The difference between Planned vs Actual vs Actual Actual Business Value when it comes to SAFe PI Objectives

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Pinterest
WhatsApp

Actual is a relative term when it comes to business value delivered by a SAFe PI Objective. We had a discussion about this a couple of weeks ago in an Implementing SAFe class and I promised a blog post about this. Here it goes.

UPDATE: I’ll be talking about this concept and related Business Agility themes at the SAFe Summit 2019 in San Diego 

Planned Business Value – Making sure Business Owners and the Agile Team are on the same page

Let’s start from the basics though. PI (Program Increment) Objectives are used as a “back briefing” mechanism by Agile Teams on an Agile Release Train to share their plan for the PI and validate that they are indeed focusing on the highest priorities and are planning to deliver objectives that will be valuable for the business.

Business Owners (Business Executive, Product Management, System Architect) circulate between teams during PI Planning and score each PI Objective on a scale of 1..10 based on the business value they ASSUME will be delivered in case this PI Objective is accomplished in the PI.

This becomes the “Planned Business Value (BV)” for that objective.

Actual Business Value – Assessing Business Value based on a Demo of a real solution

Later on, during PI Inspect & Adapt (or earlier during System Demos) the same Business Owners circulate between the teams and score each of these PI Objectives again, this time on “Actual Business Value (BV)”.

What does Actual mean here? Well, in most cases the evaluation is based on seeing a demo of a working solution and still making ASSUMPTIONS about what the actual value would be when the solution meeting this objective will be released and available to real users/customers.

Sorry, but while being much closer, that’s still not ACTUAL business value.

ACTUAL Actual Business Value – Based on released solutions and the outcomes they deliver in the real world

ACTUAL business value delivered can be evaluated only AFTER the solution is released.

On most Agile Release Trains / SAFe contexts the PI I&A is too early to make this evaluation so you could understand why we’re still making assumptions at that stage.

But if we really care about outcomes and delivering value, we shouldn’t close the books on these PI Objectives and the PI at that point. We should get back to it later on and Inspect and Adapt based on real business value delivered.

Adjusting the SAFe Inspect & Adapt to track ACTUAL actual Business Value

If you’re with me, you’re probably asking what can we do about this. What is the right timing to get back and assess the ACTUAL actual Business Value? From a cadence perspective, there are two main ways to do this.

The simplest is to take advantage of the Inspect and Adapt PI System Demo to review the ACTUAL business value delivered by the objectives in the PREVIOUS Program Increment. E.g. if we’re now finishing PI 5, we’re assessing actual business value delivered by the objectives in PI 5 that will be released sometime during PI 6, as well as PI 4 objectives that hopefully got released during PI 5.

More to read:

How do we handle Scope Changes in a SAFe Program Increment?

Could the INVEST criteria Bill Wake came up with for evaluating User Stories help us come up with effective PI Objectives in SAFe as well?

SAFe includes Scrum – so how come many Scrum practitioners and thought leaders consider it unsafe?

AgileSparks Services

Achieving Business Agility By Implementing Agile at the Organizational level

For each one of these PI 4 objectives, now should be a reasonable time to talk about things like – Have customers started to use this solution? Are they happy with it? Did it achieve the impact we had in mind for it? Did we stop incurring the cost of delay we had in mind when prioritizing this? At this point, the 1..10 scores should be data/evidence-driven.

If we AREN’T able to evaluate the actual business value at this point – that means there’s a short-circuit in our empiric feedback loop that we should work on fixing.

If we haven’t released the solution yet, then we should keep the actual score for this objective empty and get back to it in the next PI. This objective should still be a “work in progress” from our perspective.

It’s not DONE until we evaluated the ACTUAL Business Value

You might guess what’s the next aspect of this. Mentioning Work in Progress should be an obvious clue. The Program Kanban has a role in helping us out here as well. Features on the Program-level Kanban shouldn’t be considered DONE until we collected this feedback and evaluated the ACTUAL actual business value on them. They should hang out on the board – may be in an area called “Feedback” or whatever you prefer.

I’ve been recommending this sort of Program-level Kanban Board structure for a long time now. Some of my enterprise-level clients have improved their Product Management practices dramatically through the accountability and follow-through that this practice encourages.

Just think about the impact on Product Management, Business Owners, and Salespeople asking for features, if they know they are accountable for the outcomes from these features after they’re released.

Who’s accountable for delivering the actual business value?

This brings us to an interesting question. Who’s accountable for delivering actual business value? Who’s accountable for delivering ACTUAL actual business value? Is it the Agile Team? Product Management? Business? Sales?

I’ve seen way too many teams frustrated when they deliver the objectives according to what they presented as the plan, and yet the actual business value score is lower than the plan because the Business Owners don’t think as much value will be actually delivered. When we’re moving from assumed actual to actual actual the gap can be even bigger. On one hand, in the spirit of transparency and being focused on value and outcomes rather than output, this is the right way to score the business value. It’s about value delivery rather than tracking to plans. On the other hand, you can probably understand the frustration here.

The way I see it, the only way out of this is to understand that the PI Objective plan vs actual vs ACTUAL isn’t an indication of the individual performance of either one of these roles. It’s an indication of the performance of the whole development value stream including the upstream activities related to choosing and prioritizing features and the downstream activities related to selling the solution, convincing users/customers to use it,  implementing it in the field, and operating/supporting it.

That, together with Lean/Agile Leadership that emphasizes principles such as Assuming Variability, Objective evaluation of working delivered systems, and relentless improvement of the whole value delivery cycle, is the key to focusing on learning from these surprises whether they are systemic or repeating or rare exceptions.

A relentlessly improving organization would inspect what’s the trend when it comes to plan vs actual vs actual actual for the whole program and per specific PI Objectives and try to see what it can learn from when the value gap happens and does it happen for a specific type of objectives or in a specific area of the program/business.

It’s all about Value

Value is the goal of Lean and the fast delivery of value is the goal of SAFe. If we’re serious about that, We should raise our game when it comes to managing value as a first-class citizens in SAFe. Business value on PI objectives is the perfect place for doing exactly that.

So, Next time you have PI Inspect & Adapt, don’t just look at the PI you’re finishing just now, take a look at the objectives from the previous PI as well. And on your Program-level Kanban only consider features done after evaluating actual business value delivered, ideally based on quantifiable metrics.

I love it when discussions in class drive me to write up some of my experiences, tips, and tricks for the blog. Awesome kudos to my students, now SPCs off to implement a healthy and value-oriented SAFe in their organizations!

Subscribe for Email Updates:

Categories:

Tags:

Lean Software Development
LAB
Managing Projects
Kaizen Workshop
AgileSparks
Agile Development
Agile Israel Events
Quality Assurance
Self-organization
Tools
Nexus and Kanban
Managing Risk on Agile Projects
Achieve Business Agility
Atlassian
Agile Outsourcing
Agile
The Kanban Method
Agile Delivery
Advanced Roadmaps
Jira Plans
Spotify
Agile Basics
What Is Kanban
Nexus Integration Team
SPC
WIP
Applying Agile Methodology
AI
Video
Introduction to ATDD
Lean Startup
System Team
SAFe
Presentation
Coaching Agile Teams
Lean Agile
Perfection Game
Engineering Practices
PI Objectives
An Appreciative Retrospective
Built-In Quality
Slides
ARTs
Agile Exercises
Limiting Work in Progress
Lean and Agile Techniques
Effective Agile Retrospectives
Iterative Incremental Development
chatgpt
Agile Mindset
Agile Risk Management
Scrum Guide
RSA
ART Success
Software Development Estimation
Entrepreneurial Operating System®
Story Slicing
Legacy Code
transformation
Agile for Embedded Systems
Daily Scrum
Principles of Lean-Agile Leadership
Manage Budget Creation
Continuous Integration
Jira Cloud
Lean Risk Management
Agile Project
ROI
QA
speed @ scale
SA
Reading List
Kanban Game
Scrum With Kanban
Lean and Agile Principles and Practices
Scrum and XP
ATDD vs. BDD
Code
Lean Agile Organization
IT Operations
SAFe Release Planning
Planning
Change Management
Retrospectives
Value Streams
Releases Using Lean
Professional Scrum with Kanban
User stories
Product Management
LPM
Team Flow
Agile Community
LeSS
Rapid RTC
Hybrid Work
DevOps
AI Artificial Intelligence
Agility
Covid19
RTE
Implementation of Lean and Agile
speed at scale
Scaled Agile Framework
Sprint Iteration
Risk Management in Kanban
Agile Product Development
RTE Role
Artificial Intelligence
Systems Thinking
EOS®
Agile Israel
Elastic Leadership
Amdocs
ATDD
Continuous Improvement
Program Increment
agileisrael
Agile Testing Practices
Portfolio for Jira
Scrum.org
Large Scale Scrum
Kanban Kickstart Example
Test Driven Development
Operational Value Stream
Agile Marketing
Agile Contracts Best Practices
Kaizen
The Agile Coach
Professional Scrum Master
Scrum Values
Certification
Agile Techniques
Agile Program
Legacy Enterprise
Confluence
POPM
Scrum Master Role
Scrum Master
Development Value Streams
Agile Release Management
Agile Project Management
System Archetypes
Sprint Planning
Lean Agile Basics
ScrumMaster Tales
ALM Tools
System Integration Environments
Agile and DevOps Journey
Agile Games
GanttBan
Kanban 101
Lean Agile Management
Continuous Planning
Release Train Engineer
Agile Release Planning
Certified SAFe
TDD
lean agile change management
BDD
NIT
Agile Assembly Architecture
Lean Budgeting
Tips
predictability
Sprint Retrospectives
Scrum
Agile Games and Exercises
Jira
Frameworks
Continuous Deployment
Business Agility
Scrum Primer
SAFe DevOps
Kanban Basics
Nexus
Lean-Agile Budgeting
Agile Product Ownership
Introduction to Test Driven Development
Kanban
Agile in the Enterprise
Nexus vs SAFe
Nexus and SAFe
Software Development
Product Ownership
Keith Sawyer
Lean Agile Leadership
Acceptance Test-Driven Development
Atlaassian
Jira admin
Enterprise DevOps
PI Planning
Rovo
Risk-aware Product Development
Professional Scrum Product Owner
Process Improvement
Risk Management on Agile Projects
Implementing SAFe
Accelerate Value Delivery At Scale
Games and Exercises
A Kanban System for Software Engineering
Pomodoro Technique
Continuous Delivery
Lean-Agile Software Development
Agile India
AgileSparks
Logo
Enable registration in settings - general

Contact Us

Request for additional information and prices

AgileSparks Newsletter

Subscribe to our newsletter, and stay updated on the latest Agile news and events

This website uses Cookies to provide a better experience
Shopping cart