Typical mistakes when assigning Business Value within SAFe (Scaled Agile Framework)

When introducing SAFe, companies, their Agile Release Trains (ART) and teams inevitably also deal with the definition of Program Increment Objectives (PI Objectives for short) and the assignment of planned and realised Business Value. This is a valuable means of communication between the Business Owner and teams. When used correctly, the process of assigning Business Value to each defined PI Objective makes an important contribution to building software that puts customer added value at the centre of development.

However, there are some stumbling blocks that need to be avoided when assigning value-creating Business Value, particularly when SAFe is first introduced. Below are four common mistakes that affect each other. But let’s start with the good news: this blog post also suggests specific solutions.

Mistake one: lack of common understanding about the goal of Business Value assignment

When SAFe is introduced in companies, the training provided often focuses on the Agile Release Trains and associated teams. Other people who play a part in the SAFe construct, such as Business Owners, are often forgotten. If Business Owners are then called on to fulfil the role they have in assigning Business Value, this becomes difficult and not particularly effective if there is a general lack of understanding regarding the expectations of their role and the goal of the session. Promoting awareness of this challenge and ensuring that the session is moderated well, for example, by the Scrum Master, can at best mitigate the problem but not completely eliminate it.

Mistake two: involving people without a relevant role

In addition to the Business Owner and team, other people may also be invited to the sessions for assigning Business Value. These include Epic Owners. However, increasing the number of participants also makes it more likely that the focus of the Business Value assignment session will be lost. This can occur especially when the additional participants also want to provide their own input and the situation arises in combination with mistake one mentioned above.

Mistake three: Business Value assignment focuses too much on a number

The Business Owner and team may primarily discuss – particularly during the session for assigning the planned Business Value – which number between one and ten best reflects the Business Value for a defined PI Objective. Comparisons with the Business Value from previous PIs or even a kind of ‘reference’ PI Objective with a defined Business Value are used as a tool to help obtain an assessment of the appropriate Business Value. Once the discussion between the Business Owner and team has reached this point, the focus is on the ideal number and no longer on the exchange and the added customer value created by achieving the PI Objectives.

Mistake four: assigned Business Values are misused as KPIs

In principle, there is nothing wrong with using Business Value as a measure, as is the case, for example, in the context of the ‘Program Predictability Measure’. However, it becomes difficult when, in addition to this relative value, an attempt is made to also compare the absolute Business Value figures between different teams. For example, one team may have more PI Objectives with a Business Value of between eight and ten, while the Business Value assigned is lower for another team. However, the values cannot be directly compared with each other across teams and, above all, across ARTs. When assigning Business Value, there is no common basis (especially when different ARTs and their teams have different Business Owners) that defines that a Business Value of seven, for example, always offers the same customer added value. Accordingly, it is dangerous to make comparisons across different ARTs based on absolute Business Values.

Conclusion

In order to exploit the potential of assigning Business Value to defined PI Objectives and avoid the mistakes mentioned above, it is essential that all people involved have a common understanding of what the objective of assigning Business Value is and what the expectations are of their role within the context of the Business Value assignment session. The session should clearly focus on the discussion between Business Owner and team. The aim of this exchange is to create a common understanding of the defined PI Objectives and the added value delivered to the customer.

To be able to ensure such a common understanding, it is usually not enough to hold a training session with all the people involved at the time SAFe is introduced – it is more of an ongoing process. According to the Inspect and Adapt principle, the degree of maturity of the persons involved in Business Value assignment should be continuously checked, along with which ambiguities exist and what additional action is required. The Scrum Masters and Release Train Engineers, in particular, face significant challenges.

Scrum Masters and Release Train Engineers can help to continuously improve the exchange between Business Owner and team within the framework of Business Value assignment by ensuring that the Business Value assignment session is properly moderated in a structured manner, the rules of the game for assigning Business Value are defined and small refreshers on the meaning and importance of PI Objectives and Business Value are introduced regularly. This particularly helps to counteract mistake one. If this can be eliminated and a common understanding of the meaning of the session can be reached, mistakes two to four mentioned above are also less likely to occur. The potential of the Business Value assignment session can then be unleashed and provide the Business Owner and team with a constructive communication platform in which the focus is on common understanding and the creation of added value for customers.