My inverse square law of framework scaling
A framework’s power is the product of:
The incisiveness of its point of view – its core paradigms, principles, values, and so on
The ease with which its key patterns combine – both with each other and with those from outside the framework
Both tend to decline with scale.
Corollary 1: As a framework’s scale increases, confidence that your context’s particular challenges will be addressed speedily and proportionately relative to the cost and pain of implementation declines
Corollary 2 (the human impact of corollary 1): In the absence of a coherent strategy to mitigate and reverse it, the risk of significant staff disengagement increases with scale.
If you enjoyed that, check these out:
The middle two chapters of Right to Left: The digital leader’s guide to Lean and Agile (print and ebook 2019, audiobook 2020) – the framework chapters of a singularly outcome-oriented take on the Lean-Agile landscape
Too harsh? – change management vs engagement model (linkedin.com)
Outcome-oriented (linkedin.com)
What I really think about SAFe (October 2019)
My thanks to the Friday #community Zoom group (details in Slack) for feedback on the initial draft of this post.
Upcoming workshops
8-9 September, two 2-hour sessions (1 per day), APAC-friendly timing:
Leading with Outcomes (APAC)
17 September, one 2-hour session, EMEA-friendly timing:
Strategic Mapping with Outcomes (EMEA)
22-23 September, two 2-hour sessions (1 per day), Americas-friendly timing:
Leading with Outcomes (Americas)
07 October, one 2-hour session, EMEA-friendly timing:
Probe! Stories, Hypotheses, Challenges, and Experiments (EMEA)
Agendashift
, the wholehearted engagement model
Links: Home |
About
|
Our mission: Wholehearted
|
Become an Agendashift partner
|
Assessments
| Books | Resources | Events | Contact | Mike | Subscribe
Workshops: Transformation strategy | Transformation strategy | Short training
Blog: Monthly roundups | Classic posts
Community: Slack | LinkedIn group | Twitter
