ComparisonScaling Software Development - ZeroBlockers vs Spotify Model: Which scaling framework is better for you?
There is no one-size-fits-all framework for scaling software development. Each framework overcomes the complexities of scaling in different ways. We have compiled an overview of the key features and approaches of the Spotify Model framework and ZeroBlockers to help you select the best framework for you.
ZeroBlockers vs Spotify Model: Approach
| Scroll | Effectiveness | Efficiency | Scalability |
|---|---|---|---|
| Spotify Model | |||
| ZeroBlockers |
Feature comparison
ZeroBlockers
Scaling with empowered autonomous teams
Efficiency
- Controlling complexity
Complexity and dependencies increase as companies scale.
- Dependencies and blockers need to be removed as they always slow down delivery.
- Reducing Code Conflicts
Code merge conflicts increase as more teams operate on the same code base.
- Each Stream team has a completely independent code base so code merge conflicts do not occur.
Spotify Model
Squads, Tribes, Chapters and Guilds
Efficiency
- Controlling complexity
Complexity and dependencies increase as companies scale.
- Empower teams and create a culture of collaboration.
- Reducing Code Conflicts
Code merge conflicts increase as more teams operate on the same code base.
- Each Squad has a completely independent code base so code merge conflicts do not occur.
Core Differences
Efficiency
- Controlling complexity
Complexity and dependencies increase as companies scale.
- Similar between frameworks.
- Reducing Code Conflicts
Code merge conflicts increase as more teams operate on the same code base.
- Similar between frameworks
Both frameworks identify dependencies and blockers as the cause of the slowdown in delivery as companies scale. And both frameworks view independent teams with code ownership as the best way to ensure independent and efficient ways of working.
Feature comparison
ZeroBlockers
Scaling with empowered autonomous teams
Effectiveness
- Solution Autonomy
Layers of sign off for solutions prevent teams from iterating quickly based on customer feedback.
- Teams decide on what features to build based on customer research and business objectives.
- Solution Validation
Most features fail to deliver the expected business outcomes. How can teams adapt as they deliver?
- Teams identify the assumptions behind their solutions and devise experiments to validate them before committing to building the feature.
- Accountability
What are the key KPIs that teams are measured on?
- Accountable for outcomes: The achievement of the Product Objectives.
Spotify Model
Squads, Tribes, Chapters and Guilds
Effectiveness
- Solution Autonomy
Layers of sign off for solutions prevent teams from iterating quickly based on customer feedback.
- Teams decide on what features to build based on customer research and business objectives.
- Solution Validation
Most features fail to deliver the expected business outcomes. How can teams adapt as they deliver?
- Teams identify the assumptions behind their solutions and devise experiments to validate them before committing to building the feature.
- Accountability
What are the key KPIs that teams are measured on?
- Accountable for outcomes. The achievement of the Product Objectives.
Core Differences
Effectiveness
- Solution Autonomy
Layers of sign off for solutions prevent teams from iterating quickly based on customer feedback.
- Similar between frameworks
- Solution Validation
Most features fail to deliver the expected business outcomes. How can teams adapt as they deliver?
- Similar between frameworks
- Accountability
What are the key KPIs that teams are measured on?
- Similar between frameworks
Again the frameworks are similar in their approach by giving teams autonomy over the solutions they build to achieve business goals. However, while the Spotify Model advocates for leaving the ways of working up to the team whereas ZeroBlockers provides some guidance for the Research, Ideation, Experimentation and Delivery phases.
This is the biggest change in ways of working for a lot of teams so we think there needs to be more guidance here. The more structured approach helps teams to adopt the new practices and it gives management more confidence that teams are working on the highest priority items.
Feature comparison
ZeroBlockers
Scaling with empowered autonomous teams
Sustainability
- Technical Debt
Technical debt can make software delivery unsustainable unless it is continuously paid down.
- Teams own code and are responsible for maintaining its quality.
- Continuous Improvement
There are always improvements that can be made. How do we ensure that teams are always improving?
- Teams have a clear vision of what good looks like. Zero blockers from idea to software.
- Burnout Prevention
Team motivation is critical for ensuring that momentum is maintained.
- Giving people autonomy over the way they solve problems reduces burnout.
Spotify Model
Squads, Tribes, Chapters and Guilds
Sustainability
- Technical Debt
Technical debt can make software delivery unsustainable unless it is continuously paid down.
- Teams own code and are responsible for maintaining its quality.
- Continuous Improvement
There are always improvements that can be made. How do we ensure that teams are always improving?
- Agile Coaches to guide teams on how to improve their process and do 1-on-1 meetings with team members.
- Burnout Prevention
Team motivation is critical for ensuring that momentum is maintained.
- Giving people autonomy over the way they solve problems reduces burnout.
Core Differences
Sustainability
- Technical Debt
Technical debt can make software delivery unsustainable unless it is continuously paid down.
- Similar between frameworks
- Continuous Improvement
There are always improvements that can be made. How do we ensure that teams are always improving?
- Coach guided process improvement versus vision guided process improvement.
- Burnout Prevention
Team motivation is critical for ensuring that momentum is maintained.
- Similar between frameworks
Both frameworks identify that shared code leads to technical debt so teams own their own code and are responsible for maintaining it. The approach to reducing burnout is similar by giving people an inspiring mission and challenging targets and then giving them the autonomy to achieve them.
The approach to continuous improvement is where the frameworks differ. The Spotify Model advocates for having an Agile coach assist the teams in identifying and resolving impediments. ZeroBlockers provides a similar service through the ProductOps enabling team but it also helps teams to self-service by providing teams with a vision for the way of working (zero blockers) as well as a vision for the product. This means that teams can identify the best way to achieve the vision and remove blockers themselves.
ZeroBlockers vs Spotify Model: Team
How much of the solution is the Spotify Model team responsible for?
Research
Generative research to uncover customer problems.
Ideation
Generating multiple solutions for each customer opportunity.
Design
Prototyping solutions and iterating on feedback.
Development
Building the solution iteratively and releasing the working software.
Feature comparison
ZeroBlockers
Scaling with empowered autonomous teams
Team Level
- Roles
The roles involved in creating the products.
- UX Researcher
Designer
Developers
Business SMEs as needed - Events
The key activities that teams perform while building the product.
- Ad-hoc
Customer Interviews
Ideation
Solution Evaluation
User Story Mapping
Daily
Retrospective
Weekly
Weekly Business Review
1-on1's
Spotify Model
Squads, Tribes, Chapters and Guilds
Team Level
- Roles
The roles involved in creating the products.
- Product Owner
Cross-functional squad members - Events
The key activities that teams perform while building the product.
- Ad hoc
Backlog Refinement
Iteration
Iteration Planning
Iteration Review
Iteration Retrospective
Core Differences
Team Level
- Roles
The roles involved in creating the products.
- Similar between frameworks
- Events
The key activities that teams perform while building the product.
- Unstructured approach to research versus structured approach to research
The models are similar again in terms of team roles but ZeroBlockers has more explicit research, ideation and design activities because this is the area of biggest change for a lot of teams. The structure helps teams to adopt the new practices quickly and gives management the confidence needed to trust the teams to deliver.
ZeroBlockers vs Spotify Model: Product/Program Level
Feature comparison
ZeroBlockers
Scaling with empowered autonomous teams
Product/Program Level
- Name
The name the framework gives to the team grouping level.
- Product Team
- Roles
The roles involved in organising multiple teams.
- Product Lead
Technical Functional Leads
(Research, Design, Dev)
Business Functional Leads
(Marketing, Operations, Customer Service) - Events
The key activities that teams perform while organising multiple teams.
- Weekly
Weekly Business Review(s)
Product Review
1-on-1's
Monthly
Retrospective
Ad hoc
Event Storming
Quarterly
Quarterly Goal Meetings
Quarterly Strategic Reviews
Spotify Model
Squads, Tribes, Chapters and Guilds
Product/Program Level
- Name
The name the framework gives to the team grouping level.
- Tribes / Chapters
- Roles
The roles involved in organising multiple teams.
- Tribe Lead
Functional Manager (per Chapter)
System Owner - Events
The key activities that teams perform while organising multiple teams.
- Ad hoc
Cross Tribe Scrum of Scrums
Iteration (~2 weeks)
PO Sync
Core Differences
Product/Program Level
- Name
The name the framework gives to the team grouping level.
- Roles
The roles involved in organising multiple teams.
- Tribe lead prioritises backlog versus Product Lead defines vision and strategy
- Events
The key activities that teams perform while organising multiple teams.
- Monitoring development progress versus monitoring business outcomes
The Spotify Model leans heavily into the autonomy of the squads so the activities at the Tribe or Chapter level are limited. The Scaling Agile @ Spotify document outlines the responsibilities of the Tribe as defining the "What" to be built and the Chapters defining the "How". In addition, there is a Tribe PO who prioritises across multiple tribes which seems at odds with the autonomy of the teams and the Scaling Agile @ Spotify document doesn't address this apparent contradiction.
The core difference is that the Spotify model intentionally leaves more autonomy with the squads whereas the ZeroBlockers framework recognises the need for more direction and coherence between teams using artifacts like the product vision, strategy and quarterly objectives.
ZeroBlockers vs Spotify Model: Portfolio
Feature comparison
ZeroBlockers
Scaling with empowered autonomous teams
Portfolio Level
- Name
The name the framework gives to the portfolio level.
- Product / Ecosystem Team
- Roles
The roles involved in managing a portfolio.
- Product (VP+)
Design (VP+)
Marketing (VP+)
Technology (VP+)
Operations (VP+)
Customer Service (VP+) - Events
The key activities that teams perform while managing a portfolio.
- Weekly
Weekly Business Review(s)
1-on-1's
Monthly
Retrospective
Ad hoc
Product Funding
Quarterly
Quarterly Goal Meetings
Quarterly Strategic Reviews
Spotify Model
Squads, Tribes, Chapters and Guilds
Portfolio Level
- Name
The name the framework gives to the portfolio level.
- Roles
The roles involved in managing a portfolio.
- Events
The key activities that teams perform while managing a portfolio.
Core Differences
Portfolio Level
- Name
The name the framework gives to the portfolio level.
- Roles
The roles involved in managing a portfolio.
- No portfolio level versus structured portfolio level
- Events
The key activities that teams perform while managing a portfolio.
- No portfolio level versus structured portfolio level
The Spotify Model was written at the time when Spotify had 350 employees. There wasn't a need for a portfolio level. Other people have enhanced the methodology to include an Alliance level which acts in a similar way to a Tribe.
ZeroBlockers enables scaling using multiple tiers of Product Teams as well as Ecosystem Teams. This means that the model can scale to enterprise levels.
ZeroBlockers vs Spotify Model: Implementation
Feature comparison
ZeroBlockers
Scaling with empowered autonomous teams
Implementation
- Buy In
The people you need committed to ensure a successful roll-out.
- Considerable changes are required across the business so buy-in is required at a senior level in IT, marketing, customer service and more.
- Training
The training and certification required for a successful implementation.
- ZeroBlockers provides a range of training and certifications for each role.
- Community & Support
The support available for implementing the framework.
- Large and growing community with documentation and resources.
Spotify Model
Squads, Tribes, Chapters and Guilds
Implementation
- Buy In
The people you need committed to ensure a successful roll-out.
- Considerable changes are required across the business so buy-in is required at a senior level in IT, marketing, customer service and more.
- Training
The training and certification required for a successful implementation.
- No explicit training or certification available.
- Community & Support
The support available for implementing the framework.
- There is limited support outside of the original Scaling Agile @ Spotify document.
Core Differences
Implementation
- Buy In
The people you need committed to ensure a successful roll-out.
- Similar between frameworks
- Training
The training and certification required for a successful implementation.
- No official training versus official training
- Community & Support
The support available for implementing the framework.
- No support options versus large and active community
Empowering teams requires changes across the business. But empowering teams leads to questions like how are teams structured? How are they funded? How does governance work? How do teams plan their work? And more. The Spotify Model doesn't address these challenges whereas the ZeroBlockers framework identifies solutions for each of these key areas.
