Scope Change in SCRUM Projects

One approach that has been seen over recent times, especially in the fast-paced world of software development, is the agile concept. From where the scrum approach arises. As more organizations implement SCRUM, relevant emergent questions are, how effective is scrum in dealing with project scope compared to traditional approaches? This paper aims to find the nature of scope change in SCRUM projects in response to the perception that such projects may experience various changes in scope.

Due to the nature of SCRUM that is, it is a flexible process with iterations, certainly, both the pros and the cons of scope management exist, here is the focus of this managing method of dealing with scope changes in SCRUM projects.

The purpose of this report is to help the project management understand the link between SCRUM methodology and scope changes in the process of the current project by performing a literature review of the recent academic literature on the subject. The conclusion made will be most useful for the companies including Holmes Software Technologies that have started to shift to SCRUM for large-scale projects like ERP solutions.

This paper will discuss the compatibility of SCRUM with scope management practices, tutorial questions on practicing scope management in an agile context, and best practices that successful organizations use to overcome those challenges. Based on research findings and practical recommendations of other scientists and practitioners, this paper intends to present a comprehensive view of scope fluctuations in SCRUM projects and be beneficial for the heads/decision-makers and PMs/teams in the sphere of software development.

Literature Review

Agile and SCRUM Fundamentals

Hopefully, this paper will help its readers understand why over the last two decades SCRUM and other agile methodologies are such a phenomenon in the software production industry. Based on the literature, Ozkan & Gok (2022) present an operational synthesis for the concept of agility in software development, pointing out flexibility, customer collaboration, and iterative advancement. Their paper elaborates on how agile processes, especially SCRUM, are intended to address change and not the other way around (Ozkan & Gok, 2022, p27(2)).

Figure 1 Process of scrum fundamental

(Source: Scrum, 2024)

Of all the specific frameworks recognized under the general category of agile methodologies, SCRUM is focused on the sprint structure, autonomous teams, and user engagement continuously. The authors Islam & Ferworn in the paper titled, ‘Comparative analysis of Agile SD versus Traditional SD Technique for I.V.’ map SCRUM with heightened capability to handle requirements alterations than usual waterfall style. They noted that due to its cyclic approach, SCRUM always revisits the project’s goals and it can be either beneficial or disadvantageous (Islam & Ferworn, 2020, p8(2)).

Figure 2 Process of Agile

(Source: Amoros, 2022)

Basically, according to these researchers, a clear definition of the practice of work environment is reflected in the principles of the SCRUM that establishes the background for perceiving scope changes. Comparatively with other frameworks that want to lock the date at the beginning of the project cycle, SCRUM takes into consideration the dynamism experienced in business contexts and users. This acknowledgment is inherent in SCRUM processes including sprint planning, daily stand-up and sprint review, and retrospective meetings which are a constant scope of formative sessions.

For a more detailed insight into the organizational dynamics that arise around the implementation of Agile methodologies such as SCRUM, Annosi et al. (2020). SCRUM research covers the dynamics of organizational routines during their evolution in the context of agile environment indicating the change in organizational culture and perceptions required by the adoption of SCRUM. This change also includes the scope that is no longer a well-defined and well-provided object but becomes a continuously developing aspect of the project (Annosi et al., 2020, p555(2)).

Scope Change in Agile Project

This is especially true and evident regarding the nature and frequency of scope changes in agile projects, especially projects employing the SCRUM approach that is discussed in the present literature. In their work, Marzi (2022) discusses another issue similar to the current topic of ‘Over Featuring’ concerning new product development. According to the study, it is likely that agile processes such as SCRUM are more susceptible to feature creep due to their nature of iteration and high customer interaction. It has also led to dual feedback loops, again, a concept that enhances the capacity to complete current work before taking on more, because of the focus on customer value (Marzi, 2022, p2(4)).

Figure 3 Change management process for Agile

(Source: Kranzen, 2024)

However, these changes are often not seen as a problem because the chances of scope changes are slightly higher in the case of ID definition. A systematic review made by Sandstø & Reme-Ness (2021), shows that the ability to manage changing requirements as provided by agile practices can lead to increased customer satisfaction and more relevant products at the end of the project. According to their findings, it proves that even though projects implemented applying the SCRUM approach seem to be more prone to changes in the scope, such changes affect their performance positively. According to the authors, project flexibility, in this case, can enable projects to continue meeting changing market requirements and customers’ demands, possibly enhancing the total value accruing to the project (Sandstø & Reme-Ness, 2021, p256(5)).

Kasauli et al. (2021) extend this paper to explain requirements engineering challenges in large-scale agile system development. Their work demonstrates that the use of the SCRUM system of requirements gathering and their evolution throughout the project can mean more changes to the scope of the project than in analogous non-AGILE procedures. The authors outline how Requirement Management Techniques can be applied in an environment that applies SCRUM to manage scope fluctuations in a meaningful manner (Kasauli et al., 2021, p2(3)).

For more information on the effects of agile management on project performance especially in the IT sector, refer to Muhammad et al. (2021). Their research indicated that the prospect of managing changes in scope in SCRUM projects may result in better project results, especially in customer or end-product satisfaction.

Challenges in Scope Management

While the flexibility SCRUM has to handle change in scope can be strategic it also poses certain risks. Annosi et al. (2020) following a review of the literature, describe how flexibility of activity patterns characterizes the change when the scope of work evolves in agile environments. They agree with their colleagues that much stronger organizational learning capabilities are required to support this form of adaptation. The authors posit that without such mechanisms in place then the team could feel unable to hold the project together, especially in terms of the scope of work planned by the team (Annosi et al., 2020, p555(2)).

Kumar and Sharma (2020) give information on the problems of APMS, which became a big issue during the COVID-19 crisis. Their work shows how environmental influences further complicate scope management challenges, forcing it to be even more responsive for an agile team. The study also stresses the role of several principles in SCRUM teams, vulnerability, and adaptability being some of the most important aspects when the teams are challenged by unforeseen circumstances that directly affect the size and goals of a project (Sharma et al., 2022, p462(2)).

According to Kohnová & Salajová (2021), one of the many evident issues is the relationship that is evidenced between customers and agile teams. In SCRUM ideology, one of the major principles is customer collaboration; however, then customer involvement may result in scope changes. To these writers, scope control need not be overbearing but it requires specific boundary definition and communication channels whenever a work is developed in response to another piece of work. All of them advise that organizing customers’ feedback and requests may cause the team to lose sight of the initial project goals and objectives, thus threatening its performance and possibly jeopardizing the project's completion within the expected time and costs.

Strategies for Effective Scope Management

When working on SCRUM projects, the following useful practices have been distinguished by researchers. Agile management is explored by Muhammad et al. (2021) on the extent of its effect on project performance, with top practices about scope management. Among them are the daily backlog grooming, prioritization, and all communications to the stakeholders. The authors also highlight the need for proper and efficient, effective product backlog management and maintenance (Muhammad et al., 2021, p7(3)).

Lindskog & Netz (2021) state that it is possible to control such changes by using timeboxing and engaging the stakeholders continuously; finally, retrospectives can also be used. They suggest that these practices enable the development of the structure within which change can be introduced without distorting the general project goals and objectives. The authors also focus on the criteria for the scope changes where it is stated that no changes should be made until they are shown to add that much value to a project (Lindskog & Netz, 2021, p1530(3)).

Specifically, requirements management in large-scale agile projects affects scope management as Kasauli et al. (2021) suggest the following strategies: These are feature-based development, extending requirements engineering throughout the project life cycle, and tight integration of requirements management tools with the agile project management solution. The authors state that both of these approaches afford teams the ability to keep the right perspective on what constitutes a project while at the same time providing the necessary leeway to incorporate new and relevant portions where necessary (Kasauli et al., 2021, p2(3)).

Both Ozkan & Gok, in their 2022 paper, reveal the need to embrace a broader perspective of agility within software development, including the scope management framework. To the same extent, scope management in SCRUM workflow can be applied only provided that certain practices are observed alongside with cultivation of the overall mentality within the organization that supports the SCRUM strategy. This includes living the organization’s tolerance for change where he or she lives the organization’s policy of receiving change with open arms or enthusiasm, rather than the frustration that is often brought across when changes are made in the scope of a project (Ozkan & Gok, 2022, p27(2)).

Discussion

In light of the findings of this paper, several questions can be answered based on the existing literature about scope changes in SCRUM projects. To begin with, it can be mentioned that hence mentioned SCRUM projects are confronted with a higher frequency of scope changes compared to the projects that are managed with traditional methodologies. However, this causes the change in a project to be more elastic, although it can be a vestige of the SCRUM approach.

AGILE through its framework of operation in SCRUM provides an environment that is prone to natural scope refinement due to operations being benchmarked in short sprints and usually followed by a review. This makes it possible for the project to be on track with current business and opportunities and additionally, user needs that can to a great extent contribute to better customer satisfaction and more suitable products to be developed in the end. As Sandstø & Reme-Ness have a more favorable outlook on the situation as they believe that flexibility in accommodating changes in scope results in increased customer satisfaction and final outputs. To this end, their research gives an empirical base for the idea of showing how flexibility of scope can be of benefit in SCRUM type of projects (Sandstø & Reme-Ness, 2021, p256(5)).

Marzi's exploration of "Featuring" in new product development highlights a significant challenge in SCRUM projects: the tendency towards scope expansion The goal of this paper is not only to identify the main ideas contained in Ijdo and Siddharth’s article but to also explain the solid grasp those two authors have on the subjects of project, program, and portfolio management as well as the tendency towards scope expansion. They note that the SCRUM’s ability is based on an iterative structure where the customers are involved directly in the process, this results in more feature creep. Although Marzi has explored useful learning about the danger of scope creep, downloading a tad too much on the negative without exploring deeper into the positive dimensions of flexibility in scope management (Marzi, 2022, p2(4)).

Kasauli et al. (2021), offer a complex perspective on the problems of requirements engineering in large-scale agile systems. The work is quite relevant to companies such as Holmes Software Technologies as it relates to the issues of scope management in large-scale activities such as ERP system implementation. As to the scope changes, the authors describe the following strategies: feature-based development, and continuous requirements engineering. Even though all these approaches can point out some promising solutions.

Another crucial issue highlighted in the literature is the trade between stakeholders’ engagement and boundary definition. While beneficial for product relevance, the close presence of customers and end-users to software developers also means frequent exposure to new ideas and feature requests. Kohnová & Salajová explored the effects of customer collaboration on agile teams, valuable findings that help to address one of the primary issues of scope management in SCRUM projects. This is particularly relevant, as their theoretical framework primarily insists on strict division of roles and open lines of communication. They must have though possibly provided a more comprehensive analysis of how those boundaries can be preserved without eradicating the very spirit of agile that involves the customers in the development process (Kasauli et al., 2021, p2(3)).

The strategies for effective scope management in SCRUM projects, as identified in the literature, revolve around several key principles: daily backlog review and categorization, clear reporting with all the roles involved, team self-organization, enriching experience and practice in the context of Scrum, and appropriate flexibility and control far from the extremes. I believe these strategies are consistent with SCRUM’s four values and more importantly, they directly solve the issues of scope management.

Conclusion

This study showing the increase or decrease in the project’s scope in SCRUM projects is not that simple, this paper offers a detailed analysis of the changes in its scope. Though it seems that scope changes are much more likely to occur in SCRUM projects as compared to traditional methodologies is true but this is one of the features most commonly accomplished intentionally. SCRUM is more flexible and iterative, which means that the project scope often changes through the phases, thereby overcoming problems of wrong scope definition and with high chances of improving customer satisfaction.

However, the management of scope in SCRUM projects can only be done efficiently and, therefore properly if a fine line is to be tweaked. However, organizations have to understand all the flexibility that SCRUM provides and bring in proper solutions to prevent a project from getting out of hand or focus creep. These strategies are as follows: backlog grooming on a fixed schedule, frequent communication with the stakeholders, and allowing for self-organization to decide on scope changes.

In the case of Holmes Software Technologies adopting the SCRUM for the ERP solution development pros and cons. They might be able to build a more valuable product by following the fluid nature of SCRUM and having considerable control over the scope. However, this strategy will have to encourage a change in organisational culture especially embracing change but at the same time attached to discipline.

Therefore, it can be argued that although SCRUM projects may generally undergo increased levels of scope changes, and under-skilled control, changes should be embraced as an effective strategy for implementing business success, and customer-centric solutions in the highly competitive and rapidly evolving business environments of the current knowledge economy. The essence, therefore, lies within the organizational culture, which should embrace scope changes as positive change agents that help deliver value incrementally.

References

Amoros, J.L. 2022. The Agile Development Process for Mobile Apps. Krasamo. Available at: https://www.krasamo.com/agile-development-process/ [Accessed 3 Oct. 2024].
Annosi, M.C., Martini, A., Brunetta, F. & Marchegiani, L., 2020. They are learning in an agile setting: A multilevel research study on the evolution of organizational routines. Journal of Business Research, 110, pp.554-566. https://library.wur.nl/WebQuery/wurpubs/fulltext/453831
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
Kasauli, R., Knauss, E., Horkoff, J., Liebel, G. & de Oliveira Neto, F.G., 2021. Requirements engineering challenges and practices in large-scale agile system development. Journal of Systems and Software, 172, p.1-26. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0164121220302417
Kohnová, L. & Salajová, N., 2021, November. Agile organization: Introducing self-managed teams. In Management Trends in the Context of Industry 4.0. https://eudl.eu/pdf/10.4108/eai.4-12-2020.2303550
Kranzen, M. 2024. Agile Change Management: Valuable Insights for Project Adaptability. Prosci. Available at: https://www.prosci.com/blog/agile-change-management [Accessed 3 Oct. 2024].
Lindskog, C. & Netz, J., 2021. Balancing between stability and change in Agile teams. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 14(7), pp.1529-1554. https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/IJMPB-12-2020-0366/full/pdf
Marzi, G., 2022. On the nature, origins, and outcomes of over-faturing in the new product development process. Journal of Engineering and technology management, 64, p.1-11. https://arts.units.it/bitstream/11368/3019176/3/Marzi-OVF-RG.pdf
Muhammad, U., Nazir, T., Muhammad, N., Maqsoom, A., Nawab, S., Fatima, S.T., Shafi, K. & Butt, F.S., 2021. Impact of agile management on project performance: Evidence from IT sector of Pakistan. Plos one, 16(4), pp. 1-24. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0249311&type=printable
Ozkan, N. & Gok, M., 2022. Definition synthesis of agility in software development: a comprehensive review of theory to practice. International Journal of Modern Education and Computer Science, 14(3). Pp. 26-44 https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Necmettin-Ozkan/publication/362733413_Definition_Synthesis_of_Agility_in_Software_Development_Comprehensive_Review_of_Theory_to_Practice/links/62fca983ceb9764f72028442/Definition-Synthesis-of-Agility-in-Software-Development-Comprehensive-Review-of-Theory-to-Practice.pdf
Sandstø, R. & Reme-Ness, C., 2021. Agile practices and impacts on project success, Journal of Engineering, Project, and Production Management, 11(3), pp.255-262 https://ntnuopen.ntnu.no/ntnu-xmlui/bitstream/handle/11250/3042913/ID_354_11_3_255_262.pdf?sequence=1
Scrum 2024. What is Scrum? Scrum.org. Available at: https://www.scrum.org/resources/what-scrum-module [Accessed 3 Oct. 2024].
Sharma, M., Luthra, S., Joshi, S. & Joshi, H., 2022. Challenges to agile project management during COVID-19 pandemic: an emerging economy perspective. Operations Management Research, 15(1), pp.461-474. https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s12063-021-00249-1.pdf

The Nature of Scope Change in SCRUM Projects

Table of Contents

Table of Figures

Introduction