Go away and think before you tear down the fence

I recently told a group of new Scrum Masters that a particular customer's development process required phase gates, such as the System Functional Review (SFR), Preliminary Design Review (PDR), Critical Design Review (CDR), and Test Readiness Review (TRR) - and that the customer was resistant to discontinue them.

The immediate and almost reflexive response from the SMs was to universally and unambiguously condemn these milestones as redundant and to plan their immediate elimination. They saw these gates as wasteful anachronistic bottlenecks that delay value delivery. In fact, this mindset seemed so logical and self-evident to them that there was little room for discussion. 

My thinking, though, was very slightly different. And so (at the risk of being drowned as a heretic), I challenged the SMs to reconsider not so much their conclusion, but their process for having arrived at that conclusion.

In 1929, Gilbert Keith Chesterton wrote a book called "The Thing" in which he made an observation that I find generally applicable to all "process improvements." He wrote:

"In the matter of reforming things, as distinct from deforming them, there is one plain and simple principle; a principle which will probably be called a paradox. There exists in such a case a certain institution or law; let us say, for the sake of simplicity, a fence or gate erected across a road. The more modern type of reformer goes gaily up to it and says, “I don’t see the use of this; let us clear it away.” To which the more intelligent type of reformer will do well to answer: “If you don’t see the use of it, I certainly won’t let you clear it away. Go away and think. Then, when you can come back and tell me that you do see the use of it, I may allow you to destroy it."

In other words, I told the SMs, before we reflexively tear down this customer's phase gates because they "obviously" run contrary to Agile, we must first go away and think. We must learn why the gates were put up in the first place. They may have been erected as a response to lessons learned from ended Waterfall projects that failed. We need that context.

It's critical to empathize with those who resist or who don't share your mindset or enthusiasm. Without resistance, every change - good or bad - would be implemented. Resistance avoids a good idea being poorly executed. Resistance forces change agents to justify and explain their recommendations and to be thoughtful in their implementation. Perhaps most importantly the welcoming of resistance leads to coalition building.

So... I'm not saying you should keep your customer's phase gates. I'm just saying you should understand why they're there before you tear them down.