Why are phase-gate Milestones problematic?

A. They only allow integration on PI boundaries

B. They prohibit decision-making at the large-solution level

C. They are a construct of the well established way of working

D. They use documentation and signoffs as a proxy for Solution progress

Correct Answer is

D. They use documentation and signoffs as a proxy for Solution progress

Explanation

Phase-gate milestones are problematic primarily because they use documentation and sign-offs as a proxy for solution progress.

Phase-gate processes, traditionally used in waterfall project management methodologies, require specific deliverables to be completed and approved at various checkpoints (gates) before the project can move to the next phase. This approach can lead to several issues, especially in environments that benefit from agility and adaptiveness:

• They only allow integration on PI (Program Increment) boundaries: While limiting integration to PI boundaries can be seen as restrictive, especially in Agile contexts, the primary critique of phase-gate milestones is not their impact on the timing of integration per se, but rather how they formalize progress assessment.


• They prohibit decision-making at the large-solution level: Phase-gate processes can indeed centralize decision-making and slow down the response to changes. However, they don’t inherently prohibit large-solution level decision-making but may make it less agile due to the bureaucracy and rigid structures.


• They are a construct of the well-established way of working: While phase-gate milestones are part of traditional project management methodologies, the critique isn’t simply that they’re well-established, but rather that the approach they represent may not be suitable for environments where flexibility, adaptability, and continuous delivery are key.


• They use documentation and sign-offs as a proxy for Solution progress: This is the core issue with phase-gate milestones in many modern development environments, especially those adopting Agile or Lean methodologies. Relying heavily on documentation and formal sign-offs to measure progress can lead to a focus on ticking boxes and preparing for gate reviews rather than on the actual value delivered or the adaptiveness of the development process. It often results in a slower response to changes, increased overhead, and potential misalignment between documented plans and the current reality of the project.

The emphasis on documentation and formal approvals can detract from the more iterative, value-focused, and responsive approaches favored in Agile and Lean development practices, where working solutions and customer feedback are prioritized over comprehensive documentation.

Other SAFe Scrum Master Question – Which two events provide opportunities for the team to collaborate? (Choose two.)