At Blask, we’ve figured out the hard way that growing fast doesn’t always mean getting things done faster. In this article, I, George Gaievsky, CPO at Blask, talk through our experience with project management frameworks — from trying out Kanban in the beginning, switching to Scrum for a while, and then realizing that Kanban was the better fit for us in the end. I am sharing what we’ve learned in the hope that it helps other startups avoid the same mistakes and choose the right approach for their teams.
The early days: why Kanban?
When we started Blask, our development team was just three people. At that stage, predicting workload or timelines was more a guessing game than a science. We chose Kanban for its simplicity and flexibility — we could adjust priorities on the fly and focus on getting stuff done. For a small team it was perfect. Tasks flowed naturally and we could see where things were blocking and fix them without unnecessary overhead.
Of course we had other departments in the company but Kanban worked as a lightweight solution for our core technical processes. As we grew though our approach needed to evolve.
The Scrum experiment
As we grew, we felt Kanban wasn’t flexible enough for a larger more structured organisation. We turned to Scrum, thinking its framework for sprints and ceremonies would bring predictability and help us scale. It seemed the logical next step – after all Scrum promises clarity and control especially for teams with multiple priorities.
What we didn’t expect was how the rigid structure of Scrum would impact our team’s workflow. Daily standups and sprint planning started to eat into our productive hours. Waiting until the end of a sprint to adjust priorities made us slower, not faster. For a startup like ours where flexibility is a survival skill, Scrum started to feel like an ill fitting suit.
To be fair, Scrum works brilliantly in certain contexts — like teams with a mix of experience levels or where long-term planning is a bigger priority. But for Blask, it just wasn’t the right fit.
Back to Kanban: finding our flow
After two months of Scrum, we decided to switch back to Kanban. The team greeted the news with humor — not because they were thrilled, but because the back-and-forth felt like a running joke. Adjusting to one framework only to reverse course took its toll, and it became clear that finding stability was just as important as finding the “right” approach.
Despite this, the return to Kanban allowed us to regain flexibility and focus. It helped clear the technical debt that had piled up during the more rigid Scrum phase and let us prioritize product complexities without the overhead of ceremonies and sprints. While the process wasn’t seamless, it marked a turning point in aligning our workflow with our team’s needs and goals.
Scrum vs. Kanban: pros, cons, and who should use them
Scrum: pros and cons
Pros:
- Structure and predictability: Clear timelines and deliverables make it easier to plan long-term.
- Defined roles and responsibilities: Helps teams with mixed experience levels stay on track.
- Focus on teamwork: Regular scrum cadencies like standups and retrospectives build collaboration and accountability.
- Good for large, complex projects: Encourages incremental progress with clear goals.
Cons:
- Rigid structure: Requires strict adherence to sprint cycles, which can reduce flexibility.
- Overhead of meetings: Cadencies can take up significant time, especially for smaller teams.
- Not ideal for rapidly changing priorities: Adjusting mid-sprint can disrupt the process.
Best for: Contrary to popular belief, our experience proved it best suited for teams with clear, stable goals and a mix of junior and senior members who benefit from structure and long-term planning.
Kanban: pros and cons
Pros:
- Flexibility: Tasks can be reprioritized at any time without disrupting the workflow.
- Simple to implement: No strict rules, making it easy for small teams to get started.
- Focus on flow: Visualizing tasks on a board helps identify bottlenecks and optimize processes.
- Minimizes overhead: No mandatory meetings or ceremonies.
Cons:
- Lack of structure: Teams without strong self-discipline may struggle to stay organized.
- Less focus on teamwork: Can become siloed if team members only focus on their individual tasks.
- Challenging for fixed milestones: Kanban can work for long-term planning, but in small startups, its focus on continuous delivery often fits better with shifting priorities and incremental progress.
Best for: Agile, fast-moving teams that need to adapt priorities frequently and work well independently.
Lessons for other startups
If there’s one takeaway from our journey, it’s this: there’s no one-size-fits-all solution. The best project management framework is the one that matches your company’s pulse and goals. Here’s what we learned:
- Feel the pulse of your team: Understand how your team works best. If a framework feels like it’s adding friction instead of removing it, don’t hesitate to rethink your approach.
- Adapt as you grow: What works for a three-person team may not work for a larger one. Be ready to evolve, but don’t lose sight of what’s important for your workflow and culture.
- Focus on outcomes, not speed: Releasing fast is tempting, but if quality suffers, it’s not worth it. Invest time in testing and refining your product — it pays off in the long run.
- Experiment, but don’t overcommit: Trying a new framework doesn’t mean you’re stuck with it forever. Give it a fair chance, but if it’s not working, don’t be afraid to pivot.
Final thoughts
At Blask, we’ve landed on a version of Kanban that works for us — a flow that’s objective, flexible, and, most importantly, feels right for our team. If you’re a startup navigating the same challenges, remember that finding your flow is a process. Be willing to experiment, learn from your mistakes, and make choices that support your goals and your team’s well-being.
No framework will do the work for you, but the right one can make the work feel seamless. For us, Kanban has been the key to delivering solutions that matter — not just quickly, but thoughtfully.
