Again a very good article that hits the nail on its head. We have to be careful however, if you're right that some people are confounding the role of PO in Scrum and the one in SAFe, we shouldn't dismiss SAFe simply because it is not Scrum. It's unfortunate that our language favors such ambiguity over more distinctive appellations, but we aren't Ents to discuss about it all day. This convenience comes with the responsibility of trying to avoid creating relation where none exist.
On my part, I think SAFe isn't to be blamed for the PO confusion, but put the blame to the poor implementation of Scrum many have been subjected of. Could be just anecdotal, but I have seen tons of misunderstood PO roles in Scrum (as well as SM and even Devs!) but my contact with people having actual experience with SAFe have been minimal (and yet, still suffer a similar misunderstanding that Scrum has). At least, articles like your are a step in the right direction.
I still consider that our biggest problem in this complex industry is still our attachment to a silver bullet solution, a magic pill making everything clear, simple, stable and certain. It's what block us to embrace the growth mindset required to deal with our complex and messy reality. Thanks for giving us some light on that subject.
Thank you for this thoughtful response. I agree that the PO was misunderstood before SAFe, that many Scrum teams miss the mark and that its not about silver bullets. It is about understanding what you use though.
You can easily tell that people do not understand Scrum when they equal the Product Owner with Product Backlog management. What keeps me wondering is that 1. people do nor like to learn, even by doing the bare minimum, 2. people hold on to use the terminology and 3. people see value in making uninformed negative judgements. If Scrum is not your thing, even if you do not even know it, fine! Then do not use it.
Again a very good article that hits the nail on its head. We have to be careful however, if you're right that some people are confounding the role of PO in Scrum and the one in SAFe, we shouldn't dismiss SAFe simply because it is not Scrum. It's unfortunate that our language favors such ambiguity over more distinctive appellations, but we aren't Ents to discuss about it all day. This convenience comes with the responsibility of trying to avoid creating relation where none exist.
On my part, I think SAFe isn't to be blamed for the PO confusion, but put the blame to the poor implementation of Scrum many have been subjected of. Could be just anecdotal, but I have seen tons of misunderstood PO roles in Scrum (as well as SM and even Devs!) but my contact with people having actual experience with SAFe have been minimal (and yet, still suffer a similar misunderstanding that Scrum has). At least, articles like your are a step in the right direction.
I still consider that our biggest problem in this complex industry is still our attachment to a silver bullet solution, a magic pill making everything clear, simple, stable and certain. It's what block us to embrace the growth mindset required to deal with our complex and messy reality. Thanks for giving us some light on that subject.
Thank you for this thoughtful response. I agree that the PO was misunderstood before SAFe, that many Scrum teams miss the mark and that its not about silver bullets. It is about understanding what you use though.
You can easily tell that people do not understand Scrum when they equal the Product Owner with Product Backlog management. What keeps me wondering is that 1. people do nor like to learn, even by doing the bare minimum, 2. people hold on to use the terminology and 3. people see value in making uninformed negative judgements. If Scrum is not your thing, even if you do not even know it, fine! Then do not use it.
Mind-boggling isn't it?