Agile is not a process to increase
Posted: Sun Jan 19, 2025 10:08 am
This article about the Scaled Agile Framework is an adapted translation of “Warning! SAFe Is an Undercover Waterfall Agent” , written by David Pereira. As it is a high-value content, we believe it can be useful for the Brazilian Product community. Enjoy reading!
Delivering value as quickly as possible is vital to surviving in today’s highly competitive market . Companies have no choice but to adapt to a rapidly changing world. Becoming agile is no longer optional, but a necessity for anyone who wants to stay alive. However, being agile is more challenging than you might think. How companies embrace change will shape their destiny.
Any agile framework will fail when treated as a process . To be agile, you need to adapt , more than just adapt the way you deliver solutions.
“ production speed, it is a mindset to help teams solve real end-user problems while generating value for the business.”
The biggest obstacle to becoming agile is the reluctance of see iceland mobile phone number nior management to give up command and control behavior. Executives want predictability, they fear uncertainty because the unknown scares them. However, they need to show the world that they are agile. How can they be agile without embracing empiricism? SAFe (or Scaled Agile Framework ) comes as the answer for companies afraid of deep structural change. But is SAFe really agile ?
Let me explain why I see SAFe as Waterfall in disguise .
Note: This article is based on my experience and observations. You may disagree with my opinion. That is why I invite you to share your perspective with me.
What is Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe)?
SAFe is one of the most widely used frameworks for scaling with agile. Giant corporations like Barclays, Cisco, and Lego, among others, work with it. Indeed, it is a robust framework that aims to help organizations successfully scale with agile. But how SAFe does this is by adding prescriptive and complex processes . Let's take a look at the official definition:
“ SAFe for Lean Enterprises is the world’s leading framework for business agility. SAFe integrates the power of Lean, Agile, and DevOps into a comprehensive operating system that helps enterprises thrive in the digital age by delivering innovative products and services faster, more predictably, and with higher quality.”
– SAFe for Lean Enterprises
While SAFe may have good intentions, I’ve found that adding more processes to gain control is counterproductive . We may have the illusion that everything is figured out, but software development doesn’t work that way.
Dean Leffingwell, creator of SAFe, insists that Agile is no longer optional. I agree with him. But where I disagree is how companies can be agile.
“In the Digital Age, every business is a software business. Agility is not an option, or something only for technical teams, it is a business imperative.”
– Dean Leffingwell, creator of SAFe
Don't be fooled
If you’ve been working in software development for a few years, you’ve probably heard about the Rational Unified Process (RUP) . It’s a deeply prescriptive methodology. But what does it have to do with SAFe? Well, do you know who was heavily involved in RUP? Dean Leffingwell, the same person who created SAFe. That’s why I doubt it has its roots in Agile.
Have you ever tried to understand how SAFe works? Try looking at the following image for a minute.
process representation with SAFe
Source: Scaled Agile
I don't know about you, but I get dizzy, scared and lost when I look at this image. It's complex to understand and difficult to follow. Yet they have the nerve to call it agile. To me, SAFe is, at best, a cumbersome process . Let's understand more why SAFe is not agile at all, in my opinion.
The first value of the Agile Manifesto is “individuals and interactions over processes and tools.” The Scale Agile Framework breaks this value down by focusing on processes over individuals and interactions . It segments communication between teams by creating silos. It’s similar to an assembly line, with each part taking care of its responsibility.
“ SAFe is a process in itself. It gives teams the illusion that they are in control of their work while killing their autonomy. ”
Another critical aspect of the method is how it falsely combines with other agile frameworks . What SAFe calls Scrum XP has nothing to do with Scrum . SAFe has its own version of Scrum, which has a different goal than real Scrum.
With SAFe, Scrum XP becomes a process for feature factories . Agile teams work exclusively to produce the output previously defined by the Product Manager . This implementation breaks the core of Scrum: empiricism .
“Empiricism states that knowledge comes from experience and making decisions based on what is observed .”
– The Scrum Guide
When teams are focused on production, they become a feature factory . The only thing that matters is to keep generating output. This approach is not Scrum and will lead to diluted results.
It’s frustrating to be part of a team that’s focused solely on delivery . I’ve been in this situation many times. The team is responsible for building something that will change the lives of end users, but the team is powerless to decide what makes sense to build. With SAFe, agile teams focus on building the right thing, while the product manager decides what the right thing to build is.
Delivering value as quickly as possible is vital to surviving in today’s highly competitive market . Companies have no choice but to adapt to a rapidly changing world. Becoming agile is no longer optional, but a necessity for anyone who wants to stay alive. However, being agile is more challenging than you might think. How companies embrace change will shape their destiny.
Any agile framework will fail when treated as a process . To be agile, you need to adapt , more than just adapt the way you deliver solutions.
“ production speed, it is a mindset to help teams solve real end-user problems while generating value for the business.”
The biggest obstacle to becoming agile is the reluctance of see iceland mobile phone number nior management to give up command and control behavior. Executives want predictability, they fear uncertainty because the unknown scares them. However, they need to show the world that they are agile. How can they be agile without embracing empiricism? SAFe (or Scaled Agile Framework ) comes as the answer for companies afraid of deep structural change. But is SAFe really agile ?
Let me explain why I see SAFe as Waterfall in disguise .
Note: This article is based on my experience and observations. You may disagree with my opinion. That is why I invite you to share your perspective with me.
What is Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe)?
SAFe is one of the most widely used frameworks for scaling with agile. Giant corporations like Barclays, Cisco, and Lego, among others, work with it. Indeed, it is a robust framework that aims to help organizations successfully scale with agile. But how SAFe does this is by adding prescriptive and complex processes . Let's take a look at the official definition:
“ SAFe for Lean Enterprises is the world’s leading framework for business agility. SAFe integrates the power of Lean, Agile, and DevOps into a comprehensive operating system that helps enterprises thrive in the digital age by delivering innovative products and services faster, more predictably, and with higher quality.”
– SAFe for Lean Enterprises
While SAFe may have good intentions, I’ve found that adding more processes to gain control is counterproductive . We may have the illusion that everything is figured out, but software development doesn’t work that way.
Dean Leffingwell, creator of SAFe, insists that Agile is no longer optional. I agree with him. But where I disagree is how companies can be agile.
“In the Digital Age, every business is a software business. Agility is not an option, or something only for technical teams, it is a business imperative.”
– Dean Leffingwell, creator of SAFe
Don't be fooled
If you’ve been working in software development for a few years, you’ve probably heard about the Rational Unified Process (RUP) . It’s a deeply prescriptive methodology. But what does it have to do with SAFe? Well, do you know who was heavily involved in RUP? Dean Leffingwell, the same person who created SAFe. That’s why I doubt it has its roots in Agile.
Have you ever tried to understand how SAFe works? Try looking at the following image for a minute.
process representation with SAFe
Source: Scaled Agile
I don't know about you, but I get dizzy, scared and lost when I look at this image. It's complex to understand and difficult to follow. Yet they have the nerve to call it agile. To me, SAFe is, at best, a cumbersome process . Let's understand more why SAFe is not agile at all, in my opinion.
The first value of the Agile Manifesto is “individuals and interactions over processes and tools.” The Scale Agile Framework breaks this value down by focusing on processes over individuals and interactions . It segments communication between teams by creating silos. It’s similar to an assembly line, with each part taking care of its responsibility.
“ SAFe is a process in itself. It gives teams the illusion that they are in control of their work while killing their autonomy. ”
Another critical aspect of the method is how it falsely combines with other agile frameworks . What SAFe calls Scrum XP has nothing to do with Scrum . SAFe has its own version of Scrum, which has a different goal than real Scrum.
With SAFe, Scrum XP becomes a process for feature factories . Agile teams work exclusively to produce the output previously defined by the Product Manager . This implementation breaks the core of Scrum: empiricism .
“Empiricism states that knowledge comes from experience and making decisions based on what is observed .”
– The Scrum Guide
When teams are focused on production, they become a feature factory . The only thing that matters is to keep generating output. This approach is not Scrum and will lead to diluted results.
It’s frustrating to be part of a team that’s focused solely on delivery . I’ve been in this situation many times. The team is responsible for building something that will change the lives of end users, but the team is powerless to decide what makes sense to build. With SAFe, agile teams focus on building the right thing, while the product manager decides what the right thing to build is.