Skip to main content

Before Scaling Up - consider...

Before one scales up their functioning teams (I'm assuming one would not want to scale up non-functioning teams - yet I've seen that done) one should look for alternatives to the scaling problem.
"Scaling Agile methods is the last thing you should do" —@martinfowler, 2003

This scaling problem has been studied:


"In 1957, British naval historian and management satirist Northcote Parkinson [known for Parkinson's law: “work expands to fill the time available for its completion”] painted a cynical picture of a typical committee: It starts with four or five members, quickly grows to nine or ten, and, once it balloons to 20 and beyond, meetings become an utter waste of time – and all the important work is done before and after meetings by four or five most influential members."

Scaling up Excellence

Why Big Teams Suck by Robert Sutton is a Stanford Professor and co-author (with Huggy Rao) of Scaling Up Excellence: Getting to More without Settling for Less.

Studied in Academia

"After devoting nearly 50 years to studying team performance, the late Harvard researcher J. Richard Hackman concluded that four to six members is the team best size for most tasks, that no work team should have more than 10 members, and that performance problems and interpersonal friction increase 'exponentially as team size increases'.”

Studied in the Military

"Some organizations learn about the drawbacks of oversized groups the hard way. Retired Marine Captain and former U.S. Senator James H. Webb explained why the “fire team” – the basic combat fighting unit – shrunk from 12 to 4 during War II. Webb wrote in the Marine Corp Gazette that this “12 man mob” was “immensely difficult” for Marine squad leaders to control under the stress and confusion of battle. Coordination problems were rampant and close relationships – where soldiers fight for their buddies – were tougher to maintain in 12-man teams."


Studied in Health Care

"A Harvard Business School study by Melissa Valentine and Amy Edmondson of a large hospital’s emergency department [...] The crowd of 30 or so doctors and nurses who staffed the department at any given time were divided into multiple six person “pods,” each led by a senior doctor or “attending physician.” After the change, information about patients flowed more quickly and accurately and personal relationships improved markedly. Smaller teams reduced confusion and discomfort about who to ask for help and updates."

I think the general lesson learned is to not scale up, because the systems and structures that created and support the current organization will not bare the stress of scaling up.



Some alternatives to Scaling Agile:

Scaling Agile – the Easy Way by Arlo Belshee

Try to re-structure the organization in a way that doesn't require efficiency of scale to achieve the goal. For example WL Gore's organizational pattern a team based flat lattice.

Or Semco, "a Brazilian conglomerate that specializes in complex technologies and services. Semco is a self-managed company. Workers at Semco choose what they do as well as where and when they do it. They even choose their own salaries. Subordinates review their supervisors and elect corporate leadership. They also initiate moves into new businesses and out of old ones. The company is run like a democracy." -- Podular organization: a business within the business written by Dave Gray.


Try a fundamentally radical idea like Holacracy.  "Holacracy is a real-world-tested social technology for agile and purposeful organization. It radically changes how an organization is structured, how decisions are made, and how power is distributed."

Take a lesson from the US Government's FBI Case Management system.

Before you consider the leading market agile/scrum scaling tool-sets like SAFe, DAD etc. try this alternative approach:  Open Agile Adoptions by Dan Mezick author of The Culture Game.

“Scaling is actually a problem of less,” says Sutton in The Do’s and Don’ts of Rapid Scaling for Startups. “There are lots of things that used to work that don’t work anymore, so you have to get rid of them. There are probably a bunch of things you’ve always done that slowed you down without you realizing it.”
See Also:
The Founder Effect
Comparing Scaling Agile Frameworks - CIO 
The Agile Late Majority has different needs
The Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe) – A Review by Agile Scout
SAFe - but not good enough  by Ron Jeffries
Scaling Scrum: SAFe, DAD, or LeSS? by Peter Stevens
Scaling Agile Development LeSS - PDF by Larman & Vodde
IBM's Disciplined Agile Delivery DAD by Scott Ambler
Scaled Agile Framework SAFE by Dean Leffingwell
A Scaled Agile Framework® (SAFe™) Case Study by Brad Swanson
Large Scale Scrum (LeSS) @ J.P. Morgan by Craig Larman and Matt Winn
Case Study of a Difficult Federal Government Scrum Project: FBI Sentinel by M. James
Kanban and its flight levels by Klaus Leopold
Agility Adoption Rather Than Agile At Scale by Oana Juncu
The Folly of Scaling Agile by Rachel Davies
Speaking on SAFe: Thoughts from my Leading Scaled Agile Framework course  by Andrew Clear
Enterprise Agile: Are you Ready by Scott Ambler - DAD slides from Agile2014
LeSS vs SAFe case study at Nokia by Gosei (Ari Tikka & Ran Nyman)
Moving Past the Scaling Myth by Michael Feathers
LeSS is More - SolutionsIQ Agile Amped talk at Agile2015 by Bas Vodde & Craig Larmann
Descaling Organizations with LeSS  by Viktor Grgic
Large Agile Projects by Martin Fowler
SAFe: the infantilism of management by Dave Snowden
Post a Comment

Most Popular on Agile Complexification Inverter

David's notes on "Drive"

- "The Surprising Truth about what Motivates Us" by Dan Pink.

Amazon book order
What I notice first and really like is the subtle implication in the shadow of the "i" in Drive is a person taking one step in a running motion.  This brings to mind the old saying - "there is no I in TEAM".  There is however a ME in TEAM, and there is an I in DRIVE.  And when one talks about motivating a team or an individual - it all starts with - what's in it for me.

Introduction

Pink starts with an early experiment with monkeys on problem solving.  Seems the monkeys were much better problem solver's than the scientist thought they should be.  This 1949 experiment is explained as the early understanding of motivation.  At the time there were two main drivers of motivation:  biological & external influences.  Harry F. Harlow defines the third drive in a novel theory:  "The performance of the task provided intrinsic reward" (p 3).  This is Dan Pink's M…

Software Development terms applied to Home Construction

Let's Invert the typically wrong headed view of Software Development project management as a construction project.  We can map it the other way just to see if it works... to have some fun, to explore the meaning of phrases we toss around quite frequently.


Normally Project Management terms come from a construction domain.  We are going to apply the lexicon of modern software to the construction of a home.  We will follow the construction project and meet some of the people doing the work.

This is a very small (8 homes from $600,000 skyward) program in my 30-40 year old neighborhood.

About 6 months ago I saw the programs landing page go up.  It gives casual observers and some of the stakeholders a general idea of the intent of the program.  And most importantly who to contact for additional information if you happen to be interested in their products.

The Refuge program has 8 product projects and has them running independently.  Yet much of their DevOps infrastructure has already b…

Where is Shakespeare When We Need Him?

We are desperately searching for a term for people that connotes the best of human kind.  The creative, sensing, combinatorial synergistic, empathic solutioning persons that have yet to been labeled with a role name that works.

Some of the old terms:
Staff, Workforce, Human Resource, My Team, Army, Company

Shakespeare created 1700 words in his time.  He mutated verbs to nouns, and vice-a-versa, transformed verbs into adjectives, and formed words from whole cloth never before heard.  This skill is rare, but there is a poet that can create the term we need in the twenty-first century.

What should this term define?

21st Century Human Resource; the generalizing specialist.

Yes, but what more?  What less?

Suggest your poetry in the comments, let us see if we cannot do 1/1700 as well as The Bard.

By-the-way; who create the phrase "coin a word"?




a little feedback please...

some feedback please...
How do you like the new look and feel of our site?
  ___)  nah (I like the old one better - bring it back)
  _X_)  yeah (much cleaner and easy to navigate)



powered by Typeform
See Also:

Innovation in the Automobile Industry

In the 1900s the automobile industry was the most important and innovation industry in the USA.  But one could question if this was good for our society in the long run.  And one could question if they actually innovated.

In the early 1900s there were few automobiles, very little infrastructure created to support the industry.  For example the road system was still designed for horse drawn wagons and the wagon wheel (remember a steal rim and wooden compression spoke wheel).  The future US Highways, or the 1950s Interstate Highway System at the cost of $425 billion were decades and many innovations away. There was no gas service station, there were however horse stables, farriers, and blacksmiths in each town along the roads.  There was no real "road map", there was no road naming system, like was created in 1926 - the United States Numbered Highway System.

The industry employees millions of people, and was a large factor in the economy of the USA.  It created or was created b…