My thoughts on SAFe (The Scaled “Agile” Framework)

October 16, 2021

SAFe is a hot topic. Every once in a while, someone asks me my thoughts on the topic. And while ostensibly, SAFe may only apply to large enterprises, it also seems to get some traction even in small companies. I once worked with a company using SAFe for just 3 Scrum teams.

I have two core thoughts about SAFe:

  1. SAFe is a terrible name, becuase there’s very little “agile” about it. As I’ve said before, I think the very concept of “scaling agile” is flawed. Maybe I’ll start calling it S*Fe for that reason. 🤔

    If you don’t believe me, I challenge you to pull up S*Fe next to the Agile manifesto and do your own comparison. Here are a few of my highlights:

    Agile Manifesto S*Fe
    Individuals and interactions over processes and tools A very complicated process
    Customer collaboration over contract negotiation Barely mentions the customer at all (only once in the standard chart)
    Responding to change over following a plan Built on an 8-12 week plan
  2. S*Fe can still be a big improvement for companies that have a slow, bureaucratic process.

    Just because something isn’t completely “agile” doesn’t mean it’s bad, right? If your organization is benefiting from S*Fe, don’t be ashamed. Embrace what works.

    I just hope you’ll also be free to explore new options when S*Fe is outgrown at your organization!

Related Content

Can we parallelize agile?

What makes large, agile companies successful? The fact that each team, individually, is being agile. It's agile in parallel, not agile at scale.

Can we scale agile?

The Agile manifesto makes it pretty clear that agile software development happens at the team level.

Is it really possible to scale agile?

Agile, like family, cannot be scaled. But we can allow for it at scale.