Kanban vs Scrum: Choosing the Right Methodology

Kanban and Scrum are both agile methodologies, but they suit different situations. Scrum provides structure through sprints and roles, while Kanban offers flow-based flexibility. Understanding the differences helps you choose—or combine—the right approach.

Comparison Overview

Scrum Deep Dive

Scrum Structure

SCRUM FRAMEWORK
═══════════════

CADENCE:
─────────────────────────────────────
Sprint 1    Sprint 2    Sprint 3
[2 weeks]   [2 weeks]   [2 weeks]
  Plan       Plan        Plan
  Work       Work        Work
  Review     Review      Review
  Retro      Retro       Retro

ROLES:
├── Product Owner: Priority decisions
├── Scrum Master: Process facilitation
└── Development Team: Builds product

CEREMONIES:
├── Sprint Planning: What we'll do
├── Daily Standup: Sync & blockers
├── Sprint Review: Demo what shipped
└── Retrospective: Improve process

ARTIFACTS:
├── Product Backlog: All future work
├── Sprint Backlog: This sprint's work
├── Increment: What's complete
└── Definition of Done: Quality bar

Scrum Strengths

WHEN SCRUM WORKS WELL
═════════════════════

PREDICTABILITY:
├── Regular release cadence
├── Velocity enables forecasting
├── Stakeholders know when to expect
└── Burndown shows progress

PROTECTED FOCUS:
├── Sprint = commitment
├── No mid-sprint changes (ideally)
├── Team can focus deeply
└── Reduced context switching

REGULAR IMPROVEMENT:
├── Retro every sprint
├── Systematic learning
├── Process evolves
└── Team grows together

CLEAR ACCOUNTABILITY:
├── Roles defined
├── Ceremonies provide checkpoints
├── Transparency through artifacts
└── Everyone knows expectations

GOOD FOR:
├── Product development
├── Feature teams
├── Predictable workload
├── Stakeholder visibility needed
└── New agile teams (structure helps)

Kanban Deep Dive

Kanban Structure

KANBAN FRAMEWORK
════════════════

NO CADENCE:
─────────────────────────────────────
Work flows continuously:
│ Backlog │ Ready │ In Progress │ Done │
│    ∞    │   5   │      3      │  ∞   │
            ↓           ↓
        Pull when    WIP limited
        capacity

KEY PRINCIPLES:
├── Visualize workflow
├── Limit work in progress (WIP)
├── Manage flow
├── Make policies explicit
├── Improve collaboratively
└── Evolve experimentally

NO PRESCRIBED ROLES:
├── Team self-organizes
├── Keep existing structure
├── Add as needed
└── Minimal process overhead

METRICS:
├── Cycle time: Start to done
├── Lead time: Request to done
├── Throughput: Items per week
└── WIP: Work in progress count

Kanban Strengths

WHEN KANBAN WORKS WELL
══════════════════════

FLEXIBILITY:
├── No sprint to wait for
├── Priorities can change daily
├── Start immediately
└── No sprint commitment conflict

CONTINUOUS DELIVERY:
├── Ship when ready
├── No waiting for sprint end
├── Faster time to customer
└── Smaller batches

VARIABLE WORKLOAD:
├── Support/ops teams
├── Unpredicable requests
├── Emergencies welcome
└── No sprint disruption

LESS OVERHEAD:
├── Fewer ceremonies
├── No sprint planning
├── No velocity tracking
├── Lower process burden

GOOD FOR:
├── Support teams
├── DevOps/SRE
├── Maintenance work
├── Continuous deployment
├── Experienced teams
└── High interrupt environments

Comparison Details

Work Flow

WORK FLOW COMPARISON
════════════════════

SCRUM:
─────────────────────────────────────
         Sprint 1                Sprint 2
   ┌─────────────────────┐  ┌─────────────────────┐
   │ Committed work      │  │ Committed work      │
   │ ████████████████    │  │ ████████████████    │
   │ Plan → Build → Ship │  │ Plan → Build → Ship │
   └─────────────────────┘  └─────────────────────┘
   
Work batched per sprint
Changes wait for next sprint

KANBAN:
─────────────────────────────────────
   Continuous flow →→→→→→→→→→→→→→→→→→
   │ Item │ Item │ Item │ Item │ Item │
   │ done │ done │ done │ done │ done │
   ←──────────────────────────────────→
   
Work flows continuously
Changes enter when capacity allows

Handling Changes

CHANGE HANDLING
═══════════════

SCRUM:
─────────────────────────────────────
New urgent request arrives mid-sprint:

Option A: Wait for next sprint
├── Protect current commitment
├── Request goes to backlog
└── Addressed in 1-2 weeks

Option B: Swap
├── New request in
├── Equal work out
├── Negotiate with PO
└── Track disruption

KANBAN:
─────────────────────────────────────
New urgent request arrives:

Process:
├── Evaluate priority
├── If higher priority, put at top
├── Pull when capacity opens
├── WIP limit protects from overload
└── Flows in naturally

DIFFERENCE:
Scrum protects current work
Kanban absorbs changes more easily

Metrics Comparison

METRICS COMPARISON
══════════════════

SCRUM METRICS:
─────────────────────────────────────
Velocity: 32 points per sprint
├── Predicts future capacity
├── Enables release forecasting
├── Stable = predictable team

Burndown:
├── Track sprint progress
├── Visual alert if behind
└── Daily visibility

KANBAN METRICS:
─────────────────────────────────────
Cycle Time: 3.2 days average
├── Time to complete work
├── Lower = faster delivery
├── Predictability measure

Throughput: 12 items/week
├── Consistent output
├── Capacity indicator
└── Trend tracking

WHICH IS BETTER?
├── Scrum: If you need to forecast releases
├── Kanban: If you need flow optimization
└── Both: Provide useful insights

Choosing the Right Approach

Decision Framework

DECISION FRAMEWORK
══════════════════

CHOOSE SCRUM IF:
─────────────────────────────────────
✓ Need predictable release cadence
✓ Stakeholders want regular demos
✓ Team benefits from structure
✓ Workload is relatively stable
✓ Can protect sprint commitment
✓ New to agile (structure helps)
✓ Product development focus

CHOOSE KANBAN IF:
─────────────────────────────────────
✓ Work arrives unpredictably
✓ Need continuous deployment
✓ Team is small and experienced
✓ Priorities change frequently
✓ Support or maintenance focus
✓ Want minimal process overhead
✓ Already have delivery cadence

CONSIDER SCRUMBAN IF:
─────────────────────────────────────
✓ Want sprint planning but flow delivery
✓ Need ceremonies but continuous flow
✓ Current Scrum is too rigid
✓ Current Kanban lacks structure
✓ Transitioning between methods

GitScrum Configuration

GITSCRUM METHODOLOGY SETUP
══════════════════════════

FOR SCRUM:
─────────────────────────────────────
Settings → Methodology → Scrum

Enable:
├── Sprints
├── Velocity tracking
├── Burndown charts
├── Sprint planning view
├── Sprint backlog
└── Story points

Ceremonies reminder configured

FOR KANBAN:
─────────────────────────────────────
Settings → Methodology → Kanban

Enable:
├── Continuous board
├── WIP limits per column
├── Cycle time tracking
├── Throughput charts
├── Cumulative flow diagram
└── No sprints

FOR SCRUMBAN:
─────────────────────────────────────
Settings → Methodology → Scrumban

Enable:
├── Sprints (for planning)
├── WIP limits (from Kanban)
├── Cycle time + velocity
├── Continuous delivery
└── Best of both

Best Practices

For Methodology Selection

1. Start with need — What problem are you solving?
2. Consider workload — Stable vs. variable
3. Evaluate team — Experience level, size
4. Think stakeholders — Visibility needs
5. Be willing to adapt — Mix approaches if needed

Anti-Patterns

METHODOLOGY MISTAKES:
✗ Choosing based on trend (not fit)
✗ Scrum for ops teams (too rigid)
✗ Kanban for new teams (needs structure)
✗ Forcing one approach on all teams
✗ Not adapting when problems arise
✗ Religious adherence to methodology
✗ Ignoring what works for hybrid

Related Solutions

• Getting started with Kanban
• Getting started with Scrum
• Getting started with agile