Facilitate and execute Agile Release Trains

In this three-day Release Train Engineer course you will gain an in-depth understanding of the role and responsibilities of a Release Train Engineer (RTE) in the SAFe enterprise. You will learn how to facilitate and enable end-to-end value delivery through Agile Release Trains (ARTs) and value streams. Passing the exam, you will receive a SAFe Release Train Engineer certificate.

 

You will learn how to build a high-performing ART by becoming a servant leader and coach, and how to plan and execute a Program Increment (PI) planning event, the primary enabler of alignment throughout all levels of a SAFe organization.

 

Release Train Engineer Course

Blog: Servant Leader in Superman’s clothing: Ready to be RTE?

 

During this three-day course you will learn to:

  • Effectively perform the role of the Release Train Engineer
  • Apply Lean-Agile knowledge and tools to execute and release value
  • Assist with program and large solution execution
  • Foster relentless improvement
  • Build a high-performing ART by becoming a servant leader and coach
  • Develop an action plan to continue the learning journey

 

 Attendees who pass the exam will receive:

  • SAFe Release Train Engineer certificate
  • A SAFe 4 Release Train Engineer digital badge to promote your accomplishment online
  • A one-year certified membership as a SAFe Release Train Engineer, which includes access to the RTE Community of Practice
  • A SAFe Release Train Engineer certification usage guide with RTE certification marks
  • Access to a variety of learning resources to support certified professionals during their SAFe journey

 

More for you as RTE:

Stay updated and keep in touch with each other via the RTE LinkedIn group

 

Three-day course program

Each course day starts around 8:30 and ends at 17:00 hours, including lunch and intermission.

 

Topics covered

  • Identifying SAFe essentials
  • Learning the RTE role and responsibilities
  • Understanding the ART
  • Planning a Program Increment
  • Executing a Program Increment
  • Collaborating through Value Streams
  • Fostering Relentless Improvement
  • Coaching the ART
  • Continuing the Learning Journey

 

Prerequisites

The following prerequisites are highly recommended for those who intend to take the SAFe Release Train Engineer (RTE) certification exam:

  • Hold at least one current SAFe certification
  • Have launched or participated in at least one ART and one PI

 

Exam Details

  • Exam name: SAFe Release Train Engineer Exam
  • Exam format: Multiple choice; Multiple select
  • Exam delivery: Web-based (single-browser), closed book, no outside assistance, timed
  • Exam access: Candidates can access the exam within the SAFe Community Platform upon completion of the SAFe 4 Scrum Master course
  • Exam cost: First exam attempt is included as part of the course registration fee if the exam is taken within 30 days of course completion. Each retake attempt costs $50.
  • Exam Duration: Once the exam begins, candidates have 120 minutes (2 hours) to complete the exam
  • Number of Questions: 60
  • Passing Score: 44 out of 60 (73%) for RTE 4.6 exam
    Note: 40 out of 60 (67%) for RTE 4.5 exam
  • Language: English
  • Retake policy: Second attempt on exam (first retake) can be done immediately after first attempt. Third attempt requires a 10-day wait. Fourth attempt requires a 30-day wait. Contact support@scaledagile.com for any retake questions.

 

Professional Development Units (PDUs) and Scrum Education Units (SEUs)

  • Attendees may be eligible to apply for 20 PDUs toward their continuing education requirements with the Project Management Institute (PMI) for PMP, PgMP, and PMI-ACP certifications
  • Attendees may be eligible to apply for SEUs under category C, toward earning or renewing their CSP through Scrum Alliance

Audience

The following individuals will benefit from this course:
 

  • RTEs and Solution Train Engineers (STEs)
  • Program- and projectmanagers
  • Scrum Masters
  • Leaders and managers
  • Agile coaches
  • SAFe Program Consultants (SPCs)
    • TypeCourse
    • Period 3 days
    • Maximum number of participants:18
    • Level:Advanced
    • Language:English
    • Lunch included:Yes
    • Exam:Yes
    • Incompany:Yes
    • Payment methods:Invoice, iDEAL, CreditCard
    • Examinator:Logo
    • Sundaresan RUNGASAMY - Review: 10/10
      The sharing of experiences and exchanges with the group. It would have been great to do some test example in the class just to test our understanding of the role and activities of the RTE. Location is great.
    • Sune Hermit - Review: 9/10
      Good content, nice mix of lectures and discussions
    • Nikolaos Maris - Review: 10/10
      I liked that the trainer, Kathy Marshak, kept a balance between following the agenda and answering context-specific questions. I would prefer having a PDF version of the slides rather than in printed form.
    • Olof Nilsson - Review: 9/10
      I liked the idea of many diskussions in pair och triads. So i think that the pedagogic were very good. Excellent planned 3 days in a very good locations.
    • Alexey Ionov - Review: 10/10
      One big table for all is not the best setup for team exercises.
    • Benoit Cade - Review: 10/10
      I liked in first the trainer Matt, the planning even if this 3 days were intensive. The other peole and there experience and all the discussion about our experience ant the fact that Matt gave us time to discuss.
    • Ayma Khan - Review: 10/10
      Course was delivered at a very good pace, the instructor was knowledge and gave good examples.
    • Mark Creasy - Review: 10/10
      Matt was an awesome instructor. He paired the course learning with very insightful, real world examples that helped me gain a deeper understanding of the concepts being presented.
    • Karuna Dadia - Review: 7/10
      I think having 2 coaches take courses like SPC & RTE help bcos they can handle providing more feedback on exercises
    • Jacquelin Tripp - Review: 10/10
      Matt provided real life examples and tried to provide suggestions/solution to problems.
    • Randy Shumpert - Review: 9/10
      While real world examples are important and helpful, emphasis should be placed on passing the exam. Real world experience comes from working in the field and less important in the class room. This is a difficult balance, but the edge has to be given to knowledge needed to pass the exam as highest priority.
    • Werner Wesenhagen - Review: 9/10
      The training was very interactive and there was a good balance between focus and breaks. The emphasis was primarily on software driven / commercial organizations. Although this is very logical, I would also like to explore how SAFe would fit in a non-profit product or more service driven organization (with external IT vendors).
    • Nils Oud - Review: 8/10
      I like all the content; especiall Agile Portfolio Management. Some videos and excercises are outdated or did not make much sense to me. E.g. the clip about the rugby game.
    • Bo Fluitman - Review: 8/10
      A lot of information in 4 days, but the trainers brought a lot of energy.
    • Patrycja Krajewska - Review: 8/10
      The training in general was okay. My main remarks concern poor lunch and too big group for such intensive trainings.
    • Sven Petersen - Review: 7/10
      Trainer were well prepared, passionated about the topic and with a pretty good attitude. Location was in general ok, but the group was simply too large. With around 40 people a training is pretty hard to deliver. I would have prefered if we haf spend more time on how to customize the general model/framework of SAFe according to companies specific situation, circumstances etc.
    • Marijn Wegh - Review: 7/10
      Content was super. Wat ik erg jammer vond was dat het zo'n grote en gemêleerde groep was. Van mensen die veel ervaring hebben met SAFe tot mensen die er 0 ervaring mee hadden. En die laatsten werkten vertragend. Ik kwam speciaal voor de laatste hoofdstukken, maar die werden op donderdagmiddag afgeraffeld, terwijl we daar vanaf woensdag al mee bezig hadden moeten zijn. Wellicht deze cursus enkel aanbieden voor ervaren mensen of mensen met Leading SAFe.
    • Andre van Dijk - Review: 7/10
      For me there was a bit too much time spent on the Leading SAFe part and the basics. I would have liked to spent more time on e.g. Value Stream Workshop and real implementation skills.
    • Bert Bouwknegt - Review: 9/10
      Liked the room for discussion, the location and the trainers. A bit more time boxing on the schedule because we didn't get to het parking spot with questions :-)
    • Anna Skog - Review: 9/10
      I liked that the trainers used their own experiences and point of views. They were all experts in their fields and not just SAFe agilists. However, I did not like the amusement part case as an example. I experienced it as non-motivating as it did not relate to actual business issues. Also, I'd recommend mixing the tables so that there is not a majority from a common organization or country, if possible.
    • Deb Talapatra - Review: 8/10
      The trainers were very approachable and knowledgeable however, the training material was exhaustive and despite of the 4 days duration, certain portions had to be sped up.
    • Stefan Roloff - Review: 8/10
      Individual presentation that fits the time constraint, separate trainer training
    • Maxime Delhorme - Review: 8/10
      I liked discussion on deeper level. Also it would be nice to touch topics on the enterprise level and talk a bit more about lean portfolio management. Location was really good as well as trainer.
    • Michiel Koster - Review: 8/10
      The standard content is very Scaled Agile-ish, which is OK but often dogmatic. 6 for that. The training as hosted by Eelco is excellent, with inspiring anecdotes, real-life examples and more interaction. 10 for that. Makes 8.
    • Raymond Sondagh - Review: 8/10
      Good level of interaction, room for discussion. In my case, it was very beneficial to be in a course with people from only my company.
    • Saskia Bons - Review: 9/10
      content: very good, answered to all my expectations and questions level: good for beginners (me) and experienced people trainer: very good, he obviously has a lot of experience and tells about it with enthousiasm support: ? planning: good location: the lunch was poor. There were long waiting rows, it was unclear what you could take and what not. It was not very generous knowing the price of the course.
    • Edwin Zwaagman - Review: 9/10
      Lot of information, up to speed, goed trainer
    • Kirti Bhogle - Review: 9/10
      The trainer, content of the course, venue and food :) Especially the group exercises
    • Stan Derksen - Review: 10/10
      Excellent course. Compliments to Eelco. His experience is worth taking the couse at Gladwell.
    • Essi Teräs - Review: 10/10
      I felt that time always ran out when we were doing exercises, but it probably did not matter, because we had thought about the matter at hand on our own before the collective sharing or learning, and that was probably the point, but I still wanted to say that I wasn't quick enough for the pace :) Also when other people spoke it was sometimes hard to hear them or to understand the (French) accent, so sometimes it might be a good idea for the teacher to repeat what the other person said. I had thought that the class ends at 17.00, so I had to leave to catch my flight before the course ended at 17.30, so I was a bit upset that I couldn't stay until the end (it leaves an unfinished feeling), so maybe it would be good to tell the schedule beforehand. I loved the course, and got a lot from it. I was very happy to attend Eelcos version of it specifically, because he seemed to care that we get the most of it (I've been to two other persons courses before, and haven't had the same feeling), and even to be excited to share with us. This is very special.
    • Krisztian Niesz - Review: 8/10
      Very much liked that the trainings was focusing on practicing the RTE role and spending full time on the theories. I found it very long though.
    • Signe Pedersen - Review: 9/10
      There was not enough respect for the time boxes, which meant that we were very busy in the end to get through the curriculum.