Scaling: Getting Big is NOT the Answer!

Ask someone why they want to scale and their response is often, "So we can continue practicing agile as we grow bigger." While the pursuit of agility is a noble one, most often the pursuit of "bigness" is not. But what is?

In this talk, David Bulkin and Donald Patti will introduce attendees to three of the most popular scaling frameworks -- Scrum@Scale, LeSS and SAFe -- comparing the qualities of each. In addition, they'll explain what organizations looking to scale SHOULD pursue as they scale.

3 favorite thumb_down thumb_up 0 comments visibility_off  Remove from Watchlist visibility  Add to Watchlist

Outline/Structure of the Talk

  1. Introduction (2 minutes)
  2. Scaling Activity (15 minutes)
  3. Popular Scaling Frameworks -- Scrum@Scale, LeSS and SAFe (21 minutes)
  4. Recap & Close (2 minutes)
  5. Q & A (5 minutes)

Learning Outcome

Attendees will be able to:

  • Make an informed decision about when and whether to scale agile.
  • Be able to select which scaling framework is most likely to work in their environment

Target Audience

Individuals considering scaling; or, individuals in scaled agile environments

Prerequisites for Attendees

Basic understanding of agile.

schedule Submitted 1 month ago

Public Feedback

comment Suggest improvements to the Speaker

  • Liked Donald Patti

    Donald Patti / David Bulkin - Plays over Plans: Using Transformation Plays to Coach Enterprise Change

    45 Mins

    Unlike agile at the team level, enterprise agility requires cultural change throughout the organization to be successful. But, cultural change is far from easy. Much like the roots of a tree, culture runs deep, so it takes persistence and the right approach to achieve success.

    In this talk, Donald Patti and David Bulkin will describe multiple successful plays, or approaches, to enterprise agile transformation, providing attendees with a number of practical ways to understand and change an organization's culture.

  • Liked Melinda Solomon

    Melinda Solomon / Ken Moser - IV&V Just Looks Like a Four-Letter Word

    45 Mins
    Experience Report

    The job of an IT Project Manager is a difficult one and traditional approaches to governance tended to make it even more difficult. In the best of times, these approaches employ Independent Verification and Validation (IV&V) as an impediment to project teams; in the worst of times, they set IV&V up as judge, jury, and executioner for projects.

    But just because that’s the way things are often done doesn’t make it right. Oversight entities can be healthy enablers instead of adversarial obstacles.

    Traditionally, the role of a governance framework is to enumerate statutory requirements, promote best practices, and reduce risk. The purpose of an IV&V team within this world is to ensure that appropriate elements of the framework are followed so as to mitigate risk. Larger projects typically present greater risks and require more controls; smaller projects less so.

    The big challenge has always been in defining what is required for a given project.

    Project sponsors want working solutions. The CFO wants tight budgets and lower costs. Project teams want happy sponsors. These stakeholders often oppose IV&V because the cost/benefit case for everything it promotes can be difficult to justify in comparison to business needs. Also, when these stakeholders do not pay directly for development costs they can have a very high tolerance for risk – but that’s an issue for another day.

    What if we re-frame IV&V from risk mitigation to added value?

    • What if, instead of requiring reams of documentation, IV&V identifies information it needs in the tools and processes already in use?
    • What if, instead of forcing teams to follow so-called best practices in cookie-cutter fashion, IV&V provided the metrics and data they need to take specific action when it is most effective?
    • What if, instead of reciting regulations to teams, IV&V worked hand-in-hand help teams meet them in the most efficient ways possible?
    • What if, instead of looking for defects, IV&V asked teams how it could help and then provided the specific support they need, where and when they need it most?
    • What if IV&V helped to onboard new teams and train them in specific skills and resources they will need to succeed?
    • What if IV&V assessed team needs as they worked together and then developed training courses to address those needs?
    • What if IV&V built project dashboards to present useful information from development tools that helped teams surface problems quickly?
    • What if these and other steps help project teams deliver value while meeting regulations, reducing risk, trimming costs, and increasing quality all around?

    What if? There is no what if. This works. It really does.

    These are just some of the innovative governance strategies that our IV&V team at USCIS has employed and it has made all the difference.

    Let us tell you more about them…