In 2001, the term agile programming was stamped by the advocates of XP, DSDM, SCRUM, Adaptive Software Development, Crystal, and other methods of programming. Hence, ‘The Agile Alliance’ was created, a manifesto for Agile Software Development from a group that found mutual ground in software development.
According to VerizonOne’s survey, there are four major types of scaling methods used today. Scaled Agile Framework, or SAFe, accounts for 29% of the projects that scale. Scrum of Scrums accounts for 19% of the large-scale Agile projects. And about 10% use internally created methods, which are typically hybrid. 5% use Discipline Agile Delivery, or DAD, and another 5% use the Large-Scale Scrum Framework or LeSS. Often, we see that internally created scaling methods tend to look like hybrid methods. In the next couple of lessons following this one, we’ll explore SAFe, DAD, and LeSS. In this lesson, we’ll cover the hybrid methods. Each scaling framework has the following items in common: They all use Scrum as the base model for managing teams. They all have product owners, Scrum Masters, and development teams. They all differ on how to manage support teams and how to make organizations Agile. The simplest means of understanding Agile at scale is to look at two methods originally used to scale Agile.
First is the Scrum of Scrums method. The hybrid methodology coordinates teams by using predictive, or traditional, controls, such as stage-gates, to manage delivery. So how does Scrum of Scrums work? Scrum of Scrums uses daily stand-ups. Each team sends a representative who is usually a product owner or a Scrum master. Scrum of Scrums can take literally just as long as a standard daily stand up. At these meetings, the representatives focus on reporting out completed stories and blockers. Scrum of Scrums provides an opportunity to identify the need for coordination among team members. This, in turn, made people think of a new certification, which is now known as the CSM certification (also called Certified Scrum Master), which has its own training facility named CSM training.
Note that a Scrum of Scrums will have a Scrum Master, who is usually a senior person in the organization, who is responsible for facilitating the coordination of work and for the overall team productivity. The question remains, why do it? Well, Scrum of Scrums can help when two teams could have dependencies on each other. When teams share resources, such as people or services, or when coordinating large product launches, or when there is simply a shared goal or vision among the teams. Originally, this approach was proposed by Jeff Sutherland, one of the founders of Scrum, as well as one of the original signers of the Agile manifesto in 2001. Sutherland published Agile Can Scale: Inventing and Reinventing SCRUM in Five Companies, in the Cutter IT Journal, in 2001. This is the story of using Scrum of Scrums at IDX, where weekly product line Scrums and monthly management Scrums occurred.
Scrum is a famous framework that manages to work very well for creative as well as complex projects of product development. However, it has certain disadvantages too. But before we take a dive into the pros and cons of it, let us understand what the Scrum framework exactly is. Scrum is a proven and worldwide accepted genuine method for obtaining agility in software. By working in short pace runs, this repeated cycle can be iterated until enough completion of the promised work items, depletion, or arrival of the budget completion. The momentum of the project is maintained, and when the project ends, Scrum ensures that the essential work has been finished.
Pros of Scrum
Given below are the framework procedures that are so popular today:
*Scrum can assure groups finish project deliverables quickly and efficiently.
*Scrum assures proficient use of time as well as money.
*Bigger projects are broken into easily manageable pace runs.
*Advancements are coded and used during the review of the pace run.
*Acts well for the development of fast-moving projects.
*The group gains a clear vision through scrum gatherings.
*Scrum, being useful, adapts to reviews from customers and shareholders.
*Short pace runs enact changes based on feedback a lot more efficiently.
*The individual attempt of each group member is visible clearly in the time period of scrum meetings.
This is a sharp contrast to the more age-old waterfall way of approach that fixes the project outcome upfront, demanding the extensive creation of needs, analysis, and design of the documentation before steps related to development can get initiated. Delays in projects as well as exceed in budget issues are quite common and can be termed as the failure to optimize the specification set, which more often results in the production of low-quality products that are furnished with features that the customer or the user does not require quite specifically.
