DAD vs SAFe vs Scrum

Methodology Comparison: DAD vs. SAFe vs. Scrum
This paper will compare and contrast the definitive traits, roles, processes, artifacts, benefits, complexities, uses, tools and other factors among the following three methodologies: Disciplined Agile Delivery (DAD), Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe), and Scrum. Ultimately this paper will illuminate the advantages and disadvantages of each process, based on their specificities. Finally, this paper will discuss which of these three methods would be most suitable to employ at my specific company, a media company which focuses on new and publishing.
Disciplined Agile Delivery (DAD) refers to a form of IT solution conveyance that puts people first and which is founded on a more flexible, learning-oriented approach (disciplinedagiledelivery.com). The lifecycle of this methodology is risk-value and cognizant of enterprise and always adjustable in terms of scale (disciplinedagiledelivery.com). For these reasons, it is one of the major foundations of the entire Discipline Agile Framework. Some experts argue that DAD is more of “a process decision framework, not a methodology.  It is a hybrid of leading agile and lean methods with guidance on how to make better choices when applying strategies for the situation that you find yourself in.  DAD can be summed up as ‘pragmatic agile,’ giving you the flexibility to adapt your approach for your unique context” (Lines, 2015). This is one of the main reasons that DAD is enjoying so much popularity of late: it offers users such a massive amount of adaptability.
The main of role of DAD is that it offers a more fluid and comprehensive approach to the delivery of agile solutions (disciplinedagiledelivery.com). One way that it achieves this is by supporting a more robust array of roles via its hybrid method (disciplinedagiledelivery.com). This hybrid approach is one of the major advantages that it offers as this allows it to extend the capabilities of Scrum with techniques that have been proven to be effective. These are strategies from methods like Agile Modeling (AM), Extreme Programming (XP), and Unified Process (UP) and others (disciplinedagiledelivery.com). Another benefit that DAD offers is that it’s open: it’s a non-proprietary, freely accessible methodology that even supports a range of delivery lifecycles. One of the advantages that DAD has over Scrum is that it is able to elongate the extension of its construction-centered lifecycle from the start of the project all the way to transferring the solution to its end receivers (disciplinedagiledelivery.com). DAD also centers on lean, constant delivery and lean start up versions of the lifecycle as a whole (disciplinedagiledelivery.com). As opposed to other methods, this framework doesn’t revolve around one set lifecycle as it acknowledges that context is crucial and variety is necessary. This is yet another advantage that DAD presents: it offers choices, not set prescribed tactics in a one-size-fits-all process. It offers a goal-centered approach, offering contextual guidance towards worthwhile solutions and their pros and cons (disciplinedagiledelivery.com). Another benefit is that DAD offers guidance regarding technical practices as well as governance strategies that Scrum does not possess.
The four lifecycle models that DAD possesses means that it offers a higher level of flexibility in overall project guidance and recommendations for best processes within each type of project (Francino, 2016). To offer a construction analogy, this means that DAD offers the overall basic framework for creating a cottage, mansion, townhouse or mobile home, doing this by offering general guidance on the types of tools and processes one might want to use, rather than the prescriptive blueprint that something like Scrum would offer (Francino, 2016). It is important to note that this level of flexibility isn’t appreciated by all people, generally just those who have a solid grasp of agile in general. For professionals who are new to agile, a method like DAD doesn’t offer enough guidance. While SAFe and DAD generally have more complimentary qualities than the opposite, it’s important to note that DAD might require professional to have experts on hand who can offer specific guidance, such as experienced coaches and consultants (Francino, 2016).



(Table: Nizami, 2016)

DAD offers both primary and secondary roles, composed of around ten roles, whereas Scrum only has three roles (Ambler, 2015). For example, DAD has five primary roles, composed of the Stakeholder, Team Member, Team Lead, Product Owner and Architecture Owner (Ambler, 2016). The Primary roles are found regardless of scale, whereas the secondary roles are a reaction to the scaling. The secondary roles include the specialist, the domain expert, the technical expert, the independent tester, and the integrator. Thus, DAD has over three times the number of roles than Scrum, largely as a result of scope: Scrum makes leadership and change management the main aspects of construction, thus the roles it creates for people reflect that. On the other hand, DAD’s focus is on the total delivery lifecycle and all factors of solution delivery, particularly the technical factors that Scrum eliminates: thus, a larger scope means more roles need to exist to fulfill all the needs created. For example, DAD being more comprehensive, it includes agile architecture, hence there’s an architecture owner role: Scrum doesn’t deal with this, so no such role exists. DAD creates an atmosphere where the roles are more interchangeable and people on the team may take turns performing one another’s roles. Some might argue that this creates a stronger team, as everyone has a familiarity with the jobs and tasks that make things work. On the other hand, SAFe has roles for five to ten people who all have the responsibility to iterate, develop and assess some aspect of the overall solution value.
Scrum is a subdivision of Agile and an exceedingly common method for processing and implementing Agile. “It is an iterative software development model used to manage complex software and product development. Fixed-length iterations, called sprints, lasting one to two weeks long, allow the team to ship software on a regular cadence. At the end of each sprint, stakeholders and team members meet to plan next steps” (Smartsheet, 2017). Scrum follows a set of concrete jobs, tasks, and meetings that always remain constant: some professionals like this high level of consistency, whereas others find it confining or narrowing. One common example of this is how Scrum requires four ceremonies that offer structure to each sprint: sprint planning, daily stand-up, sprint demo and sprint retrospective (Smartsheet, 2017). Each individual sprint calls for the use of visual artifacts such as task boards or burndown charts which will allow one to demonstrate their progress and still be a recipient of constructive feedback and guidance (Smartsheet, 2017). The tools and artifacts, which are specific to the Scrum process, are very specific. For instance, a Scrum board is used to show the backlog or burndown chart as a means of demonstrating superior work, usually divided into three areas: work, progress and completed (Smartsheet, 2017). User stories is another software feature that harness the unique gaze of the customer, following what type of user the customer is, what he/she is trying to achieve, so that the appropriate code can be developed. The burndown chart is another element that shows all superior work as symbolized by significant benchmarks, helping the team to refocus if they are faced with many obstacles (Smartsheet, 2017). There is also the Large-Scale Scrum framework available to assist in the extension of rules and guidelines so that the core of principles of Scrum are fulfilled.
While DAD is enjoying more and more popularity, there are still many marked and definitive advantages to a methodology such as Scrum. Scrum is very concrete, prescriptive, and the roles and procedures for all involve are specific: while some might find that overwhelming to get a hold of at first, the rules and clear framework of Scrum do offer distinct advantages. The first advantage is the high level of transparency and overall project visibility that Scrum creates (Smartsheet, 2017). “With daily stand-up meetings, the whole team knows who is doing what, eliminating many misunderstandings and confusion. Issues are identified in advance, allowing the team to resolve them before they get out of hand” (Smartsheet, 2017). This simple fact means that the project is consistently being developed in a wise and manageable manner, ensuring that any issues are being addressed in a consistent fashion. This pillar influence the next decisive advantage which is that it helps to create increased team accountability, as there is no boss who is in charge overall of who does what and when. Everyone works together helping one another in a strong spirit of collaboration, still empowering the team to remain independent (Smartsheet, 2017).


Table Credit: Ken Schwaber 
SAFe is a methodology that offers a more prescribed strategy to deconstructing larger initiatives into smaller pipelines of work that can be completed by teams so that they are meeting the flow of work and the delivery as needed to stakeholders. One can describe it as a type of interactive knowledge base for the implementation of Agile practices at the enterprise scale with a marked “Big Picture” style graphic, SAFe offers a model for the overall agility of the enterprise while tackling the three levels of team, program and portfolio (Rabon, 2015). SAFe does provide a service that meets a need that the IT industry was facing: there was a general lack of a pattern for ascending these large endeavors (Lines, 2015). SAFe does have an ideal place in very particular situation, namely large agile teams that “…are working on a cohesive product ideally based upon a shared architecture.  The teams should also be very competent and can be depended on to reliably deliver functionality on a common cadence with the other teams in their release train.  SAFe is definitely not a good fit for teams new to agile” (Lines, 2015). Likewise, SAFe is often a good fit for projects where there is a large yet highly intricate development team working on a common product: this is another example of when SAFe is an appropriate selection (Lines, 2015). However, when a company has a lot of varied work with high levels of range and variety, SAFe starts to appear less and less appropriate or desirable.
Some professionals continue to select DAD over SAFe for a variety of reasons. For example, implementing SAFe across a company can be relatively disruptive and often requires an expensive investment, meanwhile SAFe isn’t applicable to all types of projects, giving its use a limitability (Lines, 2015). DAD continues to offer benefits over SAFe because many users appreciate the enterprise practicality that it possesses, along with the fact that it offers a selection of four life cycles bolstering all varieties of agility, yet within a consistent framework, with built-in agile governance along with support for endeavors that follow a more traditional approach (Lines, 2015). It’s also important to note that SAFe includes team, program and portfolio processes: “At the Team level, the techniques outlined are those used in scrum, recommending two-week sprint cycles. At the Program level, SAFe extends scrum by using the same ideas but one level up. The Program level works on a Release Train, which is composed of five sprint cycles” (Francino, 2016). SAFe also includes the sixth innovation planning sprint that empowers the team to innovate, assess and re-develop; roles and methods are iterated at the Program level that ensures a level of consistency and collaboration within the endeavor as a whole (Francino, 2016). Within SAFe there’s also an even higher level where processes can be shaped via lean principles, such as by streamlining values to ensure that team leaders and executives are able to best prioritize (Francino, 2016). From the perspective of the team level, SAFe highly resembles Scrum, though with one major difference: not every sprint offers a possibly shippable addition (Rabon, 2015). Furthermore, at the Program level, the efforts of the agile teams are coordinated to serve the needs of the entire entity, providing a fair amount of guidance on how to achieve this (Rabon, 2016). The principles and practices of SAFe revolve around Lean thinking, the pillars of proper product development flow, and the intensive advantages of agile development, though this methodology truly values alignment, code quality, transparency and efficient program execution (Rabon, 2016). Hence, SAFe is a methodology that can encourage collaboration while maintaining focus, though at times with an overly prescriptive format.
Finally, when it comes to the success of my own media company, which focuses on journalism and publishing, we would more directly benefit from a methodology like DAD. This is largely because DAD tackles the range of issues that Scrum leaves you to determine and address on your own. One way that this is clearly visible is that the official Scrum guide is around twenty-some pages and the office DAD guide is around 500 pages or so, going into deeper detail so that you don’t need to reach out to experts outside of your organization. The composition of DAD empowers on to significantly increase the likelihood that one’s improvement efforts will succeed, in a manner that is generally less expensive in the long-term. This is largely because DAD focuses on a more holistic, context-sensitive and focuses approach (Ambler, 2013). To be specific, DAD creates an extension of Scrum in a manner which is useful and while still addressing all aspects of agile (with the exception of management and collaboration) while still supporting the existence of a complete delivery lifecycle (rather than simply the construction), going past mere software development to tackle many of the solution delivery aspects (Ambler, 2013). Scrum has given the professional a lot of crucial ideas, though in day-to-day use, it often demonstrates just a small element of the overall picture.
This leads to yet another reason why I would select DAD for my company: DAD’s adaptable qualities mean that it centers on solution delivery, not simply software delivery (Ambler, 2013). High quality software is very important, but this software still needs to acknowledge the needs of the company at large so that the software and hardware together are streamlined, offering consumable solutions to the enterprise (Ambler, 2013). Another reason that DAD would be preferable for my company is that it clearly supports a full delivery lifecycle including inception, construction and transition, whereas Scrum tends to just focus on construction (Ambler, 2013). Furthermore, there are certain other details connected to DAD that are simply a better fit for my company. Given the fast-paced world of media, we often need a range of options and wide variety of choices: this is one way that DAD outperforms both SAFe and Scrum. This alone means that DAD is a better choice for us, but there are other compelling reasons, such as the fact that DAD offers lucid tailoring advice, a fact which will save my company both time and money, now and in the future. Finally, as one expert decreed, “DAD reflects the realities of enterprise agile” (Ambler, 2013). Modern companies have to tackle a host of challenges, some anticipated and others unexpected and he variety of choices that DAD offers allows one to be more pragmatic and develop the best mode of attack to the particular challenges one is facing at the moment, fully knowing that next year the challenges might be different. This is one of the main reasons that DAD would be suitable for the media company that I work for because we have to constantly be flexible in our approach to media, libel laws, delivery of information, freedom of speech and copyright laws all within the fast-paced world of online and print publishing and journalism.


(Table Credit: Disciplined Agile Delivery, Ambler)










References
Ambler, S. (2013, October 24). Nine Reasons to Choose DAD over Scrum. Retrieved from www.disciplinedagiledelivery.com/category/scrum/#Extends
Ambler, S. (2016, July 4). Roles on DAD Teams | The Disciplined Agile (DA) Framework. Retrieved from http://www.disciplinedagiledelivery.com/roles-on- dad-teams/
Bodamer, R. (2013, October 29). Comparing Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe) and Disciplined Agile Deliver…. Retrieved from https://www.slideshare.net/RodneyBodamer1/scaled-agile-framework-and- disciplined-agile-delivery-comparisons
Disciplinedagiledelivery.com. (n.d.). Introduction to Disciplined Agile Delivery (DAD) | The Disciplined Agile (DA) Framework. Retrieved from http://www.disciplinedagiledelivery.com/introduction-to-dad/
Francino, Y. (2016). SAFe vs DAD: Large-scale agile frameworks comparison. Retrieved from https://techbeacon.com/large-scale-agile-frameworks-compared-safe-vs-dad
Lines, M. (2015, June 17). Why Companies are Choosing DAD over SAFe | The Disciplined Agile (DA) Framework. Retrieved from http://www.disciplinedagiledelivery.com/dad-over-safe/
Nizami, I. (2016, November 27). Overview of Disciplined Agile Delivery Framework. Retrieved from https://www.slideshare.net/IrshadNizami/overview-of-disciplined- agile-delivery-framework
Rabon, B. M. (2015, June 19). Scaling Scrum – a brief comparison of DAD, LeSS, and SAFe. Retrieved from https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/scaling-scrum-brief- comparison-dad-less-safe-brian-m-rabon-cst-pmp/
Schwaber, K. (n.d.). SCRUM Development Process -- by Ken Schwaber. Retrieved from http://geekswithblogs.net/emanish/archive/2008/10/24/126087.aspx
Smartsheet.com. (2017). Full Comparison: Agile vs. Scrum vs. Waterfall vs. Kanban. Retrieved from https://www.smartsheet.com/agile-vs-scrum-vs-waterfall-vs- kanban