Evolution of the Agile Scaling Frameworks

Abstract

Over the past decade, agile methods have become the favored choice for projects undertaken in rapidly changing environments. The success of agile methods in small, co-located projects has inspired companies to apply them in larger projects. Agile scaling frameworks, such as Large Scale Scrum and Scaled Agile Framework, have been invented by practitioners to scale agile to large projects and organizations. Given the importance of agile scaling frameworks, research on those frameworks is still limited. This paper presents our findings from an empirical survey answered by the methodologists of 15 agile scaling frameworks. We explored (i) framework evolution, (ii) main reasons behind their creation, (iii) benefits, and (iv) challenges of adopting these frameworks. The most common reasons behind creating the frameworks were improving the organization’s agility and collaboration between agile teams. The most commonly claimed benefits included enabling frequent deliveries and enhancing employee satisfaction, motivation, and engagement. The most mentioned challenges were using frameworks as cooking recipes instead of focusing on changing people’s culture and mindset.

Scaled agile framework. Dealing with software process‐related challenges of a financial group with the action research approach

“…12 Nevertheless, the original agile methods such as Scrum, XP, or Kanban do not provide guidance on dealing with scaling issues. Thereby, their custodians as well as consultants who have helped companies in large-scale transformations have proposed several agile scaling frameworks, 13,14 Large-Scale Scrum (LeSS), Scrum-at-Scale, Nexus, and others-with Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe) being the most predominant. 1 These off-the-shelf solutions incorporate predefined workflow patterns to deal with issues related to large number of teams, interteam coordination, and lack of up-front architecture.…”

“…1 These off-the-shelf solutions incorporate predefined workflow patterns to deal with issues related to large number of teams, interteam coordination, and lack of up-front architecture. 14 One must bear in mind, though, that successful implementation of any of the aforementioned frameworks is not an easy undertaking. As a matter of fact, Abrar et al came out with a categorization of as many as 15 demotivators for such processes from the management perspective.…”

“…Thereby, their custodians as well as consultants who have helped companies in large‐scale transformations have proposed several agile scaling frameworks, 13,14 Large‐Scale Scrum (LeSS), Scrum‐at‐Scale, Nexus, and others—with Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe) being the most predominant 1 . These off‐the‐shelf solutions incorporate predefined workflow patterns to deal with issues related to large number of teams, interteam coordination, and lack of up‐front architecture 14 . One must bear in mind, though, that successful implementation of any of the aforementioned frameworks is not an easy undertaking.…”

Scaling Agile Company-Wide: The Organizational Challenge of Combining Agile-Scaling Frameworks and Enterprise Architecture in Service Companies

“…These methods also help innovators dealing with instability and uncertainty in technological and market environments [31], [32]. They are not suitable in all projects [33], and their potential "impact on the people, the process, and the project must all be considered." [34, p. 8] Traditional stage-gate methods are used in larger projects with stable and predictable requirements [29], [35].…”

“…Adopting ASFs brings several benefits and challenges [13], [33], [41], [43]. Benefits include easier prioritization of business requirements, better management of dependencies, enabling frequent deliveries, and enhancing employee satisfaction, motivation, and engagement.…”