Many popular Agile frameworks, such as Scrum, XP, and Kanban, were originally designed for small teams of around a dozen people. However, these frameworks do not provide guidance on scaling Agile across multiple teams or entire organizations. Scaled Agile frameworks, including SAFe, LeSS, and the Spotify Model, address this need by coordinating work across large groups and departments.

SAFe (Scaled Agile Framework)

SAFe offers a structured approach to scaling Agile, helping teams navigate the complexities of large-scale adoption.

According to recent research, 37% of organizations find SAFe useful for scaling Agile. However, a significant number of respondents selected “I don’t know,” highlighting widespread uncertainty about scaling Agile effectively.

The SAFe model is complex, often leading to skepticism about whether such an intricate system can truly be Agile. It incorporates elements from Agile, Lean management, and systems thinking into structured modules, such as “Lean Governance” and “Agile Portfolio Operations.” Additionally, it includes traditional management practices, like quarterly planning, which some Agile practitioners view as counter to Agile principles.

SAFe is ideal for large organizations with traditional management structures that seek a gradual transition to Agile. It provides a structured, step-by-step approach, making it particularly appealing to executives and program managers. However, some argue that SAFe prioritizes control over agility, potentially hindering true Agile transformation.

LeSS builds on Scrum principles by synchronizing all teams within a Sprint to deliver a single, shippable product.

For example, in a mobile app development project, different teams may work on separate components, but all contributions are integrated into one final release at the end of each Sprint. Unlike Scrum or Scrum of Scrums, which maintain separate work item lists (Backlogs) per team, LeSS employs a single Backlog and a unified Product Owner across all teams.

LeSS is a lightweight alternative to SAFe, best suited for organizations with multiple autonomous teams that already use Scrum and collaborate on a large-scale product. It simplifies the process of scaling Scrum without adding excessive complexity.

Disciplined Agile (DA)

Developed from Scott Ambler and Mark Lines’ book Find Your WoW, Disciplined Agile (DA) is a flexible framework that draws from Agile, Lean, and even Waterfall methodologies.

Rather than prescribing specific processes, DA acts as a toolkit, allowing teams to tailor Agile approaches to their unique needs. Unlike structured frameworks like SAFe, DA offers a customizable “à la carte” approach rather than a rigid, predefined process.

Jagriti Kapoor, an experienced DA practitioner, describes it as a “process-decision toolkit” that helps teams evaluate Agile strategies and build a customized framework. Adopting DA often requires coaching and continuous reflection to optimize processes.

DA is a good fit for organizations that find SAFe too rigid and other frameworks too simplistic. It enables teams to evolve their Agile practices in a structured yet flexible manner, providing an alternative to both prescriptive methodologies and loosely defined Agile approaches.

Scrum of Scrums (Scrum@Scale)

Scrum of Scrums extends traditional Scrum by introducing an additional layer of coordination.

Each team maintains its existing Scrum structure—including Backlogs, meetings, and roles—but representatives from each team meet daily in a “Scrum of Scrums.” This forum allows teams to align on upcoming work and manage dependencies efficiently.

Agile Coach Chris Wolff explains that Scrum of Scrums helps teams stay informed, providing a lightweight mechanism to track shared code and dependencies. For example, if one team modifies a shared codebase, another team can immediately assess the impact and address potential conflicts.

Scrum of Scrums is ideal for organizations that are outgrowing Scrum and need additional coordination without overhauling their existing processes. Unlike LeSS, it allows teams to maintain independent Backlogs, roles, and meetings while adding a higher-level synchronization layer.

Spotify Model

The Spotify Model organizes teams into a matrix structure rather than following a predefined Agile framework.

Teams, called “Squads,” choose their own Agile methodologies, such as Scrum or Kanban. Related Squads are grouped into “Tribes,” each with a Product Owner, Agile Coach, and Technical Leader. The model also introduces “Chapters” and “Guilds” to foster knowledge sharing across disciplines.

For example:

• Squad – An Agile team using a framework of their choice
• Tribe – A collection of Squads working on a shared feature or product
• Chapter – A group of specialists (e.g., designers within a Tribe) collaborating across teams
• Guild – A community of interest spanning multiple Squads (e.g., an accessibility-focused Guild)

Although Spotify itself has moved away from this model, companies like ING continue to find value in its matrix structure. Agile Coach Murray Robinson notes that the Spotify Model enhances coaching, training, and functional expertise support within Agile teams.

The Spotify Model provides a flexible alternative to SAFe, offering structure without being overly prescriptive. It allows teams to maintain autonomy while ensuring cross-team collaboration. This makes it a strong choice for organizations seeking a balance between guidance and flexibility.

Choosing the right framework depends on an organization’s existing culture, team autonomy, and Agile maturity level. The key is to find a model that supports agility rather than adding unnecessary complexity.

Are you also convinced that Scaled Agile frameworks coordinate work across large groups and departments? Let’s talk!

Inspired by Parabol