Agile Horizons: A Journey into User-Centric Development
Introduction
This week, we’ve explored Agile practices, which are essential in today’s fast-paced environment for delivering products and services efficiently. We’ve compared two project management paradigms: the traditional waterfall approach and the Scrum Agile framework. Understanding the company culture, customer expectations, and project size/type is crucial in choosing the right methodology. Startups, known for their fast-paced work cultures, often find Agile practices more suitable, despite each method having its own limitations.
Navigating Agile Waters: A Journey of User-Centric Development
In my previous role as a product designer at a tech startup, we embraced Agile practices to develop and refine our flagship web-based product. Our team operated in a fast-paced environment where adaptability and collaboration were key. We utilized a blend of the Waterfall Method and Scrum Agile Framework to manage our projects effectively. Collaborators included engineers, product managers, owners, and designers.
Scrum Agile Behaviour
Step1:
We shipped features weekly, sometimes receiving requirements abruptly. However, we kicked off each project with an envisioning session to align stakeholders, developers, and designers on the product vision and roadmap. This session set the tone for the project and ensured everyone was on the same page.
Some potential red blockers I encountered:
a. Some team members or stakeholders may resist changes to the product or project direction, which impedes progress.
b. There were instances when the problem statement was unclear or overly generalized, requiring additional effort to fully grasp its meaning.
Step2:
Projects were divided into Backlogs > Sprints, managed using JIRA with each sprint lasting 10 working days. Requirements in the form of features fell into two categories:
Type1: Feedback-based requirements from the previous sprint often referred to as “Sprint backlog”.
Type2: New feature additions, occasionally from backlogs, with an envisioning session to set the tone.
Step3:
Features that were broken into tasks often were assigned collaborators as tasks or subtasks. Each sprint followed a waterfall approach, with tasks labeled for requirement gathering, design, implementation, testing, and handoff. The choice of Agile was based on its ability to accommodate the constantly evolving market conditions.(Manisha, Meenu and Kamaljeet 2021:6)
A blend of the Waterfall Method and Scrum Agile Framework
Requirement gathering: Gather requirements from stakeholders.
Design: Create a detailed design based on the requirements.
Implementation: Develop the solution according to the design.
Testing: Test the solution to ensure it meets the requirements.
Handoff: Hand over the tested solution to stakeholders or developers for further implementation or deployment.
Estimations were crucial, although there were instances of overestimation/underestimation leading to task transfers between sprints.
Step4:
Daily stand-ups required each team member to record hours spent and remaining work for their tasks, ensuring transparency and progress tracking. (Hema, Valpadasu, et al.)
Time tracking in Jira enables the team/individual team members to log the time spent on tasks effortlessly.
Step5:
Sprint Retrospectives aided our improvement by tackling issues like overcommitment, burnout, and scope creep. Meetings often focused on overestimation/underestimation and project scope clarity. Unlike the situations mentioned by (Andriyani, Hoda and Amor 2017: 10) regarding dependencies, we didn’t encounter such issues due to our waterfall approach within sprints.
Step4:
Daily stand-ups required each team member to record hours spent and remaining work for their tasks, ensuring transparency and progress tracking. (Hema, Valpadasu, et al.)
Waterfall or Agile – Which is better?
The choice between Waterfall and Agile depends on various factors. Agile, particularly Scrum, is characterized by result and deadline flexibility, small teams, frequent reviews, cooperation, and object orientation, product type, company culture, investor commitment etc.(Carvalho and Mello 2011: 40)
However, there’s no definitive answer as to which is best, as it ultimately depends on the values and needs of the project. I poured hours into solving this puzzle when I led the design sprint at my company, only to find that the team couldn’t fully commit to one solution under those circumstances such as tight rather unrealistic deadlines. Transitioning from traditional project management to Agile can be challenging for existing teams. In our experience, combining agile and waterfall approaches proved effective for our small-stage startup.
Obstacles
1. Differentiating between waterfall and agile scrum was challenging but a necessary part of the process.
2. Pitfalls included overcommitting in sprints, leading to burnout and unfinished work.
3. Agile’s flexibility sometimes causes scope creep, disrupting sprint goals. We addressed this with stricter change control processes.
Learning
As per my experience, the answer to the question is subjective. There is no definitive approach to determine which method is appropriate. The choice depends on factors such as the type of product, company culture, and investor commitment.
Agile Scrum practices can sometimes feel cumbersome due to their fast-paced nature and short deadlines, which leave less room for ideation. This can lead to unfinished work spilling over into the next sprint, making it heavier.
References
Andriyani, Yanti, et al. “Reflection in Agile Retrospectives.” Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, 2017, pp. 3–19, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57633-6_1. Accessed 12 Apr. 2024.
Carvalho, Bernardo Vasconcelos de, and Carlos Henrique Pereira Mello. “Scrum Agile Product Development Method – Literature Review, Analysis and Classification.” Product Management & Development, vol. 9, no. 1, 2011, pp. 39–49, https://doi.org/10.4322/pmd.2011.005.
Hema, Valpadasu, et al. “Scrum: An Effective Software Development Agile Tool.” IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, vol. 981, no. 981, 5 Dec. 2020, p. 022060, iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1757-899X/981/2/022060, https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899x/981/2/022060.
Manisha, et al. “Impact of Agile Scrum Methodology on Team’s Productivity and Client Satisfaction – a Case Study.” IEEE Xplore, 1 Dec. 2021, ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/9725505/.