Three teams building one product are on different cadences and each waits on the others. Would you align their sprints?
Answer
Short answer
Aligning cadences makes the waiting comparable and gives you one integration point, which is worth having.It does not shorten the queue - it only tidies the moment work joins one.
Scaling shows up here as cross-team dependencies, not as a framework diagram. Good scaling makes cross-team dependencies visible early, decides which dependency must be removed, and gives teams a cadence for integration that matches the risk. Weak scaling adds coordination meetings while cross-team dependencies keep arriving late. Strong scaling asks whether the dependency should exist at all, then uses planning, contracts, integration tests, or ownership changes to reduce it.
Was this answer helpful?
Likely follow-ups
- One of the three teams is a platform team serving nine consumers, not two. Does your answer change?
- How would you measure the coordination cost you are claiming to reduce, before and after?
- The teams agree to align but the release window is still monthly. What have you gained?
- Which of these dependencies would you accept permanently, and how would you make that honest?
Related questions
- You have six teams building one product and they keep blocking each other. How do you coordinate the dependencies, and what do you make of frameworks like SAFe?hardAlso on scaling and team-topologies6 min
- A team tells you the scaled agile rollout is process for its own sake and wants no part of it. What do you do?hardAlso on scaling7 min
- Six months into a scaled agile rollout the sponsor asks whether it is working. What do you measure, and what do you refuse to report?hardAlso on scaling7 min
- Two teams build one product and they have different sprint lengths, different boards, different estimation units and different definitions of done. A programme manager wants them standardised. What would you standardise and what would you leave alone?hardAlso on scaling6 min