Release Management vs. DevOps: Collaboration Challenges

Release management and DevOps often clash due to differing priorities. Release management focuses on structured processes to minimise risks, while DevOps prioritises speed and automation for continuous delivery. This disconnect can cause delays, higher costs, and inefficiencies across teams.

Key differences include:

• Processes: Release management follows step-by-step approvals; DevOps uses automated, continuous workflows.
• Roles: Release management relies on distinct teams; DevOps encourages shared responsibilities.
• Tools: Release management favours manual oversight; DevOps depends on automation and integrated pipelines.

Common collaboration issues:

• Conflicting goals between speed and stability.
• Communication gaps across development and operations teams.
• Resistance to changing established workflows.

Solutions include:

• Automating CI/CD pipelines to streamline deployments.
• Setting shared goals to align priorities.
• Using real-time monitoring for better feedback and decision-making.

When aligned, these approaches can enable faster deployments, improved reliability, and reduced costs. The challenge lies in bridging the gap between their philosophies and practices.

Making Release Management Real in a SAFe and DevOps World

What Are Release Management and DevOps?

To understand the challenges of collaboration between release management and DevOps, it's important to first get a clear picture of what each approach represents. These two methodologies stem from different periods in software development history and reflect distinct ideas about how technology should be delivered.

What is Release Management?

Release management is a structured, process-oriented approach designed to plan, schedule, and control software releases. It emerged in traditional IT settings where updates were rare, large-scale, and required extensive coordination across multiple teams and departments.

Every change undergoes rigorous scrutiny, passing through a series of approval gates, detailed documentation, and thorough testing before it reaches production. Releases are planned well in advance to minimise disruption to business operations.

A key feature of this approach is the involvement of a Release Advisory Board (RAB) or Change Advisory Board. These groups review and approve proposed changes, considering factors like risks, resource needs, and potential business impacts. Documentation often includes rollback plans and communication strategies for stakeholders.

Release management thrives in environments where stability and compliance are critical. Industries like finance, healthcare, and government rely on this method to meet strict regulatory standards and ensure system reliability. Every change is carefully tracked, approved, and tested to maintain control and predictability.

What is DevOps?

DevOps takes a completely different path. It’s a cultural movement and set of practices focused on breaking down barriers between development and operations teams. Instead of treating these functions as separate, DevOps encourages shared responsibility for the entire software lifecycle.

The focus here is on continuous integration, continuous delivery (CI/CD), and fast feedback loops. Unlike the large, infrequent releases seen in release management, DevOps promotes small, frequent deployments - sometimes multiple times per day. Automation plays a central role, reducing manual effort and minimising errors.

At its core, DevOps is built on collaboration and shared accountability. Developers take ownership of how their code behaves in production, while operations teams get involved earlier in the development process. This fosters faster feedback and more reliable systems.

A fail-fast mindset is another hallmark of DevOps. Small failures are embraced as opportunities to learn and improve quickly. Real-time monitoring tools provide immediate insights into system performance, helping teams identify and resolve issues as they arise.

Compared to release management, DevOps prioritises speed and agility over exhaustive documentation and lengthy approval processes. Automated testing, infrastructure as code, and deployment pipelines replace manual checks, enabling rapid and reliable deployments.

Different Approaches to Deployment and Workflows

The contrast between these two approaches is most evident in their deployment strategies and day-to-day workflows.

• Release management workflows resemble a waterfall model. Changes progress through defined stages: planning, development, testing, approval, and deployment. Each phase has specific deliverables and requires formal sign-off.

• DevOps workflows, on the other hand, operate in a continuous flow. Code changes automatically trigger pipelines that build, test, and deploy applications without human intervention. Techniques like feature flags and blue-green deployments allow teams to roll out features incrementally and quickly revert changes if issues occur.

Their approaches to risk management also differ. Release management reduces risk through detailed planning and multiple layers of approval. DevOps, however, relies on automation and real-time monitoring to manage risk dynamically, instilling confidence in frequent deployments.

These differences often lead to friction. Release management’s focus on control and predictability can feel overly rigid to DevOps teams, who prioritise speed and flexibility. Conversely, DevOps methods may appear reckless to those accustomed to the careful planning and approvals of release management.

These contrasting philosophies and workflows set the stage for deeper exploration of how their processes, roles, and tools differ.

Main Differences Between Release Management and DevOps

The gap between release management and DevOps isn't just philosophical - it shows up in how teams work, make decisions, and use tools every day.

Processes and Workflows

At its core, the difference lies in how code moves to production. Release management takes a step-by-step approach, where each stage - planning, development, testing, approval, and deployment - must be completed and formally signed off before moving forward. It's a structured, gate-based process.

DevOps flips this on its head with a continuous flow. Through CI/CD pipelines, much of the manual effort is automated. Developers frequently commit small code changes to a shared repository, triggering automated builds and tests with every change [1][2][3]. Instead of waiting for staged and infrequent releases, DevOps validates code changes immediately. Continuous Integration ensures these changes are verified right away, while Continuous Delivery prepares them for release - often deploying first to a staging environment for further testing [1][2][3].

This shift in processes creates distinct roles and requires different tools, which we'll explore next.

Roles and Responsibilities

The structural differences between these approaches are reflected in team dynamics. Traditional release management relies on clear divisions: release managers coordinate efforts, Change Advisory Boards approve changes, and separate teams handle development, testing, and deployment.

DevOps, on the other hand, breaks down these silos. Developers are not just responsible for writing code - they're also involved in ensuring its performance in production. Operations teams, meanwhile, engage earlier in the process. This cross-functional collaboration reduces the handoffs typical of traditional workflows. Accountability shifts to shared, data-driven decisions made by cross-functional teams. DevOps fosters a blameless culture, where failures are treated as learning opportunities to improve systems, rather than assigning blame to individuals.

This collaborative approach also demands a modern, integrated toolset, which brings us to the next point.

Tools and Automation

The tools used in each approach further highlight their differences. Release management often relies on manual processes and human oversight, with tools focused on documentation and approvals.

In contrast, automation is the backbone of DevOps. CI/CD pipelines take care of everything from code compilation and testing to deployment and monitoring. Tools like Infrastructure as Code manage server configurations, while automated testing frameworks independently validate changes. This heavy reliance on automation not only speeds up deployments - enabling multiple daily releases - but also provides real-time monitoring and feedback on performance and user experience.

Additionally, release management tools often operate in silos, with limited connectivity between planning, development, and deployment systems. DevOps prioritises integrated toolchains, offering a cohesive view of the software lifecycle. This integration ensures smoother transitions between development and production environments.

These differences in workflows, roles, and tools highlight the challenges teams face when trying to bridge these two distinct approaches.

Common Collaboration Problems

Bringing together release management and DevOps often sparks friction that can disrupt progress. These challenges usually arise from fundamental differences in how teams approach software delivery, communicate, and adapt to changes.

Conflicting Goals and Communication Issues

One of the biggest hurdles comes from conflicting priorities between development and operations teams. Developers are typically focused on delivering new features quickly and hitting project deadlines, while operations teams prioritise system stability, uptime, and minimising risks [4][6].

When Dev, Ops, QA, and Security teams work in silos, breakdowns in communication and mistrust are almost inevitable [6]. Information gets lost during handoffs, assumptions go unchecked, and teams often interpret requirements and priorities differently.

In many organisations, release management processes haven’t caught up with DevOps principles. They still rely on manual approvals and lengthy planning cycles, which slow down delivery and make it harder to adapt when requirements shift or problems arise [5]. Early DevOps efforts often stumble due to these communication gaps and collaboration failures [5].

Developers may feel stifled by excessive oversight, while operations teams may rush through approvals to meet tight deadlines. Neither side feels fully understood, which can lead to defensive attitudes and deepen the divide. These communication struggles become even more problematic when dealing with complex system architectures.

The Challenge of Modern Systems

The rise of distributed systems, microservices, and multi-environment deployments has introduced a level of complexity that traditional release processes struggle to manage.

When applications rely on multiple services, containers, and cloud environments, even a small change can have unpredictable consequences. For instance, a tweak to one microservice might unexpectedly impact several others, with issues only surfacing in production. This complexity makes it harder for release management teams to assess risks using traditional methods, while DevOps teams find it challenging to maintain their preferred rapid deployment cycles.

The problem gets worse when teams lack shared visibility into these intricate systems. Developers may not fully grasp the constraints of the production environment, and operations teams may not understand the architectural choices driving deployment needs. Without this mutual understanding, collaboration often feels more like negotiation than genuine teamwork.

When problems do emerge, it’s common for teams to point fingers, as the root cause might span multiple services, environments, or even technology stacks managed by different teams. This complexity not only complicates problem-solving but also fuels resistance to change in teams used to simpler, more predictable systems.

Resistance to Change

One of the toughest obstacles is resistance to changing established workflows and responsibilities. Teams that have thrived under traditional release management methods may view DevOps as a disruptive force.

This resistance often shows up as a lack of stakeholder alignment on the benefits of closer collaboration [6]. Senior leaders may back DevOps in theory but fail to implement the organisational changes needed to make it work. Middle managers might resist giving up control over approval processes, and individual team members may worry about job security or an increase in workload.

Long-standing habits and cultural norms play a big role too. Teams often develop informal processes, communication styles, and trust over time. Asking them to adopt new tools, share responsibilities they’ve traditionally owned, or work more closely with unfamiliar teams demands a major cultural shift.

Fear of accountability also contributes to resistance. Traditional release management offers clear handoffs and approval chains, which can shield individuals when things go wrong. In contrast, DevOps’ focus on shared responsibility can feel risky to those who prefer clearly defined roles and boundaries.

Without addressing these human factors, technical fixes alone won’t resolve collaboration challenges. Teams need time, support, and incentives to build trust, adapt to new processes, and form stronger working relationships.

How to Improve Collaboration

Bringing release management and DevOps teams closer together isn’t something that happens by chance. It requires intentional effort across technology, processes, and culture. The organisations that excel in this area build systems that naturally encourage teamwork and shared responsibility.

Automating CI/CD Pipelines

Automated CI/CD pipelines are a key building block for connecting release management with DevOps. By making deployment processes consistent and repeatable, both teams can trust the system and spend less time on manual coordination.

To create effective pipelines, it’s essential to integrate automated testing, security scans, and compliance checks directly into the deployment process. These shouldn’t be treated as separate stages but as built-in steps. Teams can set up automated gates that ensure all tests pass, performance benchmarks are met, and the necessary approvals are secured before code moves to the next environment.

Infrastructure as Code (IaC) adds another layer of transparency. By making environment configurations visible and version-controlled, it ensures that operations teams can see the exact infrastructure changes tied to each release. At the same time, developers gain a clear understanding of production environment constraints, aligning both teams around a single source of truth.

Automated rollback mechanisms further boost confidence, enabling both release management and DevOps teams to embrace frequent deployments without fear of prolonged disruptions.

For organisations ready to embrace these practices, Hokstad Consulting offers expertise in DevOps transformations, particularly in implementing automated CI/CD pipelines and monitoring solutions. Their approach focuses on balancing speed and stability, helping organisations move past the traditional trade-offs between rapid delivery and careful release management.

Once automated pipelines are in place, the next step is to ensure both teams are working towards unified goals.

Setting Shared Goals

Aligning team objectives means moving away from metrics that create a divide between speed and stability. Instead, focus on measuring success in ways that encourage collaboration.

For example, Mean Time to Recovery (MTTR) is more useful than Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF). MTTR shifts the focus towards resolving issues quickly and collaboratively, rather than simply trying to avoid all risks. Similarly, tracking deployment frequency alongside deployment success rates helps teams prioritise sustainable delivery practices.

Creating cross-functional incident response teams can strengthen collaboration. When developers and operations staff work together to resolve production issues, they gain a better understanding of each other’s challenges and expertise.

Regular retrospectives that bring together both release management and DevOps teams are another valuable tool. These sessions should focus on improving processes rather than assigning blame, creating a safe space to discuss what’s working and what needs adjustment.

Shared documentation and runbooks also play a big role in improving collaboration. When developers clearly document their applications’ operational requirements, and operations teams share deployment procedures, both sides can make more informed decisions. This kind of transparency reduces the need for lengthy approval processes because everyone understands each other’s needs and constraints.

Using Monitoring and Feedback Systems

To complement pipeline automation and shared goals, effective monitoring provides real-time data that aligns team efforts even further.

Comprehensive monitoring acts as a shared language between release management and DevOps teams. When both teams have access to the same metrics - covering application performance, user experience, and system health - discussions become data-driven rather than opinion-based.

Real-time dashboards that display both business and technical metrics help teams see the bigger picture. For instance, showing how deployment frequency impacts customer satisfaction or how automated testing coverage reduces production incidents enables teams to make well-informed trade-offs between speed and quality.

Automated alerting systems are another important tool. These systems should notify the right people based on the type and severity of issues. By ensuring developers are alerted to performance problems they can address, and operations teams are notified about infrastructure issues within their control, response times improve while reducing unnecessary blame.

Post-deployment monitoring with automatic health checks builds trust in the release process. This kind of automated feedback loop eliminates the need for constant manual oversight while maintaining the safety nets that release management teams rely on.

Finally, feedback loops from production back to development ensure that teams learn from real-world usage patterns. When developers can see how their code performs under actual conditions, and operations teams understand the business impact of performance improvements, both sides can prioritise more effectively.

The best monitoring strategies combine technical metrics with business outcomes, offering a complete view of how collaboration influences both system performance and broader organisational goals. This shared perspective naturally fosters the kind of teamwork that allows DevOps and release management to thrive together.

Release Management and DevOps for Cost Reduction

When release management and DevOps teams work closely together, the results go beyond smoother workflows - they can lead to significant cost savings. By combining automation with shared goals, organisations can implement strategies that trim expenses while maintaining efficiency.

One major area of cost reduction is cloud resource management. When both teams have insight into deployment patterns and resource usage, they can collaborate to optimise scaling. For instance, release management teams can predict business cycles and determine when applications might need more or fewer resources. Meanwhile, DevOps teams use their technical know-how to implement automated scaling and manage resources efficiently. This teamwork helps avoid over-provisioning, a common source of unnecessary cloud spending.

Another key saving comes from reducing waste in deployment processes. Traditional methods often rely on permanent testing environments, which can be costly. By adopting infrastructure-as-code practices, DevOps teams can create on-demand environments, significantly cutting these expenses. Policies like automatically scaling down non-production environments, pausing unused services, and streamlining storage further drive down costs when paired with scheduled release management.

For organisations aiming to cut cloud expenses, Hokstad Consulting offers expertise in cloud cost engineering. Their strategies focus on reducing cloud costs by 30–50% through optimised deployment cycles, automated resource management, and tailored solutions for public, private, and hybrid cloud environments. Their No Savings, No Fee model ensures that fees are tied directly to the savings achieved, making their approach low-risk for businesses.

Frequent, smaller deployments also play a role in cost reduction. They minimise rollback risks, speed up time-to-market, and improve the return on development investments. Additionally, pricing models can be designed to align financial outcomes with operational performance, further enhancing cost efficiency.

Collaborative planning during cloud migrations is another area where release management and DevOps shine. By prioritising high-impact applications and ensuring zero-downtime transitions, they help reduce ongoing operational costs. Similarly, shared caching strategies - where DevOps implements caching mechanisms and release management identifies priority content - boost performance while cutting infrastructure expenses.

Finally, shared monitoring and feedback loops allow teams to detect and address issues early, reducing the likelihood of costly incidents. This proactive approach not only saves money but also strengthens long-term operational stability.

When organisations align their release management and DevOps efforts, they often find that the savings generated can be reinvested into further improving deployment processes. This creates a self-sustaining cycle of cost efficiency and operational enhancement.

Conclusion

The partnership between release management and DevOps goes beyond being a technical requirement - it's a game-changer for how organisations deliver software and control costs. When these disciplines are aligned, businesses can enjoy quicker deployment cycles, greater reliability, and reduced expenses, all of which directly benefit their bottom line.

By integrating these practices, organisations can tackle the challenges we've discussed - whether it's balancing speed with stability or managing the complexity of distributed systems. With the right combination of best practices and automation, teams can navigate these hurdles and deliver real, measurable value. The results highlight the importance of aligning release management and DevOps as a deliberate strategy.

Financially, this collaboration pays off. The cost savings generated can be reinvested into further process improvements, creating a cycle of continuous progress that benefits the entire organisation.

To help UK businesses on this journey, Hokstad Consulting provides tailored expertise in DevOps transformation and cloud cost optimisation. Their No Savings, No Fee model ensures that businesses can pursue these advancements with minimal risk, tying investment directly to tangible results.

Reaping these rewards requires a commitment to automation, shared responsibility, and ongoing improvement. Organisations that embrace this alignment are better equipped for long-term success, combining the speed to adapt to market demands with the stability and governance essential for smooth operations. The real question isn't whether to align these practices, but how quickly you can act to secure that competitive advantage.

FAQs