I can easily tell that the new agile strategy by itself made teams overstaffed.
What I mean by that is
Business analysts can serve an important role helping the product owner elicit requirements and write user stories. I have not encountered someone who is technically the product owner who can do this on their own, usually they are setting requirements at the epic and feature level. There are even some small systems where a developer isn’t needed, the business analyst can use an interface to make changes. There is no one single scrum team composition, anyone who thinks there is has very narrow experience with the application of Agile.
Project managers can serve as the scrum master or product owner. In many cases the project involves quite a bit more than what a scrum team would do, especially when that scrum team is focused on a single platform or system. A developer on a scrum team is not going to coordinate training, compensation changes, procedure updates, telephony changes, communications, UAT, office space changes or anything else that can be part of a project. People who think that a scrum team can run a project are just usually not referring to something that is actually a project, a common problem at the bank.
What will happen to companies current pm teams? If agile is taking over.
Unfortunately, this is what happens when companies implement Agile while ignoring Agile principles. Agile teams should consist of a Product Owner, Scrum TeM, and Scrum Master. There should not be a PM, BSA/BSC, or any other PMI/Method 1 style role on the team.
Engineers shouldn't be running the board. They need to focus on their own tasks. I've seen way too many times where an engineer/developer tries to be a developer and a PM/scrum master. Neither one gets the attention it deserves.
That said, not knowing what the scope or situation is, it seems weird to have that many people for non-engineering roles (2 scrum masters? 4 analysts?)
The whole purpose of separation of duties was so that developers were not testing their own code, and coding time was not sacrificed to analysis. Of course, I know development has little use for oversight or any pushback, so this doesn't surprise me. Now with agile they are bringing all that back from the old days. Go figure.
Yes and no.
Sure engineers can run the whole board, but not at the level of responsibility and accountability required. Maybe if it's a great engineering team who's code never has an issue, but once stuff breaks and you need a different build? Accountability and process go out the window because you already spent 6 hours trying to fix the intended implementation and don't want to jump through the required hoops to remain properly accountable.
So many dev teams want to operate like they're a standalone app in a small startup, not an interconnected app in a multi-system, multi-billion dollar heavily regulated operation.
Not to mention the whole separation of duties aspect.