Why Innovation and Planning Sprint?

[#1]

Scaled Agile Framework(SAFe) states about the Innovation & Planning(I&P) Sprint, which is the last sprint of PI. Many organizations don't see the value of having one and see that as free time for the Agile Release Train(ART), while others consider this as a buffer sprint.

Yes practically, for important commitments that couldn't be accomplished in time as per the PI planning plan, if handled in the I&P sprint can be fine, till the point it's not a recurring way of working.

Some might argue as to what's the harm in utilizing that time as a buffer sprint. The point here is that when this becomes a regular practice, then Agile Teams consider this for granted, yeah there is a spot available let's plan to deliver work in I&P sprint, which impacts the speed of delivery of stories. This can also question the time criticality aspect which is important for a Program Increment(PI).

Clearly SAFe advocates not to plan work in the I&P sprint, and there are rational reasons for the same. To understand the reason better, first one needs to understand WHY we need an I&P sprint.

I&P sprint is a sprint duration of 2 weeks,

Week 1 has hackathons, training, basically anything and everything pertaining to thinking outside the box, in the case of Agile teams in ART who consistently work on sprint after sprint to ensure the commitment of sprints stays intact as per PI planning, don't get time to think or get a platform to experiment out new things. Also about the important part of the training, we live in a dynamic world, new upgrades in technologies keep emerging, how and when to keep pace with them. Training isn't limited to just the technical side of things, what about business understanding, along with Enterprise Agility training(s)? What SAFe did not state, it's also the moment to be ready with a refined, prioritized list of features that are going to serve as input for PI planning in week 2.

Week 2 of I&P Sprint, is where the PI planning takes place across 2 days of the week. However, prior to PI planning is the Inspect and Adapt(I&A) event. In simple words, it's retrospective, however at the ART level. Over and beyond the PI planning the I&A event entails the following:

PI System Demo - ART-level demo of integrated work of Agile Teams towards the common business objective in terms of Features

Quantitative and qualitative measurement - A checkpoint of predictability in the terms perceived vs. actual business value comparison of PI objectives across the PI{start of PI(at PI planning) vs. at end of PI}

Retrospective and problem-solving workshop - Looking back at the PI what were the accomplishments that we are proud of, what needs to improve, and based on the feedback what can be the possible actions once the root cause is figured?

Now that the WHY is on the table, let's see what some organizations opt for, after standard sprints of PI, directly do the PI planning and move to the next PI, what do we lose in this approach?

• No time to reflect on and improve the PI implementation
• No time to take a pause and innovate
• No ART predicability check
• No time to prep for PI planning, understand the prioritization behind the work to be done
•  Impact on cadence of sprints

Innovation and Planning Sprint provides a platform for teams to innovate and improve. It gives them time to sharpen their skills, think outside the box, learn, and grow.