If you haven't already guessed it, Emertxe (pronounced e-murt-see) is Extreme spelled backwards. And indeed an Emertxe project is an Extreme project, but done backwards. Rather than looking for a solution, you are looking for a goal. Pardon my play on words, but it was the best way to name these types of projects.
The Emertxe PMLC model looks exactly the same as the Extreme PMLC model. Everything that was said previously about the Extreme PMLC model applies unchanged in the Emertxe PMLC model.
The differences have to do with the intent of the project. The Extreme PMLC model starts with a goal that has great business value and searches for a way (a solution) to deliver that business value. The solution may require a change in the goal. If that revised goal still has great business value, the project ends. The Emertxe PMLC model starts with a solution and no goal. The question to be answered by the Emertxe PMLC model is this, “Is there a goal that this solution can reach, and does that goal have business value?”
The commonality is that both PMLCs strive to gain a simultaneous convergence of goal and solution, but from different perspectives — one to find a solution, the other to find a goal.
The Emertxe PMLC model should be your model of choice in any project that seeks to find business value through the integration of a new technology into a current product, service, or process. There are two major types of projects that call for this model to be used: R & D projects and some problem-solution projects.
This is the most obvious application. You are considering how, if at all, a new technology provides business value to your organization. The search for the goal might lead your team in obvious directions, or it could be very elusive.
In most cases, you would initially choose to use APF for these types of projects. The solution of a critical problem is sought. The goal will therefore be clearly and completely stated, and you start out on a journey to find and define a complete solution. Not long into the project, you and the client come to the conclusion that a complete solution to the problem as stated doesn't seem too likely. You could abandon the project, but that might not be an acceptable resolution. Perhaps the next question should be this: What problem can you solve? Now the goal is not clearly stated. Congratulations, you now meet the conditions of an Extreme project, but you are using an Adaptive model. Do you change models or continue on the present course? Would there be any noticeable difference between the two models given the present situation? You know that APF is Adaptive. Can you adapt APF to fit this situation?
The answers are really quite simple. Continue with your present strategy of introducing Probative Swim Lanes to complete the current solution to the extent that you can. Change your APF cycle strategy to introduce more Probative Swim Lanes in an attempt to find other solution alternatives or other alternatives to reinforce the current solution. There will not be any noticeable change of models. You can call what you are doing Adaptive or Extreme — it doesn't make any difference.
18.216.24.36