How do you compare scrum and kanban software engineering methods?

As with everything, there are principles to Scrum. The basics, the bare necessities. Follow them, pragmatically, understanding when forcing a one form ceremony is just not the best course of action. The ceremonies themselves have outcomes, and those outcomes can be obtained through small variances to the traditional basics as long as they serve the end optimisation. Keep it tight, keep it sharp, Scrum works best when it serves the team, and not the team serving the framework

Scrum and Kanban are Agile methodologies prioritizing iterative development, continuous improvement, and flexibility. Scrum is structured with fixed-length iterations, defined roles, and ceremonies. Kanban is flexible, focusing on visualizing work, limiting WIP, and optimizing flow. The choice depends on the project goals. Scrum offers structure, collaboration, and effective requirement management. Kanban provides flexibility, continuous delivery, and workflow optimization. Experimenting and adapting methodologies is crucial based on the team's context and objectives. Choose Scrum for changing requirements and Kanban for continuous delivery and workflow focus. Find the best fit for success.

Comparisons are unwarranted when discussing Kanban. It isn't a framework to be imposed but a strategy enabling perpetual improvement. The Kanban strategy is versatile, adaptable even within a Scrum framework. Its core philosophy revolves around surfacing issues and diligently addressing them, embodying progression rather than radical alteration. Regardless of one's current position, implementing Kanban principles is feasible, making it distinct from predefined agile frameworks. Even established, conventional teams can assimilate Kanban practices, appreciating its efficacy as a management strategy. By doing so, organizations pinpoint bottlenecks and constraints, initiating a journey of continuous enhancement and growth.

Kanban is a project management method that helps visualize tasks, while Scrum is a method that provides structure to the team and schedule. Kanban and Scrum are project management methodologies that complete project tasks in small increments and emphasize continuous improvement.

Scrum, a framework for software development, utilizes short sprints, typically one to four weeks, with defined goals and committed tasks. The team is self-organized and cross-functional, with roles like the product owner, scrum master, and developers. Regular meetings like the daily stand-up, sprint review, and sprint retrospective facilitate communication, collaboration, and continuous improvement.

Kanban fits well into organisations that are used to operating in a waterfall model - it supports the managing of tasks in a visually more clear flow and can be used to show progress and status on remaining tasks giving an idea about the progress and throughput. It’s also a method that can easily be used across different disciplines in an organization ( hardware, mechanics and software alike) and is not limited to handling small task increments like for example scrum does. Tools like Jira is excellent for Kanban task management.

Kanban's visualization of the development process is more than just a board, it's a powerful tool for transparency and efficiency. To enhance its effectiveness, consider incorporating color-coding for work items based on priority or complexity, providing a quick visual reference for the team. Beyond the typical stages, adapt the board to fit your project's specific needs—whether it's a complex algorithm development or a creative content generation process. While Kanban promotes flexibility, consider introducing regular "reflection sessions" to discuss process improvements and innovative ideas collaboratively. So, embrace Kanban's flexibility as a canvas for creativity and innovation, extending its benefits to a broader spectrum of projects.

Kanban visualizes software development as a flow on a board with columns representing stages (e.g., to-do, in progress, done). Work items have priorities and stage limits. It's a flexible, continuous method without fixed iterations or roles. Teams monitor the board, cycle time, and throughput to spot and eliminate bottlenecks, waste, and variability.

Kanban is all about the visualizing our current workflow of the value stream . Using a pull-based system in which work items can come to the flow only when there is a free capacity for that work item is another benefits of this method.

Kanban, often hailed for its simplicity and adaptability, can sometimes inadvertently encourage a lack of structure. The absence of fixed iterations and roles might seem flexible, but it can lead to a sense of complacency and a lack of urgency. Without defined timeboxes, teams may struggle to maintain a sense of momentum and pressure to meet deadlines. In my experience navigating Kanban as a method, the emphasis on continuous flow can sometimes overshadow the need for strategic planning and larger goals. Teams might get caught up in managing the immediate flow of work items without aligning them with the bigger picture.

Beyond customer satisfaction, Scrum can also enhance stakeholder engagement, involving them more closely in the development process, which can lead to more informed decision-making and a sense of ownership. The self-organizing aspect not only boosts motivation but can also uncover hidden talents and leadership skills within the team. When it comes to quality, Scrum's iterative approach encourages a culture of continuous improvement and creativity, where even small innovations can accumulate over time to make a significant impact. Moreover, reducing risk isn't just about adaptability but also about fostering a culture of transparency and accountability, which can be a powerful driver for success.

Scrum is a kind of goal-oriented framework.The most significant part of this framework is to have goals like Sprint Goal and the Product Goal. These two objectives which are outcomes of a Scrum Team make a big different between this framework and others. Having a cross-functional team in which people can produce an increment every sprint without helping outside is another suggested point in this framework.

With scrum approach, I feel that the role of the product owner is quite a bit key, considering the fact that at the end of the day, they're charged with engaging with the client in order to decipher what exactly is needed in the end result, and at the same moment, engaging with the dev team, scrum master, etc in order to ensure that the code is solid. Obviously, QA must play nice in the process as well. Fact is, it's a complex dance between people who require proper marketing from a UI standpoint and from a financial standpoint, and from a client satisfaction standpoint, and also need to collect very exact and relevant data. There's nothing simple about it, but there are people who are very good at it!

While Scrum promises customer satisfaction through frequent iterations, this can inadvertently result in 'feature bloat.' The pressure to deliver customer value in each sprint might push teams to prioritize quantity over quality, leading to a bloated product with unnecessary features. In my experience, the emphasis on team self-organization can sometimes backfire. It might lead to power struggles or decisions based on popularity rather than expertise. A self-organized team requires a level of maturity and guidance that can be difficult to achieve. In some cases, a more balanced approach that combines autonomy with structured guidance could yield better results.

Kanban undoubtedly brings a host of advantages to software projects. In addition to boosting efficiency and flexibility, it instills a culture of waste reduction, streamlining workflows. The enhanced transparency and visibility provided by Kanban ensure that everyone stays informed about project status and progress. Moreover, it serves as a powerful tool for promoting continuous improvement and learning, as it facilitates performance measurement and process analysis. With Kanban, software engineering projects gain the agility and insights needed to excel in a dynamic landscape, fostering a culture of efficiency and innovation.

Kanban tries to create a kind of balance through three things. The first one is effectiveness by producing a valuable product for the customer. The second one is efficency by using our resources more efficent. The last one is about predictability by using historical data.

O método Kanban, enquanto instrumento evolutivo, traz ótimos benefícios para projetos de engenharia de software, dentre eles, alguns abaixo: - Visualiza??o do trabalho; - Tamanho de lote; - Métricas de fluxo; - Políticas explícitas. Entre outros. Por ser um método evolutivo, sua filosofia nos oferece a possibilidade de come?armos com exatamente o cenário que temos hoje e, acompanhado e medindo o progresso, avan?armos na cria??o de elementos e artefatos que melhorem o trabalho.

Most of the time, having a clear goal for the Scrum Teams is really tricky. Remember that, goals are the outcomes not the outputs. It means that, producing a specific thing is not a goal. Goals are about the impact of producing a specific thing. Using these two steps might be helpful for the Scrum Teams. The first step for setting a goal is to think about a specific issue and try to add some motivation to it. The second step is to make this goal measurable. If you can measure it, you can decide achieve it or not.

While commitment is essential, it's equally crucial to maintain a work-life balance, ensuring the team's well-being and sustained productivity. Moreover, in the absence of a clear product vision, Scrum can be complemented with practices like Design Thinking to foster innovation and shape product direction iteratively. To mitigate sprint-related stress, incorporating mindfulness techniques and regular retrospectives can promote team resilience and self-improvement. For projects with complex dependencies or distributed teams, exploring hybrid methodologies that combine Scrum with elements of Kanban or Lean can provide adaptability. Embracing these strategies, we can harness Scrum's benefits while effectively addressing its challenges.

Scrum, while effective, has challenges. It demands high commitment, discipline, and a stable product vision. Sprint length and demands must be balanced to avoid team stress and burnout. For complex, variable, or distributed projects, Scrum may not be the best fit.

When following Scrum, problems and pain points that the team or process have are highlighted readily. It is tempting in that moment to seek escape from the pain through abandoning Scrum or moving into Scrum-but (Scrum, but we aren't cross functional. Scrum, but we don't do retrospectives) or Scrum-Ban (often not really either and a way to become lax around the framework that is supposed to help the team). Like taking aspirin for a dehydration headache, this may make the pain go away but it often covers up the root of the problem which shows itself in other ways throughout the product development.

A challenge while implementing Scrum is the prescriptiveness and low level of technical, business and often lean/agile that often a person who is implementing “by the book” has. In the modern day and age most people in the industry don’t need to get coached on the timebox of the daily or the necessity of having one product owner instead of a comittee, but they need help in a plethora of other ares, which the majority of so called agile professionals have no idea about (devops, gitflow, testing, etc).

A challenge is a common misunderstanding that Kanban is just having a board and moving stuff around. Implementing proper Kanban and then, even more important, constantly optimising the flow and WIP limits, is not a task you can learn on a 2-day online course, contrary to a basic PSM/CSM certification.

In the agile realm, Kanban and Scrum stood as contenders, each with distinct challenges. Kanban's fluidity posed risks: directionless teams lacked shared goals, inviting confusion. Neglected board limits led to stagnation, like a dammed river. Undefined outcomes obscured work's true value. Kanban thrived in flexibility but faltered with strict deadlines, fixed deliverables, or hierarchies. In the Kanban vs. Scrum dance, I discovered that every method had its hurdles. The art lay in choosing wisely, leveraging strengths, and addressing weaknesses.

While Kanban aims to provide clear visibility into work status and progress, this can unintentionally become a surveillance tool. The constant monitoring of work can lead to a culture of micro-management, eroding trust and autonomy within the team. The desire for transparency can inadvertently stifle creativity and independent decision-making.

Some years ago, I had a Kanban Masterclass with David Anderson, leader of the Kanban movement. I don’t remember if it was his words or something he read, but I heard the most intriguing thought: Scrum is to Catholicism as Kanban is to Buddhism. Scrum is a framework. With defined roles, artifacts, and events, it’s perfect for some contexts. Kanban is a method. It assesses your scenario and evolves from there, its adaptability creates the necessary fit. While the Agile community likes to debate which is superior, I believe in harmonious coexistence. Kanban helps us to improve continuously, even if it is the use of Scrum. Instead of choosing one or another, why not both?