https://federicoscariot.com/advisory/ Recent content in Advisory for Software Organizations on Federico J. Scariot Hugo en-us https://federicoscariot.com/advisory/software-delivery-current-state-diagnostic/ Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000 https://federicoscariot.com/advisory/software-delivery-current-state-diagnostic/ <h2 id="when-this-is-useful">When this is useful<a class="anchor" href="#when-this-is-useful">#</a></h2> <p>This diagnostic is designed for organizations that can see signs of difficulty but do not yet know what kind of intervention they need.</p> <p>Those signs may include:</p> <ul> <li>Delivery becoming slower or less predictable</li> <li>Recurring coordination problems</li> <li>Unclear ownership</li> <li>Too much work in progress</li> <li>Repeated operational interruptions</li> <li>Technical and organizational concerns becoming entangled</li> <li>Leadership receiving conflicting explanations of what is wrong</li> <li>Improvement initiatives being proposed without a shared diagnosis</li> </ul> <p>The objective is not to evaluate every team, process, or technical decision in detail. It is to identify the small number of conditions that most strongly shape the current performance of the software-development system.</p> https://federicoscariot.com/advisory/scaling-governance-diagnostic/ Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000 https://federicoscariot.com/advisory/scaling-governance-diagnostic/ <h2 id="when-this-is-useful">When this is useful<a class="anchor" href="#when-this-is-useful">#</a></h2> <p>Growth often exposes structural problems that were previously absorbed by founders, informal coordination, or a small number of experienced people.</p> <p>Decisions begin to circulate without clear ownership. Escalations bypass normal channels. Teams compensate for governance gaps through workarounds, and formal structures fail to survive delivery pressure.</p> <p>The diagnostic is designed for organizations already showing signs such as:</p> <ul> <li>Founders or senior executives remaining involved in too many operational decisions</li> <li>Unclear decision authority</li> <li>Repeated escalation and override</li> <li>Cross-team coordination friction</li> <li>Architecture and product decisions becoming politically difficult</li> <li>Governance existing formally but not operating consistently</li> <li>Teams waiting for decisions or making conflicting local decisions</li> <li>Growth creating structural fragility that is difficult to describe</li> </ul> <p>This is not a general process review. It focuses specifically on the relationships among authority, governance, architecture, coordination, and organizational scale.</p>