Agile at scale, honestly

Overview

When many teams must work as one, the hard part moves to the joins between them. This module names four forces that pull teams apart, compares SAFe, Large-Scale Scrum, Scrum at Scale and Nexus, and argues for reducing dependencies before adding coordination and descaling before scaling, drawing on Wintzen's cells at BSO. The Spotify model, from Kniberg and Ivarsson's 2012 snapshot to Jeremiah Lee's critique, is the case. Governance is not the enemy of agile, but it must change so that accountability and learning pull the same way. This module compares project and team funding, explains Hope and Fraser's Beyond Budgeting and Handelsbanken's choice not to set sales targets, and draws on the National Audit Office on agile governance. It then covers outcome roadmaps, Goodhart's law and John Doerr's OKRs at Google, closing with guidance for public boards.

What you'll develop

In this Bitesize, you will develop the ability to:

1. 1Explain why the hard part of scaling lies in the joins between teams, and identify the four forces of dependencies, shared platforms, funding cycles and hand-offs.
2. 2Compare the main scaling frameworks by how much structure they add, and judge whether a framework is reducing dependencies or rebuilding bureaucracy.
3. 3Plan a scaling approach that starts from the teams and descales the work, avoiding the trap of copying another organisation's labels.
4. 4Explain why an annual budget for uncertain work fixes scope too early, and compare project funding with funding stable teams and products.
5. 5Distinguish the target, forecast and resource allocation jobs that Beyond Budgeting separates, and apply that insight to goal setting with OKRs and Goodhart's law in mind.
6. 6Plan board assurance that moves from checking the plan towards testing value, using outcome roadmaps and a quarterly review to continue, change or stop work.