Project Management

The Agile Enterprise

by
This blog will explore agility at the enterprise level, examining how agile principles can be implemented throughout the organization—and in departments other than IT.

About this Blog

RSS

Recent Posts

Seven at One Blow: Lessons for Agile Teams and the Pitfalls of Story Points Misunderstanding

Lessons from the Emperor’s New Clothes: Rethinking Agile Transformation

Transparency in Backlog Prioritisation for AI Features

Balancing Model Complexity vs Interpretability, Finding the Sweet Spot in Machine Learning

Fairness vs Performance Trade-Offs in Agile Delivery

Categories

Agile, Artificial Intelligence, Benefits Realization, Change Management, Communications Management, Complexity, Consulting, Decision Making, Disciplined Agile, Diversity, Earned Value Management, Estimating, Ethics, General, Governance, History, Innovation, Knowledge Management, Leadership, Lessons Learned, Metrics, Organizational Culture, Product Management, Risk Management, Scope Management, Scrum, Social Impact, Stakeholder Management, Teams, Testing/Test Management

Date

Velocity Misuse and Performance Pressure: Rethinking Agile Metrics

linkedin twitter facebook Request to reuse this  
Agile introduced velocity as a simple tool: a way for teams to estimate how much work they can deliver in a sprint, supporting better planning and realistic forecasting. Yet, over time, velocity has been repurposed—and sometimes misused—as a performance metric, leading to unintended consequences for teams and organizations.

The Problem: Planning Tool or Performance Benchmark?

Velocity was never meant to be a Key Performance Indicator (KPI) or a tool for comparing teams. However, it’s common to see organizations:
  • Setting targets based on velocity numbers
  • Using velocity to compare teams or individuals
  • Tying incentives or recognition to velocity increases
This shift puts pressure on teams to "hit the numbers," which can lead to:
  • Gaming the system (inflating story points or splitting work unnaturally)
  • Burnout and stress from relentless demands
  • Dishonest reporting to avoid negative scrutiny

The Ethical Dilemma

When velocity becomes the yardstick for performance, teams face a fundamental question:
  • Are we incentivized to deliver real value—or just to hit metrics?
If the focus is on numbers, the true spirit of Agile—delivering customer value, learning from feedback, and adapting—gets lost. Teams may spend more time managing perceptions than solving real problems.

A New Direction: Value and Outcomes Over Output

The hottest trend in Agile metrics is a move away from output-based measurements like velocity toward value-driven and outcomes-based approaches. This shift means:
  • Prioritizing customer impact over story point accumulation
  • Measuring success by outcomes (e.g., user satisfaction, business goals achieved)
  • Rewarding learning and adaptation, not just speed
Organizations embracing this mindset are seeing healthier team cultures, more honest communication, and better results for stakeholders.
The Bottom Line:
Velocity is a useful planning tool—but it’s not a measure of team worth. The future of Agile metrics lies in focusing on value, outcomes, and ethical practices that support both team wellbeing and organizational goals.

How is your team measuring success? Are your metrics driving value—or just numbers?
Posted on: May 11, 2026 10:31 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

Manifesto for Enterprise Agility alignment with PMI's Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct

linkedin twitter facebook Request to reuse this  
In one of my webinars dedicated to the Agile Enterprise,, I stated that Ethics is the foundation of Agility. This blog ia review of the recently published Manifesto for Enterprise Agility. The Agile Enterprise is not a new concept; it was coined in 1990's by the Agility Forum, a group of experts, academics, and executives that predicted the changes that the 21st Century would bring.
The new manifesto emphasizes purpose, transparency, learning, and sustainable ways of working. It can be used as ethical guardrails to make Agile commitments more explicit so Agile can’t be misused to justify “speed over integrity.”


Responsibility (own decisions, actions, consequences)

The manifesto explicitly frames disruption as requiring better decisions, adaptive plans, guardrails, and “making risk visible (and actionable).” That supports responsible stewardship of outcomes and resources, and it signals accountability rather than reckless autonomy.
Phrases like “move quickly… with incomplete data,” “cut out small decisions,” and “replace approval structures with trust” can be interpreted as bypassing due diligence. The PMI Code also carries an obligation to comply with laws, regulations, and organizational policies; the manifesto implies this via “guardrails,” but doesn’t state it.


Respect (regard for people and resources entrusted to us)

“Human centricity amidst change,” “sustainably deliver value,” “change fatigue,” and emphasis on empathy, trust, and psychological safety are directly aligned with respect for people and well-being.
The manifesto says “continuous learning” and “learning from failure,” which is positive, but it could be strengthened by stating that accountability is non-punitive while still addressing misconduct or repeated negligence. Also, “distributed talent” and ecosystem language should avoid treating partners/suppliers as interchangeable capacity.


Fairness (impartiality; avoid favoritism and competing self-interest)

“Shared enterprise outcomes over functional optimization” and “work visible” encourage objective prioritization and reduce hidden agendas. Ecosystem collaboration also supports fair dealings with stakeholders.
“Move authority to where value is created,” and dynamic funding can unintentionally increase favoritism if decision criteria aren’t transparent. The excerpt does not explicitly address conflicts of interest, procurement ethics, or equitable access to opportunities.


Honesty (truthful communications and conduct)

The manifesto repeatedly promotes visibility: “make work visible,” “progress, dependencies, and risk visible,” “govern through visibility,” and “evidence-based agility / ground-truth facts.” This is strongly consistent with honesty as PMI defines it.
The main risk is operationalizing “visibility” with metrics that get gamed; the manifesto could pre-empt that by stating metrics are used ethically (to learn, not to mislead).
Posted on: March 04, 2026 04:43 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
ADVERTISEMENTS

"A noble spirit enbiggens the smallest man"

- Jebediah Springfield

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsors