HI5029: Project Management in SCRUM Framework

HI5029

IS Project Management

Student ID:

Student Name:

Introduction

From Waterfall to the adoption of Agile frameworks, the ever-changing scene of software development has gradually travelled. Among all the Agile frameworks that are leading, SCRUM is one. In developing its new ERP system, Holmes Software Technologies has chosen the implementation of the SCRUM framework. As much as Agile like SCRUM gives more flexibility and adaptability, it also presents challenges, especially when handling project scope (Akinbaleye, 2021, p34(2)).

In SCRUM projects, frequent changes in the scope are pretty regular due to its iterative methodology. However, it may be tricky to properly manage and control such scope changes, and there exists a fair possibility of scope creep or some other resource management issues. This report presents a deep analysis of scope changes in SCRUM projects and discusses methodologies used to counter these changes by providing effective strategies for keeping control over project scopes.

This report deals with undertaking a critical literature review of the best practices that facilitate scope changes in SCRUM, and major challenges arising within this framework, to address client concerns about scope management. From here, effective scope management strategies apt for a SCRUM-driven environment will be outlined to make sure that project goals remain in line with expectations set by stakeholders (Baxter and Turner, 2023, p1249(3)).

Literature Review

A Comprehensive Review of Agile Methodologies in Project Management

Agile project management frameworks revolutionized software development by offering methodologies that allow for flexibility, responsiveness, and customer satisfaction. SCRUM is one of the leading agile methodologies to assist a project team in the incremental delivery of quality products. Iterative development is at the heart of this framework, enabling progress continuously through Sprints-fixed time-boxed periods that normally last two to four weeks. In each Sprint, certain tasks chosen from the Product Backlog are developed and presented for review to stakeholders (Daraojimba, et al., 2024, p191(2)).

While traditional models like the Waterfall usually had requirements and scope fixed from the outset, Agile, and especially the SCRUM framework, welcomes changeable requirements and enables continuous refinement and adaptation. The ability of SCRUM to adapt makes development teams respond very fast towards variations in the requirements of the users or changes in market conditions, hence increasing customer satisfaction. They also, however, warn that this flexibility adds a layer of complexity to managing the project scope, as the iterative nature of SCRUM may lead to more frequent changes in scope, compared to traditional models.

The authors (Daraojimba, et al., p192(3)) explained that the iterative processes in SCRUM stimulate creativity and adaptability, they can at the same time challenge managers attempting to balance responsiveness with strict control of scope, timeline, and resources. The authors say that to avoid recurring disruptions in unplanned scope expansions, the approach to scope management in effective SCRUM projects must be highly disciplined.

Hybrid Project Management between Traditional Software Development lifecycle & Agile-based.

The SCRUM approach to scope management is diametrically opposite to that of a traditional approach to project management, such as the Waterfall methodology. In the Waterfall methodology, the project scope is defined in a detailed form at the planning stage and largely remains the same during the project life cycle and any deviations commonly require formal change request processes that result in delays. Conversely, in SCRUM, changes in scope are considered normal changes during development. The Product Backlog is the single source of truth for all requirements, current and future. Throughout the project, the refinement of the Product Backlog will be done to have products that match the shifting business objectives and the stakeholder needs.

Within SCRUM project scope management, the Product Owner has an important role through product backlog ownership. This owner is responsible for prioritizing backlog items in order of value to ensure that the most valuable features are done first, and he decides upon what should form the scope of each Sprint. Such circumstances permit the product owner to refine the backlog and make changes to such a list as priorities change (Leong, et al, 2023, p4(4)).

According to the author Leong, et al., p4(6) the other valuable scope management instrument in SCRUM is the use of Sprint Reviews and Sprint Retrospectives. These regular checkpoints allow the avenue for the stakeholders to gauge progress and propose addition of changes, thus allowing continuous feedback and iterative improvement. Although this will allow these practices to drive flexibility, they do present challenges in ensuring changes will not result in scope creep-uncontrolled growth of project scope that will surely undermine project success if not kept under control.

Influence of Scrum Methodologies on Team Cultural Values

According to the authors (Patrucco, Canterino and Minelgaite), Agile project scope management is about Scrum: flexibility, collaboration, and continuous adaptation against a rigidly predefined prospect of the boundaries of the project. Challenges for the adoption of Agile practices from industries other than software also seem to appear because of the wide divergence between traditional organizational cultures and Agile sub-cultures. "The findings point out that Clan and Market-oriented are the prevailing sub-cultures in Agile teams, underlining teamwork, openness, and attainment of results. The above values resonate well with Scrum values such as courage, respect, and transparency, offering a clear environment for trust and continuous improvement. Iterative Scrum allows for this nature so that the scope may evolve through retrospectives and sprints and by stakeholders to maintain alignment with project objectives sans rigid scope fixation. Other operational practices that ensure scope remains flexible and adaptive to emergent needs include retrospective meetings or the definition of certain artefacts. In addition, it further adds to the overall success of Agile projects in more varied industries other than software development (Patrucco, et al., 2022, p3(4)).

Real-world Scrum Theory Variations

According to the authors (Masood, Hoda and Blincoe), Scrum project scope management is usually quite different from the formal guidance in its foundational documents. While Scrum insists on a flexible and iterative approach to managing the scope, this investigation has demonstrated that real cases of Scrum in practice do entail significant variants in core practices like work breakdown, estimation, and prioritization. These are not quite harmful; in fact, they form necessary adaptations in many contexts for a particular team or organizational needs. In this study, the variations in Scrum practices are grouped under four classes: standard, necessary, contextual, and clear deviations. Such subtlety allows making a distinction between useful adaptations and probable misuse or abuse of Scrum. These variations, within the scope management context, reflect the need to tailor Agile methods to meet the peculiar demands of the project, not forgetting core Scrum principles on process flexibility and collaboration with stakeholders. Properly understanding these variations is key to successful Scrum implementation and project scope management (Masood, Hoda and Blincoe, 2020, p2(8)).

Communication Challenges in Agile Teams

According to author Yermolaieva, the communication dynamics within teams will affect the way Agile/Scrum manages the project scope because in Agile methodologies processes are less important than people and interaction, and communication barriers directly relate to scope management. Diversity in cultures, behaviour, and communication styles is often a reason for misunderstandings that affect coordination and scope alignment in projects. In this research paper, 53 respondents were surveyed about the common communication challenges they face while working in an Agile team. These are then mapped to communication theories that indicate how these barriers prevent effective collaboration. From this study, it comes out that if communication issues are not addressed, they may make the Agile projects suffer either from scope creep or misaligned expectations. Managers of Agile teams will find it useful to learn the root causes of ineffective communication and self-apply selected solutions to improve collaboration. Addressing such challenges will empower teams to exploit the flexibility of Agile scope management, yet retain clarity, consistency, and meaningfulness of information exchanges so vital for adaptation to changes throughout the project life cycle (Yermolaieva, 2020, p2(6)).

A Comparison between Agile and Traditional Software Development Methodologies

According to the authors Islam and Ferworn, this research study aimed to compare Agile and traditional methodologies concerning their suitability for project size, software quality, and cost. On the contrary, traditional methodologies have a formal and plan-driven structure, especially in scope management, compared with Agile's incremental approach. The majority preferred Agile in small-scale projects, with over 90% of respondents preferring it for its flexibility in scope management through iterative development. It finds that for medium-scale projects there is a more or less balanced distribution of projects between pure Agile and traditional methodologies, which could suggest that optimal flexibility and structure perhaps lie in some combination. Traditional methodologies rule in the case of large projects since they provide the formal requirements and high-level planning necessary to manage a complex project scope. The results of this study show how Agile methodologies, even while being very adept for relatively small and dynamic projects, get strained by large project scope and complexity where a traditional approach will ensure much better control and predictability (Islam and Ferworn, 2020, p3(8)).

Agile, Waterfall and Iterative Approach in Information Technology Projects

According to this research, the authors Fagarasan, et al. mentioned in this research and consider the effectiveness of Agile methodologies, Scrum and Kanban in particular, as viable alternatives to the waterfall model for managing software projects. Relating the said project to techniques in scope management, Scrum would be underscored as the most predictable and uncomplicated way to make frequent deliveries of software. The iterative framework of Scrum enables continuous adjustment of a project's scope-a necessary element in addressing complex issues and responding to market changes. This research underlines that Scrum is good at handling evolving requirements through project breakdown into manageable sprints, hence increasing the circle of flexibility and adaptability. Kanban, in turn, offers a more flow-based and visual approach but may turn out less predictable when handling large or complex scopes. The paper concludes by stating that Scrum and Kanban are thus appropriate to projects of differing characteristics related to project complexities and predictability. Thus, Scrum would be perfect for projects requiring quality deliverables regularly in a constantly changing environment (Fagarasan, et al., 2021, p2(3)).

A Systematic Literature Review: How Agile is Agile Project Management

According to the authors Behrens, et al., this research identifies how Agile Project Management has evolved to meet the challenges of project management in high-uncertainty projects, especially those caused by disruptive technologies. It emphasizes flexibility, communication, and iteration as important ingredients in coping with changes in project scope. The literature review Development of Agile Project Management (APM) through peer-reviewed articles ranging from 2015 to 2021, dealing with uncertainty via daily reactivity and adaptability, thus becoming the preferred approach in fast-evolving environments. In turn, Scrum-arguably one of the more popular APM frameworks-allows teams to manage scope through regular sprints but more importantly through constant feedback from stakeholders, actually allowing changes in scope when changes or new information in the market are present. The findings indicate that the Agile project scope blooms on permutations and flexibility, hence very effective in managing dynamic and high-uncertainty projects. The study points at APM as iterative, and that feature itself is a critical factor in relevance and responsiveness in fast-moving industries (Behrens, et al., 2021, p279(4)).

Hybrid Model Using Scrum Methodology for Software Development

In this research paper authors Reddy, et al. have mentioned that Agile and SCRUM have evolved as project management methodologies, having emerged from the deficiencies of traditional project management techniques to deliver solutions that properly address the business needs and earned the right to meet the budget and box of time. The Agile/SCRUM framework is all about flexibility and iterative progress that lets a team be more responsive to evolving requirements. SCRUM's emphasis on short development cycles or Sprints-and the dynamic list of requirements, called the Product Backlog, enables constant adjustments in project scope, which are necessary to tackle those aspects most important first. In any case, Agile methods do not exclude potential problems in managing the scope since continuous changes can lead to scope creep or be driven by stakeholders. It "proposes a hybrid Agile-scope statement approach that leverages the best of both worlds, integrated by leveraging the strengths of one methodology to address the weaknesses of the other". Based on the concept in the article, such a model offers a balanced approach that considers these industries where things like adaptability and structured scope control are imperative (Reddy, et al., 2021, p3(6)).

Improving the Performance of Student Teams in Project-based Learning with Scrum

According to the authors Fernandes, Dinis-Carvalho and Ferreira-Oliveira, the agile/SCRUM methodologies hold quite strong potential in managing projects and scope effectively through their implementations in Higher Education Project-Based Learning teams. With Scrum's systematic process for task assignment and performance monitoring, regular feedback allows for sustaining momentum in the project and clarity about how individual tasks link to the overall goals of the project. Scrum boards support well-defined scope and progress toward the goal, thus enabling teams to easily to adapt changes without losing their focus. In guiding the team through challenges in the management of scope, however, the roles of the Scrum Master and Product Owner become very important. These roles ensure that the project stays within a defined scope while enabling iterative improvements. These findings support that Scrum adds value to team performance and project outcomes, mainly through task focus and adaptability, even in academic projects with their typically complex scoping process (Fernandes, Dinis-Carvalho and Ferreira-Oliveira, 2021, p2(2)).

Discussion

The above literature on Scrum and agile projects reveals some scope management advantages and challenges. Among the most striking advantages inherent in scrum relates to the fact that this is an iterative and adaptive approach, providing the team with the ability to flexibly respond to changes to ensure the final product meets the users' current needs. Such adaptability is of critical importance in those environments where project requirements have the potential to frequently change due to changing market conditions, user feedback, or technological advances. By incorporating feedback loops through Sprint Reviews and Retrospectives, scrum cultivates a culture of continuous improvement where changes in scope are done incrementally and in concert (Grass, Backmann and Hoegl 2020, p325(3)).

While this flexibility provides leeway for scope creep, it is a change in the addition of new features without minding the resources, timeline, or impact on the overall goals of such projects. Scope creep can stretch project resources to a point where the timelines will be delayed or even the deliverables incomplete, and this ultimately affects the quality of the final product. Therefore, even though the iterative process of scrum includes frequent scope adjustments, such adjustments have to be managed carefully to avoid scope expansion on the uncontrolled side of things (Alami and Krancher 2022, p27(2)).

Conclusion

In essence, the iterative and adaptive nature of SCRUM and AGILE provides substantial benefits as a project management methodology for scope shifts, particularly where the dynamically changing environment changes the requirements. SCRUM allows flexibility of teams in responding to the changing needs on the part of stakeholders through continuous product refinement via short development sprints. However, this same adaptability opens roles to certain challenges, mainly those about scope creep, misaligned priorities, and resource strain. The Literature review underlines that effective leadership by the Product Owner is required for backlog management, prioritization of work, and keeping the team focused on the delivery of high-value features. Besides that, frequent stakeholder involvement has to be maintained to tune project objectives with stakeholder expectations and avoid miscommunication. This would let SCRUM projects stay on track and deliver the product to meet stakeholder expectations without compromising on quality and efficiency.

References

1. Akinbaleye, K.O. 2021. Agile Methodology Implementation Toward Project Delivery and Employee Performance in the Workplace: S Qualitative Study. Northcentral University, https://search.proquest.com/openview/ef7e3b745f8213b39ef6850334221884/1.pdf?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=y

2. Alami, A. & Krancher, O. 2022. How Scrum add value to achieving software quality? Empirical Software Engineering, 27(7), p.165, https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10664-022-10208-4

3. Baxter, D. & Turner, N. 2023. Why Scrum works in new product development: the role of social capital in managing complexity. Production Planning & Control, 34(13), pp.1248-1260, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/09537287.2021.1997291

4. Behrens, A., Ofori, M., Noteboom, C. & Bishop, D. 2021. A systematic literature review: how agile is agile project management? Issues in Information Systems, 22(3), https://iacis.org/iis/2021/bk/3_iis_2021_298-316.pdf

5. Daraojimba, E.C., Nwasike, C.N., Adegbite, A.O., Ezeigweneme, C.A. & Gidiagba, J.O. 2024. A comprehensive review of agile methodologies in project management. Computer Science & IT Research Journal, 5(1), pp.190-218, https://fepbl.com/index.php/csitrj/article/view/717/905

6. Fagarasan, C., Popa, O., Pisla, A. & Cristea, C. 2021, August. Agile, waterfall and iterative approach in information technology projects. In IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, Vol. 1169, No. 1, p. 012025, IOP Publishing, https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1757-899X/1169/1/012025/pdf

7. Fernandes, S., Dinis-Carvalho, J. & Ferreira-Oliveira, A.T. 2021. Improving the performance of student teams in project-based learning with scrum. Education sciences, 11(8), p.444, https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7102/11/8/444

8. Grass, A., Backmann, J. & Hoegl, M. 2020. From empowerment dynamics to team adaptability: Exploring and conceptualizing the continuous agile team innovation process. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 37(4), pp.324-351, https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdfdirect/10.1111/jpim.12525

9. Islam, A.K.M.Z. & Ferworn, A. 2020. A Comparison between agile and traditional software development methodologies. Global Journal of Computer Science and Technology, 20(2), pp.7-42, https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/539593566.pdf

10. Leong, J., May Yee, K., Baitsegi, O., Palanisamy, L. & Ramasamy, R.K. 2023. Hybrid project management between traditional software development lifecycle and agile based product development for future sustainability. Sustainability, 15(2), p.1121, https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/2/1121

11. Masood, Z., Hoda, R. & Blincoe, K. 2020. Real world scrum a grounded theory of variations in practice. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 48(5), pp.1579-1591, https://arxiv.org/pdf/2103.15268

12. Patrucco, A.S., Canterino, F. & Minelgaite, I. 2022. How do scrum methodologies influence the team's cultural values? A multiple case study on agile teams in non-software industries. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 69(6), pp.3503-3513, https://re.public.polimi.it/bitstream/11311/1207366/2/2022_IEEE.pdf

13. Reddy, P.C., Nachiyappan, S., Ramakrishna, V., Senthil, R. & Anwer, M.S. 2021. Hybrid model using scrum methodology for software development system. J Nucl Ene Sci Power Generat Techno, 10(9), p.2, https://www.researchgate.net/profile/P-Chandrashaker-Reddy/publication/355986623_Hybrid_Model_Using_Scrum_Methodology_for_Softwar_Development_System/links/6189295a07be5f31b758f2cb/Hybrid-Model-Using-Scrum-Methodology-for-Softwar-Development-System.pdf

14. Yermolaieva, S. 2020. Communication Challenges in Agile Teams from The Communication Theory Prospective. In Proceedings of the 2020 European Symposium on Software Engineering, pp. 88-95, https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Sofiia-Yermolaieva/publication/347814701_Communication_Challenges_in_Agile_Teams_from_The_Communication_Theory_Prospective/links/6085059e881fa114b4277ee2/Communication-Challenges-in-Agile-Teams-from-The-Communication-Theory-Prospective.pdf