Should Biologists Scrum?
Embracing Agile Methodology in Research Labs
Being a bench scientist is hard. There’s no way around it. The daily life of a scientist involves numerous decision-making steps, repetitive tasks and context switching. But more than that, it is a lonely job. Issues such as failed experiments, writer's block, isolation, and a lack of timely and/or constructive feedback can impede progress and innovation.
Several years ago, I worked at a biotech startup that was founded (and funded) by tech giants. They observed the bottlenecks in bench science and made the decision to implement agile/scrum as a project management tool. Unfortunately the experiment was a failure from the get-go because the thought of having to do scrum ceremonies, sprints and using JIRA made the lab scientists utterly mutinous. Years later, after having employed the agile scrum methodology in various roles in biotech software, I am back to pondering its value in the experimental world.
Success Stories and Real-Life Experiments
While agile methodologies are commonly associated with software development, the adoption of scrum and agile practices in academic labs has shown promising results. Several researchers and labs have experimented with sprints, daily stand-up meetings, and retrospectives, adapting these methodologies to suit their specific needs. These experiments have not only resulted in increased productivity but have also facilitated better collaboration and improved research outcomes.Â
One of the best examples of agile methodology working in research is the creation and adoption of scrum designed for research, AKA LabScrum. This guide is a hybrid of traditional scrum used in a software context combined with best practices from research labs at University of Oregon. Read more about the implementation of this tool in a Nature article - A project-management tool from the tech industry could benefit your lab.
In this paper, Lisa May, assistant director of operations for the Center for Translational Neuroscience at the University of Oregon, reveals that scientists and students involved in research groups spanning biology, psychology, and human physiology have experienced heightened productivity and reduced stress by implementing Scrum. She played a pivotal role in introducing this tool at the university and co-authored the LabScrum study.
So why does scrum work for research labs?
Breaking Down Monumental Tasks
One of the most significant hurdles for researchers is tackling large scale, multi-step experiments. The sheer magnitude of a project can often lead to a cycle of perfectionism and procrastination. By embracing sprints in a 2-4 week cadence, labs can break down these colossal projects into smaller, more manageable chunks. This approach allows researchers to focus on incremental progress, providing a sense of motivation and achievement along the way. The regular milestones set by sprints enable individuals to track their progress, boosting morale and alleviating the psychological burden of a seemingly never-ending project.
Creating a Safe Space for Imperfection
Research labs frequently expect polished presentations and finalized work during lab meetings. I believe this expectation often originates from the academic culture of perfectionism. Perfection can be time-consuming and counterproductive, discouraging scientists from sharing their ongoing drafts or imperfect work. However, the agile methodology promotes an environment that embraces imperfection. Sprints offer researchers the opportunity to present and discuss their work-in-progress, knowing that the focus is on incremental improvement rather than achieving perfection in a single iteration. This fosters open communication, sharing of ideas, and constructive feedback, creating a supportive community within the lab.
Embracing Retrospectives
In the research setting, lab meetings often revolve solely around what is wrong with ongoing studies. This negativity can contribute to the isolated nature of lab research. However, by incorporating retrospectives into their workflow, research labs can shift the focus towards what went right, what went wrong, and how to move forward. Retrospectives provide an opportunity to reflect on the achievements and challenges faced during a sprint, enabling the team to learn from past experiences and make necessary adjustments. By fostering a culture of constructive feedback and continuous improvement, research labs can create a more positive and collaborative environment, driving innovation and enhancing the overall quality of research.
I like the emphasis on iteration in agile/scrum frameworks. however there are some possible issues: 1. they are burdened by jargon and dogma around process, 2. they tended to turn teams inward (less collaboration companywide), 3. seemed like they would just spin on short-term goals ad infinitum, and not have a good mechanism for driving toward the bigger picture, e.g. quarterly goals / OKRs. what was your takeaway?
This matches my experience. Especially making the time for a retrospective. If you take away one thing — it is that a retrospective is monumental in improving how labs work.