Scaled Agile (SAFe): When You Need It, When You Don't

Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe) has become increasingly popular for large enterprises attempting to adopt agile principles. However, simply adopting SAFe doesn’t guarantee success. In fact, applying it to teams that aren't ready can lead to increased bureaucracy and frustration. This post explores when SAFe is a good fit, when it’s overkill, and what considerations remote and distributed teams need to make.

What is SAFe and Why Does It Matter?

SAFe is a comprehensive framework for scaling agile practices across an entire organisation. It aims to align development efforts, improve time-to-market, and increase employee engagement. Unlike Scrum or Kanban which focus on team-level agility, SAFe addresses portfolio, program, and value stream levels. It introduces concepts like Agile Release Trains (ARTs), Lean-Agile Leadership, and Continuous Delivery Pipelines.

The core benefit of SAFe is enabling better synchronisation between multiple teams working on interrelated products. Imagine a complex software ecosystem. Without coordination, individual teams might optimise for their specific components, potentially creating integration issues and delays. SAFe attempts to solve this by establishing a common cadence, shared vision, and clear communication channels.

Signs You Might Need SAFe

Recognising the problems SAFe addresses is the first step. Here are key indicators you should consider the framework:

• Large, Interdependent Teams: If you have numerous teams (typically 5-12+) working on interconnected components of a larger product, SAFe can provide the necessary structure for alignment.
• Portfolio Alignment Issues: When different departments are pursuing conflicting priorities, resulting in inefficient resource allocation and unclear product direction.
• Slow Time to Market: Delays in delivering value often due to handoffs, integration challenges, and lack of visibility across teams.
• Complex Regulatory Requirements: Industries with strict compliance standards (healthcare, finance) can benefit from SAFe's focus on traceability and documentation. PointClickCare's connected care approach, as highlighted in HealthTech Magazine, showcases how better information access aids compliance, a problem SAFe's pipeline emphasis addresses.
• Multiple Value Streams: Organisations offering a diverse range of products or services that require separate but integrated development lifecycles.

A client we worked with, a large financial institution, struggled with multiple Agile teams delivering features for a core banking platform. Each team worked independently, leading to integration nightmares and quarterly release cycles. Implementing SAFe, with its focus on ARTs and PI Planning, reduced release cycles to bi-monthly and improved product quality.

Signs You Definitely Don't Need SAFe

Conversely, some teams are simply too small or straightforward to benefit from SAFe's complexity. Here are warning signs:

• Small Teams (Less than 5): Scrum or Kanban are far more suitable for smaller, self-contained teams. Introducing SAFe adds overhead without providing substantial value.
• Independent Projects: If teams work on isolated projects with minimal dependencies, there’s little need for a scaled framework.
• Lack of Agile Maturity: If teams haven’t mastered core agile principles (e.g., iterative development, user stories, daily stand-ups), introducing SAFe will likely exacerbate existing problems.
• Resistance to Change: SAFe requires significant cultural shifts and process adjustments. Without buy-in from leadership and team members, implementation will fail.
• Simple Product: A single, relatively uncomplicated product doesn't require the intricate coordination SAFe provides.

We encountered a marketing agency attempting to implement SAFe across all its teams of 3-4 people. The overhead of PI Planning meetings and SAFe-specific reporting completely stifled their creativity and agility, resulting in lower output and frustrated team members. They scaled down instead.

SAFe and Distributed Teams: Unique Challenges

Remote and distributed teams face additional hurdles when adopting SAFe:

• Communication: SAFe relies heavily on face-to-face communication, especially during PI Planning. Distributed teams need robust collaboration tools (Slack, Microsoft Teams, video conferencing) and a commitment to over-communication.
• Time Zone Differences: Coordinating PI Planning across multiple time zones can be challenging. Consider rotating meeting times or breaking the event into smaller sessions.
• Building Trust: Remote teams often struggle with building trust and rapport. Invest in virtual team-building activities and encourage regular informal interactions.
• Tooling: SAFe requires numerous tools for backlog management, sprint planning, and reporting. Ensure these tools are accessible and well-integrated for all team members. Alternatives include Jira Align, Azure DevOps, and VersionOne.
• Maintaining Cadence: Ensure all remote team members are able to commit to consistent meeting times.

Actionable Steps to Consider

Before diving headfirst into SAFe, consider these steps:

1. Assess Your Maturity: Honestly evaluate your organisation’s agile maturity. A maturity assessment can help identify gaps and areas for improvement.
2. Start Small: Begin with a pilot ART comprising a representative set of teams. This allows you to test the framework and gather feedback before rolling it out more broadly.
3. Invest in Training: Provide comprehensive SAFe training for all team members, including leaders, Scrum Masters, and developers.
4. Choose the Right Tools: Select tools that support SAFe practices and accommodate distributed teams. Ensure your tooling isn't overly complex, promoting simple organisation.
5. Focus on Value Streams: Clearly define your value streams and ensure your ARTs are aligned with delivering value to customers.
6. Prioritise Communication: Implement robust communication channels and encourage frequent interactions between teams. Consider daily virtual stand-ups and regular video conferencing sessions.
7. Embrace Iteration: SAFe is not a set-and-forget framework. Continuously monitor its effectiveness and make adjustments as needed. As seen with the Arsenal example in Premier League, adaptability is vital.

Common Mistakes to Avoid

• Treating SAFe as a Checklist: SAFe is more than just following a set of steps. It requires a cultural shift and a commitment to agile principles.
• Lack of Executive Support: Without buy-in from leadership, implementation will stall.
• Ignoring Team Feedback: Listen to your teams and address their concerns. SAFe should empower teams, not burden them.
• Overly Complex Tooling: Choosing overly complex tools can stifle agility and hinder collaboration.
• Insufficient Training: Teams need adequate training to understand SAFe practices and effectively implement them.

Takeaways

• SAFe excels at aligning large, interdependent teams, but it’s not suitable for every organisation.
• Assess your agile maturity and start with a pilot program.
• Distributed teams need to prioritise communication and choose appropriate tooling.
• Don't treat SAFe as a checklist; focus on the underlying principles and continuous improvement.
• Consider the trade-offs and be prepared to adapt the framework to your specific needs.

Resources

• Scaled Agile Framework Official Website
• Jira Align - Portfolio and program management for Enterprise Agile
• Azure DevOps - Comprehensive DevOps toolchain with SAFe support
• VersionOne - Agile project management platform optimised for SAFe.