Scaling agile in GDS - Agile Cambridge 2016 - SlideShare

Doing this would remove any possible build-up of pressure, make more space for learning, foster creativity and enable time for team reconfiguring. Sustainable structure would be a should we need to have less problematic technical debt. You can find out more in this blog site post about our 2017-2018 roadmap. This brand-new method of working would be quite a big modification for the people working on GOV.UK.

So we took a number of actions to present it thoroughly. To start with, we mapped our planned objectives against the headcount, to ensure we had the best variety of people and the right abilities. Then we sent out a survey to all staff inquiring what teams they would have an interest in dealing with or had any relevant experience in.

And we met lots of people separately to discuss their preferences and development opportunities. We have actually been running this model on GOV.UK for just over a year now. And it's likewise being used by other parts of GDS. When we first began working in in this manner, many teams faced challenges with incremental shipment, shipment at speed, sustainable building, doing things with data and responsiveness to alter.

We attained this through substantial training for groups, strong messaging and support from programme management, moving elders into wider roles where they can manage the work of numerous teams, and great deals of sharing of best practice in between groups. With 168 people across 24 teams, GOV.UK was a reasonably large program.

To neutralize this, we have actually split our work into a handful of objectives, with each goal containing 3-5 related missions and about 40 individuals. The majority of people are appointed to groups, but some people are designated to specific objectives so that they can assist out on each mission as required. This move towards operating in smaller groups rather than one big group assisted groups to progress at self-organising and more adaptable to change.

We are all very enthusiastic about our work, and it's tough to stop doing something when it appears like there is more to do. But it's finest to do less and do it well instead of to be too enthusiastic and have no slack for the unforeseen. When we did decide to stop briefly work on objectives, there was an initial and unfavorable emotional response from staff member.