Agile: Co-location or Remote?

Agile and the co-location conundrum

A discussion Agile teams have had for many years is that of co-location, with one of the arguments against remote working being that Agile states that the cross functional team should be co-located.

I remember back in the early days of Agile when we were so excited to move away from the old, almost legal type requirements and timeboxed processes to working collaboratively, removing silos with cross functional teams that communicated with each other daily.

One of the key points Agile coaches would include was co-location, the argument being that the whole team should be working closely together and that communication was more effective when the whole team was in the same physical location. 

This we thought was a breath of fresh air, having close proximity to people who had previously been distant physically and otherwise, even if they’d been in the same building, on the same floor, in at the same section of the office.

Let’s think about it.

Back then in the early 2000’s Agile introduced multiple changes at once. As scientists we know that to measure the effects of any change we must only alter one variable at a time. By applying all the changes together we cannot with certainty identify which variables were most impactful. So let's break it down a bit.

Pre Agile

Communications within the team

• Developers rarely, if ever, were exposed to the “business” people, ie the product and business owners.
• The methodology back then was very siloed, boxed with specific, rigid and hierarchical lines of communication.
• The business and product owners would communicate with the business analyst who would capture their requirements into a document
• The tech lead and possibly architect would have some limited interaction with the business in formal sessions
• The point of contact for the development team was the BA.
• Any questions for the dev team would go from the business via the BA, tech lead or project manager.
• Any questions for the business would go from the dev team via the BA, tech lead, test lead or project manager.
• Updates would be communicated via the PM or team lead.

Communication mediums

• By email
• By phone
• Via JIRA or other ticketing system
• Conference calls – audio only.
• At this time video conferencing was in its infancy, requiring specialised equipment – specific momitors for a meeting room which would have to be booked
• Face to face comms were only possible if you were either already in the same office or if you travelled to visit the team or if a scheduled series of meetings were arranged bringing the whole team together for a day or two.
• Maybe there would be an occasional team building exercise after which you’d go back to your silos
• Sometimes the team building exercise would only be with certain “key” or “important” members of the team.

Move to Agile

So when the move to Agile happened there was an overhaul of the communications processes.

• Agile principles number 4 ("business people and developers must work together daily throughout the project") and number 6 ("the most efficient and effective method of conveying information to and within a development team is face-to-face conversation") were used to stress that physical co-location was mandatory to enable those face-to-face conversations.
• Simultaneously the barriers of silos and hierarchical comms lines came down. Suddenly the cross functional team members could talk to each other freely.
• Everyone would provide their own update directly to the team at daily stand-up’s.
• Product owners, devs, BAs, QAs, tech leads, architects, scrum masters, project managers, UX designers all joined the daily stand up meetings
• Updates and communications across the team became a daily occurrence at the very least.
• Questions could be asked directly, clarity could be given immediately, actions could be agreed together, risks could be flagged and issues could be addressed. All by virtue of a cross-functional standuup meeting where anyone could speak up.

Now ask yourself this. Was the improved comms due to physical co location or due to a mandatory daily meeting where formal comms lines had been replaced by free open communication?

Fast forward 20-ish years

The technology landscape has been overhauled.

• Outsourcing to offshore teams, still using Agile methodology though not physically co-located teams
• Advancements in video conferencing technology, apps such as meet me, zoom, MS teams, Google Meet, and skype revolutionised video conferencing removing the need for dedicated meeting rooms with specialist infrastructure.
• Now you can video conference with ease from your desk, or at home on your laptop.
• Face-to-face comms when not co-located is not only possible but is now the norm in most office-based sectors.
• The 2020 pandemic with lockdowns demonstrated that we could still continue to work even when not in the office.
• We learned that there can be productivity benefits to working remotely – with reduced interruptions and context switching whilst remaining available online.
• What about brainstorming and white boards? Well, these tools also have features for whiteboarding online.
• On the flip side, I’ve seen teams physically co-located and communicating via messaging apps only eg slack rather than physically have a conversation even when the person is sat opposite or next to them!

There is a school of thought (Christian Hujer) that says that co-location is not about physical co-location but about co-location of minds and physical proximity is not the only way to achieve this. Therefore, the argument of face-to-face communication should not be used against remote working.

Introverts vs extroverts and remote working is another factor for consideration which we'll look at in another blog post.

With an Agile mindset we inspect and adapt constantly, so it makes sense to evolve alongside our ever changing worlds of work, technology, environment and personal circumstances towards a new era of ethical business.

Remote working isn’t about being permanently remote, it’s about allowing people who require this flexibility to have that option and knowing that it doesn’t impact teamwork or productivity.

Indeed, by allowing more remote working we open up the talent pool to a greater diversity of both people and thought leading to more creativity and innovation, and happier people.

And happier people tend to collaborate and communicate better too.