Which delivery strategy makes the idea of 'Minimum Viable Change Practice' particularly useful?
Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:
Delivery strategies in APMG define how change is implemented, and Minimum Viable Change Practice (MVCP) adapts Agile's MVP to change management. Let's explore exhaustively:
* MVCP Defined: A basic, functional change version tested early, refined iteratively (e.g., a pilot process tweak).
* Option A: Big Bang -- All-at-once rollout (e.g., company-wide system switch). MVCP's iterative testing clashes with this---Big Bang commits fully, no refinement. Incorrect.
* Option B: Phased -- Staged rollout (e.g., department-by-department). Useful for control, but not iterative---each phase is planned, not experimental. Less ideal.
* Option C: Voluntary Adoption -- Opt-in change (e.g., new tool usage). Feedback possible, but lacks structured iteration. Not the best fit.
* Option D: Many small incremental/iterative releases -- Correct. Matches MVCP's Agile roots---small, frequent changes (e.g., weekly process updates) allow testing and adjustment, per APMG.
* Why D: Iterative cycles enable MVCP's ''launch-learn-improve'' approach, unlike Big Bang's finality or Phased's linearity.
Currently there are no comments in this discussion, be the first to comment!