Embedding Agile ways of working in Government teams

How we help civil service teams adopt Agile effectively within their constraints.

Government organisations increasingly recognise the value of Agile delivery, but adopting Agile is rarely as simple as introducing new ceremonies or delivery frameworks. Public sector teams operate within complex governance, procurement, funding and assurance environments that can make Agile feel difficult to sustain. At the same time, services must continue operating while improvements are designed and delivered.

Our consultancy helps government teams introduce Agile in a way that works for their organisational context. Rather than treating Agile as a methodology to implement, we focus on creating the conditions that allow multidisciplinary teams to make better decisions, collaborate effectively and continuously improve services based on evidence.

A defining feature of our approach is the integration of user research and service design into Agile delivery. We believe Agile succeeds when delivery decisions are grounded in genuine user needs rather than assumptions, and when teams develop a shared understanding of the services they are responsible for improving.

Project Overview

A central government department responsible for delivering a high-volume citizen-facing digital service wanted to strengthen the way its multidisciplinary delivery teams operated. Although Agile practices had been introduced across several programmes, implementation varied considerably between teams. Some squads had adopted Scrum ceremonies, while others used Kanban or hybrid approaches. Delivery rhythms existed, but they were often disconnected from user research, strategic decision making and service outcomes.

The department had ambitious transformation objectives, including improving citizen experience, reducing operational costs and modernising legacy technology. However, leaders recognised that simply increasing delivery capacity would not achieve these goals. Teams needed to become more user-centred, more collaborative and more confident making evidence-based decisions.

Our consultancy was engaged over approximately nine months to work alongside civil servants, delivery partners and technical suppliers. Rather than acting as an external delivery function, we embedded within existing teams to strengthen capability while delivering measurable improvements to live services.

The engagement covered multiple Agile delivery teams, supported senior programme leadership and introduced a consistent approach to research, service design and iterative delivery that could be sustained after the project concluded.

“They never felt like an external consultancy. Within a matter of weeks they were working as part of the multidisciplinary team, building trusted relationships across delivery, operations and policy. Their ability to bring people together around user needs fundamentally changed how we approached Agile delivery.”

Senior Product Manager

The Problem

The organisation faced challenges familiar across many public sector transformation programmes. Agile ceremonies had become established, yet many teams were still operating in ways that reflected traditional project delivery. Sprint planning often centred on predetermined requirements rather than validated user needs. Success was measured by the completion of delivery plans instead of improvements to service outcomes.

User research was taking place, but inconsistently. Some teams commissioned research only when major decisions had already been made, while others relied heavily on stakeholder assumptions or historical requirements. Research findings were not always shared across disciplines, meaning valuable insight frequently remained isolated within individual teams.

This created a number of unintended consequences. Product backlogs became increasingly populated with features whose value had not been validated. Designers sometimes produced solutions before the underlying problem had been fully understood. Business analysts spent considerable time documenting requirements that later changed as more information emerged. Developers occasionally built functionality that required significant rework once users interacted with prototypes.

Governance processes added another layer of complexity. Delivery teams still needed to satisfy assurance boards, security reviews, procurement controls and ministerial reporting requirements. Many individuals perceived these constraints as incompatible with Agile delivery, resulting in uncertainty about how Agile could realistically operate within government.

Most importantly, users experienced inconsistency. Although individual digital transactions functioned adequately, end-to-end services remained fragmented. Citizens often encountered duplicated requests for information, confusing navigation between services and inconsistent support journeys across digital and assisted channels.

The challenge therefore extended beyond introducing Agile practices. The department needed to embed user-centred thinking into every stage of delivery while ensuring teams could operate confidently within the realities of government.

Research and Discovery

Our engagement began with a structured discovery phase designed to understand both the services being delivered and the teams responsible for delivering them.

Rather than focusing solely on delivery processes, we examined the broader service ecosystem. This included interviewing senior stakeholders, observing delivery ceremonies, reviewing existing artefacts and conducting workshops with multidisciplinary teams. We explored how decisions were made, how evidence was gathered and how information flowed across programmes.

User research formed the foundation of the discovery.

Working alongside departmental user researchers, we conducted interviews with citizens representing different demographics, digital confidence levels and service needs. We also observed users completing key journeys, allowing us to identify friction points that had not previously been recognised through performance metrics alone.

The research revealed that many service challenges stemmed from organisational boundaries rather than technology. Users did not distinguish between policy teams, operational teams and digital delivery teams. They simply expected government services to work coherently from beginning to end.

Alongside primary research, we analysed existing quantitative evidence including service analytics, contact centre data, user satisfaction metrics and operational performance information. Bringing qualitative and quantitative evidence together enabled us to validate patterns rather than relying on isolated observations.

We facilitated collaborative service mapping workshops involving business analysts, service designers, developers, operational colleagues and policy representatives. These sessions produced a shared understanding of the current service landscape while highlighting duplicated activities, manual processes and opportunities for simplification.

Service blueprinting proved particularly valuable because it connected front-stage user experiences with the operational and technical processes supporting them.

Discovery also examined the delivery system itself. We assessed how user research entered planning processes, how priorities were agreed, how backlog items were refined and how outcomes were measured after deployment.

One consistent finding emerged throughout the discovery.

Teams genuinely wanted to work in a user-centred Agile way. However, they lacked a repeatable framework that connected research, design, analysis, delivery and governance into one continuous process.

This insight shaped every subsequent stage of the engagement.

“One of the biggest differences was the emphasis they placed on building our capability rather than creating dependency. They coached our Business Analysts, Service Designers and Product Owners throughout the engagement, leaving us with the confidence, tools and ways of working to continue improving long after the project had finished.”

Head of Digital Delivery

Design Approach

Rather than introducing an entirely new methodology, we focused on evolving existing ways of working.

Our objective was to help teams become more evidence-driven without disrupting successful delivery practices already in place.

Business analysts worked closely with user researchers to ensure backlog refinement began with validated user needs rather than predefined solutions. Research findings became living inputs into prioritisation discussions instead of standalone reports produced at the beginning of projects.

Service designers collaborated with operational colleagues to visualise complete services rather than isolated digital interactions. This allowed teams to identify opportunities that improved both citizen experience and internal efficiency.

Design activities became integrated into Agile delivery cycles. Low-fidelity prototypes were tested rapidly with users before significant technical development commenced. Insights from research informed subsequent iterations, enabling teams to reduce delivery risk while increasing confidence in prioritisation decisions.

We also introduced collaborative design workshops that brought together policy experts, developers, architects, operational staff and researchers around shared problems rather than individual disciplines. These workshops improved decision-making by ensuring diverse perspectives were considered early in delivery.

From a Business Analysis perspective, we shifted emphasis away from documenting comprehensive requirements towards facilitating continuous understanding. User stories became more meaningful because they were supported by research evidence, service maps, journey maps and measurable outcomes.

Where governance required formal documentation, we aligned Agile artefacts with existing assurance processes rather than creating duplicate documentation. This significantly reduced administrative overhead while maintaining compliance with departmental standards.

We supported Product Owners in developing outcome-focused roadmaps that balanced immediate delivery priorities with longer-term service improvements. Instead of asking whether a feature could be delivered within a sprint, discussions increasingly centred on whether the feature solved an evidenced user problem.

Coaching formed an important part of the engagement. Delivery managers, Business Analysts, service designers and user researchers received practical support during live projects rather than classroom training alone. This embedded learning directly into day-to-day delivery.

Over time, multidisciplinary teams developed greater confidence making decisions based on evidence instead of hierarchy. User research became a routine part of planning, design reviews became collaborative rather than sequential, and retrospectives increasingly focused on improving outcomes rather than simply refining delivery mechanics.

Outcome and Impact

By the conclusion of the engagement, the department had established a far more consistent approach to Agile delivery across participating teams.

User research became embedded throughout the delivery lifecycle rather than concentrated at project initiation. Research findings informed backlog prioritisation, sprint planning and design decisions, creating stronger alignment between delivery effort and user need.

The quality of collaboration improved significantly. Business analysts, designers, developers and researchers worked from shared service artefacts that created a common understanding across disciplines. Decision making became faster because teams relied on evidence rather than competing assumptions.

The organisation experienced measurable operational improvements during the engagement. User satisfaction increased by approximately 18%, while avoidable contact relating to key digital journeys reduced by around 24% following service improvements. Prototype testing prior to development contributed to an estimated 30% reduction in design-related rework across participating teams. Delivery predictability also improved, with sprint objectives being achieved more consistently due to clearer prioritisation and earlier validation.

Beyond these metrics, leadership reported greater confidence in programme governance because delivery decisions could be clearly traced back to research evidence and measurable service outcomes.

Several reusable assets were produced during the engagement, including standardised service blueprint templates, research repositories, prioritisation frameworks and collaborative workshop formats. These resources enabled new teams to adopt consistent practices without relying on external support.

Perhaps the most valuable outcome was cultural rather than technical.

Teams increasingly viewed Agile not as a prescribed methodology, but as a practical way of continuously learning from users and improving services through collaboration. User research ceased to be perceived as a specialist activity and became a shared responsibility across multidisciplinary teams.

This cultural shift positioned the department to sustain continuous improvement long after the consultancy engagement concluded.

“Their user-centred approach transformed the conversations we were having. Research wasn’t treated as a separate activity—it became part of every planning and prioritisation decision. By the end of the programme our teams weren’t just following Agile ceremonies; they genuinely understood how to deliver services around user needs.”

Delivery Manager

Reflection

One of the strongest lessons from this engagement was that successful Agile adoption in government depends less on introducing new frameworks and more on strengthening the connections between research, design and delivery.

Government teams already possess deep policy expertise, operational knowledge and technical capability. The greatest opportunity often lies in helping these disciplines work together around a shared understanding of user needs.

Embedding user research throughout Agile delivery transformed conversations. Rather than debating opinions or organisational priorities in isolation, teams could make decisions using evidence gathered directly from the people who relied on their services.

Equally important was recognising that public sector constraints are not barriers to Agile—they are part of the environment within which Agile must operate. By designing delivery approaches that respected governance while maintaining iterative, user-centred practices, teams gained confidence that Agile could support accountability rather than undermine it.

For our consultancy, this project reinforced a principle that continues to shape every engagement: lasting transformation happens when organisations build internal capability alongside delivering measurable service improvements.

The result is not simply better Agile delivery. It is better public services, designed around genuine user needs, supported by multidisciplinary collaboration and capable of evolving continuously as those needs change.