Myth: Shu Ha Ri is the way to learn agile

Is ‘Ri’ the next stage of agile?

Photo by Man Chung on Unsplash

The Shu Ha Ri approach to learning a new skillset, became part of the agile world in about 2004 when it was, I believe, first introduced by Alistair Cockburn (say Co’burn, please).
Originating in martial arts, the concept is that learning occurs over three phases:

• The Shu stage is about strictly following the established rules and techniques without questioning.
• The Ha stage is about beginning to adapt and experiment, once the learner is proficient in the prescribed techniques.
• The Ri stage is about transcending rules once techniques have been mastered, allowing learners to utilise the essence of the practice and create their own method.

My own experience of martial arts was many years ago, fairly brief and ended rather painfully with an injury, but this process is familiar to me as the way I was taught. Classes of enthusiastic students all trying to perfect the stances, moves and techniques demonstrated by the Sifu.

Many of us will be familiar with Miyagi-san teaching young Daniel to “wax on, wax off” over and over again in the original Karate Kid film. Follow the rules. Don’t ask why; you will understand later.

But, I have only recently started questioning this approach within the context of agility, because Shu Ha Ri works well only when there is a single correct way to perform foundational tasks before introducing variation.

But it breaks down in complex domains where context determines the ‘right’ solution required from the beginning.

It works very well when clear best practices exist (e.g. martial arts or classical music), when mistakes are costly or dangerous (e.g. aviation, surgery or some engineering disciplines) or when skills build sequentially (e.g. mathematics or coding).

But the logic behind it falls down in complex knowledge work because the “one right way” is heavily dependent on the environment, situation and context.

There are no universal rules in complexity. Learning must be contextual, not sequential, and requires adaptation from the start. Product management, innovation, transformation, leadership and strategy are all examples where Shu Ha Ri is impractical.

With this in mind, which is better for learning agile? Even for learning a framework like Scrum?

Exactly.

We know from all the surveys, the blog posts and articles saying “Agile is Dead” or “Agile doesn’t work here”, that teaching a single rule set to people in diverse teams doing different types of work in different environments is an exercise in finding the right square hole for our square peg among a sea of round holes.

Trying first to implement a single framework, in its entirety, across an entire organisation, in which context varies between teams, before allowing any adaptation and variation, seems incredibly wasteful. Why insist on following rules in places they don’t belong, or need to be adapted.

I am not bashing the agile frameworks per se. They all contain a lot of goodness. Yes, even the ones I have said I don’t like. It’s just that, viewed in their entirety, none of them are universally applicable, and none describe a path to mastery, just the state of mastery one is expected to achieve.

Complex work benefits from a principles-first approach, where:

• Principles provide guardrails or guidelines, not rigid rules — Teams align around fundamental values (e.g., customer value, fast feedback) rather than strictly adhering to defined processes and practices.
• Context drives decision-making — Agile transformations, product strategies, and leadership approaches must be tailored based on industry, company culture, and real-time feedback.

So I think it’s time for us to think of agile adoption or transformation differently. I think it’s time for each organisation to instead take these basic steps to agility:

1. Define their objective and purpose for wanting to be (more) agile
2. Decide where change is needed to improve and achieve those objectives
3. Socialise a set of easily-understood and easily remembered principles at the core of agile, selected for their relevance to the objectives
4. Empower teams to figure out for themselves what they need to change to better follow the principles, considering their own type of work, their situation and environment.

Time, perhaps, if we think of it still differently, for agile to move into its own Ri stage.