Guidance Needed on Implementing Agile Framework for Implementation & Integration Projects

We are trying to implement an Agile framework across all our project delivery.

What are your motives for wanting an agile way of working? Agility enables innovation when facing high-risk challenges. Do the implementation and integration projects you describe present significant unknowns?

Hi Ian for your reply

In some cases, the implementation and integration are straightforward, especially when the scope is clearly defined during the commercial discussion phase. For such projects, a structured and predictable approach works well.

However, in the freight forwarding industry, we often deal with highly variable scenarios, complex processes, and evolving requirements across operations, finance, and third-party integrations. While the high-level scope may be defined initially, many detailed requirements and dependencies only become clear during the discovery and analysis stages.

Therefore, we typically follow an iterative approach that includes:

• Requirement gathering and current-state assessment
• Future-state design
• Proof of Concept (PoC) and configuration
• User training and testing
• Data migration
• Production go-live

This phased and adaptive approach allows us to address unknowns early, incorporate feedback, and reduce risks during implementation. Hence, trying to adopt an agile way of working to manage complexity and ensure successful delivery.

People adopt Agile to move faster to market and respond more quickly to change. Based on what you’re describing, Agile will work well for you.

It sounds like you’re already using sprints and stories. If that’s working, keep going. If it isn’t, make a change.

You can treat successful integration or configuration milestones as sprint goals. The key is having a clear outcome for each sprint. I use my product to generate ideas for sprint goals, and you can do the same with your team members and some AI assistance.

I would set a delivery cadence that matches what you’re building. Set it up, test it against real milestones, then review and adjust until it fits. 

While the high-level scope may be defined initially, many detailed requirements and dependencies only become clear during the discovery and analysis stages.

Reflect on how those requirements and dependencies become clear. What hypotheses are being tested, or assumptions validated? In Scrum these might represent meaningful Sprint Goals for example. 

Therefore, we typically follow an iterative approach that includes:

• Requirement gathering and current-state assessment
• Future-state design
• Proof of Concept (PoC) and configuration
• User training and testing
• Data migration
• Production go-live

If you can do all of these within a timeframe of one month or less, the leap-of-faith taken before getting an outcome will be minimal and agility is likely to be demonstrated. Things to bear in mind:

• A good outcome is not necessarily production go-live -- although it might be -- but rather the empirical validation of an assumption.
• To have a good experiment, work completed each iteration must be of usable quality even though the scope addressed may be quite trivial. Do not allow quality to become a variable which is then compromised.
• The environment from which feedback is obtained is not necessarily a live or production one, but it must be empirically fit for purpose.
• Scope is essentially a forecast of what is needed to address significant unknowns. Therefore allow scope to flex and adapt so goal commitments can be achieved. 
• Reserve time in each iteration to do enough requirements gathering, assessment, and design to ensure that work is ready for planning into future iterations. This can de-risk an agile process significantly.

@Archana Rai The answer relies strongly on whether you are a decision maker in a position of power or not. So how things are?

Software implementation and system integration almost always go hand in hand for most applications, except in very small cases. Agile and Scrum in particular, can work very well in this space.

On the specific questions:

Yes a three-week project can absolutely be Agile. Scrum explicitly allows Sprint lengths of up to one month.

Breaking phase-based work into Sprints and stories. Start by defining user stories based on outcomes or capabilities. Refine those stories into small, vertical slices that can be completed in a few days where possible, rather than fitting work into a Sprint.

Setting sprint goals can be challenging. An approach is to focus on what the team is enabling, not the technical tasks. For example, “configure the user-details web service” is a task; the Sprint Goal might be “enable users to update their profile details.” Even when work is largely technical, the goal should describe a client-visible outcome or capability. (Not all work in a Sprint must align perfectly with the Sprint Goal. Support work often exists, but the goal should reflect the primary value being delivered.)

A more Scrum-aligned approach is to define high-level requirements and take each one through design, build, test, and review with stakeholders within a Sprint. The intent is to deliver inspectable value every Sprint and use that feedback to guide next-step decisions, rather than completing all requirements, planning, and integration upfront and delivering value only at the end.