In my previous blog about Scrumban I shed some light on this interesting yet not so popular approach. Considering the currently very dynamic market I feel that a flexible approach and focus on constraints and goals while preventing downtime when waiting for more work is super important. In this article I would like to share my perspective on when Scrumban can be considered as a best fit for a project and how it can support project management daily activities.

When to consider Scrumban 

As a project manager when I’m starting a project I would like to be able to choose management methodology and a suitable framework – sounds familiar? Yes! Sounds like a user story… Story often heard in project life. But wait a second…. Even if I have my favorite project approach and everyone agrees for me to choose it should I choose the same methodology, and framework related to it, to every project I encounter? Certainly NOT! This is one of the common mistakes I see on the market – and I’m blaming here myself as well as I learned my lessons and this article is to help you to learn on my not your mistakes… 

There is no universal solution for every disease, just as there is no single way that’s always the best choice for every project. I’ve witnessed many successful applications of Agile, Lean, and Waterfall methodologies, which have convinced me that no one-size-fits-all tool exists. If you’re uncertain about which methodology or framework to use, seeking advice is always a wise approach. After brainstorming with experienced colleagues, you can feel more confident that you’ve made the right decision. 

Project management methodologies serve as essential guidelines for project managers and team leaders, helping ensure successful execution. When combined with frameworks, they provide structured processes and tools to aid in planning, execution, and project oversight. Choosing the right methodology and framework tailored to your project’s specific needs significantly enhances your chances of success. 

When selecting a framework, keep the following considerations in mind: 

1. Budget - assess how much funding is available for the project. Some frameworks may require more resources for tools, training, or specialized personnel. Choose a methodology that aligns with your financial constraints without compromising the quality of deliverables. 
2. Timeline - consider the project’s deadlines and delivery dates. Methodologies like Waterfall are more rigid and work well for projects with fixed timelines, whereas Agile might suit projects that need flexibility. 
3. Risk Factors and Stability of Requirements - Analyze how much uncertainty or potential change exists in your project. For high-risk or rapidly changing environments, Agile or Lean methodologies provide the flexibility to adapt, whereas more stable projects with predictable outcomes and well-designed backlog might benefit from Waterfall. 
4. Constraints - Identify any project limitations, including resources, team capacity, or technical constraints. Some frameworks require more frequent feedback loops or specialized team structures, so you’ll need to choose one that works within the available parameters. 
5. Backlog and Complexity - Evaluate your team’s ability to engage in detailed planning and forecasting. Frameworks like Scrum require ongoing estimation and backlog refinement, while Kanban emphasizes continuous flow and typically involves less up-front planning. In contrast, Waterfall demands thorough planning and long-term estimations early in the project. 
6. Size of the Project - Take into account the scale of the project. For larger projects that require detailed up-front planning and rigorous risk management, Waterfall may be the most suitable choice. In mid-size or large, more dynamic environments, Agile could be a better fit due to its flexibility. However, Waterfall and Lean methodologies can also be effectively applied to smaller projects, depending on the specific needs and constraints. 
7. Communication and Collaboration - Evaluate the level of communication and collaboration you expect in your project. Agile frameworks emphasize regular interaction, team feedback, and stakeholder engagement. On the other hand, methodologies like Waterfall may be more appropriate for projects where communication can be structured and periodic. 

After reading all of these points where do you think we can consider Scrumban? In my personal view this “framework”, while carefully adapted and tweaked a little can be a wonderful waterfall alternative. Whenever the team you are a part of feels that waterfall is not the answer it may fit as a great replacement.

Why IMO Scrumban is a great alternative to Waterfall 

Scrumban can be a great alternative when a team is considering Waterfall for project management, especially in scenarios where some flexibility is needed without abandoning structure altogether. Here’s why: 

1. Adaptability to Change - While Waterfall follows a linear, sequential approach, Scrumban offers flexibility in dealing with evolving project requirements. If a project is expected to have changing priorities or uncertainties, Scrumban allows teams to adjust and reprioritize work on the fly, without the rigidity of Waterfall. 
2. Continuous Delivery - Waterfall typically delivers the final product only at the end of the project, which can be risky if unforeseen issues arise late in the process. Scrumban, on the other hand, encourages continuous delivery through iterative progress, providing value to stakeholders regularly, minimizing risks, and allowing early feedback. 
3. Better Flow of Work - Waterfall requires detailed up-front planning, which can sometimes lead to bottlenecks later on if things don’t go as expected. Scrumban’s Kanban-style visual boards help teams visualize the workflow and ensure a smoother process by managing work-in-progress limits and identifying bottlenecks early. 
4. Risk Management - Scrumban offers a better balance of risk management than Waterfall, which is often front-loaded with long planning phases. With Scrumban, risks can be identified and mitigated continuously throughout the project, making it easier to adapt as challenges emerge. 
5. Improved Team Collaboration - Waterfall tends to silo teams into distinct phases, such as planning, design, and development. Scrumban encourages ongoing collaboration with daily standups, regular reviews, and feedback loops, fostering stronger teamwork and collective ownership of the project. 
6. Hybrid Approach - If a team is attracted to Waterfall because of its structured approach, Scrumban still offers some of that structure with its Scrum elements (sprints, retrospectives) but with the added flexibility of Kanban for managing unpredictable work, allowing teams to keep the best of both worlds. 
7. Handling Uncertainty - Waterfall requires clear, well-defined requirements upfront, which isn’t always possible in dynamic projects. Scrumban is more suited for projects where uncertainty exists, as it allows continuous prioritization and improvement over time. 

By combining the predictability of Waterfall with the flexibility of Agile, Scrumban can deliver a more adaptive and sustainable approach, making it ideal when a team requires both structure and responsiveness. 

In fixed-price projects, it’s essential to maintain a constant focus on the bigger picture, identifying dependencies, the critical path, and key milestones. You also need to be aware of potential risks and be prepared to address them. While Scrumban offers flexibility, it’s not a one-size-fits-all solution. It’s important to keep project goals and constraints in mind. Flexibility must be managed carefully, so the team clearly understands what minor changes can still be considered within scope, and which ones should trigger a change request. 

When using Scrumban to build a digital product with limited time and budget, thorough planning is crucial. You must double-check your partner’s or client’s needs through a series of meetings and workshops to ensure alignment. Some might disagree, but I would hesitate to use pure Scrum for a fixed-price, limited-timeline project. Scrum is fantastic for building a product where the backlog evolves over time. Its recurring ceremonies, defined roles, and structured approach are perfect for such scenarios. However, Scrum, like Scrumban, isn’t suitable for every project. 

In fact, I would go a step further and refer to the hybrid approach mentioned here as “Scrumbanfall” ;)  It balances the structured approach of Waterfall with the flexibility of Scrumban, making it ideal for certain projects. 

Adjusting Scrumban to Align with Project Management Best Practices 

To ensure that Scrumban aligns with widely accepted project management best practices, certain adjustments can be made. These modifications will help strike a balance between flexibility and structure, ensuring smooth planning, execution, and control of your project while retaining adaptability. 

1. Initiating the Project: 

In the initial phase of the project, it’s crucial to define project goals, identify stakeholders, and establish the project scope. Scrumban can support this by creating a high-level backlog that outlines the primary objectives and deliverables. Using a visual board (Kanban), teams can prioritize tasks and engage stakeholders early on to align on expectations and overall project direction. 

2. Planning the Project: 

Although Scrumban emphasizes flexibility, planning is key to setting the project up for success. This can be done by refining the backlog, estimating tasks, and identifying project risks. It’s essential to establish work-in-progress (WIP) limits based on team capacity, and to define key milestones. While Scrumban encourages “just-in-time” planning, the project team should still create a comprehensive roadmap that includes scope, schedule in iterations, and cost baselines to guide the project and track progress effectively. 

3. Executing the Project: 

During execution, Scrumban’s continuous workflow ensures that work items are actively monitored and delivered. Regular team check-ins, such as daily stand-ups, provide transparency and keep everyone aligned on task progress and potential blockers. Effective offline communication should always be ongoing, and any impediments or blockers must be raised as soon as they arise to prevent delays. Additionally, regular demo sessions and retrospective meetings should be conducted to ensure alignment with the project vision and continuously improve team performance and product quality. Scrumban’s visual board helps the team stay on track while promoting collaboration and continuous improvement throughout the project lifecycle. 

4. Monitoring and Controlling the Project: 

Project performance can be measured by tracking key metrics like cycle time, lead time, and throughput. Scrumban’s workflow allows for real-time monitoring, and regular retrospectives ensure any necessary adjustments are made to the backlog or processes. It’s important to manage changes efficiently by applying change control practices to handle scope adjustments and to continuously monitor risks and project progress against predefined baselines. 

5. Closing the Project: 

Although Scrumban encourages continuous delivery, project closure requires a more formal process. This includes conducting a final review / demo and retrospective to assess outcomes, ensuring deliverables are formally accepted, and documenting lessons learned for future initiatives. It’s also important to ensure that all contracts or agreements are closed and that the project is properly handed over to stakeholders. 

6. Key Areas of Focus and Scrumban Adjustments: 

Managing Scope: 
Scrumban allows for flexible scope management through its adaptable backlog. However, to avoid scope creep, teams should define the scope early and ensure that any changes are managed through a formal process. This ensures that the project stays aligned with its objectives. 

Managing Schedule: 
With Scrumban’s flow-based model, scheduling is managed by monitoring cycle time and throughput. However, it’s important to establish milestones and deadlines to ensure timely delivery. Regularly updating the backlog and managing the team’s capacity helps keep the project on schedule. 

Managing Costs: 
Cost control is critical, especially in fixed-budget projects. In Scrumban, this can be achieved by continuously monitoring resource allocation and ensuring WIP limits are adhered to, preventing overuse of resources. Keeping a close watch on team capacity and delivery efficiency helps avoid budget overruns. 

By making these adjustments, Scrumban can be aligned with broader project management best practices, ensuring that flexibility does not come at the cost of structure and control. This hybrid approach allows teams to respond to changes while still adhering to the key principles of project success: clear goals, structured planning, and continuous monitoring. 

Summary: 

Hope this article brought some fresh perspective on how you can approach fixed-price and time-constrained projects. “Scrumbanfall”, blending the structure of Waterfall with the flexibility of Scrumban, offers the best of both worlds, allowing for thorough planning while still adapting to changes. It ensures that you maintain control over key milestones and deliverables while fostering a continuous feedback loop for improvement. By embracing this hybrid approach, you can better manage risks, accommodate evolving requirements, and deliver value incrementally. It’s an approach worth considering for teams looking for both structure and agility. 

 

Ready to master PMO processes? Book a consultation with us today and ensure your projects are delivered on time and within budget!