Should you scale?
I am sure all of you have seen and experienced the intricacies around how projects adopt Agile methodologies/frameworks to become more flexible, to be more innovative, to become more customer-centric and most importantly to GROW.
Along this journey, there will be a crossroad that all of us will face and will have to make a decision on an organisational level: To scale or not to scale in Agile?
To set the correct “frame”, we will be focusing on Agile methodologies, practices and frameworks in the context of project delivery.
In this article, we’ll explore the crucial considerations surrounding Agile scaling:
- when is it appropriate,
- when it’s not,
- the benefits and challenges of a scaled ecosystem,
- and pragmatic steps to help you with the transition to a scaled ecosystem
Especially if it is your first time, first try at shifting towards a scaled agile framework, understanding these nuances is key to align your Agile journey with your organisational goals and needs.
What does scaling mean?
Scaling in agile implies applying agile principles to larger groups working towards a common goal that spans across multiple teams. It implies a cultural shift in the organisation’s mindset that will ultimately improve its ability to adapt to changes and react quickly to market changes.
When does scaling make sense?
Moving to a scaled ecosystem at the right pivot point can greatly improve our ability to deliver complex, multi-team projects while enhancing collaboration and alignment. But it’s not a one-size-fits-all solution. Below we will go through some clear indicators that scaling might be the right move for your project:
- Large, cross-functional projects – When the scope involves multiple interconnected teams, possibly from different suppliers/contractors, scaled frameworks enable synchronised planning, dependencies management, centralised risk management and consistent delivery.
- Compliance and governance requirements – Heavily regulated industries such as finance, healthcare necessitate formal processes and documentation. Certain scaled frameworks help balance agility with regulatory compliances.
- Strategic business needs and accelerated time-to-market – Scaled frameworks offer an efficient structure for organisations aiming to achieve tighter coordination, faster time-to-market and enhanced stakeholder transparency.
Scaled frameworks like SAFe (Scaled Agile Framework) or LeSS (Large-Scale Scrum) aim to synchronise efforts, align priorities, and manage dependencies efficiently. When a given project’s or portfolio’s complexity surpasses the capacity of individual teams to coordinate informally, scaling becomes a necessary response.
When does scaling not make sense?
While adopting a scaled framework can bring a lot of benefits, it’s not suitable for every project or situation. Premature or unnecessary adoption can lead to frustration and inefficiency.
In the following section we will walk through a few scenarios when scaling would not be the best option.
- Early-Stage Agile Adoption – Organisations/projects/teams that are new to the Agile world should focus on consolidating foundational practices within individual teams before attempting scaling.
- Small autonomous teams – If your organisation consists of small, independent teams working on distinct products, scaling might add unnecessary overhead. In these cases the teams would benefit more from deepening their agile know-how and maturity.
- Resistance to Change – A mindset shift towards scaled frameworks, particularly for teams or departments set in their ways, presents a significant challenge. This is especially pertinent in industries with a history of using sequential models, like the automotive sector. The difficulty is compounded when there’s insufficient leadership support.
The pros and cons of a scaled Agile ecosystem
Pros:
- Improved collaboration: Cross-team synchronisation facilitates an efficient distribution of the scope at hand.
- Standardisation: Consistent processes across multiple delivery units.
- Faster time to market: Parallel work streams accelerated through coordinated increment plannings.
- Risk reduction: Structured cadences like Program Increments (PIs) in SAFe helps to identify issues early.
- Organisational agility: A well implemented scaled approach enables faster responses to market changes.
Cons:
- Increased complexity: Managing dependencies and workflows across multiple teams can become cumbersome and involves additional roles in the organization.
- Potential bureaucracy: Overly rigid frameworks risk turning Agile into a checkbox exercise and may cause frustration in the teams.
- Cultural challenges: Resistance from teams accustomed to autonomy might hinder adoption and may cause tension in the teams.
- Resource intensive: Scaling requires significant investment in training, coaching, tooling and a potential decrease of productivity during the transition period.
How to transition to a scaled framework
Transitioning from individual and autonomous Agile teams to a scaled ecosystem necessitates deliberate planning and patience. Here are some first steps towards the adoption of a scaled framework:
- Assess Organisational Readiness – Start by evaluating your teams and organisations maturity and cultural openness to change. Leadership must genuinely support the journey from the initial steps up to full maturity.
- Define Clear Objectives – Identify what you hope to achieve: better coordination, faster delivery, cultural transformation, etc. and select a framework that aligns with these goals.
- Choose the Right Framework – Options include SAFe, LeSS, etc.
- SAFe – Scaled Agile Framework
- Widely used by large organisations to implement a scaled Agile framework
- It is specifically designed for large and complex projects that span across multiple teams
- Helps organise work across different levels: Team, Program, Portfolio
- Needs multiple new roles to be implemented like RTE (Release Train Engineer) and STE (Solution Train Engineer)
- More suitable for organisations that are already familiar with scaled frameworks
- LeSS – Large-Scale Scrum
- Has its “roots” in Scrum and builds upon it to support its principles in a larger context
- In its simplest form it has one common product backlog and the resulting work will be completed by multiple teams working towards a common goal
- Implies a more coordinated approach to the planning meetings, usually divided into two parts: dividing the scope between teams and the detailed team planning
- Does not need additional roles when compared to Scrum
- LeSS can be an ideal use case for a “stepping stone” into the scaled agile world
- SAFe – Scaled Agile Framework