Deconstructing SAFe Criticism - Focusing on the SPC role

There’s a lot of criticism out there about SAFe (Scaled Agile Framework). Leaders aiming to achieve agility at scale often find the landscape confusing and, at times, frightening. Some of the criticism is fair and worth addressing. Some is pure FUD mongering (Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt) As a Professional Scrum Trainer AND a SAFe Fellow/SPCT I get a first row seat for these “framework wars” and find myself in a unique position to not only understand this criticism but also work towards addressing it — whether by better explaining SAFe or evolving the ecosystem to reduce common anti-patterns.

Some of the most common criticisms revolve around poor SAFe implementations, which I often refer to as “SAFe Theater.” These are implementations that look agile on the surface but are just going through the motions without true understanding or commitment. Much of the criticism stems from the fact that organizations often rely on individuals who lack adequate experience and understanding of agility to implement SAFe effectively.

Understanding the SPC Role

The SPC (SAFe Practice Consultant) is the individual certified and positioned by SAFe to lead an organization’s SAFe journey. Responsibilities include embodying an agile mindset, leading change, implementing SAFe, coaching, and training, particularly around flow and accelerating business agility.

SAFe is explicit about defining different roles at various organizational levels. These include Scrum Masters at the team level, Release Train Engineers (RTEs) at the ART (Agile Release Train) level, and SPCs who work across teams, portfolios, and the broader journey. SPCs often operate within a Lean-Agile Center of Excellence, providing strategic guidance and coaching across the organization.

This means that the SPC is a crucial role to the successful understanding and application of SAFe in the enterprise. You can compare it to the role of an experienced Scrum Master that focuses on successful understanding and application of Scrum at the organizational level.

Becoming an SPC

To become an SPC, one must complete the Implementing SAFe class, a four-day program covering principles, practices, mindset, and implementation strategies. While the class is valuable, the problem lies in what follows: After passing a multiple-choice exam, individuals are certified as SPCs, with no real test of their ability to train, coach, or implement SAFe effectively in the real world.

In other words, becoming an SPC is very similar to becoming a Professional/Certified Scrum Master, Product Owner, or Project Manager (PMP).

Strengths of the SPC Model

When experienced professionals (e.g., VP of Engineering, PMO leaders, Agile coaches) attend the Implementing SAFe class, they gain valuable insights that enhance their ability to drive agile transformations effectively. These leaders often become strong partners for change, and the SPC certification, when paired with real experience, can be an effective tool for scaling agility.

The fact that SAFe includes a “train the trainer” model where SPCs can train others in their organization, goes one step further than the Scrum model. Scrum Masters are expected to coach/train/mentor their teams and organizations. In the Scrum world, the Scrum Master focuses on informal on the job style training. In the SAFe world SPCs are enabled to deliver formal certified training.

In the right hands, this model can help organizations scale training faster with reduced reliance on external training. The “Train the Trainer” fan-out model has helped SAFe spread fast.

Challenges and Criticisms

The problem arises when organizations or consultants treat the SPC certificate as sufficient proof of expertise. Without proper experience, new SPCs are often thrust into positions where they are expected to deliver training or lead transformations without adequate knowledge or capability.

Some consultants simply add the SPC credential to their resume to make more money, and organizations sometimes have unrealistic expectations, assuming the certificate alone is enough. When poorly equipped SPCs deliver training or facilitate implementations, it results in what I call “SAFe Theater,” where people are just going through the motions without real understanding or belief in what they’re doing.

This isn’t a problem limited to the SAFe world, of course. The Scrum Master is another example where the certification has helped Scrum spread, but also created dysfunction where organizations rely on the certification in leu of real agile expertise - leading to widespread Scrum/Agile Theater.

Opportunities for Improvement

Enterprises need to adjust their expectations of what the SPC certification means. They should look for outcomes, experience, capability, fit as well.

Organizations should ask probing questions during the hiring or contracting process. For example, asking SPCs to share stories about their experience coaching, training, or facilitating value streams can reveal much about their capabilities. Additional certifications like Professional Scrum Trainer (PST) or PSM III can also indicate broader expertise and experience.

As a community, we must discourage unprofessional or unethical behavior by setting clearer standards for what professionalism looks like. This could include agreeing on what readiness looks like for training or consulting and expecting an SPC to say NO when they’re not yet ready to take on certain responsibilities.

The SPC model has tremendous potential, but we must be willing to address the real challenges that come with it. By doing so, we can build a stronger, more credible ecosystem that genuinely helps organizations achieve agility at scale.

If you’d like to discuss the right approach for developing and leveraging SPCs in your organization - let’s discuss.