🛑 "How Chiang Gong Works"

🛑 "How Chiang Gong works."

When an organization buys the Framework for a ritual... but forgets to invest in the Mindset that completes the Product.

"We have made 100% Agile."

This sentence is one of the most often heard in recent years.

Especially from a large organization that proudly proclaims that

* Digital Transformation underway

* Use all Scrum teams

* All Squad Product Owners

* Or hire a global Consultant to help lay out the Framework, etc.

Sounds like everything's moving in the right direction.

But looking deeper into real life, what happens is the opposite.

* More conference teams

* The role is more complicated.

* Working people get tired

* Instead, customers did not get significantly more value.

Many organizations do not fail because they choose the wrong Framework.

But failed because it understood that

"Buying tools (formula) is buying success."

In fact, the Framework is just a "kitchen device."

Not "culinary ability."

= = = =

📉 when tools become car accessories... rather than engines.

In Thailand, we often see a small number of organizations adopt Agile, Scrum, SAFe or other guidelines in a way similar to buying spare parts from Chiang Gong.

"is to pick up good-looking parts and assemble them into the original system, but not really replace the internal engine." The result is

* The power structure is also the traditional Top-Down.

* The decision still has to wait for the executive to approve all matters.

* Product Owner without real authority

* Sprint is meant to speed delivery on order.

* And the Daily Meeting became a Czech ritual named in front of the flagpole.

Lastly, Agile has therefore not changed the way organizations think, but has become just Waterfall meeting more often.

= = = =

🎭 Why is it that when everyone completes the ritual but the client gets nothing more?

Many organizations complete every step, such as in Agile organizations.

* Daily Standup

* Sprint Planning

* Review

* Retrospective

* Grooming Backlog

On the corporate process, everything seems perfect, but the more important question is:

* Do customers benefit more?

* Does the team decide faster?

* Can organizations learn faster?

* Have business outcomes improved?

If the answer is "no,"

That means the organization may be doing a play called Process Theater.

Is to do every ritual in its entirety

But it doesn't actually create added value.

= = = =

⚔️ The real problem is not the Framework, but "decision-making power."

In my experience, the biggest factor in Product Team failure is not the technique, but the lack of real decision-making.

1. Product Owner with no right to decide

There's a position, but there's no authority.

All matters still require executive approval.

Finally, Product Owner thus became just a paperwork middleman.

2.Scrum Master without the power to solve obstacles

Instead of unlocking the problem,

Instead of writing down the Minutes and following the job.

3.Team with Sprint but without Product Vision

Continuing the feature every two weeks.

But don't know who the problem is.

This condition, even if the best framework in the world is used.

The results are still no different from the feature factory.

= = = =

🍳 Product Management is not to follow the texts, but the art of deployment.

The best chefs don't start out having the most expensive kitchens.

But start by understanding that

* What are the raw materials available?

* What do customers want?

* And how to adjust the formula to the best results.

Product is no different.

Successful teams often do not have the best tools.

But have the ability to

* Understand the real problem

* Fast trial

* Learn from the data

* And constantly adapt.

= = = =

🚀 is the main idea for organizations that want to do real product, not ritual.

1. Start with a customer problem, not with a Framework name.

2. If you want to be Owner, you must give the power to make real decisions.

3. Adjust how to work to suit the context, not copy the entire text

4. Measure success from results, not the number of rituals completed.

5. The team can be responsible only if the organization trusts him.

🧭 What executives should ask before buying the new Framework.

Before investing in the next Transformation, ask these questions.

1. What is our real problem?

2. Does the team have enough decision-making power?

3. Do customers really get more value?

4. Are we measuring Outcome or Outputt?

5. What is lacking is tools... or Mindset?

Many times, the real answer may not be "We need a new Framework."

But "we have to change the way people think in organizations."

= = = =

✨ The best tools can't replace the right way of thinking.

Many organizations invest with

* Expensive Consultant

* Global Tools

* Multi-training

* And new positions filled the organization.

But if you don't change the way you think about it,

* Authority

* Responsibility

* Experiment

* And learning

In the end, everything will become just corporate decorations.

Like a kitchen full of top equipment.

But no one knows how to cook for people to eat.

Because in the world of Product Management,

"The Framework does not create a good product; the person who understands customer problems and has the power to solve them is the one who creates them."

# Two stories a day

# ExecutiveMindset

# ProductManagement

# AgileFallacy

# OutcomeOverOutput

# DigitalTransformation

# FutureOfWork

# ProductLeadership

= = = =

📚 Source / Reference

* The Fallacy of Agile in Enterprises (David Pereira): A critical analysis in product management that points to the failure of the Agile Framework in large organizations, focusing on following "Rituals" rather than understanding "Mindset," leading to role redundancy problems, and the loss of the primary goal of value for customers.

* Empowered Product Teams (Marty Cagan): A concept from a global Product Management expert that emphasizes the importance of Autonomy and the provision of real decision-making power to Product Team (Empowerment) instead of "Feature Factory" operations aimed at creating productivity on order without strategy.