Skip to main content

Scaling schmaling


'Scaling agile' appears to be the latest organisational obsession. I appear beset on all sides by the latest scaling framework for agile ways of working.  SAFe, LeSS and even DAD are examples of acronym driven chicanery which parade as answers to all your organisational needs. 

So, lets just all leap aboard the Agile Release Train (because loading something up with a few months work and careering around at variable speeds sounds SAFe to me) and scale into the stratosphere.

I have a theory I've expressed on this blog before. Its just too darned hard to think about problems like this. So we outsource it. Thinking-as-a-Service. TaaS. We are relatively unique, blog reader, in our desire to go back to first principles.

Anyway, onwards. Riddle me this framework builders. Which of these doesn't scale?




Its all there. Teams, trust, collaboration, conversation, technical excellence, sustainability, self-organisation, reflection.

They are pretty explicit too for the most part. You rarely need to read between the lines. Any framework on top of these is abstraction and obfuscation of these aims.

Lets take an example. Preference for face to face conversation? That scales. More teams, more interdependent stuff to do. Talk more and regularly, at all levels, from the programmer to the CTO. But how do we scale I hear you cry? This is the bit when you consider your options (try 10 options to go beyond the obvious) and apply the rule of three. Otherwise known as the "thinking about it bit".

I won't go though them all but you probably get the picture.

I have a sneaking (more like rampaging bull elephant) suspicion that these frameworks real purpose is to fit around what your organisation already does. Still sat on the same nail and getting more painful but with a lovely layer of process to entertain us while we wear good people out, harpoon careers and lampoon ideas.

But then, at least with SAFe-LeSS-DAD, you get to keep the corner office eh?

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

A Lone Tester at a DevOps Conference

I recently had the chance to go to Velocity Conf in Amsterdam, which one might describe as a DevOps conference. I love going to conferences of all types, restricting the self to discipline specific events is counter intuitive to me, as each discipline involved in building and supporting something isn't isolated. Even if some organisations try and keep it that way, reality barges its way in. Gotta speak to each other some day.

So, I was in an awesome city, anticipating an enlightening few days. Velocity is big. I sometimes forget how big business some conferences are, most testing events I attend are usually in the hundreds of attendees. With big conferences comes the trappings of big business. For my part, I swapped product and testability ideas with Datadog, Pager Duty and others for swag. My going rate for consultancy appears to be tshirts, stickers and hats.

So, lets get to it:

3 Takeaways

Inclusiveness - there was a huge focus on effective teams, organisational dynamics and splitt…

Wheel of Testing Part 2 - Content

Thank you Reddit, while attempting to find pictures of the earths core, you surpass yourself.
Turns out Steve Buscemi is the centre of the world.

Anyway. Lets start with something I hold to be true. My testing career is mine to shape, it has many influences but only one driver. No one will do it for me. Organisations that offer a career (or even a vocation) are offering something that is not theirs to give. Too much of their own needs get in the way, plus morphing into a badass question-asker, assumption-challenger, claim-demolisher and illusion-breaker is a bit terrifying for most organisations. Therefore, I hope the wheel is a tool for possibilities not definitive answers, otherwise it would just be another tool trying to provide a path which is yours to define.


In part one, I discussed why I had thought about the wheel of testing in terms of my own motivations for creating it, plus applying the reasoning of a career in testing to it. As in, coming up with a sensible reflection of real…

The Team Test for Testability

You know what I see quite a lot. Really long-winded test maturity models. 

You know what I love to see? Really fast, meaningful ways to build a picture of your teams current state and provoke a conversation about improvement. The excellent test improvement card game by Huib Schoots and Joep Schuurkes is a great example. I also really like 'The Joel Test' by Joel Spolsky, a number of questions you can answer yes or no to to gain insight into their effectiveness as a software development team.

I thought something like this for testability might an interesting experiment, so here goes:

If you ask the team to change their codebase do they react positively?Does each member of the team have access to the system source control?Does the team know which parts of the codebase are subject to the most change?Does the team collaborate regularly with teams that maintain their dependencies?Does the team have regular contact with the users of the system?Can you set your system into a given state…