I was first introduced to Agile methods about 15 years ago, when I first encountered some product teams that were experimenting with new ways of producing software.我是一个长期过程的学生,太ls for product development, and since the origin of these methods were from the custom solutions/projects world, I was asked early on about my thoughts on how to leverage these methods for the product world.
I was immediately attracted to several of the core principles of Agile, as they attempted to institutionalize several of what I considered the most important traits of the best product teams.
第一个通常最受关注的是，这是对我们来说更好的概念，更好地为我们的客户释放稳定的较小版本 - 一般按照每周或两周释放的顺序（越多）更好）。
对于曾经必威娱乐官网每月释放的公司或甚至季度（那么常数），这意味着它们如何构建，测试和发布工作的一些大变化。While this was a non-trivial hurdle for many teams, which usually meant they had to invest in test and release automation, teams came out the other end better for it.
The second change, however, is a different story.The politics inside companies became clear with the second change.
So then – and still today – in most companies, the stakeholders still provide the teams with roadmaps of what features and projects the stakeholders think best.即使团队使用敏捷方法，团队也没有赋予我描述的感觉和负责任。They are there to implement.
But aside from still getting the roadmaps, the teams were largely able to self-organize and run their teams as they best saw fit, which definitely has some significant benefits, including in productivity and team morale.
But there was another faction in most companies that was decidedly not happy with Agile.
这是一组负责抓住猫（产品，设计，工程，QA，运营等）的项目经理组，并确保路线图按时和预算交付。“They are the personification of project-mindset organizations.
当大多数公司被迁至敏必威娱乐官网捷时，这个项目管理项目组织被故意缺席。The argument was that the product teams should step up and take responsibility for this.
As you might imagine, this didn’t sit too well with the PMO organizations of the world, but the momentum behind Agile was too great, and the frustrations with the old ways of working too real, so they spent nearly a decade trying to figure out their place in the tech world.
Over the past few years, a number of companies have asked me about this notion of processes that focus on “Agile at Scale,” the most heavily marketed (judging in part by the amount of spam I receive) such process is SAFe (缩放敏捷框架）。
Normally I only write about processes and techniques that I can vouch for first-hand.The problem here is that I don’t personally know of a single leading tech product company that is using SAFe.
All the examples I have found are big IT, project-mindset organizations – big banks and insurance companies – not technology-powered product-mindset companies – so not the type of company that I would normally work with.
我也将承认强烈的偏见。From all that I have read and heard, I would not want to work in a company using a process like this.I can’t imagine any of the strong tech product companies I know choosing to move to SAFe, and if for some reason they did, I’m pretty certain their top talent would leave.
现在这个过程背后的人很精明。Rather than a frontal assault on Agile, they take an “embrace and extend” marketing strategy, so you will find every buzzword you’ve ever heard from the Agile and Lean worlds including Scrum, Kanban, XP, Lean Startup, Lean UX, Continuous Delivery, and DevOps.
但这只是一种营销策略。主要是他们只是重新定义这些术语的含义来模糊他们的目的。史诗成为“迷你商业案”;当称为“贫民治理”时，治理的概念听起来不那么繁重。当定位为“敏捷程序管理”时，程序管理可能会造成更少的焦虑。The constant talk of iterations and agile obscures the reality that these “Agile Release Trains” are mostly happening every 10 weeks.
我可以继续，但希望你明白。The core benefits of Agile and Lean are lost.More accurately, if you follow their process, I find it inconceivable that you’ll be able to achieve the underlying benefits of innovation that can come from effective use of Agile and Lean methods.
A couple years ago I wrote about the产品故障的根本原因in product companies and I identified ten key attributes of Waterfall and project-mindset.I went through and compared this list with SAFe, and literally all ten problems exist in SAFe.Indeed, I would argue that all ten problems are inherent in that process.
在最基本的是，专门的产品团队（AKA Squad）的批判概念已经搞砸了。In SAFe, this concept of a true product team has been undermined and demoted, and the core concept is now aProgram，拥有产品管理器，架构师和发布列车经理的自上而下模型，这些人员制作了所有关键决策，然后将一些具有低级别产品所有者的工程团队分配给各种部件建立。
There are several variations of SAFe depending on just how big you are, and just how much command and control you want to put in place.But if you were an old-school PMO missing your classic portfolio, program and project management, you would probably love it.
The bottom line is that SAFe is very much a top-down, mercenary model;设计和尤其是工程的作用并不像它需要的那样强大;这完全是输出而不是结果;并且实际后果是持续创新的障碍。
- an organization where most, if not all, of the engineers are outsourced, using an agency or contractors
When I first heard of this process from someone that was working in a company (a large bank) that had adopted it, I told them it just sounded like the death throes of Waterfall and I was pretty sure it wouldn’t go anywhere.But in truth their message seems to have resonated with project-mindset organizations, and just because it may cause an allergic reaction in Silicon Valley doesn’t mean it won’t get traction elsewhere.
In particular, just about every large pre-Internet company out there today has some sort of “digital transformation initiative,” but what most of them don’t realize is that the heart of this transformation is moving from project-mindset to product-mindset.
When you combine the appeal of the message of “leveraging modern concepts of Agile and Lean” with the very real challenges that come with scale, it’s not too hard to see how big companies can fall prey to this marketing strategy, ironically often in the name of digital transformation.
So I am going to redouble my efforts to help make these points.有关若干关于这一主题的几篇文章，有关项目思维和产品思维团队和组织之间的差异。
UPDATE SEPTEMBER 2020: