Advantages of Using Scrum listed down by SCRUMstudy

Scrum methodology requires a change in mindset from traditional methods. The central focus has moved from scope in Waterfall methods to achieving maximum business value in Scrum. While in Waterfall, cost and schedule are altered to ensure the desired scope is achieved, in Scrum, quality and constraints can be altered to achieve the main objective of attaining maximum business value.
The Waterfall model is suitable for ordered and predictable projects in which all the requirements are clearly defined and can be estimated accurately, and in most industries, such projects are dwindling. Changing requirements from customers have led to an increased pressure on businesses to adapt and change their delivery methods.

Scrum methods are more successful in the current market, which is marked by unpredictability and volatility. Scrum methods are based on inspect-adapt cycles as opposed to the command and control structures of the Waterfall method.
Scrum projects are completed in an iterative manner wherein the functionalities with the highest business value are completed first. Various cross-functional teams work in parallel across Sprints to deliver potentially shippable solutions at the end of every Sprint.
Because each iteration results in a shippable solution (which is a part of the overall product), there is a measurable objective that the team has to accomplish. This ensures that the team is progressing and the project will be completed on time. Traditional methods do not present such timely checks and, therefore, result in situations in which the team might get off schedule and end up with a lot of work toward the end.
As the customer regularly interacts with the team, the work completed is regularly reviewed; thus, there is assurance that the progress is per customer specifications. However, in Waterfall there is no such interaction as the work is carried out in silos, and there is no presentable functionality until the end of the project.
In complex projects, where the customer is unclear about what they want in an end product and functionality requirements keep changing, the iterative model is more flexible in ensuring that these changes can be included before the project is complete.
However, when completing simple projects with well-defined functionalities, and when the team has previous experience completing such projects (therefore, estimation would be accurate), the Waterfall method can be successful.
Given below is a table to get a better idea about the differences in Scrum and Waterfall.

	Scrum	Traditional Project Management
Emphasis is on	People	Processes
Documentation	Minimal—only as required	Comprehensive
Process style	Iterative	Linear
Upfront planning	Low	High
Prioritization of Requirements	Based on business value and regularly updated	Fixed in the Project Plan
Quality assurance	Customer centric	Process centric
Organization	Self-organized	Managed
Management style	Decentralized	Centralized
Change	Updates to Productized Product Backlog	Formal Change Management System
Leadership	Collaborative, Servant Leadership	Command and control
Performance measurement	Business value	Plan conformity
Return on Investment	Early/throughout project life	End of project life
Customer involvement	High throughout the project	Varies depending on the project lifecycle

How Scrum removes Bureaucracy and Red Tape within the Private Sector

We normally do not associate companies in the private sector with bureaucracy and reserve that criticism mostly for governments and public sector organizations. But how many times have we waited for a response from a department which never came? How many times have we felt things have taken twice as long as they should have? How many times have we faced conflict situations because of poor or inadequate communication? These issues are not specific to a governmental organization but can happen, and do happen, even in the most modern, multinational companies.
Traditional reactions to such issues involve establishing lengthy processes, assigning responsibilities or scheduling ‘regular’ meetings. But many a times, what happens is that the extra processes and responsibilities just add to the confusion and the ‘regular’ meetings are rarely focused and stop happening after a few weeks.
Scrum, as a methodology, focuses on regular communication, singular accountability, flat hierarchy and dedicated team members working to a mutually agreed schedule. In its most simple form, a Scrum team is formed of members who will actually be working on a project, selected and led by the Scrum Master, working on mutually agreed tasks and timelines, meeting on a daily basis to complete deliverables piece by piece.
However, trying to implement Scrum in its most basic form to complex projects or large organizations where tasks are often complicated, rarely works. Numerous examples abound of large teams adopting Scrum only to discard it after a few weeks. The reason is that a methodology needs to provide the tools to everyone in the team to perform their tasks and not just stop at a 10,000 feet level.
This is where the Scrum methodology, as defined in the Guide to the Scrum Body of Knowledge (SBOK ™ Guide), comes to the rescue. It fleshes out the basic Scrum framework by suggesting practical techniques and processes by which the Scrum team can complete its tasks. Large and complex organizations can benefit from it because it uses familiar techniques but puts them in a highly Agile framework. Thus, a Scrum project initiated to reduce documentation (and consequently red tape), doesn’t just get team members from different parts of the organizations to attend daily meetings, but it empowers them to fulfill their roles by providing them practical methods and techniques. The SBOK™ Guide lays out ways to build the right environment and a key element of that is the buy in of the whole team towards the project vision. Thus, the project team becomes a self-motivated unit and is not just driven by the Scrum Master.
This buy-in supplemented with empowered Scrum team members is what, in the end, removes communication hurdles and makes organizations far more efficient than they would under traditional project management approaches.
Note: The Scrum specific terms used in this article are as per the Guide to the Scrum Body of Knowledge (SBOK^TM)

To know more click on : http://www.scrumstudy.com/blog/how-scrum-removes-bureaucracy-and-red-tape-within-the-private-sector-3/