The value streams layer encompasses the capabilities required to provide value streams to your customers. A value stream begins, ends, and hopefully continues with a customer. A value stream is the set of actions that take place to add value for customers from the initial request through realization of value by the customers. The value streams layer is one of the four layers of the Disciplined Agile (DA) tool kit, overviewed in Figure 1. These layers are: Foundation, Disciplined DevOps, Value Streams, and Disciplined Agile Enterprise (DAE). This blog focuses on the value streams layer.
Figure 2 depicts the DA FLEX lifecycle, overviewing the high-level workflow for a value stream. As you can see, a value stream begins with the initial concept, moves through various stages for one or more development teams, and on through final delivery into business operations.
Let's explore the components of Disciplined Agile's value stream layer. The hexes in Figure 2 and Figure 3 represent process blades, sometimes called process areas. A process blade encompasses a cohesive collection of process options, such as practices and strategies, that should be chosen and then applied in a context sensitive manner. Process blades also describe functional roles specific to that domain as well as extensions to the DA mindset specific to that domain.
You can see in Figure 3 that some process blades, such as Product Management and Program Management, are specific to this layer. Other process blades, such as Strategy and Marketing, are shared between the value streams layer and the disciplined agile enterprise (DAE) layer. This is an indication that you may choose to implement those process blades at both the enterprise level as well as the level of a single value stream - do what is right for your situation.
Expanding upon the Disciplined DevOps layer, the value stream layer adds the following blades:
Business operations focuses on the activities required to provide services to customers and to support your products. The implementation of business operations will vary by value stream, in a bank retail account services is implemented in a very different manner than brokerage services for example. Business operations includes help desk and support services (integrated in with IT support where appropriate) as well as any technical sales support activities such as training, product installation, and product customization. As you can imagine close collaboration with both your Sales and Marketing efforts is required to successfully Delight Customers.
The continuous improvement process blade describes how people within your organization can share their improvement learnings with one another in a systematic way. There are many strategies for doing so, including centers of excellence (CoEs), communities of practice (CoPs) which are also known as guilds, techniques for exploring existing ways of working (WoW), identifying new WoW, and sharing techniques.
Governance is the leadership, organizational structures, and strategies to enable you to sustain and extend your organization’s ability to produce meaningful value for your customers. Lean governance promotes strategies such as motivating people to do the right thing, enabling them to do so (often via automation), communicating organizational objectives, and preferring visibility over reporting.
The goal of marketing is to ensure successful interactions between your organization and the outside world. Disciplined Agile marketing applies data and analytics to continuously source promising opportunities or solutions to problems in real time, deploying tests quickly, evaluating the results, and rapidly iterating. It also means taking a validated learning approach, being customer focused, working in a collaborative and flexible manner, and working in an evolutionary (iterative and incremental) manner. Your marketing efforts will represent your organization and your offerings, both products and services, to the outside world and conversely will represent external stakeholders, and potential stakeholders, to the rest of the organization. In conjunction with product management, Marketing will be actively involved with long-term visioning for your organization’s offerings. Marketing is sometimes called brand management
Portfolio management addresses how an your organization goes about identifying, prioritizing, organizing, and governing their various endeavors. Disciplined Agile portfolio management seeks to do this in a lightweight and streamlined manner that maximizes the creation of business value in a long-term sustainable manner. Potential endeavors include solution delivery initiatives/projects, stable product development teams, business experiments (along the lines of a lean startup strategy), and the operation of existing solutions.
Product management is the art of taking strategic objectives and turning them into tactical activities. Disciplined agile product management is performed in a collaborative and evolutionary manner that reflects the context of your organization. Disciplined agile product management includes the acts of:
A program is a large team composed of two or more sub-teams (also called squads). The purpose of program management is to coordinate the efforts of the sub-teams to ensure they work together effectively towards the common goals of the overall endeavor. Program management encompasses financial activities, vendor management, coordination of people/staffiing concerns, coordination of the evolution of the solution, and coordination of requirements management issues across the sub-teams within the program.
Research & development
Research & development (R&D) encompasses the innovative activities undertaken by your organization to identify potential new offerings (services or products), or to identify potential improvements to existing offerings. R&D constitutes the first stage of development of a potential new offering. R&D activities are an important part of both product management and solution development to help explore potential ideas and strategies.
The aim of your sales efforts is to, you guessed it, sell your organization’s offerings (both products and services) to customers. Your sales people, if any, will work very closely with your marketing team to ensure they are focused on selling offerings that reflect your organizations’ overall strategy. They will also work closely with product management to ensure that what they’re selling is available or can be built in a timely manner. Organizationally Sales is often combined with marketing or may even be matrixed into business operations.
Strategy is what you do now, and what you intend to do in the future. The focus of the strategy process blade is to identify, evolve, and then drive the execution of your organization’s vision. Your vision is driven by the perceived needs of your customers and influenced by the environment in which you operate.
Since Disciplined Agile (DA) joined the PMI family in August 2019 we've gotten a collection of questions from people along the lines of "Why is there a difference between the advice in DA and PMI's advice?" So I thought I would write a few blogs examining why that is. This is the first.
There are several reasons why there are differences between existing DA and existing (non-DA) PMI materials:
My point is that there are very good reasons for the differences between what is in DA and what PMI has traditionally focused on. These differences are an important aspect of the value proposition of DA for PMI, and more importantly for our membership, because we can learn from these differences and then improve and grow based on those learnings. We're currently evolving DA based on the great material encompassed by the existing PMI standards and practice guides and our hope is that the existing PMI offerings will evolve to reflect Disciplined Agile ways of working (WoW) too.
In the next blog in this series I will do a deep dive into the differences between DA's take on Program Management and the PMI Program Management Standard. I suspect this will help to make some of the ideas in this blog more concrete and it will certainly make the opportunity before us a bit more explicit.
The basic idea with rolling wave planning is that you plan things that are near in time to you in detail and things that are distant in time at a higher level. The thinking is that the longer away in time that something is the greater the chance that it will change during that time, therefore any investment in thinking through the details is likely wasted. You still want to plan at a high level to both guide your current decisions and to set people’s expectations as to what is likely to come.
Rolling wave planning is implemented in several places of the DA toolkit. First, as you can see in Figure 1 below, it is an option of the Level of Detail decision point of the Develop Initial Release Plan process goal. A rolling wave approach to release planning has the advantages of more accurate and flexible planning although can be a bit disconcerting to traditional managers who are used to annual planning strategies.
Figure 1. The Develop Initial Release Plan goal diagram.
The Portfolio Management process blade supports rolling wave budgeting as an option for its Manage the Budget decision point. This is depicted in Figure 2. The advantages are greater flexibility and greater likelihood of investing your IT funding more effectively, albeit at the loss of the false predictability provided by an annual budgeting strategy.
Figure 2. The goal diagram for the Portfolio Management process blade.
The Program Management process blade supports rolling wave planning of a program itself, as you seen in Figure 3. Planning and coordination are critical on a large program, and rolling wave planning offers the advantages greater flexibility, the ability to think important cross-team issues through, and the ability to react to changing stakeholder needs. The primary disadvantage is that it can be disconcerting for traditionalists who are used to thinking every thing through from the beginning.
Figure 3. The goal diagram for the Program Management process blade.
As you can see in Figure 4, rolling wave strategies can be applied in Product Management to evolve the business vision/roadmap. A continuous, rolling wave approach is critical to your success because the market place changes so quickly – these days, few organizations can tolerate an annual approach to business planning and in the case of companies with external customers an ad-hoc approach can prove to be too unpredictable for them.
Figure 4. The goal diagram for the Product Management process blade.
Previously we saw that rolling wave strategies can be applied to evolve your technology roadmap, as indicated in the goal diagram for Enterprise Architecture in Figure 5. The advantages of this approach are that your roadmap evolved in sync with both changes in technology and with your organization’s rate of experimentation and learning. The main disadvantage is that your technology roadmap is effectively a moving target.
Figure 5. The goal diagram for the Enterprise Architecture process blade.
As you can see, rolling wave strategies are an integral part of the Disciplined Agile (DA) toolkit. In fact, in most situations they prove to be the most effective and flexible strategies available to you. The advantages of rolling wave planning tend to greatly outweigh the disadvantages. More on this next time.
For a long time now we’ve been applying what’s often called rolling wave planning with our clients. Rolling wave planning is applied in several areas of the Disciplined Agile (DA) toolkit, including release planning by a delivery team, technology roadmapping, and product roadmapping to name a few. This blog overviews this important practice.
The basic idea is that you plan things that are near in time to you in detail and things that are distant in time at a higher level. The thinking is that the longer away in time that something is the greater the chance that it will change during that time, therefore any investment in thinking through the details is likely wasted. You still want to plan at a high level to both guide your current decisions and to set people’s expectations as to what is likely to come.
In Figure 1 below you see an overview of how rolling wave planning works and in Figure 2 an example of how a Disciplined Agile Delivery (DAD) team applies it for release planning. Upcoming work is planned in detail, the planning unit “X” is one month in the case of the delivery team. In order to do their work they need detailed user stories and supporting artifacts such as acceptance criteria and supporting models such as user interface (UI) sketches or data source analysis. They have this information for the work that they are doing right now as well as about one month’s of upcoming work. They don’t yet need details for work that is several months away in time. In this case for work that is two to three months in the future they only have user stories developed and work that is four to six months away epics. Work in what the team considers to be the distant future, in this case six or more months away, is described in very high-level terms such as epics or solution capabilities.
Figure 1. Rolling wave planning overview.
Figure 2. Rolling wave release planning on a solution delivery team.
Part of the work that the team is doing right now is to keep their plan up to date. For example, if they are working in two week iterations they will pull two weeks of work into the team. During the current iteration they will pull about two weeks of user stories from the near term category (the yellow box in Figure 2) into the very near term (the green box). They may also bring upcoming work into the near term category at this point too.
Rolling wave planning has its source in iterative software development such as the Rational Unified Process (RUP). It is a strategy that is commonly applied by agile software teams and the Project Management Institute (PMI)’s Project Management Book of Knowledge (PMBoK) supports it.
In future blog postings in this series we will work through examples of applying rolling wave planning in practice.
On February 23, 2016 I gave a webinar entitled (In Agile) Where do all the Managers go? A recording of the webinar is posted on Youtube and a PDF of the slides on Slideshare. This blog overviews the webinar and provides answers to the numerous questions that were asked during it.
The webinar began with a discussion of four trends that are reducing the need for people in management positions:
We then discussed the options that existing managers have in an agile environment. In Disciplined Agile there are four roles that existing managers are likely to transition to: Team Lead, Product Owner, Team Member, and Specialist. Specialist roles – such as Data Manager, Portfolio Manager, Program Manager, and Operations Manager – occur at scale and the corresponding positions are few and far between. Read the article Disciplined Agile Roles at Scale for more details.
We end with words of advice for existing managers: Observe what is actually happening; be flexible; and choose to evolve.
Questions and Answers
We’ve organized the questions into the following topics:
Evolving to New Roles
Will not the existing technical managers be disappointed with only people management work?
That depends on the person. Some will be very happy to do this, some will not.
How will managers fit into a leader role?
It depends on the person again. Some managers are very good leaders right now, some have the potential to be good leaders, and some don’t. They will need training and coaching to fit into their new role(s).
Addressing “Management Activities”
If there are no PMs in Agile, who handles communication with clients (meeting deadlines, priorities, etc.)
The Product Owner.
How does individual performance to be taken up in Agile team? I think that is more crucial and challenging for Agile Leader / Manager.
It is always difficult to address performance-related activities. There are many lines of thought on how to do this. The most progressive is for the Team Lead to provide feedback to team members on a just-in-time basis. If the Team Lead seems behaviour, either desirable or undesirable, but a team member then they should comment on it right away so as to reinforce or dissuade it as soon as possible. Many organizations still have an annual review process, a strategy that many organizations have abandoned due to it’s ineffectiveness, where functional managers get involved with the review process.
I have seen that you have selected the Team Lead as the responsible of assess team members and budgeting the project. In Scrum the Product Owner is compare to a CEO that’s the reason I would say the Product Owner is responsible for bugdeting and about assessing I prefer a more democratic form which involve all the members. So what do you think about PO managing the budget and a democratic assessing vs one single vision assess?
Yes, I misspoke during the webinar. The Product Owner is often responsible for the team’s budget and is responsible for reporting the current financial information to the stakeholders. The Team Lead is often responsible for similar reporting to their management team.
Having multiple people involved with reviews/feedback is usually a pretty good idea. The People Management process blade captures several potential strategies. However, it is still a good idea for the Team Lead to provide feedback as well, see my earlier answer.
Potential Management Roles
I think there is still a need a bridge manager role between Finance, Teams, and PMO type orgs to ensure Product owners have budget… views. Thoughts?
In smaller organizations this likely isn’t an issue. In larger organizations there is often a Portfolio Management effort that is responsible for such issues.
What might be potential responsibilities of an Operations Manager, Data Manager, …?
Please read the article Disciplined Agile Roles at Scale for descriptions of these roles.
Okay, the data management team needs a team manager/leader. Are large organizations using various resource managers? (Although would be less necessary with stable teams I would think)
Exactly. Large organizations still tend to have people in resource manager roles, although sometimes they have different titles such as CoE Lead or HR Manager, but with stable teams they need far fewer of them.
If the team has a Team Lead/Scrum Master that is only the servant leader for 1-2 teams, is it suitable to have people managers?
What value would a “people manager” bring to the team? This is the fundamental dilemma for managers, for everyone for that matter, when an organization moves to agile ways of working. If they’re not bringing real value to the team then they either need to find ways to do so, which likely isn’t whatever management activities they’re trying to cling to, or they need to go elsewhere and try to add value there.
Do you intend to update the DA 2.0 interative pic on the DAD site to talk about “Potential Management Roles at Scale” as mentioned in page 18 of this presentation?
Yes. We actually have something in beta that we haven’t released yet. We’re just about to release an update to the main picture, which in turn requires an update to the role version of the interactive pic.
What is the most basic difference between Project/Program/Portfolio Managers in Agile?
Quick answer is that there isn’t Project Managers in Disciplined Agile nor in methods such as Scrum, XP, and so on. At the program level (a large team of teams) you likely need someone in a Program Manager (or more accurately Program Coordinator) role to coordinate activities (see the Program Management process blade for details). A Portfolio Manager is focused on the IT level and should be concerned about pre-development activities, development/delivery teams that are currently in flight, as well as operational activities.
Also, please read the article Disciplined Agile Roles at Scale for descriptions of these roles.
How does one manage the career path of the Team Leads? Is there career progression beyond a TL to be a specialist or does s/he continue being a TL throughout his career?
Everyone is different, so there isn’t one exact answer. It depends on what the person wants to do and what positions are available to them. If their desire is to move into management then there are fewer IT management positions available to them. If they want to become an AO or PO then they need to work towards getting the skills and experience to fulfill those sorts of roles. The People Management process blade includes career management strategies.
How do you evaluate what roles are/will be necessary?
It depends on the needs of the team in the situation that they face. The primary delivery roles typically exist on all delivery teams and the secondary roles start to appear at scale.
How do you see the role of a BA in agile?
Most existing BAs, like most existing project managers, will need to transition to other roles. However, at scale there is a need for some people in the specialist BA role. I recently has a user group presentation recorded on this very topic. See Disciplined Agile Business Analysis: Lessons from the Trenches.
How do we approach a situation where management wants weekly status reports from a Program Manager who can combine both Team Lead & Product Owner roles, as well as manage multiple projects that may be similar in nature or not.
A few thoughts on this:
In a typical organization, where to team lead(s) report into?
It depends. We’ve seen them report into a Program Manager or a Portfolio Manager. During the transition effort a Project Management Office (PMO) may still exist so Team Leads might report into there, although we often find that there’s a serious cultural and mindset difference that can be very frustrating for everyone involved.
During Your Agile Transformation
What about managers being responsible to support an agile transformation journey in a large organization?
Yes, they would very likely be working as part of an Agile Center of Excellence (CoE), although that would be mostly staffed by experienced agile coaches. There is a need for one or more senior execs to sponsor your agile transformation.
How to deal with “Project Manager” role renamed as “Agile Project Manager” but expected to do the same responsibilities as traditional PM?
We see this sort of stuff all the time unfortunately. First thing to do is to get these people educated in how agile actually works in practice, we’d suggest DA 101: The Disciplined Agile Experience or DA 104: Introduction to Disciplined Agile as your best option to get the whole picture. Next, work through with them how they would actually add real value on the team (see the discussions earlier). Very likely many of the activities that they think need to be are being handled by someone else or have been automated away. Third, get them some coaching to help them to truly transition to agile.
On my project, I am the Team Lead and there is a Project Manager. So far, I have observed that there are several conflicts in responsibilities. How do we come to an agreement of who handles which responsibilities? For my next project, would you suggest I work on a project with no project manager?
We often have to run facilitated workshops in organizations where we work through the roles and responsibilities that are needed in practice. We do this with a wide range of people and we do so in a collaborative and public manner. You need to come to an agreement as to who does what. Doesn’t sound like that’s happened in your case. When you work through this sort of an exercise you quickly discover that you don’t need a project manager, although there may be some project control officer (PCO) responsibilities that would be assigned to either the team lead or some sort of administrative role (such as PCO).
Do you have any advice on how to deal with the removal of the traditional hierarchy – in a flattening of responsibilities, ‘reporting-lines’ and salaries (or having a vast range of skills and pay-scales all with a job title of ‘team member’?)
This is what an agile transformation will accomplish for your organization. It takes time and investment in your people to implement. I highly suggest that you get some experienced coaches to help you do this.
Management is severely, negatively, personally affected by Agile, and will not look fondly upon it in many cases. Any tips to reduce this? Do you recommend mass management reduction, or multiple smaller rounds?
The first step is to recognize that your organization doesn’t exist to create jobs for managers, regardless of what the managers may think. Agile is about focusing on value, so why wouldn’t a good manager be interested in being actively involved with doing so? My recommendation is always to get training and coaching for everyone, including managers. As I described in the webinar there are many options for existing managers in the agile world if they’re willing to be flexible and evolve. Your organization should choose to help people make these transitions to new roles. However, if people are not willing to make the transition then they shouldn’t be surprised if the find themselves being asked to seek employment elsewhere.
It sounds like the person asking about “who’s responsible for delivery” might have used “responsible” when they meant “accountable” – many managers are the single wringable neck for something in their job description. Do you feel Agile draws the same distinction between the two like ITSM, for instance, does?
Agile is based on a collaborative, teamwork-based mindset. Having said that, it does make sense to have someone ultimately responsible for certain things. For example, the Product Owner is responsible for prioritizing the work on an agile team. Similarly, you may have someone in the Release Manager role who is responsible for overall Release Management within your organization. This is particularly important for regulatory environments where by law you need to have someone not involved with development who makes the final decision as to whether the solution is released or not.
From your observations and experience, what is the average timeframe for the managers number to decrease? How long does the process of the shift take?
It depends. We’ve seen this happen over timeframes as short as six months to several years. With solid coaching this process will go a lot faster and smoother.
How to motivate and enable senior leaders to give up control?
In agile, particularly in Disciplined Agile, senior leaders have greater visibility and opportunities to steer than what they had in the traditional world. What they need to do is give up their false sense of control that traditional strategies provide. The real issue usually isn’t senior leaders but instead is middle management. They are the people who are currently performing many of the management tasks that are implemented in a more streamlined manner following agile approaches.
How can middle management start the agility journey when top leaders are not yet on board?
Agile typically begins following a stealth adoption strategy where senior leaders are unaware that it’s happening. The point is that anyone, including middle management, can start adopting agile strategies long before senior leadership gets involved. Strategies such as working collaboratively, enabling your team(s) to plan and organize their own work, adopting dashboard technology, and streamlining the bureaucracy whenever possible is very possible to accomplish on your own.
Thanks for being frank about the role(s) for managers in an evolving Agile culture: Agree, traditional project management organization’s aren’t highlighting these trends (and positive outcomes.)
You’re welcome. Traditional project management organizations often go at it from the point of view of how to continue justifying management activities. We go at it from the point of view of how to improve your overall organizational effectiveness and as a result come to a different conclusion.
Will the idea for stable team become stale after some years? People tend to get frustrated doing same work. What’s the solution in that case?
Stable teams evolve over time. You’ll get people joining the team every so often and similarly leaving the team every so often. It’s natural for people to want to move on and try something new every few years. As a result your organization will still need People Management activities in place that motivate and enable people to manage their careers.
As far as stable teams go, commonly Valve, Inc. is referred to a place where teams are formed around projects that the team members find the most interesting. Project leaders try to sell their project to get developers. Your thoughts?
This is great technique that other organizations may be able to adopt. Allowing teams to form themselves is likely the most effective way to do so. However, like all strategies, there are some potential disadvantages. Team culture may become ingrained and they will not attract people with a different culture who would have the potential to add some real value to the team otherwise.
Is there a method to build the stable teams? Domain, Product, line of business?
There are several strategies for doing this. The most common is to form feature teams that do all of the work to implement a feature as a vertical slice through your entire infrastructure. Another approach is to form component teams that work on a technical or domain component/framework/LoB. A third approach is internal open source. We’ve discussed these strategies in greater detail at Strategies for Organizing Large Agile Teams.
Do you think stable teams concept will work in service-based organisation?
Yes. It’s a bit more difficult because you’d be bringing entire customer projects to the team at once instead of a flow of smaller features. Of course you can break each large project up into smaller features and feed them to teams in an interleaved manner, requiring a sophisticated approach to requirements management.
Training and Certification
What baseline training do you recommend for agile managers?
A good place to start is training on agile thinking, often referred to as how to be agile. Then I would recommend training that describes the full delivery lifecycle from end-to-end, something like DA 101: The Disciplined Agile Experience or DA 104: Introduction to Disciplined Agile. You want to understand all aspects of the agile delivery process, not just the management ones. Scrum training is popular but far too narrow. SAFe training isn’t for beginners.
I would like to participate in a certification workshop/further training. There doesn’t seem to be many offerings in the US. Are there plans to expand training opportunities in the states?
Yes. In fact we have training coming up in the Baltimore area in March and Philadelphia in April. We will have more open enrollment workshops scheduled soon. Please visit the homepage of the Disciplined Agile Consortium for a listing of upcoming public workshops.
What should we be telling folks that have PMP’s – are they still valid? is PMP training moving toward Agile software development.
Yes, the PMI is moving towards agile but they have a very large ship to turn. Unfortunately the PMI training tends to suffer from the challenges that I described earlier – it seems to promote a rather unrealistic vision of how managers can potentially fit into agile.