Large-scale agile transformation at Ericsson: a case study

Abstract

Many large organizations are adopting agile software development as part of their continuous push towards higher flexibility and shorter lead times, yet few reports on large-scale agile transformations are available in the literature. In this paper we report how Ericsson introduced agile in a new R&D product development program developing a XaaS platform and a related set of services, while simultaneously scaling it up aggressively. The overarching goal for the R&D organization, distributed to five sites at two continents, was to achieve continuous feature delivery. This single case study is based on 45 semistructured interviews during visits at four sites, and five observation sessions at three sites. We describe how the organization experimented with different set-ups for their tens of agile teams aiming for rapid end-to-end development: from component-based virtual teams to totally cross-functional, cross-component, cross-site teams. Moreover, we discuss the challenges the organization faced and how they mitigated them on their journey towards continuous and rapid software engineering. We present four lessons learned for large-scale agile transformations: 1) consider using an experimental approach to transformation, 2) consider implementing the transformation step-wise in complex large-scale settings, 3) team inter-changeability can be limited in a complex large-scale product -specialization might be needed, and 4) not using a common agile framework for the whole organization, in combination with insufficient common trainings and coaching may lead to a lack of common direction in the agile implementation. Further in-depth case studies on large-scale agile transformations, on customizing agile to large-scale settings, as well as on the use of scaling frameworks are needed.

Voices from the Teams - Impacts on Autonomy in Large-Scale Agile Software Development Settings

“…A conclusion from the large-scale agile transformation at Ericsson [6], who invented and tailored their own practices, was that they probably would have benefitted from implementing a common framework instead. They thought such a framework would have provided a common ground for team practices which could instead have been tailored later on [6]. Findings from this study, however, suggest that it is not that simple as having a shared framework.…”

“…Some organizations, such as Ericsson [6], invent and tailor practices to scale up the agile ways of working while others implement full frameworks. The most commonly adopted framework today for large-scale agile ways of working is the Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe), according to the industrial survey The State of Agile [1].…”

Coordination in Large-Scale Agile Software Development

“…Rather, agile can be understood as a set of values, principles and practices, that may be implemented in more or less successful ways. As such, there may be great differences in how large-scale agile is implemented [14], and finding consistent results from large-scale agile may be difficult [13]. Initial fieldwork supports these observations.…”

Changes Over Time in a Planned Inter-team Coordination Routine

“…Conboy and Carroll [10] put forth, in a study of 13 agile transformations, that the risk of implementing a common framework is that it imposes too many restrictions and rigidity on the employees. On the other hand, the lack of guidelines from a common framework may lead to a lack of common direction in the agile implementation as Paasivaara et al [11] pointed out from studying the company Ericsson.…”