Strategy Execution: Use a Traditional or Agile Project Approach?

Strategy is executed through projects. Selecting an appropriate project approach is essential to making execution successful. There is a lot of talk about being ‘agile’, which as a word represents being flexible, adaptive and nimble.

Many people are touting the phrase ‘agile projects’ as an excuse to avoid project planning, however agile project management practices are the opposite to that. It effectively is delivering projects in cycles and planning the detail only for the immediate work being progressed.

Agile project management is a philosophy that was formalised in 2001 through the ‘Agile Manifesto’ as a set of principles and values. The ‘scrum agile’ methodology has become the most commonly used approach. Scrum gets its name from the rugby game, following the concept that whoever has the ball keeps it moving during the sprint to the end zone.

Where the traditional project approach is to plan the project completely, identify the schedule, budget and resources upfront, and then execute to the plan, agile scrum projects are done in cycles called ‘sprints’. This means the complete scope, budget and schedule may not be known upfront as work can start as soon as there are enough items to start a sprint. A sprint typically comprises of a standardised 1 to 4 week period.

The biggest challenge with an agile approach for executives is the inability to present a total budget and schedule upfront, which can only be identified when all the ‘to do’ items are known.

Work is broken up to ‘to do’ items that are being consistently reviewed and prioritised, ‘doing’ items that are being executed in the sprint, and ‘done’ items that have been finished. The work items are called ‘stories’ that reflect required products, product components or functions.

Stories are written in the form ‘As – I need – so that’. For example, a story for a student management system may be presented as “As a student, I need to check my module marks to determine if I have passed, so that I can enrol in my next module”.  This highlights the need for a reporting function for student marks, and an ability to self-enrol.  

Each story is given a comparative point value known as ‘story sizing’. The schedule is determined by the number of points on the ‘to do’ list and the number of sprints required to complete that number of points. This requires the scrum team to determine how many points they can do in a sprint, which they refer to as the ‘velocity’.

The budget is determined by the cost of the human resources in a sprint and any materials, equipment or consumable expenses. As the team is expected to be fixed, the human resource budget can be determined by the number of people involved multiplied by the number of days in a sprint and their rates. 

There is no project manager in agile scrum. Instead it promotes a self-organised and cross-functional project team, recommending a fulltime and co-located team that comprises 3 to 9 people with three defined roles. The ‘product owner’ acts between the traditional project sponsor function and a business analyst, determining the prioritised ‘to do’ list on a tool called the Product Backlog, and thereby setting the work agenda. The ‘scrum master’ who is a facilitator and coach of process and helps source resources and eliminates any barriers for the team. The ‘scrum team’ (development team) are the actual project team members undertaking the work. Large project teams are created by multiples of scrum teams, as it is believed teams need to remain small and focused groups.

Each day the team meet in a ‘daily scrum’, which is a stand-up meeting where each member presents what they did yesterday, what they are doing today and any obstacles they envisage.

When determining a traditional or agile approach, projects that can be well defined, like construction projects, are best to be managed using a traditional method. A lot of projects needing points of review can also be planned and delivered in stages anyway.

An agile approach is best suited to projects that have a lot of uncertainty that may require a different direction at the end of each sprint, such as election campaigns, marketing campaigns and software development. 

Agile scrum comes with its own jargon. For example, ‘ceremony’ for a meeting, an ‘artefact’ for a tool, a ‘story’ for a feature, ‘information radiators’ for a report, a ‘timebox’ for a period of time, and ‘velocity’ for team productivity. Those contemplating moving to an agile approach are best to determine what elements work for their environment, and jargon may be best presented that is more understandable to the organisation.  

What is often missing in organisations using traditional projects is their lack of responsive variation (change) management, poor lack of stakeholder engagement and ineffective communications. Fixing these may result in becoming more ‘agile’ anyway.

Reprinted from the AIMWA “Leader”, Number 15, June 2019.

About the Author - Todd Hutchison

 Todd Hutchison is an international bestselling business author, a Nationally-accredited trainer and certified speaking professional (CSP), and a global strategist, project management and behavioural specialist. He is listed in the Who’s Who of Business in Australia. 

Todd is the Global Chairman and CEO of Peopleistic (including the Business Education Institute and Film My Video businesses), an executive with law firm Balfour Meagher and resides as the Chairman of the International Institute of Legal Project Management, as well as being a Board Director of Leadership Western Australia.

Todd is also a qualified company director, having served on boards in Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States, and has led international businesses. He has worked in over 160 organisations in 13 countries, including global corporations like AT&T, Microsoft, Coca-Cola, Deloitte, Sime Darby, Genting, Schenk Process, JP Kenny and Honeywell.

He holds adjunct positions with Edith Cowan University and Curtin University, and teaches international business as part of the MBA academic staff at the Australian Institute of Management, and the Masters of Engineering at Curtin University.

Todd’s qualifications include an MBA and a Master of Commerce and he is now progressing a PhD.