SAFe or Un-SAFe

Convener: David Hicks @AgileDave

Photo of Dot Voted Agenda attached:

Photo of Final Participants' Names & Their Recommendations attached:


Further Notes from one of the participants below.
Kind regards
agil8, One Kingdom Street,
Paddington Central, London W2 6BD
+44 207 681 6078

Begin forwarded message:

From: Kris Philippaerts
Date: 25 September 2013 12:57:32 CEST
To: David Hicks
Subject: Notes SAFe

  • Structured, disciplined
  • Scripting the critical moves
  • Same cadanse for different projects
  • Synchronized plannings
  • ScrumXP is basic building block
  • Designed for different programs, each containing 50+ people
  • Fractal: practices are reused on all levels
  • Something youncan start doing now
  • Red versus blue: architecture features versus business features
  • Leffingwell is just a frozen state of SAFE
  • Bad image:
    • Very commercial
    • Highly polished
  • Built on the house of lean
    • Try to work with feature teams
  • Roadmap built-in: how to get there (??)
  • Good place to start, but need to be climbing up
  • PO is on project level, Product Manager is higher level PO, scaled vision
  • SAFE speaks in business language where Scrum does not
Level 3: team 
  • Strong on XP practices: you cannot scale crappy code
  • Is actually Scrum, but goes away from the "ideal" picture: an imperfect pragmatic version
  • HIP sprints:
    • hardening sprints, sort of program increment.
    • no coding, hardening practices, integrated ci
    • somewhat fuzzy, no eal agreement
    • Can be seen as celebration moment, sort like hackathon
Level 2: program coordination
  • New roles
  • System working, integration, …
  • Architectural runway: framework in advance of dev teams
  • Agile release train: over level 1 and 2:
    • 2 day release planning

Level 1: portfolio

  • Based on kanban approach
  • Investment themes
  • System of epics, business and architectural
Other frameworks: LESS and DAD
  • Less is more scrum oriented: keep to minimum
  • Safe is more described as broad and deep
  • DAD: good on diagram method, nice, on the way, pragmatic. But for the details, might be too rigid, like RUP.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>