Agile Software Development
Aside Posted on
Enjoying the questionnaire Nissreen Barakat. I have pondered this question for a while too. I don’t feel like the answers I’ve found so far tell the whole story, although most are decent. What are your thoughts?
From your point of view, what is the definition of organizational agility?
My take at starting the discussion:
An internalization [permanent] of the capacity of an organization to consume simple, complex and/or complicated problems quickly without requiring a formal reconfiguration or restructuring (adaptability) of the organization’s internal structure while being able to deliver on the mission and value delivery in a way that customers of the organization would consider successful outcomes. Measurable organizational agility would be reflected as a learning culture focused on relentless improvement with no regret failure. “Pivoting without mercy or guilt” as Leffingwell and Knaster would say. Learning cultures in organizations should also be able to consume chaotic problems by bringing order to the chaos through iterative experimentation and study of outcomes and generation of new hypothesis. Also, organizational “agility” is possible without “Agile.”
#SAFe #Agile #agility #organizationalagility #howto #whatnext
Have you ever worked in an organization run by committee? All decisions requiring consensus, even the minutiae? Immutable command and control structures that were often too busy to collaborate with underlings? What did their results look like? I like how Mel ties in the social construct and communication into the discussion of organizational structures. How we work together is important, just like what we are working on.
To the extent that an organization is not completely flexible in
its communication structure, that organization will stamp out
an image of itself in every design it produces.
… Because the design that occurs first is almost never the best
possible, the prevailing system concept [the design] may need to
change. Therefore, flexibility of organization is important to
effective design. Ways must be found to reward design managers
for keeping their organizations lean and flexible.
We had a “SAFe Air Bear” visit us for P3 PI Planning this week! Hilarious selfie’s ensued… The SAFe Air Bear was motivating our Agile Release Planes (ARPs) to successfully plan out feature flights for the next three months (Program Increment three).
Two ARPs, and a little over 150 people participated. Still working on feature / PI Objective counts… Release Plane Flight Engineers, where are you?
We are formally requesting an “Air” version of the SAFe. Airplanes are faster than trains. They can go where trains will never reach without tracks. Quality is higher on a plane than a train. Airplanes can break the sound barrier. In-flight entertainment.
Due to privacy laws, I had to blot out people. But not the SAFe Air Bear. I do not work for or represent Scaled Agile Inc…
After instructing “SAFe® for Teams” a half-dozen or so times now using the stock slides I decided to experiment with simulation improvements to address concerns / challenges students have had learning about program level PI Planning on a team of teams in SAFe context. The geekbooks.com simulation and intent and timing of SAFe for Teams as part of the overall “Implementation Roadmap” does not fit my client. Financial services and information technology go hand in hand. One size fits all courses…don’t. That being said, the content, slides/materials and learning path are top-notch quality from the amazing thought leaders at Scaled Agile. They have to please everybody. But the use case here with my client is different. Hence the experiment.
I have been teaching SAFe for Teams over the past few months with the stock v4.x slide deck and in musca change of the geekbooks simulation in favor of “Building a House.” It was quite a bit more effective as a learning tool than the stock simulation. However it takes much more time for setup of features and story development. Plus I had to coach the Exec/PMPO/Arch’s on the context vision slides separately. PO’s had to have time to write up the features while the other instructor continued with the course. Or as in most cases I teach by myself (not recommended)… we take a class break while the PO’s and I create features.
Since then I have found some time to create new slides to draw in the context of the Build a House PI planning simulation into the SAI instructional material (no I don’t change any of their slides; license compatible; Enterprise client). Read the rest of this entry »
Coaches and Practitioners of Lean-Agile and the SAFe
In my experience the amount of time that we get to spend in Lean-Agile and SAFe courses on the subject of Velocity and Capacity Planning is inadequate. So I spent some time building a tool for one of my client organizations. I have since spent some time greatly enhancing the tool and getting it ready for distribution. I am offering the tool for free. All that I ask is if you decide that the tool has value and you are going to use it, to like my blog. Perhaps even share this article on your favorite social media. Read the rest of this entry »
The good folks at Scaled Agile, the SAFe® community, Agile agnostics, consultants, and some in the “Agile” community are onto something incredibly important in defining the elusive and dynamic Agile End Game for organizations. Read the rest of this entry »
Aside Posted on Updated on
I can’t say that I agree at all with Dave Snowden’s approach to communication. The guy is rough around the edges, a “perpetual curmudgeon” in his own words. And that is describing it kindly. He does have some good ideas on decision making though. Read the rest of this entry »