Product operating model Archives

From Agile to the Product Operating Model: What Practitioners Say Is Actually Changing

by Stefan Wolpers | 2026-08-10 Featured Agile TransitionLean and Product

TL; DR: The “Agile to the Product Operating Model” Survey Results

Between August 2 and August 10, 2026, 48 practitioners participated in my Agile to Product Operating Model (POM) survey, which tries to shed light on what is actually changing.

Let me summarize the answers for you: the reported transformations change decision-making less than the Cagan framework suggests. Where respondents report improvements, they appear in delivery and collaboration rather than in business results. Unfortunately, the human side of the transition is the least encouraging part of the answers.

Take all the following information with a grain of salt, given that the sample size is so small. (I recall the good times when 1,000 to 2,000 people would participate in a Scrum master salary report, but those times seem to be over, despite my asking 39,000 people for their contributions via a newsletter.)

Agile to the Product Operating Model Survey Results: What Practitioners Say Is Actually Changing – Age-of-Product.com

Thesis: Product operating model transformations mostly change vocabulary and organizational structure while leaving the decision system, who decides what gets built, on what evidence, at what speed, largely untouched. AI is changing product decisions independently of POM transformations.

The Scrum-to-POM Transition Is a Role Repositioning Event

by Stefan Wolpers | 2026-04-26 Agile and ScrumAgile Transition

TL; DR: Scrum-to-POM Is Not About Frameworks

Two weeks ago, I asked my audience whether they wanted a short course on moving from Scrum to a Product Operating Model, and 22 answered. That was not the Scrum-to-POM dataset I hoped for, but it was valuable for the conversations. Interestingly, one pattern ran through more than a quarter of the responses: The people writing back were not asking about transformation practices or operating models. They were asking what was about to happen to their jobs.

Let me paraphrase some of their replies: One Agile Coach wrote that their role had already been made redundant, and the internal training their employer offered was not enough. Another asked a blunt question: “What will happen to my role?” A third described leadership, saying they wanted this shift, while their behavior remained inconsistent. A fourth reported confusion about what a product coach actually is. A fifth dismissed the whole discourse as high-level fluff, transformational buzzwords, zero accountability, and vague systems thinking with no teeth.

My takeaway: While the organizational design debate appears to be the surface, the ongoing role repositioning is what the people on the ground are living through.

The Scrum-to-POM Transition Is a Role Repositioning Event; Many Practitioners Haven’t Yet Noticed — Age-of-Product.com

The End of “Good Enough Agile”: AI and Product Models Are Your Wake-Up Call

by Stefan Wolpers | 2025-05-26 Agile and ScrumAgile Transition

TL; DR: The End of “Good Enough Agile”

“Good Enough Agile” is ending as AI automates mere ceremonial tasks and Product Operating Models demand outcome-focused teams. Agile professionals must evolve from process facilitators to strategic product thinkers or risk obsolescence as organizations adopt AI-native approaches that embody Agile values without ritual overhead.

The End of “Good Enough Agile”: AI and Product Models Are Your Wake-Up Call; it is time to listen and learn — Age-of-Product.com

Product Team Empowerment Anti-Patterns

by Stefan Wolpers | 2024-12-02 Agile and ScrumAgile Transition

TL; DR: Product Team Empowerment Anti-Patterns

Leadership anti-patterns often undermine product team empowerment — an essential success factor in Marty Cagan’s product operating model. These failures include micromanagement, overly rigid constraints, conflicting stakeholder demands, informal power struggles, and inadequate tools.

Learn more about addressing these challenges by redefining success, aligning incentives, fostering alignment, and balancing autonomy with standardization.

Product Team Empowerment Anti-Patterns — Age-of-Product.com

The Inverted MoSCoW Framework: Stop Building What You Do Not Need

by Stefan Wolpers | 2024-11-25 Agile and ScrumAgile Transition

TL;DR: Inverted MoSCoW

The inverted MoSCoW framework reverses traditional prioritization, focusing on what a product team won’t build rather than what it will. Deliberately excluding features helps teams streamline development, avoid scope creep, and maximize focus on what truly matters.

While it aligns with Agile principles of simplicity and efficiency, it also requires careful implementation to avoid rigidity, misalignment, or stifling innovation. Used thoughtfully, it’s a powerful tool for managing product scope and driving strategic clarity.

Read on and learn how to make the inverted MoSCoW framework work for your team.

The Inverted MoSCoW Framework: Stop Building What You Do Not Need and Focus on Creating Value — Age-of-Product.com

Why Leaders Believe the Product Operating Model Will Succeed Where Agile Initiatives Failed

by Stefan Wolpers | 2024-11-18 Agile and ScrumAgile Transition

TL; DR: Why Leaders Support the Product Operating Model Despite Agile’s Failure

Why might leaders turn to the Product Operating Model (POM) after a previous Agile transformation, for example, based on SAFe, failed?

This article uncovers the psychological, organizational, and strategic reasons behind this seeming contradiction, exploring what motivates leaders to believe that a new approach will succeed where others have not.

Why Leaders Believe the Product Operating Model Will Succeed Where Agile Initiatives Failed — Age-of-Product.com