your sticky note example really points to the importance of incremental development as much as the value of feature teams and reducing dependencies. If, with 3 component teams, one team can't get their work done there's no chance a feature team, with only a fraction of the component team, would be able to get that same work done within the sprint. For example, if 3 individuals on the component team can't complete the work there's no chance a single individual, now on a Feature team, can complete it. Thus, breaking that functionality down so that we can incrementally complete a portion of what's required, in order to get feedback, is just as important as removing the dependency. If you move to Feature teams, and continue to insist on doing huge implementations it will still take you just as long.
Yes breaking down work into pieces that you can complete and get feedback on is important. But creating a feature team doesn't mean that we reduce the number of people on the team. A feature team should have everyone necessary to deliver the feature. So in the sticky note example instead of having 2 separate teams (frontend and backend) we would have one team that has both frontend devs and backend devs working together to deliver the feature. To your point about incremental work. If you had those 2 component teams, you could probably create 2 feature teams form them, each of which would be able to deliver entire features instead of half a feature per team. Just in that release cycle alone you'd double the amount of feedback from stakeholders (the more you complete and show to stakeholders the more they can actually provide feedback on).
![Seungmin "그렇게, 천천히, 우리(As we are)" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/kAzmhLHePqU/mqdefault.jpg)
![Noob To Max With DRAGON REWORK In Blox Fruits [FULL MOVIE]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/LnBMOinoOvA/mqdefault.jpg)
your sticky note example really points to the importance of incremental development as much as the value of feature teams and reducing dependencies. If, with 3 component teams, one team can't get their work done there's no chance a feature team, with only a fraction of the component team, would be able to get that same work done within the sprint. For example, if 3 individuals on the component team can't complete the work there's no chance a single individual, now on a Feature team, can complete it. Thus, breaking that functionality down so that we can incrementally complete a portion of what's required, in order to get feedback, is just as important as removing the dependency. If you move to Feature teams, and continue to insist on doing huge implementations it will still take you just as long.
Yes breaking down work into pieces that you can complete and get feedback on is important. But creating a feature team doesn't mean that we reduce the number of people on the team. A feature team should have everyone necessary to deliver the feature. So in the sticky note example instead of having 2 separate teams (frontend and backend) we would have one team that has both frontend devs and backend devs working together to deliver the feature.
To your point about incremental work. If you had those 2 component teams, you could probably create 2 feature teams form them, each of which would be able to deliver entire features instead of half a feature per team. Just in that release cycle alone you'd double the amount of feedback from stakeholders (the more you complete and show to stakeholders the more they can actually provide feedback on).