Since the scope is fixed outside of an agile environment and cost/time are the variables, in an adaptive project is it tougher to control the scope in comparison?
Being that time and cost are fixed, is controlling the scope more of a challenge? Scope seems to be one of the most important factors of the project. After all it’s what actually defines why the project is being created.
What if the scope becomes bigger than it’s fixed time and cost attributes? How can you maintain the quality of what is expected to be delivered if that translates to either revealing that more time or cost might be needed to accomplish that? How do you condense the scope to fit a set budget and set schedule?
I assume that expanding the scope would be easier as expectations would typically involve more versus less. If your scope is small, but time and cost allow you to create some flexible growth, that would probably be a more ideal situation right? If time and cost is more of a constraint, I imagine it to be a bit tricky to consolidate scope if expectations or the vision is exceeding to that. Saving Changes...
Anton OosthuizenSenior Business Analyst / Project Manager| Self EmployedPretoria, Gauteng, South Africa
Michael
The key to controlling scope in an adaptive project is not to control the functionality but rather the value. While this means that the scope is flexible it does not mean it has no boundaries. Traditionally we say that we will deliver a fixed scope for a fixed cost but instead we now aim to deliver a certain value for a fixed cost. The fact that the scope change is almost irrelevant because if the stakeholder wants to add or expand then something of lesser value will drop out the bottom. If they want to include these lesser value items in the scope the cost will change.
...
1 reply by Michael Brian
Jun 05, 2018 1:08 PM
Michael Brian
...
Thank you for response.
So this is where the importance of the backlog comes in to play, yes? Sounds like the high priorities can change, not so much the scope itself.
The key to controlling scope in an adaptive project is not to control the functionality but rather the value. While this means that the scope is flexible it does not mean it has no boundaries. Traditionally we say that we will deliver a fixed scope for a fixed cost but instead we now aim to deliver a certain value for a fixed cost. The fact that the scope change is almost irrelevant because if the stakeholder wants to add or expand then something of lesser value will drop out the bottom. If they want to include these lesser value items in the scope the cost will change.
Thank you for response.
So this is where the importance of the backlog comes in to play, yes? Sounds like the high priorities can change, not so much the scope itself.
...
1 reply by Anton Oosthuizen
Jun 05, 2018 2:06 PM
Anton Oosthuizen
...
Correct. The backlog remains flexible and whatever is in the backlog represents the scope, within the parameters of agreed value. So lower priority (value) items remain on the backlog but might never make it into the provided solution. It does, however, have its own challenges. Traditional contractual obligations being one of them.
It helps to bound the potential for scope creep by ensuring alignment & shared understanding of the project vision, developing a product roadmap, developing a story map so there's line of sight into alignment between themes, epics & stories and using acceptance criteria to bound the scope of development/test efforts.
Kiron
...
1 reply by Michael Brian
Jun 05, 2018 2:10 PM
Michael Brian
...
Thanks Kiron!
Saving Changes...
Anton OosthuizenSenior Business Analyst / Project Manager| Self EmployedPretoria, Gauteng, South Africa
Jun 05, 2018 1:08 PM
Replying to Michael Brian
...
Thank you for response.
So this is where the importance of the backlog comes in to play, yes? Sounds like the high priorities can change, not so much the scope itself.
Correct. The backlog remains flexible and whatever is in the backlog represents the scope, within the parameters of agreed value. So lower priority (value) items remain on the backlog but might never make it into the provided solution. It does, however, have its own challenges. Traditional contractual obligations being one of them.
...
1 reply by Michael Brian
Jun 05, 2018 2:13 PM
Michael Brian
...
Where would agile be most found? IT applications?
Now what happens to this method if used in a hybrid? Where does scope fall within the triangle? Would that depend on the type of project or is there a default in how that is considered with the triangle of constraints?
It helps to bound the potential for scope creep by ensuring alignment & shared understanding of the project vision, developing a product roadmap, developing a story map so there's line of sight into alignment between themes, epics & stories and using acceptance criteria to bound the scope of development/test efforts.
Correct. The backlog remains flexible and whatever is in the backlog represents the scope, within the parameters of agreed value. So lower priority (value) items remain on the backlog but might never make it into the provided solution. It does, however, have its own challenges. Traditional contractual obligations being one of them.
Where would agile be most found? IT applications?
Now what happens to this method if used in a hybrid? Where does scope fall within the triangle? Would that depend on the type of project or is there a default in how that is considered with the triangle of constraints?
...
1 reply by Anton Oosthuizen
Jun 05, 2018 2:25 PM
Anton Oosthuizen
...
While the Agile principles were drafted with development in mind agility can be implemented in any project that lends itself towards flexibility. I've worked on many large complex construction projects where a hybrid approach works best. Typically subprojects that relate to systems are managed using the adaptive approach while the actual construction remains predictive. To complicate it even further we would follow a hybrid approach on some subprojects too i.e. the development would be agile while the implementation remains predictive. In these cases the adaptive triangle would apply i.e. the scope would be dictated by value. BTW I do not believe there is a default or standard approach to these situations, the approach being dictated by what will actually work best.
Saving Changes...
Anton OosthuizenSenior Business Analyst / Project Manager| Self EmployedPretoria, Gauteng, South Africa
Jun 05, 2018 2:13 PM
Replying to Michael Brian
...
Where would agile be most found? IT applications?
Now what happens to this method if used in a hybrid? Where does scope fall within the triangle? Would that depend on the type of project or is there a default in how that is considered with the triangle of constraints?
While the Agile principles were drafted with development in mind agility can be implemented in any project that lends itself towards flexibility. I've worked on many large complex construction projects where a hybrid approach works best. Typically subprojects that relate to systems are managed using the adaptive approach while the actual construction remains predictive. To complicate it even further we would follow a hybrid approach on some subprojects too i.e. the development would be agile while the implementation remains predictive. In these cases the adaptive triangle would apply i.e. the scope would be dictated by value. BTW I do not believe there is a default or standard approach to these situations, the approach being dictated by what will actually work best. Saving Changes...
Got it! Thank you for the example - Definitely expanded my thinking on how it can be used on sub-projects in support of the overall project.
Going even further with your construction example - What part of a construction project would you use a predictive approach and what would be a subproject example to where agile would be used along with that? Hopefully that question makes sense. Saving Changes...
I think this valuable conversation should be blogged .. Saving Changes...
Sergio Luis ConteHelping to create solutions for everyone| Worldwide based OrganizationsBuenos Aires, Argentina
First, Agile is a practice. You can apply Agile with waterfall life cycles. Is nothing related to fix the scope or something like that. Second, is not true that you can make what you wish with scope in Agile based methods. Change management process is still in place. Is a big missunderstanding that you can put changes when you want. Unfortunatelly "embrace change" has been missunderstanding for lot of people. So, there is nothing new behind the sun. When you use Agile based methods you have a change management process defined into them in implicit or explicit way.
...
1 reply by Anton Oosthuizen
Jun 06, 2018 9:21 AM
Anton Oosthuizen
...
If we spend more time doing and less time concentrating on the terminology we'll get a lot done. Being agile/adaptive means that you have the ability to adapt to change, and that change includes scope. Correct that other management disciplines like change, communication and stakeholder management does not disappear, and nobody said anything close to that. Common sense dictates that you need to manage change if you want to control it.
But the days where I give you 5 apples for $5 just because you said so is no more. I will identify WHY you need the apples and then provide you with a solution to answer that WHY within the $5 constraint. But because I am agile I realize that your needs might change while the apples are growing so I might change the one apple for 2 pears which means that 2 apples will become a low priority and outside the scope for now.
So YES agility has got a LOT to do with the scope, to name just one. Oh and adaptive scheduling is like you say a repetitive waterfall without the initiation and closing phases.
