In the ideal world of Scrum, teams self-organize, claim the necessary resources, and minimize administrative overhead to focus on delivering value. However, in the reality of corporate governance, this vision often clashes with the complex structures and processes that exist within large organizations. Agile methods, including Scrum, must coexist with established project governance systems, legal requirements, and internal policies. Balancing agility with corporate controls creates challenges that can’t be ignored—Scrum projects must align with wider organizational goals, comply with regulations, and meet business expectations. This article explores how agile projects navigate these demands while staying true to the core principles of Scrum. Curious? Then read on to learn more about the real challenges Scrum teams face.
Scrum Projects Must Adapt to a Structured Business World
“We organize ourselves; we take the budget and resources we need. Over-administration and comprehensive documentation are a burden to us.” These statements are commonly heard in the Scrum environment, reflecting the agile spirit of self-organization and minimal bureaucracy. However, many people involved in these projects overlook an important reality: a Scrum project cannot operate in isolation within a company. You can’t simply start a project and claim resources and budget without consideration for the wider organizational context. Doing so would lead to conflicts with other projects and disrupt the company’s overall project organization.
The Role of Project Governance in Agile Environments
In nearly every large company, there is a formal project governance framework that dictates how potential projects are evaluated, prioritized, and integrated into the overall project portfolio. This governance applies equally to both traditional and agile projects. It ensures that projects are aligned with the company’s strategic goals and are implemented in a way that maximizes value and minimizes risk.
Project governance varies depending on whether the project is an “internal project” with an internal client (such as a project sponsor within the organization) or an “external project” for an outside customer. In both cases, every project must be approved by a governance body, which considers factors such as alignment with corporate strategy, business value, resource availability, risk management, and, of course, budget constraints.
This means that agile projects, including those following the Scrum framework, must also adhere to project governance rules and many other company policies. Unfortunately, not all internal customers, project sponsors, or even Product Owners always recognize this. They may also struggle to understand the need for mandatory deliverables, like business cases or other documentation, which are often seen as incompatible with the agile mindset.
For small businesses, project governance might be less rigid and more adaptable. However, in very large organizations that use a mix of project management methods—like waterfall and agile—this governance can create additional hurdles for agile projects.
Following these challenges of corporate governance, we can further explore why Scrum, as outlined in the Scrum Guide, cannot always be applied to the letter in real-world environments. The complexities of today’s business landscape require integrating Scrum appropriately within the company in order to meet legal, regulatory and internal requirements.
Agile Projects Need to Adapt to a Dynamic and Complex Business Environment
Scrum, as outlined in the Scrum Guide, provides a clear and structured framework for agile project management. It emphasizes transparency, inspection, and adaptation through well-defined roles, events, and artifacts. However, while the Scrum Guide serves as a powerful foundation, it is rarely applied to the letter in real-world business environments. The dynamic and complex nature of today’s organizations, shaped by legal regulations, internal policies, and diverse business contexts, often necessitates deviations from the pure Scrum framework.
Legal and Regulatory Complexities
Scrum teams must operate within the realities of their external environments, which often include diverse legal and regulatory frameworks. For instance, in the European Union, the Digital Operational Resilience Act (DORA) imposes strict compliance requirements on businesses, particularly in the financial sector. Such regulations may necessitate additional layers of documentation, approval processes, and compliance checks that are not explicitly outlined in Scrum. Similarly, businesses operating in other highly regulated industries, such as healthcare or aerospace, face stringent legal and safety obligations that go beyond the flexibility of the Scrum framework. These additional activities, while not contrary to Scrum principles, are external realities that require adaptation to the process.
Internal Company Policies and Organizational Structures
In addition to legal constraints, internal company policies, particularly in larger organizations, can significantly impact the work and efficiency of Scrum teams. Large enterprises often have well-established procedures, approval workflows, and reporting structures that are deeply embedded in their culture. These internal guidelines can impose constraints on the autonomy of Scrum teams or slow down decision-making, which contradicts the ideal of rapid iteration and cross-functional collaboration in Scrum. For example, organizations may require formal project documentation, governance meetings, or stakeholder reviews, all of which can add overhead to Scrum processes.
Adapting Scrum to Complex Business Realities
Moreover, many companies find that their specific operational environment demands the addition of roles or activities that are not part of the original Scrum framework. While Scrum defines just three roles—Product Owner, Scrum Master, and Development Team—real-world implementations often involve other stakeholders such as legal teams, compliance officers, and external auditors. These additional actors may need to be incorporated into the agile environment, complicating the streamlined structure recommended by the Scrum Guide.
In larger organizations, agile frameworks like Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe) or Large Scale Scrum (LeSS) are often used to handle the complexities of managing multiple teams or large-scale projects. These frameworks provide guidance on how to scale agile practices while addressing the coordination needs of bigger enterprises – and often also add additional roles into the agile organization.
Successfully Navigating Real-World Challenges in an Agile Environment
Despite these challenges, Scrum, also as part of a Scaled Agile Framework, provides substantial benefits also in complex environments. It is important to stay as close to the framework as possible, adhering to its principles of iterative development, frequent feedback, and team empowerment. However, the reality is that agile teams must adapt to fulfill the internal and external requirements. This often means integrating additional activities—such as compliance checks, security audits, or detailed documentation—that are not directly specified in the Scrum Guide but are necessary to meet the demands of today’s business world.
In summary, while the Scrum Guide provides essential guidelines for implementing agile projects, it is not a one-size-fits-all solution. The complexity of the legal, regulatory, and internal landscapes within which businesses operate requires organizations to modify Scrum in practice. Staying close to the framework’s core principles is crucial but recognizing when and how to adapt is equally important for successful project delivery.
Here You Can Find Even More Knowledge
Would you like to learn more about how to make your projects more successful with Scrum and Agile Project Management? My book Scrum – How to Successfully Apply Agile Project Management and Scrum takes you an important step further!
Do you know somebody who might be interested in this article? Then forward it or share it. Thank you!
