Scaling Agile: Frameworks to Manage Complexities for Larger Projects
Agile scaling is the rope that an organization climbs when having large-scale projects that tend to lend themselves to Agile flexibility but require the organization to deal with the complexities of multiple teams and cross-enterprise alignment. The two most common frameworks in the application of Agile practices to these large projects are Safe (Scaled Agile Framework) and Less (Large Scale Scrum). We will see these two frameworks below, what they consist of, and some examples of how they can be applied.
Scaled Agile Framework (SAE). Since SAFe is meant for very large organizations, it provides a systematic framework that scales agile practices throughout the organization proactively and allows better collaboration, alignment, and consistent value delivery.
Components of Safe:
1.Lean principles and agile principles:
Principles lean and agile ended to deliver more of customer value meanwhile ensuring efficiency and flow and collaborative aligned working across the organizations that facilitated such actions and expectations.
2. Roles Defined:
Defined roles such as Release Train Engineer (RTE) and Product Owner, Scrum Master, and team members create accountability and structure.
3. Agile Release Train (ART):
This typically consists of 5-12 agile teams that, acting together closely and delivering incremental value, share a synchronous Program Increment (PI) cycle of 8-12 weeks.
4. PI Planning:
Safe is exceptionally vital because it brings all teams together to align goals, define work, and synchronize efforts throughout the entire program increment.
5. Inspect and Adapt (I&A):
I&A will be the workshop in which the progress will be assessed and some of the bumps and changes that will have to be made will be highlighted because, till now, the outcomes don’t meet the expected points.
Example:
A Large Financial Services Company is making use of the SAFe framework for the enhancement and simplification of processes in software delivery. Agile Release Trains ARTs are linked to the different products they support but are scheduled to infrequently coordinate their work during PI Planning to realize consistent implementations of all new regulatory changes across offerings.
Less (Large-Scale Scrum)
Less provides a lightweight framework for scaling Scrum across multiple teams while keeping the principles simple and very close to core Scrum.
The elements constituting Less are:
- Core Scrum Principles: Less brings back the well-known Scrum roles (Scrum Master, Product Owner, Development Team), events (Sprints, Daily Scrums, Sprint Reviews, Retrospectives), and artifacts (Product Backlog, Sprint Backlog, Increment).
- Single Product Backlog: One common Product Backlog is used by all teams. It is prioritized concerning the highest-value items.
- Common Sprint Planning and Reviews: The teams participate in the common Sprints Planning and Review sessions, thus improving coordination as well as sharing a better understanding of the product.
- Unified Definition of Done: It will provide the same Definition for Done for all teams, signifying that their work will be integrated.
Example: There is such a software development company that runs LeSS with different teams working on one complex product. All teams choose items from a single Product Backlog to have Planning in a Sprint, considering their capacity and expertise. All these teams produce the same product at a Sprint Review at the end of each sprint.
Choosing Between Safe and Safe
Yes, the two scales to choose from depend on the particularity, singularity, and complexity of the respective organizations:
Safe:
Most appropriate for large, heavily regulated industries or enterprises that require a lot of alignment and coordination. It makes a very strong framework for realizing and managing complexity.
Less:
Most appropriate for companies that want to scale Agile more lightly. LeSS preserves the lightness of scrum while providing avenues to interface multiple teams.
Conclusion
Safe and Less are two strong frameworks for scaling agility, as different in their applications as they may be. Organizations need to determine which framework is best suited to them based on its scale, culture, complexity, and specific requirements to make the most in realizing the aims sought by them. Both of them prepare a strong arsenal for scaling Agile practice, making them pliable, collaborative, and managing large projects within the organization.
