# Agile vs Scrum vs Kanban: Choosing the Right Approach for Your Team - Canonical: https://33rdsquare.com/agile-vs-scrum-vs-kanban-choosing-the-right-approach-for-your-team/ - Published: 2024-03-19 - Author: Kara Masterson - Categories: [Technology](https://33rdsquare.com/category/tech/) --- Agile, scrum, and kanban have revolutionized how modern teams manage projects, but their overlapping concepts can create confusion. This comprehensive 2600+ word guide breaks down the key differences between the methodologies and provides expert guidance on when to use each. ## The Origins of Agile Popular myth credits the 2001 Agile Manifesto as the start of agile. However, agile practices such as incremental delivery and customer collaboration have long histories across global product development. For example, iconic manufacturer Toyota developed lean processes in the 1930s centered around iteratively improving workflow and eliminating waste. Later adopted by software teams, these approaches formed the foundation for agile. In the 1990s, rapid changes in hardware and programming languages demanded faster software release cycles. Developer Alistair Cockburn created the “Crystal” family of agile methodologies to boost team communication and flexibility. Other lightweight processes like Scrum aimed to overcome burdensome Waterfall documentation. These pioneering frameworks were formalized in the written Agile Manifesto – though the authors didn’t initially call their solution “Agile". The label was popularized after the fact. ### The Agile Manifesto Emerges 17 software developers gathered in Snowbird, Utah in 2001 to discuss these innovative project management solutions. United by common values, they aimed to promote: - **Individuals and interactions** over processes and tools - **Working products** over documentation - **Customer collaboration** over contract negotiation - **Responding to change** over rigid plans This collective statement of values formed the essence of the Agile Manifesto and launched the umbrella term for adaptive approaches. Signatories included Scrum co-creator Jeff Sutherland, XP pioneer Ken Schwaber, and computer scientist Ward Cunningham. Upon release, the Manifesto gave name to the burgeoning agile software movement. And although specifics continue to evolve, the core principles have remained steady markers guiding agile teams for over twenty years. ## The Spirit of Agile Behind Agile is the belief that traditional sequential development approachesoptimized for predictability fail in dynamic, rapidly evolving environments. Rigid processes cripple responsiveness. As a value system, Agile empowers individuals over restricting bureaucracy and tools. The focus is working solutions over perfectly formatted documents. Customer satisfaction beats internally focused output metrics or utilization rates. And critically, Agile does not aim to simply accelerate Development. First priority is the ability to **change direction** based on feedback and learning. Enabling this agility requires rethinking assumptions. How do we best organize as Cross-functional, cooperative teams? What workflows deliver Value early and often? How can internal processes embrace – not resist – change? Agile provides guiding pillars for this organizational shift – but avoids being overly prescriptive. Specific tools and practices enable teams to apply agility based on their context. For example, the Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe) adds additional structure for large, multi-team initiatives. The Spotify Model empowers autonomous squads at the team level. Teams blend philosophies into custom Hybrid models meeting their needs. As an umbrella methodology, Agile integrates various frameworks with the same iterative spirit. Two of the most popular are Scrum and Kanban. ## Scrum: Structured Sprints and Daily Alignment While Agile provides overarching values, Scrum delivers concrete practices all wrapped in a neat rugby metaphor. ### The Origins of Scrum Scrum traces back to 1986 when Hirotaka Takeuchi and Ikujiro Nonaka published “The New Product Development Game” in the Harvard Business Review. The authors argued holistic, flexible processes (like those in Rugby) outperformed siloed, rigid systems (like those in American football). Organizing self-empowered teams in sprint cycles promoted the speed, alignment, and camaraderie Takeuchi witnessed on his college rugby squad in Japan. These Cross-functional teams would self-organize around problem-solving rather than delegated tasks. Daily stand-up meetings enhanced transparency. The role of the Scrum Master emerged as both facilitator and barrier-breaker. While Takeuchi and Nonaka focused on hardware, Scrum translated well to the turbulent 1990s software industry. Iconic developer Jeff Sutherland pioneered the framework at companies like Easel Corporation. His collaboration with Ken Schwaber more formally documented Scrum processes in the 2000s. Now Scrum dominates agile software teams. Recent surveys show **58% of agile practitioners leverage some variation of scrum** compared to 25% kanban. The lessons learned optimizing complex, multifaceted software projects apply across knowledge work. ### Scrum Practices Scrum teams organize work in fixed-length sprints – typically 2-4 weeks. Guided by a Scrum Master, the team manages itself to: - Maintain a prioritized project backlog - Select backlog items for each coming sprint - Meet daily for 15-minute video/chat standups - Review functionality at end of each sprint - Retrospect to improve team processes This structured cadence balances the flexibility of self-organization with the urgency of regular delivery. It provides rhythm through a timeline of set ceremonies. Daily scrums drive alignment. Backlog grooming prevents stagnation. Sprint reviews force hard deadlines. Retrospectives enable continuous improvement. Together these rituals embody the empirical, iterative nature of scrum. They maximize feedback loops to repeatedly inspect and adapt both product and process. Just like a rugby squad, flexibility is mandatory in the face of rapidly shifting conditions. ![Scrum sprint cycle] (Image caption: The sprint development cycle under Scrum methodology) The fixed sprint cadence entrains this constant realignment. Requirements transform over a long project lifecycle. But short sprints limit risk and increase value delivery. They also avoid endless theoretical debates by constantly testing ideas via implementation. As agile thought leader Ken Schwaber noted “Scrum is like your mother-in-law, it points out ALL your faults.” By repeatedly exposing dysfunction, scrum drives positive change. ## Kanban: Smoothing and Improving Workflow While scrum provides project structure, kanban offers workflow visualization. Kanban gives managers an eagle-eye view into process constraints through detailed task boards. ### Kanban Origins on the Toyota Production Line Some trace kanban back to toy manufacturer Taiichi Ohno, father of the Toyota Production System. In the 1940s, Ohno used visual signals at inventory stocking points to streamline workflow. These color-coded “kanban cards” smoothed just-in-time material delivery in Toyota factories. By the 2000s, David Anderson applied kanban systems to manage software development – proving knowledge work could benefit from these lean manufacturing principles. Kanban slowed overload and reduced bottleneck severity by capping work-in-progress. Managing task flow through detailed kanban boards soon emerged as an alternative visual project approach. Easy tool access via Trello, JIRA, and other sticky-note style platforms popularized adoption. Now used by over 25% of agile teams, kanban boards shine for understanding cycle times, task handoffs, and cross-team dependencies. Details missed in other views bubble up visually for analysis. ### Kanban Practices Kanban revolves around the kanban board – a visual flowchart of major process steps: ![Simple Kanban Board] (Image caption: A basic horizontal kanban board with columns for Backlog, In Progress, and Done.) Cards on a kanban board represent tasks. Teams limit the number of cards allowed per column based on realistic capacity. This caps work-in-progress to smooth flow. It also exposes where processes bottleneck. Common additional kanban practices include: - Replenishment meetings to update the backlog - Splitting large initiatives into smaller pieces - Defining classes of service around task complexity - Setting due dates based on average cycle time For example, data teams might have separate streams for simple data requests vs complex model development. Classes of service help balance priorities. While kanban lacks prescribed roles or events, the visual nature encourages collaboration. Anyone can glance at the board to check progress and identify dependencies. You don’t need to wait for standups. This transparency provides near real-time demand/capacity insights – an exponential upgrade from Gantt charts. Both strategic leaders AND front-line contributors have access to the same workflow intel. ## Blending Agile Approaches There is no Agile orthodoxy enforcing strict adhesion to any specific framework like Scrum or Kanban. In the spirit of continuous improvement, teams can and should customize approaches to meet their needs. As long as solutions uphold agile values, tooling should bend to the team – not the opposite. In practice, many teams leverage a hybrid model selecting elements from multiple strategies. ![Venn diagram showing overlap of agile approaches] (Image caption: Venn diagram with scrumban at the intersection between scrum and kanban) For example: **Scrumban** blends scrum ceremonies with kanban limitation of work-in-progress **Kanplan** improves cadence in kanban using scrum rituals **Scrum/XP hybrids** apply XP (eXtreme Programming) engineering practices within scrums **Spotify model** stimulates autonomy through independent scrumban squads The specifics should evolve over time as teams inspect current practices and adapt based on learnings. Even Spotify continually tweaks their famed model. Customization prevents agile “cargo cults” clinging to rituals without purpose. But specialized integration does require deeper agile fluency even as teams rely less on prescriptive guidelines. **Agile coaches well-versed in multiple frameworks can help bridge this gap.** An outside expert perspective provides guidance applying only relevant elements for your team. ## Which Approach is Best For Your Team? All agile methodologies aim to deliver value faster. But teams must match approach to need. Appraising your project across several dimensions indicates where frameworks like Scrum, Kanban & beyond best align. Consider variables like: - Solution complexity - Requirements uncertainty - Team distribution - Organizational landscape For example, large initiatives with hundreds of cross-functional contributors will likely require additional coordination. More points of integration increase uncertainty. Both factors suggest breaking efforts into staged releases with defined sprints. Hence scores of enterprises leverage Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe) for major transformations. On the opposite end, a simple application with an established codebase may only involve tuning or incremental improvement. Here Kanban would suffice to smooth any minor workflow issues for a small, colocated team. While every team exhibits unique dynamics, analyzing core aspects provides clues. Specifically consider complexity, uncertainty, scale, and team experience. **Complex domains and high uncertainty benefit from Scrum’s structured sprints and embedded feedback mechanisms.** Frequent inspection catches diverging requirements before initiatives derail. Clear incremental goals boost fragile motivation common on difficult projects. Conversely, **smooth workflow and incremental improvement map better to Kanban.** When the challenge lies more in coordination than complexity, improved visualization and work-in-process limits provide focus. Kanban boards shine light on handoff gaps or cross-team lags. Enhanced transparency enables smoother flow. **Larger scale demands added coordination.** Dozens of teams or dispersed groups need structured synchronization. Scaled frameworks formalize the alignment ad-hoc meetings easily achieve for a handful of colocated colleagues. And teams new to agile often appreciate prescriptive guidance. The clear rules in Scrum provide psychological safety while gaining fluency. As agile practices become cultural norms, rigor dissolves into principle-guided standards. While every team shouldn’t attempt to emulate industry luminaries, examining how experienced peers structure initiatives provides helpful context. Real-world insights ground theoretical models. For example, kanban became popular in part by improving coordination for offshored software teams. Visual workflow removed reliance on spoken languages. Standard global processes now enable easier cross-regional delivery. Studying other use cases and building context-specific theories prepares teams to thoughtfully experiment. Trial-and-error still critical path – but informed trials start farther along the learning curve through built knowledge capital and reference points. ## Spotlight: Agile Transformation at Multinational Food Company Consider organic multinational food company Green Giant’s recent transition toward agile. Lacking digital maturity, legacy teams struggled coordinating handoffs between marketing, IT, and external vendors. Prior waterfall approaches crippled responsiveness amidst rapidly evolving shopper preferences and channel shifts toward ecommerce. C-suite leaders aimed to promote experimentation through increased autonomy and reduced friction between groups. Their vision focused on innovating consumer experiences and products rather than optimizing internal capabilities. Recognizing product/market uncertainty and multifunction complexity, Green Giant adopted a **Spotify-inspired model**. Small scrumban squads own vertical product delivery aligned to consumer value streams. A lightweight coordination rhythm keeps squads acting in concert. Program increments structure larger release sequencing while team-level independence maintains creativity. Green Giant also implemented a kanban contribution model for shared services like IT to smooth workflow between teams. So far results seem promising – experiment velocity increased four-fold in the first year. And unexpectedpositive byproducts included enhanced transparency, psychological safety, and engineer retention. The Green Giant example reflects one customized agile implementation matching complexity, culture, and strategy. Right-sizing form to function allowed this enterprise brand to respond with speed. ## Key Takeaways - Agile provides overarching values for adaptive approaches like Scrum and Kanban emphasizing iteration, feedback, and flexibility. - Scrum delivers structured sprints to break down complexity and drive alignment via constant feedback loops. - Kanban implements workflow visualization and work-in-process limits to smooth bottlenecks. - Teams blend Agile elements like Scrumban to meet project and culture needs. - Matching approach to variables like uncertainty, scale, and experience guides methodology fit. - There is no universal perfect solution – inspect and adapt to improve over time. The future remains notoriously hard to predict. But agile practices equip teams to navigate uncertainty. As the agile adage states: “In complex environments, plan the work by working the plan.” Priorities continuously evolve. Feedback loops keep efforts aligned with reality, not yesterday’s assumptions. Regular delivery cycles provide value faster while evaluating strategy. By inspecting and adapting both product AND process, agile methodologies help organizations thrive amidst turbulence. And that flexibility is mandatory for any team aiming to ride the waves rather than be drowned by them in our exponentially accelerating world. --- Source: [Agile vs Scrum vs Kanban: Choosing the Right Approach for Your Team](https://33rdsquare.com/agile-vs-scrum-vs-kanban-choosing-the-right-approach-for-your-team/)