile, Scrum or the Scaled Agile Framework for the Enterprise were processes or methodologies they wouldn’t make a lick of sense. The frameworks are massively incomplete if they are processes or methods. They are both frameworks by design and intent.
In conclusion I would like to point out again that there is a significant difference between a framework, a methodology and a process. Agile is a mindset. Scrum is a framework (for managing a process). The SAFe is a framework (best practice guidance). Organizations should be applying the guidelines and principles of the frameworks within the context of existing or new or changed processes and methodologies. Processes and methodologies are built and documented and used on top of a framework.
See this article from vsellis to read about the differences between frameworks, methodologies and processes.
Another article on why agile Scrum is a framework.