In our last article, we discussed the ‘power of agile transformation in modern companies’. Agile methods have shown their potential in terms of flexibility, innovation and customer orientation since the 1990s, and particularly in recent years. However, as an increasing number of experts are also discovering, many agile transformations run the risk of falling into routine, bureaucratic patterns that counteract the original goal of agility. According to the O'Reilly article ‘The Death of Agile’, companies risk diluting the basic ideas of agility through rigid processes and the loss of true adaptability – and this happens when the focus is increasingly on tools and procedures rather than on real cultural change. Proagile speaks fittingly of the agile iceberg (see Fig. 1). Agile methods continue to work with appropriate best practices – recipes for success that go beyond the mere application of methods and are specific to a company and its current situation. As best practices, we clarify three fundamental questions in this article:
- When do agile methods make sense?
- How do I find the right agile methods for my company?
- How does a cultural change look practically?
Once organisations can answer these three questions, there is nothing standing in the way of a sustainable, agile and authentic way of working.
Agile approaches: when are they most appropriate?
First of all, when do agile methods make sense? To use and implement agile methods, the right context for their application must be identified. A simple and effective method for determining the suitability of agile approaches is the Stacey Matrix. This matrix helps to evaluate complexity and uncertainty in a project in relation to the requirements and the approach to a solution. This helps to decide whether agile methods make sense for the specific case.
What is the Stacey matrix?
The Stacey Matrix was developed by Ralph Stacey (originally in the context of organisational theory and complex systems in companies) and is widely used in project management and change management literature. A number of adaptations (see Figures 2 and 3) can be found online. The matrix categorises projects based on two dimensions:
- Consensus: This examines the degree of unity among stakeholders in various decision-making processes. In the best case, there is complete consensus – all parties are united behind the decision. At the other end of the spectrum is the extreme case in which each stakeholder comes to a different conclusion, resulting in no consensus at all.
- Certainty: This dimension refers to the certainty with which decisions can be made. In the best case, there is a high degree of certainty, while in the worst case, there is complete uncertainty and ambiguity.
In total, Ralph Stacey developed five areas with their respective management strategies. As it turned out, this was the ideal template for the new Stacy Matrix for project management.
Using the Stacey Matrix with Agile Methods
The adapted matrix is an ideal approach for project management. The two dimensions are to be interpreted as follows:
- Clarity of the solution approach (X-axis): How clear is the solution approach?
- Clarity of the requirement (Y-axis): How clear are the requirements?
1. Simple systems
For projects that are classified as simple, the complexity is low and the requirements are clearly defined. In these cases, simply structured project management methods are sufficient – such as the waterfall model. To put it bluntly, ‘what is usually done is done’. The clear steps and planning enable efficient implementation because all parties involved know what needs to be done and the risks are manageable.
2. Complicated systems
In complicated projects, uncertainties arise with regard to the requirements and the approach to the solution. In such situations, experts are needed to develop solutions based on analysis and planning. Standardised planning and control is recommended for this. These approaches offer structured processes and help to overcome challenges through informed decisions and comprehensive planning. Kanban, in particular, is used for such projects.
3. Complex systems
In complex environments, where requirements are unclear and change frequently during the project, agile methods reveal their significant advantages. In principle, a risk analysis should also be carried out at this point. In addition, agile practices enable teams to work in short iterations, regularly solicit feedback, and respond quickly to changes. This not only promotes the adaptability but also the innovative ability of the team. In this situation, flexibility and close coordination/communication between team members are essential. Frameworks such as Scrum (or Kanban) are particularly useful here to ensure this dynamism and flexibility.
4. Chaotic systems
In chaotic systems, it is important to act quickly and experiment frequently. This means that speed, flexibility and agility have the highest priority. Agile approaches support these iterative processes by enabling rapid adaptation to new insights and conditions. In these situations, methods such as design thinking and lean startup can be particularly advantageous for quickly developing and testing prototypes. The focus here is on learning from experiences in order to find the best solutions in a timely manner.
In general, the Stacey Matrix is an excellent tool for evaluating the suitability of agile methods in different situations. It assesses projects based on two questions:
- What is the problem? (requirements)
- How should it be solved? (solution approach)
By analysing these factors, companies can make informed decisions about when and how to implement agile approaches. Agile methods are particularly advantageous in complex and chaotic environments.
Which agile methods are the right ones for my company?
Let's now move on to the second part. Choosing the right agile methods is fundamental for a successful transformation – and a truly adaptable corporate culture. Various factors such as company size, industry and specific challenges are taken into account. Four strategic steps are presented below that can facilitate the selection process and lead to a targeted decision.
Analyse your company's needs and goals
The first step is to analyse the company's specific needs and goals. This is where challenges are identified that the company wants to solve – be it faster product development, higher customer satisfaction or improved collaboration between teams. With this clarity, suitable methods can be selected that directly support the company's goals and meaningfully integrate agile principles into everyday life.
Choose an agile method based on company size and team structure
Not every agile method is equally suitable for every company structure or size. Smaller companies and start-ups often benefit from more flexible methods such as Scrum or Kanban, which enable rapid adaptation and close collaboration. Larger organisations often rely on scaling methods such as SAFe (Scaled Agile Framework) or LeSS (Large Scale Scrum) to apply agile principles to multiple teams and departments without losing sight of the big picture.
Experimentation and phased implementation
Organisations should test new methods on a small scale before rolling them out company-wide. This allows teams to gain initial experience and provide feedback on the suitability of the method in the company context. A step-by-step implementation reduces resistance and allows for adjustments based on feedback from the employees who are applying the methods. These iteration steps also reflect the principles of agility: testing, learning and adapting.
Consideration of corporate culture
As already mentioned, the successful introduction of agile methods is often closely linked to the existing corporate culture. A company that already has an open and collaborative culture can more easily adopt more agile processes. However, if this culture is not present, an agile transformation can serve to initiate necessary cultural changes and create a better foundation for flexibility and innovation. However, this requires clear communication strategies and a strong commitment from senior management / agile leadership.
Selecting agile methods – conclusion
Choosing the right agile method should always start with a thorough analysis of the company and its goals. There is no universal model, and often a combination of different agile practices is the optimal solution to ensure maximum adaptability and effectiveness. A step-by-step approach and intensive employee involvement ensure sustainable implementation and help to fully exploit the advantages of agile methods.
Culture Transformation Case Study: Otto Group
Finally, we address the question posed at the beginning: ‘What does cultural change actually look like in practice?’ The Otto Group provides valuable insights into how such a cultural transformation can be successfully implemented in established companies. It is culture that anchors the fundamental values and principles of agility and, ultimately, agile methods in a company.
Culture as the basis for agile transformation
Otto impressively demonstrates the importance of cultural change in order to provide a solid basis for agile methods. A central aspect of agile transformation at Otto is the promotion of transparency, self-organisation and continuous development. These principles lay the foundation on which agile methods can be successfully applied and anchored. After all, an agile transformation is unlikely to be successful in the long term without a supportive cultural change.
Leadership and responsibility in agile structures
Keyword ‘agile leadership’. Otto emphasises the change in leadership roles and the promotion of personal responsibility. For the introduction of agile methods, this means that executives should coach less and encourage teams to take responsibility for themselves.
Practical implementation steps and flexibility
Otto also shows that cultural and structural changes were introduced step by step to create space for adjustments and feedback. This iterative approach fits perfectly with agile principles and emphasises that transformation does not have to be perfect immediately, but can develop continuously.
Learning culture and dealing with mistakes
Another important element for the Otto Group is the establishment of a learning culture that promotes the open handling of mistakes and continuous learning. This is a central aspect for companies that want to introduce agile methods: agility thrives on adaptability, and a culture that sees mistakes as learning opportunities is optimal for this.
Conclusion: Success factors for implementing agile methods
The correct application of agile approaches depends heavily on the context. Agility requires not only the right and appropriate tools and techniques. It also requires a profound cultural change (if it does not already exist), based on transparency, personal responsibility and continuous learning. The successful introduction of agile methods also depends on organisations analysing their specific requirements and challenges, selecting the appropriate methods and creating space for step-by-step adaptation. Such a transformation improves company-wide processes and anchors agility sustainably in the company's DNA.
.png)
