A grants-management business team that does not write software is told they “cannot be Agile.” What should the SM/TC explain?
Select an answer to reveal the explanation.
Short Explanation
Grants clerks moving applications through review are not 'too business' for Agile. Team Kanban was built for that kind of operational flow. Nobody needs a compiler to pull the next case.
Full Explanation
Business and operations teams on an ART—such as grants clerks moving applications—can use SAFe Team Kanban; Agile is not software-only. Grants workflow visualization, WIP limits, and ART participation are valid Lean-Agile team practices for civic business work. Calling clerks "too business" for Agile misunderstands Team Kanban's purpose on a train.
Claiming only software feature teams may join an ART so grants must stay waterfall fails because ARTs routinely include business and operations teams delivering value in their domain. Saying the team must hire developers before visualizing workflow fails because visualization does not require writing code. Allowing business teams to attend PI Planning only as guests who cannot pull work fails because participation without pull is spectator status, not team membership.
Exam caveat: Agile Release Trains organize around value, not around a software-only identity test. Operational check: help the grants team map and visualize its real workflow, adopt Team Kanban policies as fit, include them as full ART participants in cadence events, and measure flow of applications rather than waiting for a developer hiring gate. Municipal grants, permitting, and casework teams often deliver the citizen-facing value stream; excluding them from Agile team design recreates handoff waste.